Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debate erupts over subdivision waiver after resident questions drainage clearance
Summary
A resident challenged a waiver granted for subdivision lots, saying Gravity Drainage did not issue formal written 'no objection'; council members and staff cited email documentation and said the issue was cleared, prompting a prolonged exchange and a pledge to require formal letters in future.
A prolonged, at times tense, exchange over a subdivision waiver dominated discussion on July 9 after a resident raised concerns the council had granted a waiver without a formal written 'no objection' from Gravity Drainage District.
A member of the public identified to the council as Gary Talbert addressed the council and said the waiver on certain lots should not have been granted without proper drainage documentation. Talbert asked why the item had been pulled from the agenda and whether the drainage board had actually approved the subdivision.
Council members and staff responded that engineers and Macklin and Associates had exchanged emails with Gravity Drainage District 2 indicating there were no drainage features on the property and that the parish had documentation of that exchange. A council member said there was not a formal board vote posted in the drainage‑district minutes but that an email clearance existed and had been provided to the council.
The back‑and‑forth included accusations from the resident that the council had acted improperly and responses from council members that the record — including certified letters, engineer correspondence and an email clearance — supported the waiver action. One councilman said he would ask the drainage board to require a written letter of no objection or objection for future subdivides to avoid similar confusion.
The council did not rescind the waiver during the meeting; members said they would ensure clearer documentation in the future and recommended routing such matters through planning and zoning or requesting explicit letters from drainage authorities going forward.
