Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

hats. Commissioner Boyd here. Commissioner Coleman, Commissioner Helder here. Commissioner Fowler here. Commissioner Maxi here. We have a quorum.

Thank you, Mr. Hul. At this time, we'll move on to the approval of the minutes. Is there a motion to approve the minutes of the April 20th meeting? Motion by Commissioner Boy, second by Vice Chairman Grout. Are there any objections? Seeing none, these items have now been approved. At this time, I'll ask the vice chair to read in the rules for conducting public hearings. The rules for conducting public hearings. This is a public meeting. Any interested member of the public who wishes to comment on an item on from this agenda may comment in person at city hall, 222 St. Louis Street, 3rd floor, room 348. During the meeting, members of the public desiring to speak on a particular item should refer to a meeting agenda and complete necessary information prior to the meeting by filling out a request to speak card indicating which item you wish to speak and place it in the designated location prior to the meeting. Applicant and applicants representatives for the proposal will speak first for a total or combined period of not to exceed 15 minutes. Proponents will speak and then the opponents. Each speaker will not be allowed more than three minutes. Speakers are requested to limit their remarks by avoiding duplication in their presentations. Applicant will be allowed a total period of five minutes for rebuttal. Opponents will not be allowed to rebut. Items placed on the consent agenda by the planning commission staff will not have time allocated for speaking unless there is a member of the public at the meeting who wishes to speak on the item. In such cases, the proposal will follow the standard procedure. Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Vice Chairman Grout. We can now move on to the consent agenda. Mr. Bowwin,

consent items for deferral. Item three, MCUP 126, 7740 and 9400 through 9500 Pettit Road. Proposed sand and gravel mining operation located on the south and west side of Pettit Road, north of Comey Drive. Deferred by the planning director to July 20th. Consent items for approval. Item four, SNC 126, Bowmont Lane to Eliza Bowmont Lane. Proposed street name change for Bowmont Lane to Eliza Bowmont Lane located north of Mountison Drive west of South Aadian Throughway and east of Parker Street. Item five, Cup 810 St. Joseph's Academy. Additional parking 2927 and 3015 Bruceard Street. Proposed parking lot on property located on the north side of Brussard Street east of Arlington Avenue. Items six, CS626, Johnny W. and Saber G. Turner Track 19760 Pride Baywood Road. Proposed flag lot minor subdivision located on the south side of Pride Baywood Road east of Hall Road. Item 7 CS 726 Jesse L Web Property 1624 Wyoming Street. Proposed flag lot minor subdivision located on the west side of Wy Wyoming Street west of Nicholson Drive. Item 8 CS826 Jerry B. Noble Track 2162 Cheney Road. proposed flag lot minor subdivision located on the east side of Cheney Road south of Milldale Road. Planning Commission staff certifies that all of these items are consistent with the comprehensive plan and the unified development code.

Mr. Chairman, we have a speaker card for item five, conditional use permit 810, St. Joseph's Academy. This item will be taken off the consent agenda and heard in regular agenda order. Thank you. Commission members, you have heard all the items that have been placed on the consent agenda that are to be taken with one vote. Are there any members of the planning commission who have an item on consent that they would like to be pulled and heard as part of the regular agenda? Do we have any members of of the public present who would like to speak on any items that are on the consent agenda?

Yes, sir. Which item would you like to see pulled? Did y'all hear that? Does he need to come up? It's conditional use permit. St. Joseph's Academy. That item will be heard in regular agenda order and be pulled from the consent agenda.

Are there any additional items from the public? Seeing none, is there a motion? Motion from Commissioner Addison, second from Commissioner Eller. Are there any objections to accepting the items that have been placed on consent agenda? Seeing none, these items have not been approved and we can move on to the regular agenda. At this time, I will also make a motion from the chair to reorder the agenda and take items number five that was pulled and item number nine prior to taking item number two. Is there a second to that motion? Second from Vice Chairman Grout. Any objections? Seeing none, we'll move on to item number five, Cup 810, St. Joseph's Academy. Cup 810 St. Joseph's Academy. Additional parking 2927 and 3015 Bruar Street. Property is located on the north side of Bruce Street, east of Arlington Avenue, Council District 7, Harris. The applicant is Susie Adler. It should be our land use designation is residential neighborhood. The applicant is proposing a office building and additional parking for educational institution. The existing zoning is single family residential with no request and zoning change. Cup 810 St. Joseph's Academy additional park 2927 and 3015 Bruceard Street. staff certifies the proposed request meets the minimum criteria for conditional use permit being consistent with the comprehensive plan compatible with surrounding uses and conforming to UDC requirements.

