Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Population Growth topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Livingston Parish population reported near 155,036; committee urges master-plan updates for infrastructure
Summary
At a Master Plan Review Committee meeting, Gerald Burns reported that Livingston Parish’s population is approximately 155,036, prompting members to call for updates to the master plan to address infrastructure, medical services and housing needs as the parish grows.
Gerald Burns, a committee member, presented recent population figures and urged the Master Plan Review Committee to consider updates to the parish master plan to reflect rapid growth.
Burns said Livingston Parish’s population stands at approximately 155,036 and is climbing as new subdivisions are developed. "We're at a approximately 155,036 and that's climbing every day when they bringing home new houses and all these subdivisions," he said during the committee meeting. Members noted that Livingston Parish now leads nearby parishes in growth and discussed implications for roads, medical services and other infrastructure.
Committee members reported planned or ongoing medical investments that could affect local capacity: a small facility under construction south of Juban (discussed as a roughly 14‑bed facility in the transcript) and an expansion at Our Lady of the Lake in Walker, which committee participants described as a multimillion‑dollar project. Members said these developments, together with population growth, reinforce the need to update the master plan and to coordinate infrastructure priorities with mayors, state legislators and the planning commission.
Members also raised hazard-mitigation concerns. The committee noted the parish’s hazard mitigation plan is due for renewal in mid‑July and discussed recent federal-level proposals that, if enacted, could change FEMA’s cost-share formulas; the Stafford Act was referenced in that portion of the discussion. Committee members said potential changes to federal reimbursement matching could increase local costs and underscored the importance of planning for those contingencies.
The committee asked members to review the master plan materials and UDC language in advance of future meetings and requested that representatives from infrastructure and hazard mitigation plans attend upcoming sessions so the committee can align those plans with the master plan.
