2026-10-13 - City Planning Commission

All right. Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to today's City Planning hearing. Get started with roll call. Commissioner Jackson, Commissioner Abare, Commissioner Josie Gupta, Commissioner Flick,

Commissioner Whitrey's present, Commissioner Worden, Commissioner Stee, thank you. I'm going to read the rules. If you all are here to speak, please go ahead and fill out a card and then notice so

that staff can come down and grab it so that everyone can speak. We have a large docket item today and lots of speakers, so I want to make sure that we can get through everybody. City Planning

Commission has established certain rules governing the procedures to be followed at public hearings. Before speaking, each person shall give their name, address and state her he or she is

representing. Proponents for the proposal will speak for a period of 10 minutes. Each speaker will be allowed a maximum of two minutes. Opponents or other interested parties will speak for a period of

15 minutes. Each speaker will be allowed a maximum of two minutes. Proponents will be allowed a period of six minutes for rebuttal. Each speaker will be allowed a maximum of two minutes. Opponents

will not be allowed to rebut. No material written matter, photographs, maps, etcetera will be accepted by Commissioner or staff at any time during this public hearing. This procedure shall be followed

except at such time and the proceeding officer shall, with the approval of the Commission members, present and extend such time. We'll get moved on to our first docket item, which is, do we have the

minutes, Mr. Crowl? Yeah, Commissioner Flick will move approval. Thank you so much. Is there a second? I'll second. Thank you. Any questions or discussion? If not, let's vote. This is the approval for

this September 22nd meeting minutes. Commissioner Jackson, Commissioner Abare? Yes. Commissioner Josie Gupta? Yes. Commissioner Flick? Yes. Commissioner Witchery is a yes. Commissioner Jordan? Yes.

Commissioner Stiek? Yes. Thank you. So the meeting minutes have been adopted and we're going to move on to the first zoning docket. Who would like to start? Good afternoon. We are here to consider

zoning docket 3626, which is a request to City Council Motion for a text amendment to the CZO to define day centers and any related uses to consider whether these should be permitted or conditional in

any zoning district or overlay and to implement appropriate use and design standards for the uses not limited to density requirements, soundproofing, and safety measures and other regulations

necessary. The request has been deferred several times, most recently at the CPC meeting on August 25th for 59 days. Today is 49 days from that hearing. However, the Council imposed deadline is

October 23rd and today's hearing is the last one that the request can be considered to comply with the Council's deadline. The commission asked staff to consider a number of considerations at their

last meeting, which we will spend the majority of this presentation reviewing. Here is the current and previous recommendation provided for the definition of data centers. The staff's proposal

essentially creates four categories, accessory, small, medium, and large or hyperscale. Accessory data centers would serve primary use at a site and would be no larger than 2000 square feet and would

take up no more than 20 feet. Small data centers are up to 20,000 square feet with no greater than 5 megawatts of power. Medium data centers are up to 100,000 square feet with no greater than 20

megawatts of power and large or hyperscale data centers would be any data centers beyond the medium thresholds of 20 megawatts or 100,000 square feet and these would be prohibited citywide. So

additional considerations. So as previously mentioned, the commission at the last hearing requested for staff to consider additional items. That analysis is provided in the report and will work

through each one today. It should be noted that there is a hesitation to add specific power or water use requirements or restrictions in the zoning ordinance. This is for a number of reasons.

Violations would be enforced the same way other zoning violations are enforced. A license would be a better place for power and water restrictions because utilities are regulated by the council and

their utility office. This would have more informed and appropriate oversight into any specifications and because the technologies are changing so rapidly this could be a moving target. So lowering

the floor of medium to 10 megawatts to limit the areas that would allow small data centers. Staff considered this but ultimately decided on no changes. Energy use can vary but is comparable in

districts that would allow medium. So add standards about water usage to help define each category. There are regulations around water use for data centers and other jurisdictions but staff did not

propose making any changes primarily because the quantity of water is undetermined. Staff did find some examples of water consumption by use type but none included the use of data centers

specifically. Third consider a larger distance than 500 feet from residential zoning districts for the distance buffer. We did look at increasing this buffer distance from residential to 750 feet and

1000 feet and the images are in the report. However the 500 feet appears to be limiting enough from the residential zoning district. We have a slide showing an example but 500 feet is roughly from the

property line of City Hall to the property line of the main library and we'll show that in a minute. Fourth considering allowing or requiring that medium sized data centers utilize their own power

plants to ensure that they're off the grid. Staff considered this but chose not to make any changes instead staff recommends that the council and Cura closely consider what types of regulations and

requirements should exist around power and coordinate that within the city code. Set a cap or max or limit of total data center staff considered this but determined not to make any changes. Setting

caps is not a common practice for us in the zoning code and we think this could have more unintended negative consequences and benefits overall. If a data center would be interested in coming to New

Orleans they would be required to go through the conditional use process which would provide oversight for each new data center. Review institutional allowances or exceptions for universities and

hospitals and make sure they are relegated under one of the categories small medium or large. The institutional allowances for universities and hospitals would require any data center to go through

the conditional use process for smaller medium data centers and those would be required to comply with all the use standards including the buffer restriction. Expand the buffer requirements to schools

and residential care facilities staff considered this but maintains the proposal to establish the buffer restriction by zoning district instead of specific uses. We have seen buffers by use type

established in other jurisdictions for data centers. We looked at the buffer for residential and this is proposed as the proper buffer type and distance. Okay. So that all data center information is

public and not secret specifically. So staff asked legal about adding a provider requiring all information be public and including some language around rescission of a conditional use for approved and

then found to have provided information privately. This turned to be problematic. The process requires that all materials submitted to us our public record and so are accessible to the public. Also

council retains a right to rescind a conditional use once it's granted and this oversight is included within the proposal require that the city's guidelines exceed the international building code

guidelines. The IBC guidelines for data centers are not yet complete but once they are the city code could be amended to reflect them if necessary. The zoning code would not be the proper place to

point to the unfinished guidance but we certainly recommend the council to review the guidance once it's available and make any necessary changes to the city code if they are needed. Developing clear

utility standards and approval criteria. Staff looked at examples of more specific regulatory standards and concludes that while there could be a benefit for greater more broader reviews staff does

not recommend any changes to the proposed text. As proposed the staff does not provide by right permissions for larger data centers that could be negatively impactful and steadily allowing them by

conditional use. Staff also requires the request be considered by energy and sewage and water board each of which would issue pre review statements any additional standards would best be managed by

city council establishing ongoing monitoring and reporting requirements. Staff did review this and recommends adding an additional use standard to require an annual compliance report and reporting to

safety and permits. This would be to ensure compliance with any zoning requirements but particularly any consumption of water or power that the data center was set to comply with. Clarifying

enforcement mechanisms and consequences for non-compliance ultimately the council can rescind a conditional use which is really the ultimate enforcement mechanism. There are also standard enforcement

mechanisms through zoning and code enforcement that could be pursued but no changes are proposed. Evaluate evaluating required close requiring closed loop cooling system staff looked at looked at

requiring closed loop liquid cooling systems as opposed to open loop systems. Staff believes this type of regulation is best determined by the council with advice from curo evaluating cumulative

cumulative citywide utility impact limits the council as the oversight body for energy and sewage and water board is the appropriate entity to review and regulate cumulative citywide impacts. However

staff is recommending an annual compliance report be submitted to safety and permits to include information on any water power consumption as a means to check if the project complies with the

provisions approved by the conditional use process. Strengthening standards for backup generation backup power generation staff look at regulations around backup power and does recommend making one

small change to add emergency into the into the use standard so it will read on site power generation is prohibited except for emergency backup supply purposes. Developing decommissioning and site

restoration requirements there are some concerns around data centers leaving hazardous materials of abandoned staff believes this would be regulated by the fire department or potentially Louisiana

Department of Environmental Quality and does not recommend any changes to the proposed tax. Developing emergency response and shutdown requirements staff does not recommend any changes as a result of

this consideration new structures will need to be developed to withstand and maintain current operations through storms that are a threat to New Orleans. Staff is supportive of zoning and city code

regulations that require backup energy and encourages the use batteries and clean power sources in lieu of fossil fuels for recommends that this language be addressed by city council evaluating

whether pending data center building code standards warrant additional provisions as earlier discuss staff recommends future adoption of the data center guidance being developed by the International

Code Council likely to be reflected in the city code. Okay size regulations in a real world context so we have some examples of visuals that can be used. This is City Hall a small data center which

would be conditionally allowed would be up to 20,000 square feet which is just under the size of one floor in City Hall. Okay this is an example of a data center in Baton Rouge these are just some

example photos from literally Google Maps and the website from dark points but it's just to provide general information for the public this is a 25,000 square foot data center in Baton Rouge. This is

another one this is a just over 5600 square foot data center by dark points and Shreveport. This is the example of the Lumen data center that's 1250 Poitras Street and they occupy a suite within that

building. This is our real world example of a buffer restriction which is from the property line of City Hall to the property line of the main library this is 569 feet but it. All familiar with City

Hall and so this is an example of what that distance would look like all right recommendations use standards we're going to go through these again that were previously presented a new data center

would be required to have a review and consideration from enter G potentially a water board certainly building permits and these would be stipulated in initial considerations considerations as part of

the use standards. The first all data center applications for conditional use must be pre reviewed by curo energy. Suasion water board and a statement of review by those agencies must be provided to

CPC before an application can be made. Second each application would be required to include a general impact assessment to provide information on electrical load water usage expected noise levels and

a description of the mitigation efforts to be undertaken. The building and site design is largely similar to other industrially permitted use types which are required to comply with the underlying

zoning districts regulations for bulk yard design landscaping staff includes density and distance restrictions first all data centers must be 500 feet from all residential zone properties and

industrial districts data centers must also be 500 feet from one another and in the CBD only one data center is permitted per building to limit the potential for multiple for multiple units within one

building any facility that was approved by conditional use must seek a re approval for any expansion of the use either by physical square footage increase in consumption of energy or water or other

expansion and metal medical or educational campus subject to the master plan requirements could seek an entitlement by way of the conditional process institutional master plan process that data center

would still be subject to all the use restrictions and the distance and density restrictions on site power generation is prohibited except for emergency backup purposes. Lastly, a new annual

compliance report would be required. It would require that each each property owner submit an annual report to the Department of Safety and permits on particularly water and power consumption. Use

permissions, small data centers would be conditional uses and mixed use CBD and industrial districts. Medium data centers would be conditional uses in industrial districts and CBD seven large and

hyper scale data centers would be prohibited city citywide. The map showing the locations that could conditionally allow small or medium data centers. This is the map with the 500 foot buffer from

residentially zoned districts. That concludes our presentation staff recommends approval of proposed languages with language with the modifications and we're here for any questions. Thank you. Before

we get started, I would like to ask if a fellow Commissioner could suspend the rules, uniting and strengthening New Orleans East neighborhoods and businesses submitted additional information. We

should all have that up here, but we'd like to make it as part of the public record. I'll make a motion to suspend the rules to accept the material. Thank you. Is there a second, a second emotion.

Thank you. Commissioner Jordan and Commissioner a bear. Yes. Thank you. And any discussion. Now we'll go ahead and vote. Commissioner Jackson. Yes. Commissioner a bear. Yes. Commissioner flick. Yes,

Mr. Josie Gupta. Mr. Which is yes. Commissioner Jordan. Yes, Commissioner see. Yes. Right. The motion carries. Yes. I have a comment. So I'm noticing what this is October 10th. That was this

particular correspondence. And did anyone receive comments from Eno knock on 20 on September 29, because in that correspondence and I just wanted full disclosure, they had my email because I used to

work with that organization. But in that particular document, they had CC all of us as commissioners. And I feel that we should ever see a hard copy or an email with that information. I believe that

all the email communications that we received were included in the packet date. I'm sorry. When when was that when the packet went out last week, last week with the staff report, there's a there's the

staff report and then there's all the attachments and that includes all the correspondence that we've received. Okay. And the one dated August 10th, that one we received today, everything that we

should, everything should be in there. If it's not, we can certainly make sure that it is in there. I'm just going to request that when it comes when this is received by the CPC that it is sent to us

on that date. And at a later date. So when when did we receive the packet. So what the CPC rules suggest is or require is that anything that is submitted to the CPC in writing is packaged with the

staff report and distributed to the commissioners a week prior to the meeting. So it's been, I think there have been three meetings that this has been on the agenda. So all of the written comments

that we received prior to each of those three meetings should be part of the record already. And if there's something that is missing, please let me know and we'll make sure that it is really, and I'm

just referring to the September 29. And this one that we just received while it was emailed on October 10. So the September 29 one is the recommendations that were changes in the in the report. Yes.

Right. So I know that the staff report did respond to some of those suggestions. Well, actually, it's a request by extension of deadline for CPC action. Yes. So, and I can respond to that if you would

like. Yes. So, so as you all recall at the last hearing, you know, now could requested a 60 day delay, and the commission adopted a 59 day delay that corresponds with the 120 day limit that the city

council put on the motion itself in other words, the city council extended the typically 60 day review period for the commission, ended that 120 days that authority for you as commissioners to

consider this application expires on October the 23rd. So the 59 days that you all granted extended through October the 23rd, our regular meeting schedule as a meeting on the 13th and the 27th. So, we

were unable to dock at this for the 27th for consideration, because that would have been beyond both the extension that you all the deferral you all adopted, as well as the extension that the council

adopted. So, after receiving, you know, next letter requesting the extension, we reached out to Councilmember Hughes office we reached out to Councilmember Morrell's office to see if they were

supportive of having the council grant an additional extension based on the request, both of them directed us to pursue the current timeline, which is to have this hearing today on the 13th. And so

that's what we are doing, we do not have the authority to do anything. And then any later meeting, beyond the 23rd. Thank you for that explanation. I think you're also referencing are you wanting that

October 10 notes to have been forwarded to us on October 10 important. Yes. So, I think that's just the point that she wanted to make is that this was potentially received on October 10 and she would

like for the commission to receive information as they've received it. So, let me just say we're happy to do that. I'm just what my hesitation is is that the CBC rules of procedure, do not allow us to

do that. And so that's why I brought it to the meeting today, to have you all suspend the rules. And that way, you all could spend the rules and have it on officially on the vote and incorporate it

into the record and that's, we don't have the discretion at the staff level to forward things that come after the deadline. Just for clarification, if we are CC on some correspondence, you're going to

place it in a packet. Yeah, because the community does not have our email addresses so we cannot get it directly know anything so they shouldn't have your email addresses. We should be the ones

receiving any correspondence that goes to the commission, and we package it up, and we send it to you all as commissioners. And the reason for that is that we want to make sure that you all are

working from the same information. So, if you are, if you all are receiving things, different information so that different members have different. Yeah, no, I appreciate that I was just thinking that

if CPC gets your office gets it. Yes, and we're listed on the documentation that we could be sent it through CPC, and not an individual. So, yes, anything that we receive we forwarded to you as part

of the package. Okay, and anything that a commissioner receives they should forward immediately to Bob's office. Yes, we will. If it's within the deadline will include it in the packet. Okay, thank

you for addressing that so the rules have been suspended commissioners have had an opportunity to review this additional information. We are now going to go into the. Can I make one more statement yes

of course so anything that does come in after the deadline, we don't throw it out, we put it into the transmittal that we send to the city council, so they are considering it on review, it includes

that as well. So anything that comes in after the deadline still becomes part of the record it's just, it's not something that is considered by the CDC. Thank you. We're going to move on to our public

comment, we have no cards and support of this docket item and no cards and informational only it looks like we have straight opposition, we have several to get to. I'm going to call three names at

once so please be prepared so that everyone has an opportunity to speak. Kenyon Smith, you have nine cards seated to you, you get what we have 18 minutes are under our new rules that will be different

but we've not unless someone's suspending the rules to address this. No, I think we need to get through everything unless we haven't necessarily followed those. Okay, Mr. Smith, you have 18 minutes,

and then Oh, Roland. Roland Barth, and Ahmad Jabbar, you're after that. My on. Yes, you're on. Good afternoon, members of this steam body and the commission. Thank you for this time and thank you to

my fellow citizens. As I said before, my name is Kenya Smith, I live at 7033 Lake Willow Lake Willow Drive, I am the interim president of the East New Orleans neighborhood advisory commission

affectionately known as you know not representing over 80,000 residents and representing a fair mileage area, which represents 65% of the city of New Orleans so this, as you will certainly understand

is a critical issue, particularly because these types of developments need land. And so while this is a city wide issue. It impacts certain neighborhoods in a prescribed way, I'd like to start first

