LAPLACE — An ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances to effectively protect more than 40,000 acres of wetlands north of Interstate 10 as well as regulate several historic districts was adopted by the St. John the Parish Council this past Tuesday night.

Concerns raised by at least one parish resident and apparent confusion among some council members who seemingly did not comprehend the intent of the ordinance resulted in the measure being tabled during a September meeting, but the council, minus the approval of Councilman Larry Snyder, appeared more unified in its support during this week’s relatively speedy meeting in LaPlace.

The ordinance, which establishes an Environmental Conservation Zoning District, places severe restrictions on a 43,000-acre tract north of I-10, which, coupled with mitigation costs for developing existing wetlands, makes it highly unlikely for any substantial development. In fact, the ordinance calls for one house on every 25 acres, and Parish President Natalie Robottom said any development would likely be in the form of raised camps, or perhaps recreational parks.

Robottom said approving the ordinance was critical because the current Rural Zoning designation of the area allows for higher density development and potential commercial commerce.

“This ordinance is much more restrictive,” Robottom said, adding that the regulations also prohibit any damage to the wetlands. “(Previously) you could do plenty of things out there.”

She told Snyder that the type of development he was concerned about going in the area was allowable before the new ordinance was crafted.

“Now, this is going to restrict (developers) from doing that and help to leave it a wetlands area,” she said.

Causing greater confusion was an area apparently carved out of the new ordinance boundaries that is located south of I-10, near the Belle Terre and Cambridge subdivisions. The area, which is marked by a curve in the yellow line on the zoning map, is where a recent Planned Unit Development (PUD) was recently rejected by the council, after nearby residents expressed their disagreement in a meeting that drew a standing room only crowd.

Malik questioned director of planning and zoning Rene Pastorek as to why the zoning line was not simply drawn along the entire length of I-10.

Malik, who sided with the neighbors in opposition of the proposed PUD, expressed concern of a similar development being proposed in the carved out area.

“I see a lot of development and no formal drainage,” Snyder added.

Pastorek explained that at the time the zoning lines were drawn, the proposed PUD was in the approval process and was about to be rezoned for development. Because of that, he said the area in question had to be excluded from the original ordinance map, but he and Robottom repeatedly stressed that any future rezoning requests would require council approval.

“I don’t like the way this smells,” Snyder said. “I would hate to think (the carved out area) is being influenced by some special interest group.”

Pastorek re-emphasized that the process would have been the same no matter how the ordinance map was originally drawn.

“Any future rezoning must go before the council,” he repeated.

“Even if the yellow line was along the interstate, it doesn’t change anything,” council member Jaclyn Hotard said. “Any developed can ask for redevelopment at any time.”

The ordinance also protects several historic districts in the parish, including Main Street in LaPlace.

Council members approved the ordinance 6-1. Snyder was the lone dissenting vote.

 

Richard Meek is a contributing writer to L’OBSERVATEUR.