Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council tables indefinitely plan to remove Appendix 3 from Unified Land Development Code after heated debate

Ascension Parish Council · June 18, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council members debated removing Appendix 3 (an older master plan) from the Unified Land Development Code; planners described it as expired, while several council members warned deleting it could remove enforcement 'teeth' and urged more analysis; the council voted to table the ordinance indefinitely pending further information.

The Ascension Parish Council voted to table indefinitely an ordinance that would remove Appendix 3 — the older master plan — from the parish Unified Land Development Code after planning staff described the appendix as an outdated, late-1990s document and several council members raised legal and policy concerns.

Planning staff member Mr. Poche told the council the appendix was originally codified with the ULDC and was effectively applicable in the early 2000s; a newer parish master plan was adopted in 2019 and is available to the public. "It was only applicable and stayed in the first line of appendix 3 from 2001 to 2003," Poche said, and removing the appendix would avoid having two potentially confusing documents in code.

Multiple council members, however, said they were not comfortable deleting roughly 40 pages without further review and legal clarity. One council member noted counsel had discussed conflicting language and said the older appendix may still be codified and could give the council additional enforcement leverage on development proposals. "I disagree with deleting 40 something pages just with a snap of a let's vote 'yay'," a council member said, urging caution and recommending a third-party review or more information before action.

Another council member asked staff to identify specific sections of the old plan that create conflict so the council could consider targeted deletions rather than removing the appendix wholesale. The council ultimately moved and approved a motion to table the ordinance indefinitely until more information and possible third-party review are provided.

The meeting record shows one public card filed by Adrien Alpe opposing the ordinance; Alpe indicated he did not wish to speak. Before tabling, council members emphasized concerns over road infrastructure, legal uncertainty, and political accountability to residents on development decisions.