with a couple of just procedural notes and want to commend again the staff, Mr. Rivers for for their work. And please don't take anything that is said as disparagement on your, your dedication and

commitment to the citizens of New Orleans. However, as a trained lawyer and a law professor that was admonished one time in the past by a fellow professor said you can't get to your substantive

argument. If I tie you up in procedure, that being that procedure is an important part of everything that we do those who watch football knows that if you have a false start you can never score your

touchdown. And so we have to make sure that we follow our procedures, the planning commission has to follow its procedures the city council has to follow its procedures in on egg has to follow its

procedures so on, and so forth and so with that, I know that the letter that most recently was, was considered under your rules. After the deadline for submitting public comment. There are some

comments that we would have in another frame, regarding the any tweaks that you would make to your rules because we believe that we have some public input that we would offer there as well in

considering what is public input versus or public comment formerly versus other submitted communication but we'll hold that for a for another day one of the things that I stated in my letter for

everyone's benefit was it sounded unfortunate that this matter was placed on this agenda. Last week. However, if you check the city of New Orleans website the city planning commission's website, the

public notice for this meeting did not contain this item that agenda that item that public notice stated in it that any public comment had to be submitted, eight days prior to this meeting. So the

agenda was amended to place this item on the agenda. After the eight day time limit for public comment had passed. We find that to be fundamentally unfair we believe that that does present some legal

issues we strongly encourage you to consult with your legal counsel regarding that matter and it is one of the primary reasons we believe it would be premature for you to move forward with respect to

this matter to our second point, regarding the 59 days it is my understanding and my reading of both the law and policy that if a body votes for a particular time period. It is not within the purview

of the administrative staff to shorten that time. And so, even though the minutes of the meeting of August 25 was not were not provided publicly, which is another matter that we'll address again at

another time. But the my view of the video that was made available, as well as the CPC staff report, they both cement and they both reinforce the fact that this body as was noted, did vote to defer

this matter for 59 days. And so, a plain reading under the law of 59 days means 59 days, it does not mean 39 days it does not mean 49 days it does not mean 69 days. Now, I understand and do accept the

explanation that was given to you that to to defer this matter beyond the time limit given by the City Council would have legal implications for your consideration of this matter, but I would

respectfully suggest to you that that is not germane to the primary consideration for you as an independently appointed body that you do your job, and let the City Council do its job in a separate

matter. My reading of the zoning code is that this body if it does not consider a matter like this report in a particular timeframe that it is considered a denial by this body. So you do not get

arrested you do not go to jail you do not have any other consequence if you do not move on this matter if you do not approve it today, other than it would be an effective denial I'm happy to be

corrected if I if I am in error in any way, in any way there with respect to any direction, admonition or other advice that was given to the city by the City Council, or any members there are who are

good friends, but we did request that that that that body, extend your period to allow that we did not or have not as of today, received a response to that we will we will address that with them in a

separate consideration but that does not change what the law and what policy provides that when this body acts that that traps us into the time periods and that straps us into the procedures that are

that are to be adhered to in that particular in that particular context. There was, man, there was another phone lock up on. Hold on, I'm gonna get it back won't take me too long. Come on. Here we go

to. So to the, to the point also that was that precipitate this there were as I appreciate it to council motions, one council motion as you all to study this issue and to consider it make your

judgment and then send the judgment to the city council there was a separate. There was a separate city council motion that that that provided for interim zoning district or an IZD and those who don't

know what an IZD is, it is provided as I appreciate it and again I'm willing to be corrected if I am in any way an error, provided under our city charter as well as under the city code ordinances for

essentially a moratorium, per the per the charter and per the code that moratorium exists for one year, that IZD was put into place on January 28, meaning that that that IZD will be in place until

January 28 or 27 depending on how you want to count of 2027, the charter and the code is I best appreciate it allows the council, should they should they see in their judgment to do so allows them to

extend that IZD for an additional six months, meaning that should the judge should the council exercise its judgment not only would we have until January 27 or 28, but six months beyond that, in order

to make sure that we have the appropriate public input make sure that we have the appropriate exchange make sure that we have the appropriate give and take that is the hallmark of our democracy.

Again, I do appreciate the work that this that this staff has done. However, us as we as a public being able to view it a couple of days before the meeting, we believe is not sufficient, I will

acknowledge that I did receive a call and a couple of emails to meet with me and to meet with in on that are regarding our concerns and the like and I do appreciate, honor and acknowledge that

however, we do not believe and I've always learned in my in my life, I like to think of it as a short life but as longer than I than I than I'm willing to admit at times, that this is not about me.

When I worked in public service in a previous life I had to learn that. And I, and I hold that as a dear precept now. This is not about Kenya Smith in fact this is not even about enough. This is about

how we as a citizenry will move forward with setting policy that will have very serious consequences to our residents. We see our friends our family our neighbor and our fellow Louisiana is across the

state, and we see Americans across this country struggling with this issue. How do we deal with these types of matters. And so, even though I will suggest and I will admit that these are all well

meaning people who have put together this packet that sits before you, as I've said before, having the sewage and water board, having energy, having the council offices and having, and having your

staff to be the ones who decide and meet about this policy and you with two minute increments from the public unless somebody loans their time to somebody else. But I'm sure after today is definitely

going to change the way with having that type of public hearing, I would respectfully suggest is not adequate. I did listen to the listen to staff respond in many ways to very serious concerns that

were expressed by members of this commission. I listened very intently when you express those concerns I listened very intently. When you ask the staff to, to analyze those in the light we in the

public would have loved to have had the opportunity to review those responses to you, our representatives on a commission like this prior to you having to make a decision like this. And so hopefully

and I'm and I promise Madam Chair, I'm not actually going to take all of the time is going to be a surprising remark, not going to filibuster you lawyer and the son of a preacher that's going to be

probably a brand new thing. But with that, I do believe, you know, son of a preacher they close like four times but Jackson is a bad thing. But this body has its own judgment its own discretion that

it is to exercise I was admonished again as I was doing research and we were preparing for this, regarding the history of the city planning commission, and I say this as I take my seat for real, that

I look back or some research was handed to me as to a change a fundamental change that was made to the structure of the city planning commission under former Mayor moon Landrieu, as a state

representative and then the council member and then being mayor, and like certain other certain other boards. The commission as I appreciate it was once under city administration, but it was

determined in that infant wisdom that this needed to be an independent commission, and it needed to exercise judgment that without fear or favor would be able to speak its will in ways that then other

bodies could respond to they could agree with they could disagree with one of the point again that I make in the letter so I close with an encouragement to you. In the words of a new hip hop song,

given everything that I have said and hopefully that you will consider. What is the rush, let's work together. We are not opposed to what you are trying to do. We believe that we are better working

together to do something that we can all be proud of. Let's do it right together. Let's not just do it fast. Thank you for your time, Roland Bart, Roland bought a 6416 Pines Boulevard, New Orleans,

Louisiana, President of Pines Village Association. It's kind of hard to follow that attorney right there. But what I am here he asked me to speak on some environmental issues because I'm a retired

engineer for the years, and what I'm trying to explain to the to your body is unintended consequences. Most of y'all haven't been to engineering school so you don't really know the consequences of a

decision made prior to having research done. If we use cooling towels and I use an example of this city hall building, they have a cooling tower on top of this roof. If I took all y'all up to that

cooling tower and let y'all stay up there 45 minutes, I guarantee within six to eight months, all of you have respiratory trouble. And that's the point I'm making. I don't need the whole two minutes.

I just need you all to consider the time that it takes to do the research before you approve a community data center. Thank you. Good afternoon, I'm mad with the party for socialism and liberation and

take back power campaign. Let's talk about medium data centers where they would go and who they would impact as defined in the proposal. A meeting data center can consume the electricity of 20,000

homes or a small town each the proposal places them in industrial districts near communities such as desire lower ninth Ward New Orleans East historically black working class communities that have

lived alongside industrial development and all of their negative consequences for generations. And now that same history of environmental racism that concentrated industry around these communities in

the first place is being used to justify putting even more of it there. You yourselves raised serious concerns about this proposal back in August, you sent the proposal back to staff to address those

concerns and seven weeks later, what do you get a couple minor changes and many pages of excuses us staff to look into the combined strain these facilities would put on our utilities, they rejected

putting limits on it, pass the buck to city council saying that it's their problem, and suggested monitoring consumption after data centers are already operating us about protecting homes and schools

staff rejected that too because it would give developers fewer sites to build data centers on us for solutions. Instead you got explanations on why you should leave them unresolved. You recognize

something was wrong with this proposal months ago, and staff has not given you a single convincing reason to think otherwise city council asked you to determine where data centers belong in New

Orleans, nowhere is an answer to that question. You are not obligated to find a place for them. Reject the staff recommendations advise city council to establish a total ban on new data center

construction in New Orleans, and stop making me take time of work to time off of work to come here and tell you the same thing over and over. I do want to, I do want to remind everybody that you need

to state your name and address. Prior to speaking, Cecilia pause Deborah levy permanent and Kendall Barry. Good afternoon, my name is Cecilia pause I reside at 141 South guys so street in New Orleans.

I'm an organizer with the Louisiana party for socialism and liberation as well and the take back the power campaign to stop energy from getting permits to build power plants for this giant data center

and Richland parish. One aspect of the report is really trying to draw a distinction between these hyperscale data centers and the data centers in New Orleans. I read y'all's new report, which, as

others pointed out is very difficult to find online it's not linked in the main agenda on the NOLA.gov website which is a violation of people's democratic input on what's being built in our city. And

I can only assume that was on purpose because we know the playbook of City Hall. But since the last meeting, the CPC consulted with East New Orleans Neighborhood Advisory Committee, which is good, but

that's not consulting with the people of this city, and even then you rejected most of that bodies considerations that people of New Orleans live all across the city. People don't want data centers

all across this city and these two additional changes really do not reflect that fact, an annual compliance report that should be the bare minimum for us to know what's happening in our city it's not

because of lack of democracy that really permeates the institutions of New Orleans, and a stipulation that backup generators can only been used in emergencies, you know, we're not opposed to that

either but again, this doesn't alter the negative impacts of data centers on working class people and the environment. And it doesn't change the fact that data centers can be built 500 feet from black

working class communities in New Orleans East and the industrial canal under these recommendations that they will set up our water resources they'll set up our grid our power. It doesn't change the

fact that data centers do not create needed economic benefits for the people of New Orleans. I'm almost done but I want to point out energy should not have any say in what is being built in the city

because we do not trust them at all and they suck. Good afternoon my name is Dvor Levy Perlman 3343 Esplanade I'm a volunteer with the take back the power campaign and the party for socialism and

liberation, and I'm mobilizing here today because we all see this change in the zoning code for what it really is although it's cloaked in technical language, we understand it's an attempt to bypass

democratic processes and silently steamroll over working class black communities in our city. I remember earlier this spring, the targeting of New Orleans East for a data center project that only got

a moratorium on it because the people showed out in opposition. This is environmental racism. Why is it these communities always face the most industry have to be faced with the biggest inconveniences

communities that the system is already neglecting and oppressing and squeezing and putting these things in without their input. Is it not enough that we already have Cancer Alley? Is it not enough to

have millions of Louise They're forced to live and barely able to breathe with petrochemical ants in their backyard, an oil rig in their front porch, and now a data center. Everyone in this city can

plainly see that this entire process has been characterized by a total lack of transparency and concealment or denial of the already limited channels for community input. Why is the Commission

reconsidering this zoning docket when the people of the city already came out nearly unanimously to loudly oppose it? It's because the city would rather prefer to quietly pass this amendment without

our input. It doesn't go unnoticed that the Commission waited until October 6, the day after the public comment deadline for this meeting, to publicize the proposed change to zoning. The agenda item

is also missing from the website. It's on the main NOVA.gov website. So the people's voice has been effectively cancelled. And yes, we have elections, we're supposed to be happy and stay quiet because

we get to vote for public officials every few years. But what working class people got to vote on data centers, what working class person got to vote on our utility bills going up, what working class

person got to vote on their community being abandoned? Hello, Commissioners. My name is Kendall Berry. I live at 2230 Bienville Street. I'm an organizer with the Take Back the Power campaign and the

Party for Socialism and Liberation. I'm a local artist and taxpayer and I'm here today also missing work to urge you to vote no on this text amendment. As many others have stated with wonderfully

extensive research to prove it, this text amendment is nowhere near sufficient enough to adequately protect the people of New Orleans. From the harmful effects of data centers of any size. New

Orleans, bless her heart, already has water filled with lead and PFAS forever chemicals, a power grid that fails all the time, and a totally outdated water system with pipes bursting regularly. We

already have infrastructure problems here expanded only by the looming threat of another big hurricane and more data centers in our cities will only make them worse. And 100,000 square feet,

constituting a medium data center is shocking to hear you all consider. On top of all this, as people pointed out, there's been barely any transparent public process for this whatsoever. There's not

even a live stream of this meeting right now. People care about this a lot. And for this very meeting, like Deborah said, the digital public comments were due October 5th and the revisions were out

until the 6th. And undoubtedly there would have been more public comments commenting on these very minimal revisions. It's clear that we have a long way to go before anything defining data centers and

how they should be handled in this city can be approved by the city planning commission. That is if they are truly concerned with the well being of the occupants of their seat. Thank you for your

time. Thank you. Eloise Rustin or Keith Graham and Lauren Zander, please remember to say your name and address you each have two minutes. Eloise Houston 4026 Marais, I'm just a citizen. We're

witnessing people across the country and here in Louisiana experience the negative impacts of data centers on the communities they are built in from environmental impact to strata infrastructure to

excessive consumption of limited resources, data centers wreak havoc on our communities and these are only the immediate consequences. We have no idea what will happen in 5, 10 or 15 years. The

situation calls to mind coal mines, refineries and other industries whose greed left lasting impacts on the land, lives and bodies of the citizens in the areas on which they were built here in our

city. You are the barrier to that same horror occurring here. It is your responsibility to ensure we do not befall yet more disaster in New Orleans, Louisiana. I see no consideration of heat

generation on your on your ordinance. I advise you to please consider that 500 feet is not limiting enough. It is not enough. I appreciate all you have done. Thank you for your time. Good afternoon.

My name is Keith Grady g r a d y. I live at 346 39th Street, New Orleans 7 0 1 2 4. I grew up in New Orleans. I'm an old man. I've been gone for a long time. I came back a little over a year ago. I

was shocked to hear that the city was considering data centers of this size. When I was a child, I heard a lot about the character and the historic nature of the city of New Orleans and how we would

do everything to preserve our heritage here. The historical heritage, the architectural heritage, the other things that make this city a unique and wonderful place to live and for people to visit. And

then I hear 100,000 square foot data center is a medium data center. Sounds pretty big to me. The heat generation aspects that Miss Houston just mentioned are significant. The noise we've all heard

stories on. Well, like I said, I'm an old man. I listen to the radio and I hear on the public radio that, you know, the noise levels coming off of these data centers are just unsustainable. And the

neighbors living near these things are hearing the noise all the time and it's destroying their quality of life. Having that sort of thing going on in areas that are historically underserved and

historically discriminated against just perpetuate what I've seen all my life here. You know, I grew up at a time where we had separate water fountains here. The city was segregated and I witnessed

the changes through the Morial and Landru administrations. Don't go back. And what's the rush? Like Professor Smith said, what's the rush? There's no rush to put these. Thank you. After Lauren

Sanders, Frederick Ball Jr. in Bailey and Cortez Dairnsburg. Okay. Hello, my name is Lauren Zander. I live at 7806 Belfast Street, 70125. I also was raised and born and everything happens here for me.

As a resident of New Orleans, first I want to thank you all for the time you have dedicated to this issue. But I also want to urge you to put forth more thought before moving forward. In agreement

with local guidelines, I want to remind you that most of the legal requirement, I want to remind you of the legal requirement to engage the most impacted community members as you make this decision.

Truly economic development is vital in this area, but experiences across the country demonstrate both the consequences of an adequate oversight and the benefits of thoughtful regulation. These

investments must be carefully evaluated through transparent long term planning that considers existing community needs, future demand and opportunities to expand access to affordable clean energy.