Thank you, Mr. Baldwin. Commissioner members, at this time I will open the public hearing and invite the applicant to speak for a period not to exceed five minutes, 15 minutes, excuse me. Uh, good evening. My name is Thomas Taylor and I'm uh with Reich Landscape Architecture as a representative of St. Joseph's Academy. This is a plan that we previously submitted four years ago and was approved by this commission. It's um some small connectors between two existing parking lots on campus. There's a disused building that's going to be removed and another building that will be remained and repurposed into an office. All this property is currently already existing on St. is campus and it's um mostly just a minor connector between two parking lots and uh some addition to the paving of the driveway of the the lot that currently has a house so that the it could be oriented to have the parking in there for the for the use that it actually currently already has within that that space. This is a all property that's already on St. Joseph's campus. We're asking for approval on this and um and I don't think I have too much to add.

Okay, if you guys have any questions, happy to answer them. Thank you, sir. We have one additional card that is in favor. Uh I don't believe they wish to speak for Evan Faulnau. Okay.

We have one card that is in opposition for Michael Atinson. You have the floor for three minutes, sir. Good evening. My name is Michael Ainson. I'm a resident who lives directly next to St. Joseph's Academy where their proposed parking lot expansion will be built. I strongly oppose the plan going deeper into our neighborhood. Although the proposal shows parking being built around an existing house, St. Joseph's already has taken so much from the neighborhood. This is not just about one property. This is about the continued expansion of institution into a residential neighborhood. I live directly next to the existing parking lot. along the private alleyway of Arlington and Brussard. I have personally documented flooding and runoff issues caused by this. This is my backyard. It's another picture. And this is the alleyway of Arlington. So adding even more pavement, parking and runoff is irresponsible. In addition to drainage concerns, traffic is another major issue. Um, with the addition of new stop signs around Sou Eugene and Kleiner, it is only worsening traffic causing residents to be trapped in and out of our own streets. St. Joseph's already owns significant property on the opposite side of campus near Parker Street and Kleiner Avenue. It is a giant lot that could potentially be evaluated for alternative parking options. Instead, the school continues pushing outwards into residential areas. At some point, the city must decide whether residential neighborhoods still matter, especially a historic one like the Garden District. The residents who

live here deserve to have our concerns taken seriously instead of constantly being expected to accommodate institutional expansion. I'm rejecting this proposal because there's so many alternatives. Thank you.

Thank you. At this time, I I'll invite the applicant back for a fivem minute rebuttal. Um yeah. Um there already this property that we're trying to develop here is actually not an expansion of property into the neighborhood. It's only 20 28 29 parking spaces. I can't actually recall what it was in the plan, but it's um they're going to remove a building that they're not using and connect it with a driveway. There's no expansion further away from campus. This is all property that is centrally located within campus and it's actually completely surrounded by other parking lots already. So that is the position that this this is located in. So it's it's not going to expand any further and it's just located with centrally within campus.

Okay. Thank you sir. At this time I'll close the public hearing and invite any questions, comments from the commission. Commissioner Ellander, I make a motion to approve. There's a motion on the floor to approve this item from Commissioner Eller. I believe that motion receives a second from Vice Chairman Grout. Are there any objections or any further discussion? Seeing none, that item is approved. At this time, we will move on to item number 10, excuse me, item number nine, U wireless tower 226, Ver Verizon Wireless Facility. WT226 Berta Verizon Wireless Facility 4354 South Sherwood Forest Boulevard. Property is located at the west side of South Sherwood Forest Boulevard north of Corsy Boulevard, Council District 8, Amarosa. The applicant is Pamela Turner. The applicant is proposing a 125 foot wireless communication tower. Future BR's destination is mixed WT226 Versa Verizon Wireless Facility 4354 South Sharewood Forest Boulevard. staff certifies that the proposed request meets the minimum requirements of the unified development code for planning commission consideration.

