Planning commission approves multiple minor subdivisions and right‑of‑way requests, postpones several higher‑profile items

At its meeting the St. Tammany Parish Planning and Zoning Commission handled roughly 20 agenda items: several minor subdivisions were approved (many with required waivers), right‑of‑way requests for drainage work were approved, multiple concept plans were advanced with conditions and waivers, and several items were postponed to allow corrected plats and additional technical documentation.

Notable approvals included a minor subdivision for Clifton and Catherine Royston (item 520264692 MSP), which the commission approved with a waiver after staff noted the lots would not meet the minimum lot width; staff reminded the applicants they must submit engineered drainage plans and install required swales for lots under the 90‑foot width threshold. The commission also approved a parish right‑of‑way request permitting the St. Tammany Parish School Board to enter the highway department right‑of‑way to install culverts and improve drainage after Jeff Shane (school board counsel) outlined the work and staff raised no objection subject to conditions. Those motions carried by voice vote.

Several minor subdivisions and resubdivisions across the parish — including applications in Covington, Madisonville and Folsom — were approved with waivers where parcels required reduced widths or private‑drive access exceptions. In multiple cases commissioners emphasized that waivers carry follow‑up obligations (recording of servitudes, engineered drainage or construction plans) before permits can be issued.

On concept plans, the commission approved tentative/concept layouts for subdivisions including Money Hill phases and Pelican Grove with requested waivers (cul‑de‑sac and block‑length waivers) and required that developers address staff informational items, provide full engineering (hydrology and construction plans) at final‑plat stage and consider relocating or expanding green‑space and vegetative buffers at the next submission.

The commission postponed several items for one month rather than acting on them tonight. In addition to the Oak Harbor PUD amendment and its concept plan (see separate article), other items were tabled to allow corrected plats, to obtain required signatures under existing development agreements or to give the public and staff time to review updated material. In several postponement motions commissioners set explicit resubmission deadlines (developer commitments included a July 21 delivery of corrected materials for some items).

Next steps: staff will circulate a summary of missing information and deadlines to applicants; postponed items are expected to reappear on the commission’s August agenda after staff verifies required documentation and final engineering is submitted.