Importantly, large energy users must bear the costs of necessary transmission of grades and additional generation rather than passing these expenses on to New Orleans residents. New Orleanians need

greater clarity on how developers will account for these costs and there must be protection for residents already facing significant financial burdens. I urge you to allow additional time for

research, community engagement and careful consideration before moving forward. Additionally, as a consultant and representative of the United Union of Concerned Scientists, I would love to offer

y'all support moving forward. The Union of Concerned Scientists has great technical resources and I would be happy to connect with you and provide more information as you take on next steps. All

right. Thank you. Good afternoon, y'all. Before I speak, I wanted to mention Derrinsburg. He ceded his time to me. Thank you. All right. Please say your name and address. Yes, ma'am. My name is Ian

Bailey, 2000 Lakeshore Drive. I graduated from the University of New Orleans with a Bachelor of Science in Planning and Urban Studies. We first, I want to thank you all for the fact that we have been

going back and forth about this issue for months now. It seemed, at least in the last two meetings, that there was a lot of energy towards actually implementing some of the things that we talked about

because we've been talking for months. But when we look at the recommendations that the staff put out in this last week, they glossed over a lot of the things that we talked about. So I have a few

notes that I wanted to share. One of them, I think first and foremost, we should just go back to the basics. I really like the example that one brother gave where he was talking about if you were to

just stand by the cooling tower, what would the impact be on your health? I want us to think about the fact that data centers are literally, as the definition said when they put out that proposal in

January, was a data center is a prefabricated office building for computers. So it is a building for computers. Y'all have laptops in front of y'all. Y'all probably have a console at home. Somebody

has been around a computer enough to know that when you get on really intensive software, it gets really hot and it also makes a lot of noise. You hear the fans running when you have your computer

running. So think about a building, a 100,000 square foot building filled with computers. That makes a lot of noise and it makes a lot of heat and 500 feet is not acceptable. And the only reason that

must exist is because y'all want to make it to where there is enough space to put these in multiple areas of the city. That's just because y'all can make the buffer bigger. That's just plain and

simple. Yeah, basically, it's just a computer and you have a room for the computers is going to create these issues. And we need to be looking out for residents when we do these things. I'm going to

wait till the next thing starts. You reset the time. Two minutes. For the people who weren't here, the previous meeting, thanks you, by the way. For the people who weren't here, the previous meetings

for the past year, I had been working on a project independent study where I was looking at sewage and water board and how many times they've had to issue boil water advisories. I found that between

February twenty twenty five and March twenty twenty six that they had to issue ten boil water advisories, six of which were in New Orleans East. So we already see and this is just a regular year

without any of these new industrial size uses. We see that the city can barely provide clean drinking water for the people who live here. In fact, Venetian Isles, which is in the far corner of the

east, they went 14 days, 14 calendar days without drinking water. That's unacceptable. It's shameful. It really is. And then, you know, you're going to say in your report that the pre review is needed

from the council utility regulatory office energy in the sewage and water board through procedures created by those entities. You all trust these people. I'm sorry, like seriously. I trust these

people to make actual policy that will protect the residents here. I don't believe it. I don't trust these people to make fair, ethical, equitable and transparent policies that help residents. I

don't. And it goes back to the question of what's the rush. We also heard from Brother Kenya that heard the city council motion. The moratorium is in place until January and can even be extended

further. Another six months. I read that too. So I agree. We have at least until January to continue to have a calm, collected discussion about what this looks like for residents. More research is

needed. There's a point on page nine of your report that says given the city's locations adjacent, given the city's location adjacent to water bodies, there's ample access to water. That's just not

true. And I want you to go and look at aquifers because if we continue to pump water out, whether it's from the lake, whether it's from the river or the Gulf or wherever else you want to get water

from, it's going to cause the aquifer underground to deplete, which leads to subsidence. A sinking in the city is already sinking. Please save us. Thank you. Frederick, Frederick Ball and Archer

Abraham after you say your name and address. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Frederick Ball Junior. My address is 4220 North Johnson Street. So I first just wanted to say I'm here representing

the lines for affordable energy and energy future in New Orleans, as well as a concern rate pair. Thank you guys for all your work on this report. I want to acknowledge that's no small feat, but still

we have work to do. And we need to defer this definitely in support of, you know, NAC and all of their recommendations. A couple of reasons why, you know, the scheduling, the revised schedules that

came out are standards that came October 7th. And then October 5th was the last time that people can make a comment for it. And so, you know, two days to take into all those comments. And then also

only a couple of days this meeting doesn't give folks who are really with community all the time, adequate time to address some of these things that are going to affect their communities in the

future. Obviously, we see a lot of people here in opposition to this. And so that's a clear sign to the commission that something's not right. And as an independent body, I really urge all to really

embody the spirit of why this body exists. And it exists to make sure that there's experts in community involvement with all stakeholders in the community. The Alliance for Affordable Energy did meet

with the staff. And we asked that some of the folks in the community that have been working on these types of issues have been included in these working groups. Seems like that didn't meaningfully

happen. But like others have said, there's no rush. There's still time right now. There's still time to get this right. Our country is investing like $1 trillion in AI and data centers this year. And

so we need that appropriate response on the other end to make sure that we regulate these these powers and make sure that the community is not negatively impacted by future data center and AI usage.

Thanks so much. And yeah, please defer this. Thank you. How are you doing today? I'm Artra Abraham, resident of of Little Woods 13123 I10 service role representing myself, support for Eno NAC and our

other groups concerning not having a data center in the east. The east wants development, excellent development at this moment in time as we are addressing the politics of the state. As we know the

clandery that is happening here in the state in a having legislators sign in the A's concerning development, the transparency behind the quality of life that residents need here is almost non

existent. And it's very important to state those things because we understand that the Department of Quality of Environmental Quality since 2021 and 2026 has not helped enforce any of the pollution

standards in the state. And that's just for Charles going in that we have have recently documented concerning cases going case by case throughout the state. So when we address the quality standards

that is dealing with New Orleans East from everything dealing with droughts in Bayou Sauvage to water quality advisories that have been happening within the east to dealing with infrastructure. Mind

you this would you want to board we've been doing a study for over 10 years. They have not kept their maintenance concerning the cash basis. And they have over 10,000 cash basis in New Orleans East

alone. So we address these things concerning the the conquest of many nonprofits that corporate large nonprofits that look to expand the imp their their stake in data centers to other entities that

look to expand energy centers. In the east and other areas of New Orleans. We need to fight for residents and we need that motion from you all that support to in opposition. Thank you so much for your

time. Thank you. Miss Johnson, are you wanting to speak? Is there anyone else? Yeah, okay. Just making sure I just tracking all the notes. Is there anyone else here to speak on this matter because I

don't have any other cards. Someone could bring them up so that we could. Thank you. So it looks like we have two more cards. Samantha Holland and Lizzie Pitts. Please remember to state your name and

address. You've got two minutes. My name is Samantha Holland. I live at 5805 Laurel Street in New Orleans. I'm a working class musician. I moved here about a year ago from Lake Charles, Louisiana. So

I'm no stranger to industrial devastation. But I am so disappointed to find the lack of transparency that my new city council operates with and much rather be at the studio improving my ability to

play jazz and blues right now and not having to spend my time fretting over whether this city which I already love so much will be sold to big tech for the slaughter. The people of New Orleans

overwhelmingly do not want data centers. We want lower utility bills, clean air and water and investment into the restoration and preservation of the infrastructure we have. We want investment into

our education, health care and jobs. Generative AI and privacy violating surveillance tech are consistently and intensely opposed by the people in this community if you're paying attention. And

neither do we want to be financially exploited by energy fund such a monstrously unnecessary development and it is your jobs as elected officials to make sure this does not happen. We want and need

zero data centers. We are in a worldwide climate crisis and potable water shortage. Louisiana has no extra water to give and the global climate is steadily heating towards a life annihilating point.

Water guzzling, heat producing, environment polluting data centers is the opposite of what we need right now. The fight against data centers is important everywhere in the country but as others have

pointed out today New Orleans is quite specifically unequipped to host these parasites. None of us will be immune to the devastating climate effects data centers bring regardless of how small or large

they are. We the people of New Orleans are saying absolutely not to data centers. [Applause] Hey y'all and Lizzie Pitts, I'm an up-down girl up at 1623 Bordeaux Street. I'd like to do just a quick

temp check in this room on the evaluation. Enter G and SWB are going to be a part of the group to assess. Anybody in here trust those two groups? Didn't think so. Anybody in here have an electric bill

that you're concerned about? Anybody had their energy go out in the last year? Anyone have to filter their water? Yeah so I think we're out on having them a part of the council to see if this is a

good idea. Next our environmental impact on heat generation. I will say we had a pretty cool summer. I know some of you may disagree. Last year I got an already text of 120 degree days. This year we

only had 118 degrees so maybe the climate crisis isn't in guys. Whether or not this data center is on the city's grid, it will use an exorbitant amount of energy. It will further perpetrate the

climate crisis of which we're bearing the brunt. How can you in good conscience approve a facility that will ultimately disaffect our cities and its residents? On water usage, we're already drinking

lead and we're drinking the cancer alley water but not only that in 2023 if you will remember. We suffered such a drought that the Gulf saltwater pushed up into the Mississippi. South Louisiana lost

potable water. We almost lost it. We had to engage with the National Guard to create a plan about how to bring in a million water bottles a day because we almost did not have enough data center being

500 feet from residential zones. You all said it's 500 feet to the library. I could yell about this loud enough from the library for you all to hear it in here. That is not far enough. These homes are

125 years old. I can hear my neighbors on the phone through the wall of my double shot line. On the economy, this will not create substantial jobs. AI calls 10,000 layoffs at my company this year. On

size, just because you make your data center have what you seem to think is a pretty design and landscaping doesn't mean it won't have grotesque impacts. Fines, we can include a penalty fine for

violations but to me that sounds like a subscription fee to violating our rights. Thank you. All right. Thank you all. There's no other cards to speak at this time. So we're going to close that

portion and move on to commissioners. Do you have any immediate questions for staff? Yes, please. Commissioner a bear. Commissioner a bear to go on turning the mic on. So in reading who you met with

it was the sewage and water board entity Department of Safety and permits City Council utility regulatory office information technology and innovation Department of Property Management. And I'm not

reading what any community members were involved in any of these discussions. So I'm also wondering also after the study refer to what should be done. Your study is actually referred to what should be

done if they're in operation. So also the staff meetings that were held me 13 June 17 and July 8 to discuss concerns or oversight of the use of data centers. I'm wondering since this was so important

that these entities were in your convening. Why are they not here to actually make any comments to discuss their findings. I would say that the you know the reason they were convened is because we

were tasked by the motion with creating a working group that would help essentially fill in the gaps. The planning commissions knowledge we are experts in land use and zoning regulations. We do not

you speak up a little bit more. I can say that our expertise is in land use and zoning. The planning commission staff the zoning regulations we implement do not generally touch on issues of

infrastructure availability and utility availability. So the you know the point of the working group is to bring in stakeholders that are going to deal with permitting on the water side on the

electrical side and regulating those considerations from the perspective of the council. And so I mean to answer your question that was the purpose of the meeting. They are not required to be here.

This is a set of regulations that we've developed based on their advice. And so that's why we're here and they're not. And I appreciate that. But in reading the study if they have any concerns any of

these entities about data centers come in into the community I think a lot of it. I mean I can respond to that. Yes. And I think that what we have recommended is in recognition of what Stephen said

that we are not experts on it. You know electrical usage not electric. We're not experts on the water board and you know I understand the skepticism about those two entities but under the law those

are the two entities that govern and regulate energy usage and and water usage in the city of New Orleans. I think the city of New Orleans is uniquely circumstances are situated because the city

council is the regulatory authority for electrical utilities and they are moving towards being the regulatory authority for water utilities. And so unlike any other most jurisdictions in the country

the municipality has a unique opportunity to put in regulations that address the specific concerns of New Orleans. We are not those experts. And so what we are recommending is two things. One is I

absolutely agree that there is more work to be done and I think that the council should be directing to water board and energy to come up with and safety and permits to come up with specific

recommendations about how data centers can be regulated. I'm also okay with the idea of I think it was raised by you know an act that the that there be a delay. I think the way I would envision delay

is to have the delay be on the effective date of the regulation. So because I think what where we are right now and I understand you know concerns about the timelines and the deadlines and you know

everything else that is built into the city planning commission's rules and have been you know for a number of years. There is there is a way to ensure you know land use and zoning are a part of the

puzzle. They're not the entire puzzle utility regulation is certainly important. Building code regulation is certainly important. Enforcement is certainly important. All of those things live outside

of the CZO certainly and outside of the CPC's authority but they don't live outside of the council's authority. So what we are recommending is that study be done prior to the effectiveness of these

regulations. Second thing we're recommending is that because these issues manifest themselves differently depending on where you are in the city. We are not recommending approval of anything by right.

Okay. We are recommending we are very aware of conditional use processes and how in a lot of cases they put a undue burden on things that are approval and should be approved by right. This is not one

of those cases. This is this is the type of land use that conditional uses are meant to address. And so in every case anybody wants to do a data center. They are going to have to go through a

conditional use process which is a public process before both the city planning commission and the city council so that the impacts and the issues that are raised for each individual puzzle can be

addressed in real time as they are going. Again we are not recommending approval or any. So I would push back a little bit on the idea of you're not being transparent. I think we are within the

confines of the regulations that we have to follow in terms of procedure. I think the worst thing that could be done is to do nothing. I think the council is counting on recommendations from this

commission and under the limitations that we have and again we reached out to you know NAC you know I have 10 emails that were copied me to set up meetings. That's what happened. I've got you know we

have reached out to both council offices to you know to forward the request to put the brakes on consideration of this both council offices said no we want to move forward. We want to get this moving

forward. So we are doing what we can within the limitations that we have. It is not a recommendation for approval here is not the final piece obviously has to go through city council. I do think it's

important as everyone has been saying that the water issues and the electrical issues new need to thoroughly examined. We're not the ones to do it because we are not yet. And I just want to say that

understand Mr. Smith that he does not represent the entire community. I'm thinking that he was leaning more toward the CPC needs to use their platform to reach out to the community and have a

community meeting to discuss this. But also I have one last question or does any neighborhood or community have a ban on data centers and early spare. So there is a citywide ban through the interim

zoning district and then these regulations are based on district and not geography not a specific neighborhood. Just quick question to staff can we could we get more insight on what happened in terms

of the public notice October 5th and 6th have been brought up a couple of times. And I'm just wondering what happened in terms of the public notice and then communication. Sure. I think there are two

things. One is the public notice requirement which is a requirement of every application that we need to publish notice in the city's official journal three consecutive weeks before the first meeting

that an application goes to. OK. What we do in conjunction with that is we post a public notice of we posted online on our listserv so that everyone who is signed up to a listserv gets that notice.

The requirement exists only for the first time an item goes to a meeting. OK. The agenda is a different thing. The agenda is what are the specific items that are going to be on the docket for

consideration on that given day. The city planning commission's rules determine when we release that information. So the public notice again has to be three consecutive weeks prior to prior to the

meeting at that point we do not know what it's going to be on the agenda because there's usually an intervening meeting where somebody something is going to get deferred and put on that agenda. So we

have to wait until a week prior to according to the rules before we send out the packet. Now there's been a lot of questions or a lot of concerns raised about the fact that written testimony or

written comments are due the day before the packet is sent to the commissioners. I understand that. And it's something that has been debated for as long as I've been here. Commission has consistently

directed us through the rules and procedure that they want to have everything in their hands that they are going to use to consider a docket a week prior to the to the to the meeting so that they can

take the full week to read the extensive staff reports that are submitted by the staff as well as all of the letters. All of these supplemental materials all of the site plans. They have a significant

amount of work that they need to review for every meeting. And so they would like to have a week a full week to do that. So what we have is a requirement that if comments are going to be considered by

the commission at a particular meeting they have to be submitted prior to one week before the meeting. And all that material gets sent to the commissioners. It gets released to the public. Everybody

has the exact same information at the exact same time to review in anticipation of the meeting. Anybody who has concerns with the staff report and the findings as you all have done are certainly

welcome to come and testify in person. And the commission is as they did earlier able to suspend the rules and introduce things into the public record at the meeting. We do not have the authority to

do that because our rules do not allow us to that answer question. Yeah. So I have a question for staff. Brian can you repeat the dividing lines between small and medium and the dividing line between

medium and large hyper criteria. So so we've am I right that the dividing line between the ceiling on medium before it becomes large is a hundred thousand square feet or 20,000 watts 20 megawatts.