Thank you. At this time, I'll invite the applicant uh open the public hearing and invite the applicant to speak for 15 minutes.

Hi. Uh good evening. Chip Lions, 2011 St. Charles Avenue, New Orleans, here on behalf of Vera Wireless with respect to the pending zoning application. uh Verta would be constructing this tower so that Verizon can locate its equipment on the tower to meet coverage and capacity needs in this area. The tower also would be designed to allow up to two additional carriers in addition to Verizon to colllocate their equipment on the tower. So it would have room uh ultimately for uh three wireless providers. Uh the property is zone is zoned rural, but the property and all of the immediately adjacent properties are used for commercial purposes. Um because the tower is located on a relatively narrow lot which is only 110 ft wide, we're requesting waiverss from the applicable setback requirements that would apply. Um the actual setback of the tower from structures, commercial structures on adjoining properties is about 170 ft both to the north and to the west. And again, those are uh all this is a again zone rural, but it's a commercial use for this property. And it's in a commercial strip that's about a third of a mile wide. And it's basically right in the middle of the commercial strip. Um the nearest residence is about 850 ft away from the proposed tower. So we certainly don't expect any adverse impact on those residences and again by providing additional uh cellular and data service in the area. We think having this tower there would be a benefit to the to the surrounding neighborhoods. Um, we don't have any issues or comments with regard to the staff report and would respectfully request your approval of this matter and certainly happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hul. Have we received any additional speaker cards for this item? Mr. Chairman, there's no additional speaker cards and there's no opposition of this item. Thank you. At this time, I'll close the public hearing and invite any questions, comments, or motions from the commission. Mot motion to approve.

There's a motion from Commissioner Maxi to approve this item. That motion received a second from Commissioner Addison. Any objections and further discussion? Seeing none, that item is approved. Commission members, we will now move on to item number two, plan amendment 226, Plan Baton Rouge 3 small area plan. Item number two, plan amendment 2-26, Plan Baton Rouge 3 small area plan. The plan focuses on the downtown historic core of Baton Rouge, generally bounded by the Mississippi River on the west, Oklahoma Street, Nicholson Drive, and Myrtle Avenue on the south, and the Canadian Pacific Kansas City Railroad corridor to the east, Chuckaw Drive, and the adjacent Railsburg extending towards North Street on the north returning the Mississippi River. Council District 10, Coleman. This plan focuses on the Baton Rouge downtown core and city center. This item will adopt plan B 3 and amend the community design and neighborhood element of future BR to reflect the adoption of the plan as official small area plan. Plan B 3 identifies land use, transportation, economic development, cultural, health, and safety action to enhance the character of the downtown core while respecting the area's role in development and history of Baton Rouge. Staff recommends approval considering consistency with the comprehensive plan and the public enga engagement process utilized throughout 2025 and 2026.

Thank you, Director Hulcom. At this time, I'd like to recognize Eric Dexter, vice president of civic leadership initiatives at the Batroo Area Foundation. Mr. Dexter, thanks for being with us here this evening.

Thank you for having us. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh, Director Hulcom, members of the commission, uh, Councilwoman Coleman as well. Um this is a a very special day for us to be here because we've spent the past year and really about a year and a half or so working with our consultant team led by Sasaki and we have principal and lead planner here uh Mr. Joshua Brooks, who will speak to you in just a second, uh with uh their mix of their local consultants, uh working with community stakeholders and many of our partners like the downtown development district, Visit Baton Rouge, the partnership, the planning commission, and the city parish uh of looking at what can we get more out of our downtown Baton Rouge in Baton Rouge. Uh we are are coming off the successes of playing Baton Rouge 1 and two uh which one started in 1998 and then playing Baton Rouge 2 going back to 2008 2009. So we've gone 15 years or so without an update to our comprehensive master plan in the downtown area. Uh but we know what we've seen with the successes of plan Baton Rougees 1 and two which have resulted in around $3 billion of a mix of public and private and philanthropic dollars and investment in the downtown area of what is the next phase and how do we plan for the next 10 to 15 years. And so uh what we have today is a a final master plan that we're presenting to you for uh approval and adoption into future BR. Um it is a about 148page document. So we will squeeze as much as we can into a 10 to 15 minute presentation. Uh but we'd be happy to answer questions after the presentation. Uh I'll introduce Mr. Joshua Brooks, a Baton Rouge native, but as I mentioned, he's a lead uh planner and a principal with Sasaki who will take you through the presentation. Thank you.

