Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Votes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission approves several manufactured‑housing overlays, denies one, and OKs cell tower and UDC amendments
Summary
At the same meeting the commission postponed the Lacombe S‑2 rezoning, it approved three manufactured‑housing overlay requests, denied one overlay request, approved a public‑facilities rezoning for an AT&T tower and adopted three minor UDC amendments. Several items required staff follow‑up including permits and floodplain checks.
The St. Tammany Parish Planning Commission handled multiple routine zoning and overlay requests at the same meeting where it postponed the Lacombe rezoning (see separate article). The commission approved three manufactured‑housing overlay (MHO) requests, denied one, approved a rezoning for a proposed AT&T cell tower and adopted three amendments to the Unified Development Code (UDC).
Summary of votes and short descriptions - Item 3 (Case 20254203 ZC): Approved — Rezoning to L‑1 with Manufactured Housing Overlay for a 4.95‑acre parcel on Beverly Drive so the owner could place a manufactured home. Motion to approve by Commissioner Arcemonte; second by Commissioner Seager. Public comment included a next‑door neighbor who said the new owner had cleaned up a previously derelict lot and supported the request.
- Item 4 (Case 20254211 ZC): Denied — Request for a manufactured‑housing overlay on a 0.84‑acre parcel on LA Highway 437. Commissioner Robert moved to deny (saying the lot is a nonconforming lot of record and the area does not have nearby parcels with the MHO); Commissioner Seager seconded. The petitioner said two manufactured homes were on the parcel (one present for many years, a second moved there the previous year); neighbors opposed and raised code‑enforcement concerns about rentals and unpermitted electrical hookup.
- Item 5 (Case 20254215 ZC): Approved — S‑1 suburban residential district with Manufactured Housing Overlay for a 0.32‑acre parcel at Eden Street and Spruce Street in Covington (to restore electrical service for an existing manufactured home that had been without power for more than six months). Motion to approve by Commissioner Seager; second by Commissioner Arcemonte.
- Item 7 (Case 20254219 ZC): Approved — R‑2 with Manufactured Housing Overlay for a 1.06‑acre parcel on Pichon / 2nd Street in Lacombe so the petitioner (a single mother and elementary school teacher) could place a manufactured home. Motion to approve by Commissioner Truxillo; second by Commissioner Arcemonte.
- Item 8 (Case 20254022ZC): Approved — Rezoning of a 0.4593‑acre parcel on Limpopo Road (Folsom) from R‑1/MHO/RO to Public Facilities to allow construction of a 245‑foot self‑supporting telecommunications tower (AT&T). The petitioner’s representative described a coverage map showing gaps in service. Motion to approve by Commissioner Seager; second by Commissioner Robert.
- UDC amendments: Approved — Planning staff presented three code changes: (1) add a definition and clarity for “public/civic uses,” (2) distinguish boat launch/ marina facility definitions and permitted locations, and (3) clarify how pool measurements are taken (to include decking/ coping for setback calculations). Commissioner Rob Ayer moved to approve; Commissioner Arcemont seconded. The motion carried.
Why it matters Most of the approved items were narrow, property‑level zoning corrections or overlays to allow manufactured homes on parcels where homes already exist or are planned; those approvals primarily enable property owners to obtain permits, utilities and to bring dwellings into compliance. The denied MHO (Item 4) involved a nonconforming small parcel and neighbor complaints about unpermitted activity; commissioners cited nonconformity and code/enforcement concerns as reasons to deny.
Follow up required by staff and applicants - Several approvals require the petitioners to obtain building permits, meet floodplain elevation requirements, provide proper electrical service and comply with UDC standards (skirting, removal of tongue/wheels where applicable, finished floor elevation). Planning staff advised petitioners to contact the permit office and floodplain staff. - For the AT&T tower, the petitioner must meet UDC telecommunications‑tower standards and any required technical submittals.
Actions (high level) The commission recorded motions and votes on the items above; where the transcript did not list roll‑call tallies it recorded only that motions “carried” or “failed.”