What's the dividing line and yeah and and what's the dividing line between small and medium. Small is 20,000 square feet and five megawatts. Do you just lean into the mic a little bit. Small is 20,000

square feet. Five megawatts and medium is 100,000 square feet and 20 megawatts. Are any of 100,000 square foot examples that you gave us were those located that you showed us examples of 100,000

square. Any of the examples. No, they were not 20. They were not 100,000 square 100,000 square feet is about is just over half the size of a Walmart super center. I don't know enough about the

electric use to know what might be a different dividing line. But in the research that you did, are there other cities that have a smaller have more restrictive limitations on electrical usage. In

other words, are there other places that have medium stops at 10 megawatts. There are other places that have all different types of restrictions on electrical usage. And they don't always categorize

them the same way we're proposing. So, you know, you have some cities that have like moratoriums over 10,000 10,000 square feet or over 2000 megawatts. It really varies from city to city and

Commissioner Stig if I can add on to that, you know, part of what we looked at, because you raised the question last time as to whether that dividing line should be where it is. You sort of took the

regulations about where small and medium centers would be allowed and figured out if you can build an office building by right, what sort of energy draw would it be expected to have and so if you look

at pages 24 and 25 there's some rough estimates that speak to this district, you can build to x square footage and that would be expected for an office building for example, that would be expected to

have a certain energy draw so generally speaking, the 20 megawatts or actually five. And most of the CBD you can do well over five megawatts worth of development by right through the form of an office

retail or some combination thereof and so generally there seem, I mean data centers are certainly more energy intense per square foot than a lot of things, but given what the zoning permissions are in

those districts already and the allowable energy usage, we found that the small and medium limitations were consistent with that. So, excuse me so help me out a little bit so I don't have to go find

page 23. The typical office building, you found it to be megawatt usage of and give me a range or yeah so office buildings 100,000 square feet are generally within 1.5 to five megawatts of range.

There are some very crude district by district estimates that estimate that in a maxed out building in the central business district, you know, could have far over 20 megawatts of energy usage by an

office. There's a lot of assumptions that have to be made there because you're assuming there's no parking decks, everything is used in office space that the buildings are built to the maximum

allowable height and setbacks. Generally, these estimates are consistent with the power draw that you'd expect for development already allowed. Okay, but you said an office building was typically one

to 1.5 megawatts. But 100,000 square feet which is right for feed for stories of office, but you could have a medium sized data center of 100,000 square feet and 18 megawatts. But I guess the thought

is, a lot of these zoning districts allow 1214 floor office buildings and so if the zoning permission allows for that, then you're talking over 10 over 20 megawatts for the development for the office

building in its entirety so there's already sort of an implicit allowance for that amount of energy usage in the same location you could only do four floors of data center, but just just to be clear,

I don't believe the medium data centers are being recommended. Right. Yeah, I'm sorry, you're right. In the CD for example, you can only do one for essentially one city hall floor worth of data

center. So only five megawatts. Right. No, I understand. I'm more thinking of a medium in, honestly, in New Orleans, which just seems to be the place we saw the map where more of the potential sites

are. So my, my, I mean my reason I'm asking you to do this is I'm inclined to think that those limits are too generous, but I don't have the knowledge to pick an amount of megawatts. That's more

appropriate. Although, one approach could be to pick a lower amount of megawatts and and let the city council decide and get expertise to, to, to, to figure out whether a lower amount is appropriate.

Yeah, I mean, I think the thing I would say to that is that, you know, these are creating general thresholds that are the starting point for consideration for any particular application. Every

application is going to, number one, have to have a statement from energy that either the infrastructure exists or that they, that it can be put in at the expense of the data center developer, and

then there's going to be a site specific evaluation that takes into the effect the specific geographical context, who the neighbors are what the infrastructure availability is in the council which as

Bob said is also the city's utility regulator is going to have to make the determination. So what we're trying to do is give it again, what we found is that our regulations seem to match up with the

approximate energy draw the things that are already allowed in these districts, but that doesn't mean that there will be a right by right permission to anything at any level. It's going to have to go

through a site specific evaluation ultimately through the council. I will add to that, since the last meeting we did have a conversation with energy and they suggested that that 15 megawatts is

correct, maybe a more appropriate because I think what their explanation was 15 and above, typically requires infrastructure improvements. Is that correct? Yeah, that's transition to the

infrastructure so the transmission load is typically able to be handled at 15 megawatts as opposed to 20 that 20 would require infrastructure improvements, generally, but again it's a site by site

analysis of what is available at a particular location in the city what the grid. The existing infrastructure is what, you know, what what is possible in any site so, at least from energy perspective,

they were comfortable lowering that. Okay, good. Let's say we make it 50,000 square feet and 10 megawatts 100,000 is entirely too much. Do you have anything else commissioners see I just want to make

a few points. I wanted to address the noise consideration and the idea or the statement and the docket that there's going to be a noise levels at the property line I think we need to insist on a noise

abatement plan and insist on acoustical studies in some form of regulation that can be documented. There are acoustical consultants that has their job, where they're looking at not only cooling

equipment sound levels at property lines or within, you know, maybe there's an operational setback that can be considered so that you don't you're not allowed to install equipment right now it's like

three feet from a property line maybe that should be 100 feet from the property line depending on, you know, where these developments are happening electrical infrastructure in terms of those sound

data and then also just evaluating low frequency. The one item that really is characteristic of these data centers that you hear over and over again is this low res issue. That's really uncomfortable

and there are ways of mitigating that and there's documents about what that looks like but I feel like we shouldn't be doing anything even on a conditional use without a plan in place versus saying,

just tell me what your noise is at the property line I think it needs to be a cohesive noise abatement plan that we can hold to. You know, we have a New Orleans noise ordinance, we can edit that right

now the first offenses $50 for any noise offense. We should certainly update that or, you know, requested at the administration look into that to edit for data centers if that's something that goes

forward. Thank you. Do you have any other recommendations. Besides the medium density being too high was really just. Oh, I do have one more, which was that, you know, we talked about looking at the

international building code for their data on, you know, on data centers, but the reality is that that's just the minimum so whatever they're doing we should be requesting that they be more efficient

than that. And that could just be a percentage threshold it does baseline efficiency for a data center cooling is actually say improve on it by 5% or 10% and that's going to give you better

efficiency. So Commissioner flick if there were to be emotion and if it were to include modifications. Can you, could you put that last recommendation into words that would be part of a motion. I want

to remember to speak in the mic. Yeah, that's really comprehensive in the staff. Again, repeat the 500 foot, which category was that relating to the 500 foot buffer foot buffer is for from residential

zoning districts. It would cover the, it would be city wide, and it would reach within the areas that would conditionally allow data centers. So, we have the map. I see the map but is that for low

medium and large data center that buffer so large is is prohibited city wide, it would be for medium and small. So, I do think that should be larger. The buffer buffer. Yes, because I do feel that it

should be at least 1000 square feet, because 500 square feet you can see it you can, you can feel vibration through the ground. I live on a very busy streets, and you can feel vibration through the

ground. So I think it should be at least 1000 Atlanta Georgia has, I think one of those counties there has 2000 in the report that you have. Yeah, I, I would have to look that up directly I think

they're 2000 square feet or 2000 feet distance was near a specific type of infrastructure but yeah they do less 2000 Laura, could you do we have the 750 and the 1000 accessible at least a minimum of

1000. Let me just remind commissioners our job here is to define the data center, and we are not saying anywhere in the city this is, this is a conditional use and so we're getting into the details of

what that looks like so let's focus on some of the changes and be able to answer our questions on what we want to be able to potentially put in a motion. Yes, and as just as a, you know, fundamentally

I feel very strongly, you know, opposed to the data centers but I do understand a data center, for example call or for a hospital to have its own personal data centers, those, I am okay with and I

understand the need for that, but anything other than that I'm not sure if I feel comfortable with Madam Chair. Yes, sir. Yes, Mr. Steve, I'm, I'm going to make a motion to try to put something

concrete on the table and encourage fellow commissioners to make amendments of anything that they might be concerned about. So I'm going to make a motion for modified approval with the following

modification that the 500 foot buffer be increased to 1000 feet that the dividing line between small and medium be reduced from 20,000 to 10,000 square feet and from five, five megawatts to three,

that the dividing line between medium and large be reduced from 100,000 square feet to 50,000, and that the megawattage be reduced to 15. Commissioner Steve, would you mind just saying that again, my

handwriting can't keep up. Dividing line between small and medium 10,000 square feet instead of 20 and three megawatts instead of five dividing line between medium and large 50,000 square feet,

instead of 100 and 15 megawatts instead of 20 buffer of 1000 feet instead of 500, a requirement that any application for a conditional use, and I think it is important to note that every single data

center that wants to exist has to come back before this whole process where the conditional use that every application for conditional use include a detailed noise mitigation plan, Commissioner flick

if you want to add when I'm done, add some language to that. That have to be done through procedures established by energy sewage and water board, etc. I agree with the comment that I don't think we

got to entrust them to make those reports. So, my, my amendment is to say that those things whatever they are I don't remember the technical name be developed by the city planning commission and the

city council in consultation with those other entities but but that the final. Those reports be done by city council and city planning. And last, I'm going to suggest specific language that no data or

information that has not been presented to the city planning commission as part of the conditional use application may be presented to any other governmental agency or individual with respect to the

data center that is the subject of the conditional use. So, and what I'm trying to get out there is that nobody will be in energies office or in some other safety and permits office and tell them

something present them with data that they haven't presented to the city planning commission to be part of the record for the conditional use application. So those, that's all I got but I would

welcome. I think we should add the item about the energy improvement above code, please, for energy efficiency, and that can be five or 10% and I'm not sure what would make sense but there is a line

item in the energy code to the data centers and their air conditioning. So it would just be a more stringent. I shouldn't see rating for the equipment. I accept that amendment. Thank you. And then I

think if I don't know if you need to expand on the noise abatement plan, but just as well. Thank you. So we have a first and a second discussion please. Yes, another point of discussion. Now that you

have redefined the medium data centers, and do we feel comfortable with us with the large data center or should we continue with the band. Oh, no, I would say that. So this still is the band on the

large data centers, pretty wide, correct. I just want to make that clear. Yeah, I motion is not trying to change that we're talking about is the small and medium. Okay, correct. Commissioners if

there's no other discussion, then I'm going to call the vote, Madam Chair. Yes, one of the proposed additions is that the city planning commission prepare the report. Is that correct to give a

guideline I think the report says that energy just has to provide a statement, and I believe Commissioner see suggesting something a little more involved than a statement I think we need to hash out

what that looks like. So, what I was going to suggest is what our recommendation is, is that the applicant commit to certain level of energy use, and a certain level of water use that that commitment

gets reviewed by the regulators who exist, which is energy and Water Board, and is reviewed against the regulations that they come up with in terms of performance standards, and that those performance

standards are enforceable by Department of Safety permits. I think the concern that I have with and I, you know, thank you for your trust. I just don't think that we have the expertise for the same

reason that we are not making recommendations that are specific to energy and water consumption to draft in any credible way. I think a water standard and I, you know, I just want to impress upon it

you know we could get it completely wrong because of that lack of expertise and be allowing much more than is warranted, and I, I don't think that that's our intention certainly, you know, but I, I

think when you have city officials were not experts in certain subject matters being the defining. In our recommendations to the city planning commission, but I what I thought I heard was that we were

going to be producing the reports in conjunction with the city council and I'm just not comfortable with taking on that responsibility because we don't have the expertise. Okay, Miss Brian could you.

Hey, Brian, could you read the language that talked about the things being prepared by energy and through the waterboard. So, I can answer that, just because I pulled up the language, so it's

essentially requires a pre review application by curo energy and sewage and waterboard through procedures created by those entities. And so what I took your cut to mean is that the CPC and the council

should draft rules affecting those procedures. Yeah, could the procedures be drafted by city planning and the council, not the report, but the procedures. I'm happy to contribute in any way to that

would ultimately be the council's call. I thought what I heard was that we were actually preparing the report on a site by site basis. No, but I'd like, I would like the procedures, the wording that

you use the what you read the procedures that developed by was that the language that. So, but that those procedures be developed by city planning commission and ultimately, you know, adopted by the

city council CPC provides the framework with which everyone. Recommendations, and there's plenty of time to get this hashed out as it wants to get it come to council, and I'm presuming that when you

use CPC in that language you're talking about you all as the commission and not staff. Is that correct, we will review it and recommendation, you know, make recommendations and prepare their draft,

but you all will be approving that. Thank you. Yes. I'd just like to make a comment. Research was done with the information that was sent from Inuna. In fact, it's like starts on page 84, I believe.

But they did also a lot of research that I think would be helpful in, you know, making some type of agreed. All of the public comment today has been very fruitful in this decision making process.

Thank you for taking another day off of work. All right, we're gonna go ahead and vote. Commissioner Jackson. No. Commissioner a bear? No. Commissioner Joseph Gupta? Yes. Commissioner flick? Yes.

Commissioner Whittrey? Yes. Commissioner Jordan? No. Commissioner Steve? Yes. So we have four yays, three nays. So motion does not carry. And it's an effective denial or we need a new motion. Yes,

Commissioner flick. We don't like effective denial because then we have no input as it goes council. So what is it that we can do to make it a yay to go to council? So I'll speak on my vote of no for

me. Primarily, this is about taking the time to get the process right. Like we've been here before navigating short term rentals. And so I don't want us to give a set of recommendations that are well

intended and like really thoughtful from our standpoint, but also put us in a bind that then we have to. Be the arbiters again without the teeth to change policy, right? So if there is more room for

us to be able to engage and get more consultation, not just from energy, but you know, there are organizations doing this work already like lines for affordable energy that can give us data. So that

was a comprehensive assessment that we're taking data points from not just the regulator, but we have a second source. So I don't think the majority of the recommendations I'm not against, but I just

want to make sure that we get it right. And I know that council means well in terms of the timeliness of this because we watch other things go on and on, but we have a little bit more time and I'm

cautious. How much more time do we have? Yeah, I was under the impression. Well, I'm speaking specifically because of the moratorium. So if the commission wants to delay consideration of this and work

on something before it goes to the council, it would have to be done by next Friday. If, um, if no action is taken, be presuming that the council would take a step back and send it back to you all for

further consideration. So let me ask you, which is fine. It's just not something that if a motion were to be adopted, it would override the IZD. The IZD would remain in effect until next January,

right? So the IZD is in effect till January 27th. Is that correct? Right. So, so, but just be clear, we're in, we're in October. Anything that we send to the commission is or to the council, they have

even correct me if I'm wrong, 60 days to act on the motion. They will have 60 days to act by motion and then once they adopt the motion, they have 90 days from that period of time. So we're talking

five months past whenever we send it, which takes us well past the IZD deadline, unless they extend it, which I haven't received any. Consideration either way from the council that they would be

willing to, but it strikes me that if the council shares that concern, the easiest thing for them to do would be to extend the IZD and then give us work. Yeah, but, but, but work on, on, on these

issues and but with, but if we don't commissioner flick to commissioner flicks point, if we don't advance something, then, um, then they're working from, from a clean slate. They get it, they get a

denial. It seems better to put something in front of them and say, if you don't like it, extend the IZD and work on it. But what about the, the, the previous practice of, uh, adding comments to our

denials or moving forward? Like, does the effect of denial preclude us to add comments that get transferred to council? Because I think those recommendations could be set up as well. So an effective

denial is a lack of action, right? And so in order for there to be statement, it would have to be something that is active. Got it. So if the motion were to deny with statements, absolutely take your

reasons for denial, but, and that would be tied to the action of the commission. But if there's no action taken, then there's no, nothing to hang that sentiment. So I know commissioner Jordan wants

more community input. Is there any other, um, motion that we could put on the table to have an answer sent to city council today? And before other commissioners respond, uh, uh, director rivers, do

you mind just repeating because folks said they didn't hear. So the effect of what I, I'll reflect it. And if there's anything you need to add it feel free. But basically if we don't take a, an active

vote, um, either of denying or approving our comments are not transferred to council. That is correct. So what, um, So you're saying by us giving a vote with a framework for the council to work with

is useful in their decision and possible extending the moratorium. My fellow commissioners, if we recommended that they extend their IZD, is that something that would be an agreement, maybe not

indefinitely, but I mean, some, I know as part of the recommendation. Make a suggestion that it sounds like you all want to take a lot more time, which is absolutely fine. Um, your recommendation

could be for the council to extend the IZD with, you know, and then to send a new zoning docket back to the commission for consideration after public comment, after, um, consultation on the technical

issues that you all agree. So we would remove Mr. Commissioner Seague would consider removing his motion. I'm just talking through some signs and it would be effectively as a recommendation. Yeah. My

motion's been denied. So it's, it's, it's, it's gone commissioners. Could we get moving forward if there was a motion on the floor, I can't call one, but potentially to make a recommendation to extend

the IZD that we need more time. Yes, to, um, for denial, um, with the recommendation to extend the IZD so that we have enough time to take all matters into consideration that we have discussed today.