I was actually going to read all 180 pages to you. I'm just kid. Just kidding. Brevity brevity. Um thank you all for having me. This is the second time we've presented to you all. Um, this has been an incredible partnership with BRAPH and and the DDD and so many others. Um, and and we really could not have done this alone. I think the the civic ecosystem and the civic leadership that Baton Rouge has um presented through this process, as somebody who works around the country on these types of projects, I I I can tell you that it was unique. um the sense of ownership, the sense of consistency in terms of what we heard the vision for Baton Rouge uh and downtown, excuse me, downtown was. Over the course of 12 months, uh we engaged thousands and thousands of residents uh in person, online through small conversations, large conversations. Hundreds of individuals showed up at our meetings uh that we had three large uh workshops. Uh thousands of people participated in our online surveys uh and and gave a very consistent message around what they thought the opportunities and constraints of downtown Baton Rouge were. Um the plan is really grounded in a regional understanding and a and a context that that downtown really does have to serve the broader region uh and the surrounding neighborhoods. uh all of the recommendations position themselves within other things that are happening in the context of economic development trends, transportation trends, land use trends that are happening so that what is being recommended is not an isolation but rather something that can position Baton Rouge uh for the broader future and a plan that can be for everyone, not just the residents of downtown. Um the plan is really grounded uh around a notion that of of strong community connections. uh something that positions quality of life infrastructure, economic development, land use regulation uh

around a central vision for a downtown that is better for all. At the same time, it really does position downtown as a riverfront city and really does position uh uh uh re key recommendations around how to better utilize the riverfront that we have. Now this has been a central theme throughout uh conversations and there have been other plans. I think what distinguishes this plan is a a series of very pragmatic uh uh and and an outlined roadmap uh for how to make that happen over the course of the next 10 years. The plan recommends a series of things uh prioritized recommendations that would potentially bring in $10 million of additional sales tax revenue. uh $27 million of uh uh annual property tax revenue, create thousands of new jobs, bring thousands of new residential uh units down here, and does position a substantial amount of public investment. But all of that is centered on catalyzing private investment. And so this plan, while ambitious, is also one that is grounded in market realities. Uh we conducted a comprehensive analysis that looked at three six lenses of history, people, market conditions, the landscape uh links or or connectivity and the neighborhood character. And those really grounded the recommendations that the plan ultimately makes. The structure of the 180 page document uh that Eric outlined really is centered around six overarching guiding principles. All of those guiding principles then lead to what we call big ideas, but really the the vision statements. And then within those vision statements, there are very specific recommendations about 80 in total um that are either physical projects, policy recommendations, potential partnerships or additional programs that

could be delivered. Those are grounded uh with planning metrics and KPIs that can be tracked over time and are positioned in a phasing spectrum that starts with the most important and catalytic things first. Uh the guiding principles of a market d of bringing in market diversity are really centered around creating a a series of uh institutional investments to bring people downtown, to bring students downtown, and to bring businesses downtown. On the other side of that are the quality of life things like programming and activation, promoting a diversity and housing, and the creation of mixeduse hubs that position around existing corridors. We also focus a lot on the cultural and civic components of downtown. How to celebrate cultural identity, how to celebrate a story, and how to create a unified program of walks of discovery or signage and wayfinding. We also outline a series of transportation upgrades to create clear connections uh by redefining certain confusing intersections and circulation patterns by stitching and weaving together uh recent and and planned uh uh transportation improvements and by creating transit oriented decisions so that we're not just building a bus rapid transit line but really doubling down on what that means to ultimately increase wrership. And finally, a new front porch. This is really the centralized feature of the downtown plan. Uh the the plan positions two overarching riverfront anchors, one in the north and one in the south of downtown. It provides recommendations for continuous access to the river and along the river. And then it really does double down on how to develop along the the river's edge by taking advantage of public and privately owned land to to provide catalytic investment along the riverbank. All said, it creates two miles of

