GONZALES — None of the members of the Ascension Parish Planning Commission wanted to make the motion to approve the unpopular plan for the Harvest Fields subdivision.
After more than two hours of residents urging the commission to stop the development, Commissioner Mark Villa moved to reject the project. None of the other commissioners seconded his motion. A second is required before a motion can be discussed or votes cast.
Commissioner Max Nassar, who chaired the meeting, told the other commissioners that someone needed to do something.
“We’re going to sit here until we get a motion and vote,” Nassar said.
After several minutes of sitting in silence, continued discussions, and a brief recess, Nassar made a motion himself to approve the development.
His motion also failed to get a second.
Commissioner Michele Unitas reluctantly offered a substitute motion.
“Sadly, I feel like I’ve failed you all,” she told the audience.
Her motion was to approve the plan with the caveat that all necessary environmental testing be completed before any construction could begin.
Resident Jeffrey Nolan, a retired environmental scientist, has warned the commission that he sees what appears to be a reserve pit associated with a long-abandoned oil well from the 1970s. Such a pit could contain hazardous materials, he said.
Unitas said she wanted to make sure any potential contamination is investigated before construction begins.
The motion passed with Unitas, Nassar and Cross Marchand voting in favor. Villa voted against.
Only four commissioners voted because two abstained and one was absent.
Commissioner Wade Schexnaydre announced that he would abstain because of a business connection to one of the companies involved in the project, but left before the end of the meeting. Commissioner Erik Jones said he also would abstain because a family member owns some of the involved land.
Commissioner Nicholas Miller was absent from the meeting.
The subdivision plan calls for 115 lots on a nearly 38-acre plot of land off La. Highway 44 south of Bertville Road.
Attorney Tom Easterly presented the proposal on behalf of Dantin Bruce, the developer. He acknowledged that many of the residents at the meeting would likely disagree with his conclusion, but told the commission that it wouldn’t be appropriate to reject a plan that meets all the standards set forth by the parish.
“There’s been a very in-depth review of this proposed development and it meets all of your criteria,” he said.
The commission rejected a similar plan for the subdivision from the same developer in February. It was first discussed at a January meeting, but was deferred for a month.
Dozens of residents – some of them speaking to the commission about it for the third time – had concerns about traffic, flooding and school overcrowding.
Many cited development rules that they claimed made the proposal impossible to approve because a traffic study indicated that some already-overwhelmed roads and intersections may be worse for drivers if the subdivision is built.
Mark Taylor took one intersection – North Burnside Avenue at Germany Road – and said the traffic study indicated that drivers’ experience there, which is already frustrating, would get worse.
“This board controls the land decision that would even add even more traffic into a broken intersection. Our residents, emergency responders and daily users will pay the price in dangerous queues, increased crashes and endless delays,” he said.
Joe Rozier, who said his house was one of the first ones on Cotton Field Avenue, said he didn’t see substantial changes from the proposal the commission shot down in February.
“I don’t know why we’re still standing here. Nothing’s changed. It’s gotten worse,” he said. “It’s like a frickin’ Twilight Zone. Please think about what you’re doing.”
Dina Lejeune, who lives on Woodland Avenue, said she’s concerned that roads connecting the subdivision to her street and to Cotton Field will dangerously overwhelm the narrow streets, which don’t have sidewalks. She said Harvest Fields should be reconfigured to have its own separate entrance and exit roads so their streets won’t be used as cut-throughs.
“Will homeowners have to take legal action against the planning commission?” she asked. “Leave our neighborhoods and homes alone.”
After hearing from all those who signed up to speak to the commission, a list of more than 60 people who were at the meeting and opposed, the project was read into the record.
No residents spoke in favor of the subdivision.
Then the commission turned its attention back to Easterly, the attorney representing the devleoper.
He said that while he recognizes that it is a difficult decision, the commission can’t just reject something because it’s unpopular.
“The landowners’ rights have to be taken into consideration,” he said.
Planning Director Eric Poche told commissioners he had reviewed all the documentation and spoken with his staff and the firm the parish hired to do the traffic study.
“I’m confident that it meets the code,” he said.
Villa said that the parish has a lot of work to do in terms of roads and infrastructure.
“We’re not a rural community anymore,” he said. “As a parish we really need to look at that.”
Download the Unfiltered with Kiran app from the Apple App Store and Google Play to stay updated on the latest news across the Capital area.
Support UWK and its mission to deliver The News You Deserve. Unfiltered. Become a monthly patron on Patreon today!