Is there a second or okay. I have a question. Yes, discussion. Um, what happens in the event this goes to council? So a theoretical situation could be, it goes to council and then council says, well,

I love this report just the way that it is. And they, they can, and they have the ability to approve it, right? Yes. Okay. So we could state what we want to happen, but the reality is, is that the

council can still do as they like, as they see fit for the city and their constituents. So that's just as a, as a statement. But if we, um, add these recommendations into our report with the

recommendation for denial, with all of these recommendations are added to the report. We are still giving that to council. Am I right? Yes, that would be a statement made by the commission that is

acted upon as a denial. And essentially the recommendation would be to start from scratch, but factor in the recommendations that we have made. Yes. But also I want to, I want to just ask if, are

there specific, um, things that you all want to see in terms of public engagement in terms of, um, because typically with a zoning docket, that's not something that we do. And the MPP process is

something that is, um, initiated by the applicant, which is in this case, it's the council, um, they elected not to do so. So, um, my understanding from the conversation is that you would like the

city planning commission staff to step into that role and initiate a broader public engagement. So the question is, since we have no standards for that, what do you all want to make sure that that

looks like? I think that is very important. Uh, that's the, you know, beat with the community to make those so that they can give their input because even though we have many people here and I

appreciate you all coming. There are many community people that are still, um, wondering what is going on and would like to, um, give their voice as to how they feel about this coming into their

community. So, but I have a question. So are we going to vote on numbered on the 03626 or are we just going to do the, um, we, well, we haven't, but we have a first and a second on denial with all of

our recommendations packaged in on that. So we are going to vote on that, but we're still just discussing and I'm going to rely on commissioner Jordan to make recommendations on the community

engagement process. Yeah. So, and then those amendments will have to be moved and seconded to attach to the underlying motion. I mean, uh, we, we need to make sure that public comment, uh, is, is, uh,

available for folks. Like we talked about, um, this deadline, I know is a big thing. So if nothing, when you'll be, we need to have a method for folks to be able to submit public comment ahead of the

next, uh, hearing. And by that, I'm assuming you mean between the time the packet is issued and the time that the hearing is done. So sending them the day before the hearing is okay with commission.

That's when we received comments that you all voted on today. Yeah. I think, well, I think right now folks will have enough of a heads up to know that this is, this is ongoing. Um, obviously council

will take our, we'll take our recommendations and do what they can with it. Um, but the intention there is to make sure that there's no, um, there's no misunderstanding from the folks who have shown

up today and folks who haven't been able to be in this room, that there's malicious intent in terms of receiving public comment as a body that brought this up on trying to be an arm of community

engagement for the city. Madam chair. And I'd just like to make a, uh, I think this is something that the community needs to know when you get the agenda for the meeting, it does not have the

preliminary reports. So you need to go to the CPC website and look at that agenda for the day that you're coming to read the entire preliminary because that has more detailed information. Can I make a

specific recommendation on the engagement? Um, one is that you all identify number, whether it's one, two, um, of in-person public meetings that we will meet with the community as an open meeting and

we can coordinate with the, you know, an act to set that up. And then two is, um, sending the rules to allow for written comment to be submitted after the packet is released up to the point of the

meeting. Okay. So we have a motion on the floor, um, for denial and the recommendation is going to be, um, to extend that IZD and the IZDs are extended within a year capacity. I know that that's, um,

part of the rules and then we need to be able to include our recommendations. Um, and so I'm going to maybe ask commissioner C to read through or commissioner or I'm sorry, Mr. Kroll, I have one

second, uh, you want me to read those now, please. So it would be a 500 foot buffer that would be increased to a thousand foot. The dividing line between small, or I should say that the maximum amount

for small would go to 10,000 square feet, not 20,000 and to a max of three megawatts of energy usage, not five megawatts for medium. The regulation would go to 50,000 square feet, not a hundred

thousand, 15 megawatts, not 20 megawatts. There'll be a requirement of a noise abatement plan with noise mitigation, um, measures included. There would be a requirement that, uh, the data centers be

held to energy efficiency of at least five to 10% higher than is required by the building code. There would be a requirement that we review procedures be developed by the city planning commission and

council, um, to inform the submittal requirements included in the regulations. There would be a requirement or statement that no data and no information not presented to, to the city planning

commission as part of a conditional use application. Maybe presented to any government agency or individual related to the subject of that, uh, conditional use application. We'll leave that solid. And

then we need the two pieces. Thank you, Mr. Crowell. The two pieces on the community engagement to be able to one or two meetings, two meetings Jordan says two meetings. And then we also need to

suspend the rules, um, to allow public comment to be submitted after the deadline up until the time of the meeting, after the deadline. And so the time of the meeting, I believe from my notes and

whatever one that we've covered at all. And the motion on the floor, just as a reminder, um, was commissioner Jackson and then commissioner Joseph, so commissioner Josie Gupta made the motion

commissioner Jackson seconded it. I'm just going to comment before we vote that I'm going to vote against the motion and the reason is we're denying and then we're putting the same recommendations

that we didn't approve. And to me, that is less forceful. We're saying we deny the, the report, which leaves it totally open. For example, that otherwise we would be approving the ban on large

citywide. Now we're denying the ban on large citywide because we're, we're saying we deny the report and then some recommendations, which we could have put in, in a motion. And I realized people might

disagree with that, but, um, that's my reason for, for, I think sending something affirmative when the council has the ability to reconsider and adopt is stronger on our part and more expresses our,

um, recommendations than a denial with a, we deny, but please, please think about this. So I'm voting against the motion. Um, I would say that the reason I feel a denial might be a little bit more

effective is because we have the public engagement portion of it part of our recommendation and that's a very big part. And I think it sends a message that we're denying until you take public

recommendation into consideration as well as all of our other recommendations. And that's the only reason I feel that denial might be the answer and the position for us to take. Commissioner Steak, I

totally understand your point to want to send something affirmative, but I think because our, because hands are tired and we're trying to be as specific as possible and be city planning commission.

We, we are not, we are land use recommending body first. And so for us to then be making recommendations without enough insight and engagement that ultimately then we'll be volley back to us in terms

of whether folks counsel leans in or leans away. I think unfair to our staff and the hard work that they do and trying to legitimize recommendations and to our commission, trying to be able to resolve

something that is really crushing our country, um, and our environment. So I just, I want to make sure that we do it right the first time, um, as again, again, just to remind us the short term rental

policy era that we're now coming to a close on hopefully has exhausted commissions. And I want to make sure that we're not exhausted with the volley back and forth. So commissioner, any commissioner

see we're going to vote. Commissioner see commissioner Jordan. Yes, commissioner. Which are yes, commissioner flick. No, commissioner, Josie Gupta, commissioner, a bear. Yes, commissioner Jackson.

Yes. Okay. So we have five days, two days. The motion carries. Thank you all for your time, your input, your energy, and, um, we're going to move on to our next zoning docket zoning docket 9126 is a

request by West Wriggle's lighthouse LLC for a zoning change and conditional use approval to support the reconstruction of a replica. Of the historic West Wriggle's lighthouse sites, current and a

natural areas zoning designation is intended to preserve natural areas and thus permits very limited development. The proposal includes a replica lighthouse that is considered a cultural facility and

two fishing camps that would be used as commercial short term rentals because these uses are not permitted in the current and a natural area district. The applicant is seeking a zoning change to an

mmu maritime mixed use district where they are permitted with conditional use approval. The staff acknowledges the merits of preserving the maritime cultural heritage of the site. However, the staff

finds that the proposed zoning and use do not meet standards for approval in article four of the comprehensive zoning ordinance and are inconsistent with the master plan. The main reason for denial is

in compatibility with the natural areas flum category, the flum list, only one compatible zoning district, the current natural area district. Further, the proposed conditional uses are not consistent

with the goal and range of uses for the natural areas. In addition, the commercial short term rentals are not consistent with the flum that excludes structures other than low impact amenities such as

trails overlooks and rest areas requested conditional uses to allow commercial short term rentals and a culture of cultural facility are not low impact amenities therefore, the staff recommends denial

of both the requested zoning change and conditional uses. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Vincent Marcello. I live at 508 Barracks. I am requesting a zoning change to mmu from natural areas

and I would like to clear up a couple of things that are a little bit inaccurate with the place the placement of the camps is a I intend on building a replica of the west regular Lee's lighthouse that

was blown down and doing Katrina. The. Thank you. Can we just have time please. I just want to make sure that your time. Thank you. And the the camps, I have a servitude from the Department of Land

that runs all the way to the piece of property, my piece of property that road. Some of it is in lower areas, but most of it is uplands. The project has been referred to. It's all on wetlands. The

camps themselves will be placed up on up and I have some photographs of the area and I wanted to demonstrate what's what's happened over the last 100 years with with the piece of property. We need to

suspend the rules. Is there a commissioner that would? I'll make a motion to suspend the rules. Thank you very much. This these photos are in the packet. This is a drawing from 1927 and shows the

shoreline in 1927. This this is a satellite photo of the site pre Katrina and you had quite a bit of land still existing. It certainly wasn't as much as it was in 1927 every storm that comes by really

creates a lot of erosion and and now this is after Katrina. You can see at the end of the where the original lighthouse used to be is no longer land there. It's it's about 100 feet of land is it has

disappeared. The this is from 1921 after Ida. The the land has eroded even even farther. Can we extend the time so that we could hear the rest of the presentation please. Hopefully they'll. My point

is is that there's a lot of erosion in another. I don't know what's happened to the haven't been out to the site for the last hurricane but I know there's a lot more erosion. These these are photos

that aren't in the packet but this is from a drone photo of me driving to the end. So where where if it was wetlands I wouldn't be able to drive to the end. And then this is the location where the two

camps are going. The White House will be out further and we've been negotiating with the Department of Natural Resources the Department of Land and the Corps of Engineers to to find a suitable site

that would be less invasive to the wetlands. And and we have we have done so. So we have a lot of community support for the project. The New Orleans East Business Association has no opposition to

zoning change. The lieutenant lieutenant governors. I have letters from the lieutenant governor's office in a high recommendation on on the project the punch punch a train conservative is in favor of

the project. Now some of the reasons why they like what I am doing is I am going to pride riprap to protect the shoreline and wrap the whole shoreline for any further erosion. There's also plants.

Right now we have 26 yo pine plants that seem to be doing very well and holding some of the soil back from the erosion and I plan on planning. There's a there's a whole variety of native plants that I

plan on adding to the project. So the the lighthouse is the only thing that's going to be on the wetlands. The walkway is going to be an elevated walkway and we've we've negotiated with the Department

of Natural Resources to do a grid system so the sunlight will come through the walkway. Thank you. Okay. Do you have any questions commissioners. Is Miss Laurie. Would you like to speak. Okay. Well

you've had your four minutes. Any other questions. I think we understand what you're trying to achieve the staff recommend recommendation is denial staff or commissioners. Yes Commissioner Jackson.

Even though it's in denial I kind of see the vision a little bit and I'm interested to see what that model would look like to bring you know for the future to the state. Thank you. You've got a motion

on the floor to go against staff recommendation. Absolutely. Is it. Is there a second. I second that. Thank you commissioners see. All right. We have an emotion on the floor to go against. And Justin

just to clarify that's for the zoning change and the conditional use. Correct. Yes. Can I ask staff one tiny little question which is is that the least. Is that the smallest zoning change that would

allow him to get a conditional use. Yes. Okay. Right. We'll go ahead and vote. There's no other. Oh did you have a question. Okay. Commissioner C. Yes. Commissioner Jordan. Yes. Commissioner. Yes.

Commissioner Flick while I agree and do you like the idea of renovating putting back the lighthouse. I have to stick to my commercial short term rental limitation guns. I'm going to vote no.

Commissioner a bear. Yes. Commissioner Jackson. Yes. Commissioner Josie Gupta there was a motion on the floor to go against staff recommendation. Do you like to vote. You're in agreement. Okay. So we

have six days one days the motion carries. Good luck. Thank you. All right. We're moving on to. Dr. item zoning document number four zero two nine zero nine five twenty six zoning docket zero nine

five twenty six is a request for a conditional use to permit a minor motor vehicle service and repair shop in an SB 1 suburban business district. The properties located at the northeast corner of down

the road and why our road is currently developed with the gas station and convenience store along with an attached tire shop. The applicant is proposing to retain the existing gas station and

convenience store while converting the tire shop into a full scale minor motor vehicle repair shop. The proposed repair shop will occupy approximately nine hundred thirty six square feet and will

provide two service bays with four vehicle parking spaces proposed or provided sites already established as an auto oriented commercial property and is located along a commercial corridor with other

nearby retail uses. The addition of the repair shop is not expected to materially increase traffic or adversely impact the surrounding area. Staff finds that the proposed use is consistent with the

master plans neighborhood commercial designation and with the general purpose and intent of the SB 1 zoning district. Therefore staff is recommending approval of zoning docket zero nine five twenty

six subject to two provisos and just as a reminder this case was deferred from the last CPC meeting that it was at with the commission recommending to the applicant to reach out to the community and

have discussions as far as engagement and improvements to the existing facility. Staff is in receipt of some emails from the applicant's representative that shows some improvements have been made.

However the applicant I believe would like to speak on I'm not sure if I think the applicant was intending on requesting for you to defer further the item. However the deadline for CPC action is

November 7th so we could only defer to the second October meeting which is October 27th. Our recommendation is for approval. It's Mr. Brown here or Jimmy Brown staff are you finished. Yes I just

wanted to make sure that was on the record that I believe that the community engagement discussions had taken place but I think the applicant was to give themselves some time wanted to recommend

deferral. Okay. And we have Mr. Brown is here and then we have some cards and opposition. So before you speak sir. Did you have a question. We got that question answered. Okay. Mr. Brown. Okay.

Welcome state your name and address please. My name is Jimmy Brown and I live at a 4801 Mark Street in beautiful New Orleans East and I'm here representing a client that has done everything the city

asked us to do. And we met with the two neighborhood associations about this this project and we and they gave us their concerns as to what they'd like to see done at that location. And we've already

started the improvements. I'd like to comment to the associations, even if they haven't been good neighbors in the past. My client is trying to reach out and be a good neighbor. That's why we always

before we got any approvals we had already started improving property. The only thing that's left to do is the painting and I couldn't have that done before this meeting but everything else has been

done. But we asked for your approval. Thank you. Yes Commissioner Jordan, Mr. Brown. Do you mind just naming the series of recommendations and improvements that have been made today minus the

painting. So they were asking for landscaping they were asking for and we started that they were asking for painting and they were asking that there won't be any lottery around the building,

especially after out, and we're going to do that. Okay, thank you. Okay, we have no other cards in support. That is correct. We're going to move to opposition. Miss Mary James and roll in bars, and Mr

Smith, and Mr. Barth, you have four minutes because time has been seated to you. So Miss James, please remember to say your name and address. Good afternoon. My name is Mary L. James and my address is

65 11 force road in New Orleans, Louisiana, and I'm here in opposition to the situation that exists at the grocery store, where it was a, there has been a lot of ordering. It has been a mechanic shop,

and we're asking that they discontinued those activities because it has an effect on the appearance of the, of the, of the neighborhood, we want to be able to go out if we use that store and not be

confronted by vapor on the streets. We are asking and we want to be good neighbors, and that they be profitable in the neighborhood if they can be but don't disregard our request for things that we

need. Are you in support of a denial of a deferral if that is, if they can make the proper improvements, then I'll have to be in accordance with the improvements, not, I won't deny them the

opportunity to work there. On that business, but they have to abide by the request request of the neighborhood. Thank you, Mr. Bart, and you have four minutes. It is my understanding that there was a

request for postponement of this, this particular item. Okay. All right, then let's have the postponement, because the reason why is because our people got worn down because of the lengthy data

center, because we had people here in support of it, and that we will want to speak primarily. I don't want to speak I'm the president subdivision but I rather have my people here speak themselves

instead of me speaking as one individual. So I request that we have that denial deferral. I'm sorry, Mr. Bart that can you just state your name and address for the rolling ball the 64 16 pines

Boulevard. He's your name and address and you have two minutes. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I'll try to give you 30 seconds back. Kenya Smith 7033 Lake Willow Drive, and our president of the East New

Orleans neighborhood so neighborhood Advisory Commission, otherwise known as, you know, and I can I stand here in support of one of our neighborhoods. It is my understanding from my research that

there are some specific flaws with the notification process as I have reviewed that that provided the neighborhood engagement part of the process. And so as I said before, I do encourage you all to

check with your legal counsel because we do plan to hold, hold this body accountable for that should the neighborhood not be satisfied they have expressed their opposition to this their willingness,

their willingness to work with this gentleman, with all due respect to Mr. Brown my, my neighbor in New Orleans East, I am not paid to be here in fact I've sacrificed a lot to be here and I don't want

to be here very often but I'll close with this. I usually ask my students, how many of them are parents. If you raise their hand and I asked how many have parents and then everybody raised their hand