activated riverfront. It creates an opportunity for 5,000 new residential units that are positioned to attract over 7,000 downtown residents across a broad constituency of users. Um, students, workers, state employees, families, and retirees can all find a place in this plan. All told, the early investments equate to about $1.5 billion, which would track very similarly to what was seen after Plan Baton Rouge 1 and two. And these are very much positioned around spurring private investment in our downtown. Things like a catalytic riverfront playground for children that positions the the new river center development as a place for everyone and not just for tourists. A place that that brings the state capital complex to the riverfront and creates an opportunity for riverfront jobs and and corporate expansion. A place that instills quality of life and public realm enhancements across the neighborhoods of downtown to ensure that places like Bogardtown and Spanish Town can continue to serve as remarkable residential neighborhoods and attract even more residents. Within the plan, there are four very uh uh strong ideas around the riverfront. The notion that in the north, a sports and entertainment complex and mixeduse complex could happen in partnership with the public and private land that exists around the casino. The idea that riverfront uh uh development along the surface parking lots along Laurel Street can create highdensity housing that connects to the levy front uh and provides a continuous pedestrian experience. the transformation of the River Center and the convention center area into a much more lively daily life experience and the the enhancement of incre in increasing residential housing along the riverfront and the creation of a large riverfront park um on the south side of downtown.

Moving back into the downtown area, the plan is complemented by a series of more tangible and and pragmatic uh considerations for the existing neighborhoods. how to infuse quality of life infrastructure, ground flooror activation, streetscape and public realm enhancements into downtown east along Main Street into Bogard Town and the creation of what we call a new southern gateway really uh uh strengthening the connection between LSU and downtown. All of those come together in the downtown framework plan. Um that really does uh position a a a clear set of priority corridors, priority nodes for that reinvestment over the course of the next 10 to 15 years. That is positioned around three overarching phases. The first of catalyze, the second of grow and the third evolve. And the reason why these are not called phase one, phase two, phase three is because there will be overlap in these. uh plan really is meant to be a living and dynamic document and this intention of organizing these is to really give priority to what should be focused on first. There are also a number of quick wins and I'm not going to read every single thing here, but in addition to the larger capital improvement projects that are called out, there are a number of regulatory changes, financial incentive programs, and other sorts of of programmatic considerations that existing partners can take on and run with today. The plan, and this is really not meant to be read, the plan is also incredibly detailed. Each one of those earlyphase projects has what we call a cut sheet that outlines immediate action steps, potential funding mechanisms, cost considerations, and ultimately the economic impact that each of these projects could have. We also outline a plan um uh an implementation plan that really works to organize the civic ecosystem and civic

infrastructure that already exists in downtown into a stronger set of relationships uh that can really focus on on action being taken. At the end of the day, this is a vision for downtown Baton Rouge, but it is a vision that is grounded in place and it is a vision that is pragmatic. and I thank you for your time today.

Thank you, sir. We have a couple speaker cards, excuse me, that are in support but that do not wish to speak. The first is for Johnny Palazado and the first is for Ann Brick. We have one speaker court that is in opposition that would like to speak. That is for Michael Grace. You have the floor for three minutes, sir.

Good afternoon, everyone. Um, I'm Michael Grace. I'm an attorney at Taylor Porter, and we have uh two important client considerations we just wanted to put on the record here today. Uh, one of our clients, GRO REO LLC, uh, as an owner of a $12 million piece of property north of the Queen Casino downtown where the proposed sports complex is going. And just for the record, they would like to object to any sort of reszoning or proposed resoning of that property. um for recreational use. We also represent First Presbyterian who recently purchased uh for millions the block north or east of them in between the interstate and the existing church. Um which the block which the plan has noted as N8. Uh it looks like it is being proposed at least to be changed to residential. Um and they would like to object to any sort of resoning or proposed resoning for that. And uh for Groio, just for the record, it is R six on the map that they would like to object to any sort of resoning, proposed resoning um for their property located there. Thank you.

Thank you. At this time, I would like to invite uh Braph or Sasaki to address uh the concerns raised.

