Developer appeals planning commission denial of Piney Ridge Estates concept plan

St. Tammany Parish Council committee members heard an appeal from Precision Development LLC asking the council to overturn a Planning Commission denial of the concept subdivision plan for Piney Ridge Estates, located on the north side of U.S. 190 west of Pen Mill Road in Covington (Ward 3, District 3).

The appeal grew out of a Planning Commission decision on Aug. 12, 2025, that denied the concept plan. Developer representatives said the denial stemmed from misunderstandings about which review stage (concept, final plat/construction plans, as-built) applies under the parishUnified Development Code (UDC), and from what the commission characterized as subjective objections to the layout and open-space placement.

Planning staff member Ted Reynolds told the committee the parish recently revised the UDC and that some terms were renamed to align with industry practice. "Now, our processes are concept which is your old tentative... our old preliminary is now referred to as final plat and construction plan approval," Reynolds said, adding that the change was intended to make clear which plans are final and which are earlier-stage concepts.

Paul Marone, representing Precision Development, told the committee the project is in concept subdivision review and that zoning for the tract was set earlier this year. "The inquiry, I think, now is you have your zoning. Now, here is a list of rules and regulations that you have to abide by to be able to develop the property under the UDC," Marone said. He told the committee the developer met the code requirements and urged approval: "If the answer to that question is yes, then the concept plan should be approved." Derek Peloquin, a development representative, said the team had met repeatedly with parish staff and is awaiting comments from DOTD on a traffic impact analysis submitted the prior Friday.

Council member Jennifer Casabon (committee member) framed the issue as one of public and commission understanding of the new UDC steps; she asked administration to explain the procedural point before members of the public and the developer spoke. The committee allowed parish staff to present first so the developer could respond with the same procedural context.

After the presentations and public comments, the committee voted to refer the appeal to the full council for a final decision. The referral was made by Council Member Casabon and seconded by Council Member Coogel; the committee approved the referral by voice vote.

The referral means the full council will consider the Planning Commission record, the developerpresentation, staff reports and any additional public testimony before deciding whether to uphold or reverse the commissiondecision.