I said where the side of the line you're on. We know that we would never allow a kid to start cleaning their room, and then go to the party and say I promise I'll finish the rest. With that, I'll give

you 45 seconds left. Thank you. Yes, Mr Smith before you go sit down just really quick question so there was this question about proper engagement, basically your comments what I'm hearing is that

there hadn't been engagement by, by, by your understanding, I just want to make sure that we clarify knowing that there was an MPP. Thank you for the question commission. So there are two things here

there is the law and there's the spirit of the law, as you all will know the spirit of the law indicates that we want to make sure the neighborhoods that proper engagement the letter of the law says

there's a particular process by which we go about doing that you all provide that process for the applicant. My contention is that as I read that that process, and the end the way in which this

applicant has followed that process they have not followed to the letter. And so our point is, until this applicant satisfies this neighborhood association, we contend that we plan to challenge any

ability to move forward with this, based on your rules. What were the specific ways that they didn't follow the rules, there are certain there are certain emails and I'm not going to tip my total

handy case we have to litigate this thing. There was certain that you're mentioning, yeah, so give us the facts of his general and I will and I will answer your question. Mr. Stig, you and I are both

lawyers so we know in a situation like this, I will, I will, I will answer your question to my satisfaction. Okay. As a member of the, as a member of the public, and certainly just like after two

minutes y'all cut my mic I would withdraw the question. No problem. All right, Mr. Brown, you're allowed to write you have two minutes to. So, we did have the means we did follow the law to the

letter. We met with them recently actually like a week ago. But what they said to me was, there are so many time shops along the corridor that are not doing the right thing. I said well, I can't speak

for those, but I'm going to do the right thing. You can deal with them on, you know, later but I'm going to do the right thing. And I'm going to do what you asked me to do. And I've done that. The

only thing left to do is, is to paint my building and only reason is not paying it now. It's because the guys tonight, but I've done everything you asked me to do whether it's to their satisfaction. I

don't know, but I've done it. Are you open to it for Mr. Brown. Well, to be fair, yes, because at the very first meeting, he had people there that were interested in how their neighborhood look. So, I

think that's fair. Yeah, thank you, Commissioner Jackson. Okay, so basically, as I listen to everybody give their perspective as a New Orleans resident, I just don't want another business that has

been in the district for so many years to not be there or to leave the district based on a certain level of expectation. Because again, as Mr. Brown said there are many tire shops in New Orleans East,

and I just want us to find a way where we can have common ground to where the community is satisfied, as long as the business owner. And also, I want to ask, is it a lottery, or is it the presentation

of the building. I just want to know, based on from the opposing party what is the real objective that we need to just to make a comment about procedure, because we are rebuttal. We may not be able to

invite the comments in that way. Gotcha. Okay. But I'll go I'll say, because the applicant is mentioned being open to a deferral, and we only have one date that is available. It seems like there's one

other item that could be worked out prior to then, I would support a deferral. You want to make a motion. I'll make a motion for deferral of zoning docket, zero nine five two six. Okay, thank you. And

that's October 27 meeting. So we meet the November 7 deadline. There's a motion on the floor for deferral to October 27. Commissioner Jackson. Yes. Commissioner a bear. Yes. Commissioner Josie Gupta.

Yes. Commissioner flick. Yes. Commissioner which trees a yes Commissioner Jordan. Yes, Mr. C. Yes. Right. The motion carries. We hope that you all can get together and talk and come back to this body.

All right, we're going to move on to zoning docket. It's number five was it oh nine. Sorry, that's me again. Zoning docket. Oh nine nine dash 26 is a request for a zoning change from an hu already to

historic urban to family residential district to hu MU historic urban neighborhood mixed use district for property that's located on the northwest corner of Britannia street and Mel Pong street

present structures is an historic commercial building that is presently of illegal nonconforming use requested zoning change to hu MU would bring the site into modern compliance with the current CZO,

but also allow for the site to continue the trend of mixed use zoning within the larger surrounding area. While the rezoning is technically inconsistent with the site's residential low density prewar

flum designation staff finds the inconsistencies are less relevant given the properties historic commercial use and surrounding areas trend towards mixed use development. Therefore staff is

recommending approval of zoning docket. Oh nine nine dash 26. Mr. David Glazer bizarre correct me. My name is David Glasgow. I live at 1833 Esplanade Avenue. Thank you. The building in question I'm

the architect for the owner, and they're going to do some renovations on it. They recently purchased it. I was in conversations with the zoning board about the fact that there is a. There's all sorts

of nonconforming use issues and given that the properties across the street adjacent to it along Britannia street are all this more intense slightly more intense zoning, and that would address the

current use, which has been in effect since the mid century at least. That's what we're requesting. Thank you. Y'all have any questions. No, thank you. I don't have any other cards on this matter so

not I'll be looking for a motion. I'm of approval. Thank you. Is there a second, a second. Okay, thank you. Commissioner flick moved approval Commissioner Jordan seconded Commissioner see. Yes, Mr

Jordan. Yes, Mr Witcher Yes, Commissioner flick. Yes, Mr Josie Gupta. Yeah, Mr a bear. Yes, Commissioner Jackson. Yes. Great. Thank you. Motion carries we're going to move on to the next zoning docket

zoning docket 126 is a request by the city council by city council motion 26 M26 284 for a text amendment to article 21 of the comprehensive zoning ordinance that would add to Lakeview neighborhood to

Lakeview communities of Lake Oaks and Lake Terrace to the list of neighborhoods regulated by the fence site requirements outlined in article 21 section 21.6 point in point to point a this section

currently stays at the fence height requirements for Lake Vista area or those two zoning districts is 1.5 feet free front yards and five feet for side and rear yards, it would essentially just

eliminate one section the section that particularly is specific for Lake Terrace, and it would add that to the section that's for Lake Vista, and it would add Lake Oaks as well. That's, that's

basically, it's just eliminate redundancy. We don't have any cards to speak on this matter. Is there a motion. Let's do it. I move modified approval. Thank you. Is there a second, a second. Okay.

Let's vote. Or any questions. Commissioner Jackson. Yes, Mr a bear. Yes, Mr. Josie Gupta. Yes, Mr. Flick. Yes. Commissioner Whittrey Yes, Commissioner Jordan. Yes, Mr. C. Yes. All right, the motion

carries we'll move on to zoning daca 101 dash 26 CD one to one dash to six is a request for conditional use permit to permit a bar located at 50 10 for it's new district and AC dash to arts and

culture diversity overlay district. This request comes as part of a development which will include two distinct businesses, the aforementioned bar use and a social club site is currently uses a casual

takeout restaurant staff finds that the proposed use is consistent with the master plan, the intent of the HU MU district AC to overlay district, and is consistent with a trajectory of development and

character of the threat street corridor within this year bar across the street at 5039 for its street closed, therefore this approval would not intensify activity on the block, beyond previous levels,

based on these findings staff concludes that the proposed use is appropriate for the site and surrounding area, and recommends approval. Thank you. So I have a couple cards, Eric Hoffman you have two

names and Miss Laura. Do you want to start. Yes, please go ahead. Laura bars 1000 South Norman see Francis, I am paid to be here. We would like to thank commissioners and CPC staff, we do agree with

staff that this proposed business is compatible with the mixed mixed use zoning, and specifically the commercial for a street corridor, as stated. The bar that closed down earlier this year there's

only one other bar in the vicinity it's more of a high end bar cure. This bar is going to be more of a casual small neighborhood pub. The bar itself is under 800 square feet, and there are going to be

revised plan submitted, where there's actually not going to be any form of an internal door for the two commercial units entries and exits will be from the outside where you can only enter one you

can't go through. So I just want to make that distinction. We have had on communication with the recently revived neighborhood group the fret neighbors united. They were not active for the NPP, but

they have come to us after. And you know we do have ongoing communication with them and we do intend to go to their November neighborhood eating. And there's no outdoor seating for this bar the only

rear outdoor portion is for the other commercial unit hours of operation are going to be basically until midnight. And that's it. Thank you, realize I was not going to speak if he leave already. Mr

Hoffman, would you like to come speak, you have a car heated to you so you have four minutes, you can take less, I will take less. Eric Hoffman 2605 Octavia Street, New Orleans. I'm a resident of the

community as well as the architect on the project and just here to thank staff in recognizing us meeting the conditions of approval. And we're really excited to bring what is kind of a vacant takeout

restaurant into a great community space. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Any other cards to speak. I don't have anyone in opposition unless Johnson are you, did I miss your card. I gave a card to

miss my net. I'm sure it's in here. Susan Johnson 2822 the page street historic New Orleans neighborhoods I'm not paid to be here hearing of this conditional you should be deferred until the zoning of

the entire parcel is verified. So 3636 hundred square foot a lot with two proposed uses bar for the existing structure, just 736 square feet and an alleged social club which would be a new addition on

the same level of 2000 square feet. September 21 the BCA granted a waiver of four parking spaces for a social club use four days later Susanna Kirby wrote an email CCing City Council stating that

safety and permits has not made any determination that the proposed business is a social club. So this process is happening backwards parking waivers obtained before zoning use for the bigger space

were even approved. And now the conditional use for the smaller space is being heard also before that determination has been made. The grounds for use are weak. This new venue is intended to provide

24/7 access to three indoor golf simulators and activity that is customarily carried on as a business, like Topgolf 504 that's a disqualifier per the definition, and chapter in Article 26.

Significantly the social club use would allow the club members to consume alcohol on the premises 24/7 per CZO 20.3 point CCC without a discrete conditional use process while they are playing their

simulated games of golf as to direct input from the neighbors. I'll be interested to hear what see what that looks like considering the opposition to Sunny's last October. Please defer this docket

until the zoning of the social club has been verified as a discrete. Thank you. And let the record note I did have find your card. Thank you. You have two minutes to rebut, please. I would like to

just say that there is no real reason for a deferral. These are two separate units to separate uses the social club that is being mentioned as a permitted use it has actually been cleared by zoning.

But also, if that comes up later on, that's something that zoning will have to review and if they deny that social club, then that's a whole other space. Right now we really should just be focused on

the bar and the use of the bar. Thank you. Thank you. Questions for staff. I move approval in accordance with staff recommendation. All right. Thank you, Commissioner. See, is there a second? A

second. Thank you, Commissioner Jordan. Any discussion? All right. We'll go ahead and vote Commissioner Jackson. Yes, Mr. Abert. Yes, Mr. Josie Gupta. Yes, Mr. Flick. Yes, Commissioner Whittrey. Yes,

Commissioner Jordan. Yes, Commissioner C. Yes. Okay. The motion carries. Thank you. We're going to move on to zoning 1-0-2-26. Zoning docket 1-0-2-26 is a request for a conditional use to permit a car

wash at 3509 South Carrollton Avenue. The applicant is proposing new construction of a locally operated car wash with primary frontage along South Carrollton Avenue and additional ingress and egress

at Palm Street and Short Street. The only two other uses on the block are an IHOP restaurant and the Carrollton Veterinary Hospital. The site formally featured a pet boy's motor vehicle service and

repair shop. The applicant is proposing new construction that includes a 4,680 square foot car wash tunnel office and storage structure situated towards the center of the site along with three vehicle

bays and 16 vacuum stations. The site is in an MU1 medium intensity mixed use district adjacent to HUMU and EC Educational Campus Districts, which is Xavier University, and Catacorner to an HURD2

historic or two family residential district. At least six other districts are within a five block radius of the site. This proposal is in contrast with the intent of the MU1 mixed use medium intensity

district, which aims to create walkable neighborhood centers and corridors with appropriate transitions from commercial uses to lower density neighborhood areas. Because this site is nestled among a

variety of zoning districts, ranging from commercial to institutional to residential, it needs to remain mixed use and walkable rather than skewing towards a wholly auto oriented use. Additionally,

this site is located in the EC Enhancement Corridor Design Overlay District and will be on the agenda at the October 21st DAC meeting. Aside from site design questions and traffic flows, staff finds

the building design to be interesting and appropriate for the auto oriented use. But staff recommend denial of zoning docket 10226 should the application be approved, the eight provisos should be

attached to the approval. Thank you, Miss Weber, you have two cards seated to you so you have six minutes. I'm not certain why that's not working. It's on. Okay, there we go. Thank you. And one of the

cards I we incorrectly put the person who's seating their time. So Laura is actually not sitting her time to me Cory is that's okay. So Nicole Weber 2131 B.N. Bill Street. I really wish the images

would be up because we're very proud of this. I always say I don't do ugly. And this is not an ugly car wash whatsoever. We have the design team behind me and owner Mac Bauer, and we're really proud

of what we've done. As you can see, we have. Oh, and I wish the images would come up if I could wish it into existence. Okay, well hopefully you all can see it's a really cool retro look. It was

designed for the site. We didn't take a cookie cutter car wash and try to stick it on Carrollton. It is the whole stormwater management is a vast improvement from what's there. The landscaping

everything was done, just really up to par and really beyond what I think most people would expect for a car wash and so we're very proud of that. I do want to point out we're a local team locally

owned Virgis Rome is sitting behind me Dana Brown from Dana Brown and Associates sitting behind me really proud of what we've done. Like I said earlier, some of the impacts that we've taken we will be

taking off if approved would be from 1% permeable to 40% permeable impact on the neighborhood. We have thought of everything when we went to the neighbors, we had lifted every stone that no stone be

unturned right so we looked at the lighting we looked at noise we looked at traffic urban systems reviewed the traffic impact study. Review the traffic impact and looked at, you know, what was the

best ingress and egress. What we can't fix are the streets and the poor condition of the streets unfortunately but with our Max that stormwater management plan we are taking a lot of burden off of the

streets and off the city's infrastructure. Again, in terms of long term accountability that provides those the stormwater management having to be recertified every two years, including looking at

landscaping. Those are all things that stay in place. We want to make sure that this property is very attractive, very useful. I will say, yes, we are an MU zoning district and so staff obviously had

to look at the fact that we are car-oriented. But if you look at the development pattern, if you look at the blocks in and around us, we are near Costco, we're near all commercial. There is no

residential within that first block along Carrollton Avenue. The nearest residential properties are set back and within 200 feet. So we really are more of a commercial corridor than a mixed-use zoning

district. There isn't residential within that MU1 for many, many blocks. I also wanted to point out that Mac Bauer sitting behind me, he had Aldi that was signed on when Pep Boys left. Aldi was coming

to the site and he had a lease agreement with Aldi. Aldi unfortunately had to back out and quickly Mac looked at, okay, I've got a building sitting there, what am I going to do? Instead of leaving

that building there sitting, he demolished it. He cleared the site. That to me says a responsible corporate neighbor to not let a building sit there become stagnant. Now he spent many years looking at

other uses and the car wash has been deemed the most useful for the site. It'll take off impacts on the limited amount of car washes that we do have. I'm not going to bring up any other car washes

but, you know, ours and it really have, we've done a great job on lessening any impact and then really just being beneficial and improvement to the neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Miss Laura

LaVaughn, I remember to say your name and address. Can y'all hear me? Okay. My name is Laura LaVaughn. I live at 4427 General Pershing. And I'm an architect and I work at Virgis Rome and I designed

this building. What you can't see in the front elevation is a series of spikes that go down the side. This is truly a mid century modern design, and it was designed with the neighborhood in mind.