Great. I I'll take the first one uh or really just in general and then I'll ask Josh to chime in. Um the plan is designed of course to be it's illustrative uh not necessarily prescriptive. Uh it's both aspirational and inspirational. Uh so uh not any necessarily like regulatory guidelines what the plan would necessarily implement or make concrete. Of course it's just conceptual uh but we welcome uh many of our partners and downtown stakeholders and land owners uh to develop to make Baton Rouge downtown Baton Rouge as great as it can be. So, we welcome any type of catalytic catalytic investment that will take place. Um, I'll ask Josh to come up if he needs to add anything else. You good on that? Okay, great. Okay. Thank you.

And on that note, just to state for the record, I've taken a couple calls this afternoon on this, but this plan does not change the zoning or the ability to restrict any specific property from future development rights or entitlements that they have now. Comprehensive plans and specifically this item, a small area plan, which is to be part of the comprehensive plan, are visionary in nature. They're aspirational documents intended to help shape long-term growth and community goals, not rigid regulatory maps or fixed site plans.

Thank you for that additional clarification, Director Pulum. At this time, I will close the public hearing and invite questions from the commission. Uh, Commissioner Fowler. So, Director Hulcom, in plain language for first press, that means that their opposition to this, they're not going to be uh dinged at any for the new property that they purchased. They could still use it as as they the repurpose why they bought it. That's correct. Both of the properties uh you may note tonight, we're not changing the zoning of the property. the zoning that they've always had, they will still have that zoning and development rights tied to that property.

Okay. Thank you. Additional questions about the plan. I wanted to know more about the water park. Are we like there's a water slide in one of the slides. There's there was like you had some sort of water feature that was I I just I've never seen that in any other like thriving city. a water slide. There's not a water park. I think the rendering you might be referencing is outside of the LSM, which is a what's called to be a large scale children's playground. Not a water park. Okay. Okay. I I misunderstood from the photo. The large slide. Okay. But yeah, water park.

Any additional questions about the plan from the commission? Commissioner Boy,

just to be clear that so the one of the main things that you showed us tonight is this big sports complex and from my understanding from the gentleman's comments or or objections that property is not necessarily available for that. Is there other options for doing that? Because that seems like a major part of this plan. Like is there another do you have you have a plan B for where that would go if that other if it doesn't work out? Certainly, we would love to hear from the property owners what their plans would like to be. I mean, we want to lean into where the investment is going to come from from both private and public investment. They may happen. Um, so we would like to do this in partnership with everyone here, but we would leave that up to um each individual property owner to make that direction. Again, this is very conceptual in its design of what what could could potentially could be out of downtown Baton Rouge, but certainly not exactly how things are going to end up to 100%.

So, just just to make so I understand, I know I'm a little slow, but uh this the people who purchase this property, it's expensive property, obviously have some kind of plan for it already. Um, so you you say you want to do a partnership with them to produce this sports complex, but that may not be even on their in their any of their plans.

Yeah. To to clarify, and I'm saying we as a lot of the folks that are, you know, involved in in the planning side of things um in partnership with what what they want to do with their property. So, we're not necessarily directing them on what to do with their property. This again was aspirational of what could be potentially. Um, of course based on a lot of the feedback that we got with the thousands of surveys and of course with Sasaki's expertise of what they're seeing and trending in downtowns across the country, but we're certainly going to lean on first and foremost what the property owner wants to do with their investment. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Dex. Does that answer your question, Commissioner Boy?

Any additional comments? I'm sorry. Questions on the plan from the commission? If not, uh, comments. I believe Commissioner Coleman would like to make some comments.

Okay, here we are. I say good uh, great evening to everyone. Um and and your question there regarding other folk property, I know that they ought to know better than to think that telling other folk what they can do with their property. Ain't that right, Eric? Yes.

Uhhuh. Yeah. Yeah. And so first and foremost, I want to uh thank the different entities. You know, you got Braph, you got Sasaki. Also want to acknowledge uh Whitney here with DDD. She's and for the leadership and the vision and all the commitment throughout the plan. Baton Rouge three. And keep in mind plan is the key word there. Uh Baton Rouge three process and it definitely shows about collaboration. And so I want the attorney that came up and talked about his the folk that he's representing. And I want them to make sure that you all have a conversation with plan BR here so that Yeah. But a lot of work have uh gone into this and true collaboration and the community stakeholders and the residents and the business leaders and the neighborhood groups and the everyday people has been a part of this. of public partners and uh just would not have gotten to this point without all of the many meetings and conversations that have been had. And so, uh, today is just about a, uh, uh, is it's not about a plan on paper, but it's one that must be, um, true collaboration, especially with the folk that own the property that you're talking about and

