Abita Springs debate over new zoning code centers on —adaptive mixed-use— and concerns for longtime businesses

A proposed rewrite of Abita Springs planning and zoning code set off a broad public debate at the towns March 17 meeting, with aldermen and residents sharply divided over whether a new —adaptive mixed-use— (AMU) designation would protect neighborhoods or strip commercial rights from long-established businesses.

Supporters and staff framed the rewrite as an overdue modernization of 50-year-old rules to make permitting clearer and to reduce flood risk; critics warned that the AMU designation could lower property values and harm firms that have paid commercial taxes for decades. The rewrite is before the board as instrument 2026-0202, which the planning consultant said is aligned with the master plan and intended to balance walkable downtown development with protections for flood-prone, residential-edge areas.

Planner Alex Carter, owner and CEO of Desireine, told the council the draft code was developed from Abita Springs existing code and shaped by more than a year of meetings: "This code is built from your current code... it's bespoke. It's yours," he said, urging members to identify specific parcels and submit amendment requests so staff can craft targeted revisions.

Alderman EJ and other critics said they wanted the council to slow down and reconsider the AMU language, arguing the change could restrict expansion options for existing businesses and reduce tax revenue that supports fire, library and other services. "I think we need to slow this down... the adaptive mixed-use section should be eliminated completely," EJ said, pressing for more time to review the 132-page draft.

Business owners at the meeting pressed for parcel-specific protections. David Melton, who identified himself as owner of Beetle Lumber, said his company had acquired property through annexation and successive rezoning approvals and invested heavily in infrastructure and development. "I've been in Beetle Lumber 27 years... we paid commercial property taxes," Melton said, asking aldermen to introduce an amendment that would preserve commercial zoning on his parcel rather than reclassifying it AMU.

Other residents supported the rewrite as a tool to reduce uncertainty for would-be businesses, to limit heavy commercial uses in sensitive areas, and to stop incremental practices the town has used for decades. Scott Payne, who said he has attended planning commission meetings regularly, said the AMU rules were designed to avoid encouraging large, unsuited commercial development in areas lacking city services and where flooding is already a concern.

Alex Carter and planning staff outlined options that could address specific concerns: keeping certain parcels commercial, making some uses conditional in AMU, and allowing small retail under size thresholds in residential-mixed zones. Staff asked the public and council members to submit written comments by Friday the 27th so staff can prepare an amendment package; a public hearing is already scheduled for April 7, with adoption possible at a later meeting (staff suggested April 21 as an option for final action).

The council did not vote on the comprehensive ordinance on March 17; members directed staff to compile council comments and suggested parcel-level amendments for the advertised public hearing.

Next steps: residents and business owners are encouraged to submit written comments to the planning office by the stated deadline so the council and planning consultant can finalize any proposed amendments before the April public hearing.