We've got a really fun vet clinic on one side with the nice arches. We've got IHOP. It used to be the Imperial room with five happiness. So it's got the sculptural roof and color and then we've got

five happiness. Xavier is not far away. Across the street is a strip mall. We're definitely improvement over that. The property is an unusually shaped lot. The building placement and the traffic

circulation was designed to have the least negative impact. And we're actually trying to improve, as Miss Weber said, on the drainage and anything else that we possibly can to be an improvement to the

neighborhood. We have native plants. We'll have permeable paving and everything like that. We did listen to the neighborhood. We did move the entrances and exits around as much as we could while still

allowing IHOP to have their patrons access their site. We are kind of limited because the site is a strange lot and we have to allow IHOP, obviously, to do business. Virgis Roam is a local

architecture firm. It's located a mile and a half from this site. We are invested in the neighborhood. I live a mile and a half on the other side of this site. So I am a neighbor. I am invested. I

pass by here twice a day going to and from work. So being a good neighbor is definitely a priority because we are neighbors as well. And that's about all I have to say. Thank you. Dana Brown, please

remember to state your name and address. Dana Brown, 329 Cliff Street. That's in Old Jefferson. I'm the landscape architect and designed the storm water management system for the project that was just

discussed a little bit. And I think we are really proud of how much we've been able to put on the site storage underneath, pervious paving for all the parking spaces where people get vacuums, vacuum

their cars, and bioswales and other green space. We've increased green space by, well, by 39%. Right now it's 99% impervious. So right now it's dumping all the water into the streets and therefore

into the catch basins and the pipes, and we're reducing that to, we're reducing the peak flow by 34% into the system. And that's pretty significant because the code requires that you not exceed

existing discharge rates. So we're going way beyond that. And as well as for the landscape components, got a bit of extra landscape than what is required because we landscaped our bioswales and some

other areas, a couple extra trees. I want to note that the trees on Carrollton there's one big one doesn't look in the greatest shape and a smaller one. Oaks. Mr. Bauer has an arborist who's been

looking at them and going to tear them those are going to be protected completely on a landscape architect don't go chain myself to the tree. If somebody tries to do something to do the trees because

we need our urban forest around here. But those are the main things I want to mention I think it would be actually in terms of storm management a model for that area of the city. So, thank you. Thank

you. Is there anyone else here to speak on this matter. I don't have any cards in opposition so there's no rebuttal. I asked a question to staff. Yes, this property wraps around the IHOP and goes back

on the side street. Am I right about that that were the old pep boys was. Yes, it stretches from South Carrollton to short street through the block and there is a servitude agreement with the IHOP,

which was a former sizzler initially apparently. And there's a servitude agreement that manages like the ingress and egress that they're proposing. And I'm looking at a picture. So, we have the vet on

one side, we have IHOP next to the vet is think that's a McDonald's. Then on the other side of IHOP is five happiness across the street is a firestone auto service center and a strip shopping center.

So, in light of all of that, I'm just not seeing a lot of residential. I'm not seeing a lot of walkability. That's probably one of the busiest streets in the city. Yeah, if you see the zoning map.

Yeah, please. Yeah, if you see the zoning map it's, you know, nestled in between a bunch of different zoning districts. This one in particular, intends to promote walkability and like a transition

between some of the districts but, you know, we, South Carroll, I think it tried to promote but I don't think it made it quite. I'm going to make a motion for them against staff recommendation because

of what I said about the neighborhood for the conditional use with the provisos that are in the staff report. Thank you. All right, there's a motion on the floor for approval. Commissioner see and

then seconded by Commissioner a bear. Any questions. All right, let's vote Commissioner Jackson. Yes, Mr. Aver. Yes, Mr. Josie Gupta. Yeah, Mr. Flick. Yes, Mr. what trees Yes, Commissioner Jordan,

normally I'd be a no but I'm a yes. And then, yes, because of the mid century design. Being an architect and urban planning looking for walkability so. All right, the motion carries all yays. Thank

you. Yes, I'm recused on the next. Commissioner see is recused on this next item. Thank you all for being here all afternoon. We really do appreciate it. We are going to be moving on to zoning docket

103 dash 26. This is an application affecting a historic large residential structure at the corner of St. Charles Avenue and Second Street, the proposal is to use it, it is probably originally single,

it was later converted to a double proposal is to convert it back to a single for use as a principal bed and breakfast and so that's a bed and breakfast type that is larger and that it can have up to

nine bedrooms and requires an onsite operator. Bed and breakfast, like non commercial short term rentals are limited to one per square and this square is open so this is an eligible application. The

staff finds it to be consistent kind of with it, especially with the general purpose of the bed and breakfast regulations the structure is, you know, noteworthy in its size and its location on St.

Charles Avenue and that would seem to lend itself to a larger type of bed and breakfast. And so the staff recommends approval with one waiver of the parking requirement which cannot be accommodated on

site, and three providers. Thank you. Are you all the applicants. Okay, when you get a second after if you fill out a card please. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Say your name and address, and you've got. If

you each fill out a card, then you each have two minutes. Now, you can talk and then I don't think we'll need it but john and candy MERS 2503 St. Charles Avenue, the applicants, we are applying for a

principal bed and breakfast permit at the property, we bought the house in 2017 with the in. And we were looking for an investment property where we could also live, and we came across this house and

we thought it was so beautiful and a great piece of history, and we thought it was the perfect setup for a BMB, and would be a great opportunity to share that with other people visiting New Orleans

because it is so historically significant. And but at the time, when we went to get a BMB license, New Orleans had recently started issuing short term rental permits. So we decided at that point in

time that we would utilize short term rental permits while we got our ducks in a row, painting, furniture, furniture decorating, etc. And then, you know, push off the bed and breakfast permit until a

little bit down the line. And then over time that was working pretty well for us so we've been operating at that location using short term rental permits over the past 10 years, but those have become

more and more restrictive over time. And now, we are in a better position to continue forward with what we want to do. And we had a meeting an MPP meeting, and we discussed with the participants, all

of the things that we thought would be of a concern to them. And one of one of the things that we wanted to reiterate to them was, basically, we've been good neighbors for the past 10 years, doing the

same thing in a different in a different way and that they really shouldn't be able to see a difference. And, you know, just the mere fact that we've not been a problem in the in the past, and that

we've had everything's under very good control, it's very quiet. You'll have an opportunity to rebut and you say that would work, I think. Okay. Okay, cool. Thank you. We missed a call three names at

a time. So, Andy Braun, you have time seated to you so you have four minutes. I'm Peter, and then Dana, use the motto Farley. We're, we don't have any other cards in support. Is that correct? We're

moving opposition. Your name and address. Thank you. You've got four minutes. Good afternoon. My name is Andy Braun 1203 Washington Avenue. I'm the president at the current time of the Garden District

Association, and I happen to also live in the garden district. So, the Garden District Association vehemently objects to the grant of a conditional use permit here. We also, with due respect to the

staff, we believe the staff's analysis was erroneous, and their recommendation is just plain wrong. Number one, contrary to what the owners say, they've not been good neighbors. Indeed, this was

originally a short term rental the licensed, and they were cited about six months to eight months ago for operating without a license and with advertising for short term run without a license and not

just cited convicted and ultimately find over $6,000 that alone shows that they were not good neighbors, but what we have found subsequently is that the owners also own a property in Broward County,

Florida located at 1 998 Southwest 16 court for Lauderdale law as I said in Broward County, our research reflects that it appears, they've been taking a homestead exemption at that property in

Florida, which requires, as we understand the law in Broward County, that they be not just residents, but that that be their permanent residents, at the same time, we understand that the records from

the Orleans parish appraiser also show, they've been taking at the same time, a homestead exemption on this piece of property that they now have applied for a permit for. And those two homestead

exemptions have given them a real estate state tax break, both here, and in Broward County, we believe, if we've interpreted it correctly, at the same time over the last four or five years, those two

things, if we are correct, show that the owners are not good neighbors and indeed should not be trusted with operating a bed and breakfast in this community. And this raises a number of potential

concerns. Number one, can we trust them, we believe if it's true, what we believe we found into in the public records, that they are not trust where they can't be trusted with abiding by the bed and

breakfast laws. Number two, it raises the question, are they residents here, or are they residents in Broward County? That's something quite frankly that the staff needs to should find out and analyze

and determine, because of course, they cannot be a resident operator of this property if indeed they're not permanent residents of this parish. Number three, it raises the question, if indeed we're

correct, and they have taken homestead exemptions and obtained tax breaks in two different states, two different counties, should you allow them to have a license here? And even if so, should it be

conditioned on them paying back this parish, the money, the tax breaks that they have gotten over the last four, three or four or five years, because as we all know, we need the money, and it would be

unfair for them to have a license, and at the same time, operate. We also have a problem with the number of bedrooms that the analysis that was done, and the also the whole idea of giving of awarding

them a variance on the number of parking spaces, the staff says to. Thank you. Peter Martin, or Donna, Donna Farlow. Yes, good afternoon Dana Cusimano Farley, 3908 Ashley Court in Mettery, but I am an

owner of Unit 202 at 2511 St. Charles. I have personally not been affected by the applicants, you know, the applicants tenure here, but, because my unit is on the opposite side of the building. And so

I am not, and plus I'm renting my unit at the time, although at this time, but I'm also, I also use it myself. But I'm really concerned about a couple of things. First of all, 2511 St. Charles is a

building that's L shaped, it wraps around this house on one side, and the back of it, which to me, gives us more exposure to the noise. I have not heard the noise, because again, I'm not living there

right now I, I have to abide by the rules and if I rent it has to be a 30 day minimum, which I do. Also, I understand you know when you buy a big piece of property in the garden district. You know,

you may not be and I'm thinking the applicants maybe weren't quite ready for the tax bill, the insurance that has gone up dramatically, and I really feel like they, they're looking for extra income, I

get it. But they've also explained in that little meeting that they that they had a couple of months ago, that they want to do wedding destination weddings at this at this facility at this house. And

then you're opening up a whole can of arms parking noise, alcohol consumption, which believe me, our building, you know, is right on the parade route, we have that thing. You just want to finish your

last comment aspect is not conducive to our property values and, you know, enjoying our property. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon, my name is Al Gooch reside at 2511 St Charles, which is

immediately next to the applicant's location. The reason I object to it is the noise factor is, is very intense. And they've also has spoken marijuana and it's drifted into my building, and as a

limited link they're only have two parking spots off street. So the parking of head pocket car parking blocking exit on the second street. So I object to allowing this applicant to go forward with

this project. Thank you. Is Peter Martin here. Okay. And then, Henry Apatowski and Thomas Holly, please say your name and address. I'm Peter Merton, I reside at 2025 11 St Charles, the adjoining

property. I live there with my wife. I think one of the things that that struck me in this is, is that going back to the operating and unlicensed short term rental trust was broken. And in my mind,

when you operate an unlicensed facility, and you can't be trusted with, with this zoning change. I don't really understand the guardrails of operating an Airbnb, I don't know whether there has to be

staff full time, or they have to actually serve a meal with the breakfast part. Frankly again, I do not trust these folks. They were not allowed to operate that short term rental, they put the house

on the market. Clearly it didn't sell. So this is now their last ditch effort to recover whatever they would have might have lost in this investment. I do not support it. I do not trust them. There is

a lot of rowdy people that rent that have rented in the past, I can't see any change in that, and I don't support this. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Apatowski Thomas Miss Ellie and then brandy was art

was already. Good afternoon commissioners Henry Apatowski Steeg law firm 201 St. Charles suite 3201. I'm here on behalf of the gallery condo Association which has just been described as the direct

neighbor of the applicants property. The association submitted a letter of opposition which was lodged in the record, and you all should have that and we laid out a lot of the issues that Andy Braun

brought up when he just spoke regarding the parking variance issues, the events, and so forth, but I'm here to address the particular ones to provide those that we brought in the letter and then we're

addressing the staff report. Regarding the current setup of the property is a multifamily to family and the CZO requires that it be converted to a single family so that, you know, we need eyes on that

and that needs to happen before anything would any license could even be granted and then another one is just that the that indeed that the unit above the garage, it has been declared ineligible for

overnight stay, which would, I would assume eliminate at least one of the nine rooms that would be allowed for the principal use. And so, and so yeah, as the residents have already spoken I thought I

was maybe going to go first and introduce them but a lot of that, you know, whatever trust there was has been reached or broken over the years between the applicants and the residents that are

directly, not just next to but also behind the, it almost income, you know, encloses the property so yeah, just what you know, just wanted to lodge our general opposition to the application and let

the residents speak for themselves. Thanks. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Okay, I'm ready. I know I didn't pronounce that correctly, my apologies. It's okay everyone does. So my name is Brandi Lazuzo

I'm at 2511 St. Charles Avenue, and I oppose this application. My condo is next to the property's courtyard and it overlooks it. Ever since the current owners purchased this property they have been

running the illegal Airbnb. I have experiences negatively with like large groups in the courtyard all hours of the day and night. I have also smelled hot wafting through my windows. It's greatly

affected my quality of life, and the problem will definitely worsen if they're allowed to be a BNB and if they're allowed to have larger groups with music and events. So, there's no barrier, there's

no buffer in between my unit and like all the units that overlook their courtyard and around their property. So, please keep this property residential so that our piece can be restored and that we can

just have peace and quiet in our own homes. Thank you. Jan Gillispie and Charles Gillis, and then Mr. Braun you can come back up and close it out because someone's ceded their time to you. Hi, I'm Jan

Gillispie and I live at 2511 at the gallery. And I've had a condo there for about 10 years and before that I rented from someone else and I've had family that's lived there so I have a long history

with the condos, and you can literally from the porches of our building, you could drop a stone into their courtyard so it's very close. And I'm just concerned about the noise. I mean, I don't object

to parties, we have enough parties around our area and you know if you have one night that's kind of sleepless, I'm fine with that, I'm okay with the parties, I'm a native New Orleanian, I don't

object to that. But the thought of having sleepless nights every night or any night, you know, if you're having destination weddings and events in an open courtyard or even inside, I just, it's going

to really affect our quality of life. And we have a number of people who live in the building, probably at least half the units full time living in the building, and a lot of elderly people. Okay,

thank you. Thank you. Mr. Gillis. Charles Gillis at 2511 St. Charles Avenue in New Orleans and I am president of the HOA for the Gallery Condo Association. Our board has submitted a letter and

petition that you have opposing this application, and our 27 owners asked that you focus on the nuisance of noise, as other owners have talked about our proximity to the that they describe to the

applicant's property if you would please look at the aerial bird's eye view, you can understand what they're talking about, we were right on their property on two sides. And even if the neighboring

patio is filled with just people and not even music, many of our owners would be within 20 feet of a crowded drinking celebrating event of attendees. If you allow one property owner to negatively

affect 27 others, then what conditional use will you ever deny that side, we just ask for protection and that you deny this application. Thank you, Mr. Ron please and that's the last card I have an

opposition. Thanks for hearing me again. I want to address the recommendation of the staff for nine bedrooms, which is essentially based on a waiver of the parking requirements. The report says that

they have two parking spaces, we were told at the NPP that they have four, and if they have four they don't need a waiver, because with four parking spaces, they could have up to six bedrooms that if

you are going to grant this, which we still think is a problem because they've had the use of this for the last three, four, five years as a short term rental, and supposedly they've only been allowed

to rent two or four bedrooms. And if that and you can see there's already complaints about noise congestion parking, what's going to happen if they're allowed nine bedrooms, and what's not reflected

in the report is that these bedrooms sometimes have three kings in it, or two queens altogether, or nine bedrooms if it's allowed could be over 45 people staying at this place at one time, even six

could be 35, or almost 40 people, the way I see it is, you've got to balance the detriment to the owners for not granting them this application versus detriment to the neighbors and the neighborhood,

the Garden District Association comes down on the side of the neighbors, they've already been burdened enough, why burden them more by now granting a nine bedroom bed and breakfast, even a four short

term rental was burdensome. Thank you. Thank you. Please, you all have two minutes to rebut and get all the rebuttal in I need to get in but yeah, if one of you could speak into the mic just so that

before he speaks I would just like to say that we've lived next door to these people for 10 years, and to our knowledge they have never complained to us about noise. We've also lived there, so we

would hear the noise as well and so what other guests in the house, and any noise that could possibly be heard would be reported to us, if we didn't hear it ourselves and we have security cameras as

well. So we feel like these instances of noise have been exaggerated. And, and also on at our meeting we did talk to them about the things that we had in place to address noise issues but what we

didn't understand was how much noise we put up with from them. You know, we are located in an area where everything is close together. And that's typical of the whole area, the whole city pretty much,

and they have a, go ahead. I'm sorry, we've been awakened many, many, many, many times by a dumpster being picked up at 3am in the morning from that condo, and we've never said a word to them about

it. And it happens once a week, 50 times, that's 50 weeks a year for the past 10 years. That's 500 instances of noise. I'm not sure how many instances of noise that they've had from hearing people

talk in our courtyard but it doesn't compare to being woken up by what sounds like a semi truck running into your house. And also I can just walk down the street at any random time in New Orleans and

smell marijuana. I'm not really sure what that means. I would also like to, to address the completely false accusations that we had homestead exemption in Fort Lauderdale we moved from Fort Lauderdale

to here. Around 2014 and then we bought the existing property around 2017 and we have not had homestead exemption in both places ever. We had to provide documentation to the New Orleans office to show

that we had dropped the homestead there and in fact we actually got a permit for rentals there. Florida, please, please continue. Commissioner Jordan's asking that if you have anything else to add,

please go ahead if you could add time. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it a minute. One of the thing I wanted to address the parking space is we actually work that out with staff to reduce it with

two because we could theoretically get some people in the courtyard but it would probably require a valley, and that's not something that would be in our financial wherewithal to do. I would also know