everybody being inclusive here. And so the all neighborhoods and this just not a downtown nothing either. So all neighborhoods and so plan uh Baton Rouge 3 and other things that are coming about will be um true collaboration and connecting South Baton Rouge with North Baton Rouge and that is of utmost importance. And so just uh grateful for this step, one step uh investment that's being talked about and put before us to move the Baton Rouge region and the parish and the city downtown and all of the other North Baton Rouge and all of the others and uh District 10 for sure forward together. And so with that being said, and so a lot of this is still a little fluidy, isn't that right, Eric?

That is correct. Right, Sasaki? Speaking to the mic. Yes.

All right. Just want to make sure now. And so with that being said and this truly being transformational, then I so move that uh this be accepted be and I just There's a motion on the floor from Commissioner Coleman uh to approve this item. I believe that motion receives a second from Commissioner Fowler. Uh any objections? Any additional comments? I'll make a few. Uh just as someone that was that was born, raised here, that was educated here, that's built a career here, has had the opportunity to serve the parish on uh several different uh boards in several different capacities. It's exciting to have the opportunity to support a plan like this. Obviously, there's a lot of collaboration, a lot of work that went into this. Uh this plan looks to build on a lot of our past momentum while positioning downtown for the next era of investment and innovation. Uh a thriving downtown as as many of us know uh creates ripple effects across the entire region from economic development to tourism and our ability uh to attract talent uh to the area. So that means investing in housing, mobility, public spaces uh and experiences that people will uh want to take part in and want to return to. So this is a result of a a large collaborative effort uh to create a stronger, more accessible and dynamic uh downtown experience for the residents and for those who uh choose to uh uh be uh participating in that tourist group. So, I thank Braph, I thank Sasaki, the downtown development district, the project partners, the community members, all of those that dedicated their time, their vision, their expertise uh to bringing this initiative forward, and I thank those that uh chose to come to the meeting, those that uh voiced opposition to it to make make sure that their uh

their input was heard because every every plan that I support uh in any role that I've had the opportunity and the honor to participate in uh one of the things I value the same thing the way this commission values as public feedback and making sure that everybody has a voice and that's able to be heard and even things that aren't uh rigid as director Hok said but are uh evolving and meant to be inspirational but continue to get uh feedback so that it can constantly evolve into the things that can best serve this parish. Those are the things that I'm happy to support. So with that being said, there's a motion on the floor from uh Commissioner uh Coleman to approve this item. That motion received a second from Commissioner Fowler. I don't believe there were any objections. So, at this time, uh, we will approve this item and move on to, uh, director's comments. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, a few things I want to bring your attention to. There was a recent resolution passed by the Metropolitan Council requesting that the planning commission department review and amend applicable sections of the Unified Development Code related to data centers. Uh, we'll be looking into that issue and bringing a future text amendment uh, in front of you in the coming months, and I'll keep you updated on that. And of course that will have a staff report that will be heard by this body and ultimately go on to the Metropolitan Council. The next meeting of the planning commission is scheduled for June 15th, Monday, June 15th. And I do need to note the planning commission office will be closed on Monday, May 25th for the Memorial Day holiday.

Thank you, Director Hulcom. At this time, we will move on to commissioner's comments. And I will begin with congratulating uh the newest employee of the month, Osa Marie Hopkins, who is an administrative specialist of the Long Range Planning Division. Marie is being recognized for her willingness to take on new assignments and for her work with the city parish document management system to scan and archive case files. Maria has worked diligently to prepare the documents and have them properly scanned. She's been a critical backup for other clerical when needed. She's also communicated with lead agencies to provide updates for the planning commission annual progress report. She's a valuable employee who is very deserving of this recognition. Please join me in congratulating Marie. Are there any additional comments from the commissioners? If not, is there a motion to adjourn? Motion from Vice Chairman Gr. Second from Vice Chairman, I'm sorry, from Commissioner Fowler. Any objections? Seeing none, this meeting is adjourned. Thank you all.