that there's plenty of parking on St. Charles itself. There is some parking from the doctor's office on second street but they're closed on the weekends. Usually in front of our house there's two

spaces there's spaces across the street on St. Charles and they're usually open. We also see people from the condo building who are using the street parking despite the fact that they have their own

parking garage and we've never complained about that. We believe that the street parking is for everyone but we don't believe that our use is any more so than the surrounding properties. And I would

also like to point out that we are currently zoned multifamily, so we could potentially have long term tenants in there as well. That could be talking in the courtyard smoking marijuana, whatever. You

know, long term tenants do have friends over have guests over have a party I mean we're already zoned multifamily. So we're not really clear how us being there now, having to be there having to live

there which we already do would create even more noise than the way it's in the zone now. Also, I would like to add that a lot of the complaints that were put in writing before this meeting pertain to

procedural types of things where we had, we have been have been advised by our, our planning commission contact that you know you do this and this, and then later you do this and we've been assured

that everything we've done is correct and accurate up to date and I think there's some confusion perhaps by the garden district and the condos that we're doing that we're going to be doing something

going forward like what we did in the past. But if we receive approval for the bed and breakfast license, you know it's nine rooms to guess for bedroom, that's you know the rules and we would make

changes accordingly, as opposed to how we're renting it now which is 30 day rentals. So were you operating illegally the past few years, we did get called for illegal operation and we ceased and we

paid our funds. The short term rentals became very restrictive, and we kind of got caught in the cross hairs of we can't do this anymore we need to do something you know we need to go back to our

original bed and breakfast, lessons and do something about that but yes we did get, we did get to point out to something else in response they said that we just did this now, I have emails from 2017

and 2019 with Haley Delory who I assume might be Haley web now about asking about a bed and breakfast application, and that current iteration at that time, the city required that you get home set

exemption for short term rental and we were advised by the city that that would probably a better path, because then we didn't have to go through the conditional use process, because at that time the

number of bedrooms was fine for the. And we actually did all the homestead change your license all that and went down there. They wouldn't let us apply because we hadn't paid our property tax yet,

even though it wasn't due. And then COVID hit. And then I think there was a case against short term as the home set exemption, a federal case against it as well. Thank you. I have questions for staff

in the garden district on this because this would property would be isn't it 60 day rentals that your is the minimum, there is a restriction in the garden district, but does not include. Okay. All

right, thank you. If I can add one more thing we were talking about you know the good neighbor and living next to them for 10 years for no with no complaints and I would like to say that as far as the

garden district is concerned we've had zero complaints from them in the past two years. And then the with the gallery condo next door we've had three instances one instance was a person who contacted

us because our lights are shining in their window, and we remove the lights. Another instance was a lot that was shining in someone's window and we worked with them to put a cover over the window so

they wouldn't be impacted the lights. Another instance was a person who complained about a dog that was barking and don't normally allow pets on the property. But it was my son who was visiting at the

time. And after the complaint we had him remove the dog the next day. We've been very responsive, and those are the only three, there've been no noise complaints that have been told to us that we're

aware of. Thank you. And we also have many neighbors from the condominiums that come to us and ask us for rooms like if they have people visit and they need extra space for them we have several people

that we have relationships with that repeatedly use our, you know, thing, and we offer a 10% neighborhood discount to them as well. We're trying to be good neighbors. Thank you. Okay, y'all. You have

questions. Commissioner, Josie Gupta. Do you live there full time on this property. And you, which portion of the building are you living in. In our discussion with staff, we are going to live on the

third floor of the property, but you don't live there currently. Currently we just stay whatever's open, we're just all over the house. Commissioner seek had to refuse himself. Not yet. All right.

Commissioner Jackson's back. The staff recommendations approval with waivers and provisos. You all have a motion. We've heard from the neighbors we've heard from the applicants. Yes, Commissioner

Jackson, want to vote to for motion with providers. Are you going to vote in. Are you approving or are you going against staff recommendation. We're going to approve what what provisos. Okay, what are

those. There's one waiver and three provisos. Okay. Is there a second. A second. Any discussion. I'll be voting no just because of the lack of operating illegally and I'd like to be consistent in the

past with your operating illegally and then trying to ask for forgiveness. I'm just not comfortable with that. All right, we're going to go ahead and vote Commissioner Jordan. I'm going to actually

just to be unique for me I'll vote yes in this case because I know that there have been a number of interim periods where it is has been challenging for many folks to be in compliance and the fact

that there is some transparency about not being in compliance gives me a little bit more confidence and the efforts that have been done today would be a good thing. So, yes, and I'm a no commissioner

flick. Yes, Mr. Josie Gupta. It's a very difficult. Yes, because the building is very awkward, and it's kind of caught in this L shape of the condo building and if it were a if it were a single family

residence. I don't think it could actually be sold as a single family residence. And that's, that's the coordinates of that I do not appreciate homeowners lapsing or getting around rules and things

like that. So for that reason, I was a little, I'm really on the fence, but the situation I'm voting yes, Mr. Abert, I'm going to vote yes but I agree that you really should follow the rules, because

it's what you need to do, and the neighbors, you know, have been watching what's happening at property. So, please, you can communicate with them, do what you need to do to give them a piece of mind a

living next to you. Yes, Mr. Jackson. Yes, and I call those comments as well. Okay, thank you. Follow the rules. So the motion carries with approval. Good luck. We're moving on to zoning docket.

Number 10, 10426. This is a request to sell packaged alcohol beverages in a gas station to be located in a former dollar, excuse me for former family dollar in along old Gentelli road. The gas station

itself is a permitted use, the sale of alcohol beverages is a conditional use. The staff generally finds that the sale of alcoholic beverages is sort of a normal product sold in, you know, in grocery

stores, gas stations and the like and the issues with it often come based on responsible or not responsible operation as opposed to the nature of the use itself. The staff is going to assume that the

operator will operate responsibly and if that is not the case that there will be appropriate enforcement, and so the zoning matter the staff recommends and finds it appropriate. Miss Weber, don't

think you have any time seated to you but you have one card. And for a few years, it is in a C two auto oriented, high heavy commercial district. Like you said gas stations are permitted. However,

because the retail store would sell packaged alcohol. Most gas stations, that's why we're here today. We held the meeting the NPP meeting. No one attended we had obviously sent out notices and reached

out to all individuals there were no or neighborhood organizations associated with the NPP. In fact, while we were we were there for about an hour waiting just in case anybody would show up the

employees of the business where we held the NPP were asking us if they could have jobs at the gas station. So, because it is surrounded by heavy commercial like I said, lots of fast food restaurants,

no residential, you know we feel comfortable asking the commission for this conditional use. And again, this would be reuse of the building to convert it from former retail store that sat bacon into a

new gas station. There will be improvements to the building and the building not only will have the gas station but also have space for other commercial tenants for other retail commercial tenants as

well. So I think it's a great use of a building that has sat stagnant. And as we know, usually that is indicative of stagnant buildings aren't great. And the property owner has kept up this property

since he's purchased it recently this year, and continues to do so until we can go under construction and renovate it. Thank you. Thank you. I have three cards in opposition. Adam Hughes, Mel Jones

and Lloyd harsh. Please come up and speak and you each have two minutes, state your name and address and those are all the cards I have and then call up an opportunity to rebut. Yes, my name is pastor

Mel Jones. I'm at 4114 Old Gentile Road. I have a church at 4116 Old Gentile World, and we've also invested heavily in the community in that we own pontilly coffee on Chef highway at Chicago Road. We

have a snowball stand. We own tire town, and I am in opposition to anything with alcohol. We also have with our church. We have a recovery ministry where we have 100 men that live in in the community,

and we have 100 women, and we also have a family house where we have 20 mothers that live in the community. We do all of that. That's a six month program. And we do all of that with no government

funding, our businesses, take care of the ministry. So, we have several gas stations, we have alcohol at two of the gas stations. A daiquiri shop. We have Walmart that's right around the corner, and

they all have alcohol. There's also a daycare center right across the parking lot from them. And let's see what else you have the New Orleans Baptist theological seminary that's right around the

corner. So I am in absolute opposition to any alcohol in the area. All of our business have uplifted the neighborhood, the quality of life. This would take down the quality of life. Thank you, sir. My

name is Adam Hughes, I live at 4321 Seminary Place. I am here in some ways representing New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary but also just myself as a concerned citizen. I'm not originally from

New Orleans. This is actually my second stint of living in the city. I love the city. I love the Gentile area, love living, love living there and so a lot of my comments today are based on just my

concern for that area. Really, I would say I've got two things that I would say and both of them are maybe not evidence based but more anecdotal this afternoon. First of all, I would just say

everything that Pastor Mel said I would echo. And the main reason why is because of his many, many years of living and doing ministry in the area, I would just say to you if anybody knows and

understands the needs of the community, the ethos of the community, and what that ministry needs and has been through and what the area needs, it would be him. And so I would just really, as it

relates to the community and what they need, I would defer to him. That's one thing I would say. The second thing I would say is also anecdotal. I mentioned that this is my second stint of living in

the city. I lived in the same area that I did before from 2016 to June of 2022. And then for roughly four years, I was gone so I was here for six years, then left of June of 2022 came back just

recently from June of 2026. The only reason I bring that up just as kind of two markers. When we were here the first time and especially near the end of our time from, from the end of 2021 to 2020 22.

I will just tell you the the crime in the area had noticeably increased, I'm going to say violent crimes can't give you the statistics but it was just experienced my family and I my wife and I after

being back have noticed that that's drastically different. And I'm just simply saying I think adding this element in would actually increase the crime again so I'm just asking you to thank you.

Remember to say your name and address I'm just waiting for all the mic is okay. Yeah, my name is Dr. Lloyd harsh. I live 4337 seminary place. I have lived in the city since 2000, and have gone through

Katrina they're living in this neighborhood and I've seen a whole lot of transition in our neighborhood. Pastor Mel's group in in the community, reclaiming derelict businesses and turning him into

profitable community oriented uplifting things. And when I learned there's gonna be another business coming back into our area boy was I excited. But you imagine my chagrin when I learned that the

primary sales component of that business is alcohol related. And the business is 500 feet from a daycare center, and it's 1500 feet from the church and rehab center. And scripture says lead us not to

temptation well putting another alcohol related issue, just 1500 feet from people who are recovering from alcohol and other drug addictions successfully, he didn't say it but he's got a strong high

percentage of recovery higher than your normal normally would. And so the other issue is because it's alcohol related, the studies that exist, like the link between violent crime and alcohol outlet

density by Allison Jacobs at CADCA and others I don't have time to get them to you but I had these available. The more alcohol related organizations you have in an area, it causes crime to increase,

and there are five, there'd be five in this area so this drastically raise that. So, you know, the challenge of having increased crime, because of a higher density of alcohol related issues is a great

concern. Take your center 500 feet bullets go 30,000 feet, you know, all it takes is an errant bullet. And so I'd like to have an organization that's known more for its room than its rum more for its

beignets than its beer more than its for its problems than its pineal and more for its wings than its whiskey, so vote no. Thank you. Miss Webber, there's no one else here to speak opposition, so

please go ahead. Well, I have to say this first time my career I'm surprised, did not realize that we had opposition and so I would like the opportunity to speak with the gentleman. I would like to

learn more about their organizations. So this is the first I'm learning of their concerns and their opposition because of that. If the commission so chooses we can defer this matter, or if you choose

to vote that, you know, I'm not telling you how to do your, do your job, but I will, and I will get their information and plan on meeting with them and discussing their concerns. I would also like to

address that the store would not be solely alcohol. We are limited to 10% of the shelf area and no more than 15% of sales coming from the sale of alcohol. But I do think this is an opportunity for us

to open up the conversation and a serious conversation to be had and for the owner and for myself to understand what their concerns are and how we may address them. Thank you. Staff, can you let us

know what the deadline for this is the deadline is 60 days from today which would fall in December. Okay, so there's time to defer to commissioners that recommendation is approval with one provides so

the applicant has asked for potential deferral. You know, and I'd like to have the record to note that Commissioner Steve has rejoined us. Yes, Commissioner Jackson, I want to push to our recommend

and them having a referral. So that those two parties can have that serious conversation and see what we come up with. Is there a second for deferral. Okay, great. Any discussion. All right. I'm

looking at the report, the addresses where people were notified of NPP, they're not in that area. I don't know if you all realize that so maybe that's why nobody came to the NPP. So, I would have to

look at that but the addresses that were provided that we send the notices to, and we do look at the radius there should be the radius include included in that list. I usually request it Yeah, there

you go. And so, that, that's the wrong document. That's the wrong document. Yeah, that's not ours. That's definitely not. Okay, that might be from one of the previous one of the previous zoning

dockets and it got mixed up so there's a motion on the floor floor for deferral until December. So the latest you could go is December 8. There's also the opportunity to defer to the next meeting on

October 27, or the November, was that October 27. There is October 27. Yeah, I think, I think we need more time than December 8. So there's Commissioner Jackson is that cool. Absolutely. Okay, so

there's a motion on the floor for deferral till December 8 seconded by Commissioner. See, we're gonna vote. Commissioner Jackson. Yes, Commissioner, I bear. Yes, Commissioner Joseph. Commissioner

flick. Yes, Commissioner with a tree. Yes, Commissioner Jordan. Yes, Commissioner see. Yes. Okay, good luck. Thank you, gentlemen. See you again. Okay, now we're going to move on to agenda item 11.

This is a condition used for a bar on the property that is at the corner of the Asian field in North Frank part where the robot or grocery store is located. This is a bar that would occupy one of the

suite on the site. That is about 2500 square feet. And it is proposing a one shop to operate as a grab and go business with a small 130 square foot tasting area for on site wine consumption, which

meets the requirement of the 300 square foot limit. Overall, the staff is supportive this meets all the applicable standards of the CZO, the intent of the master plan so the recommendation is for

approval, subject to three providers. Thank you, Mr. Young, you have two cards seated to you so you have a total of six minutes. I don't have anyone else here to speak on this matter and support or

opposition. Person members, Chris young behalf of St. Claude holdings. Just a point of clarification with staff. I believe there was a reference to a bar this this. This is not a bar. It's a wine shop

wine. Oh yes. And if we could just change the time, Mr. Young has six minutes. Hold on one second. Hold on. They're gonna magic's gonna happen. I mean, I'll speak for six minutes. It's good. We can

car with it with the, of course, with the staff's report and to provide those. So if you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer. Thank you. Any questions? That's it. Is there a motion on the

floor? I'll move approval. I'm going to staff recommendation. Thank you, Commissioner Flick. Is there a second? Thank you, Commissioner Jackson. Any questions? All right. Commissioner seek. Yes, Mr.

Jordan. Yes, Mr. Witcher. Yes, Mr. Flick. Yes, Mr. Josie Gupta. Commissioner a bear. Yes, Commissioner Jackson. Yes. All right. Good luck. We're going to move on to zoning ticket number 12, and we

just have one person here to speak on that, but we're going to have a staff recommendation. This one is the conditional use for the bar in the mixed use district along St. Charles Avenue. The site

currently operates as a micro brewery. So the proposal is an expansion in the scope of what the existing business already offers. Considering there's a variety of commercial uses surrounding the

property, staff thinks that it's a suitable use for for the site and recommends approval. Thank you. I have one card for Judy Perry. Judy Martinez. Oh, I'm Judy Perry Martinez, Simone Paragine 1100

Poyger Street. I am here without payment as full disclosure. I am also the mother of the applicant lessee. So thank you for allowing us to me to speak for a minute. I think that the staff

recommendation appears clear and in order. We appreciate the recommendation. I know that last night there was an email sent to Robin Jones of staff responding to the various provides those and

providing the nuisance plan and security plan and other items that were requested. I know she acknowledged that receipt in writing. I don't know if she's been able to look at those or act in those,

but I certainly move for approval and I stand ready to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any questions of the commission of the applicant or staff recommendation was

approval with provides us. Yes, there is. I'm sorry, three providers. Yes, three providers. So I move approval with providers in accordance with staff recommendation and it would be better to get

paid. I'm sorry, it's two providers. And there are a second. I'll second. We will motion and a second. Is there any discussion. Commissioner. Yes, Commissioner. Yes, Commissioner. Yes, Commissioner

Jordan. Yes. Commissioner Stieck? Yes. Commissioner Whittrie for approval. Okay, yes. Thank you very much. All right we're moving on a motion or socket item number 13. This item is another ABO item

that affects a non-conforming gas station at the intersection of, just this here, at the intersection of Norman C. Francis Parkway, essentially where it meets, excuse me, I think it's MLK, so there's

a, it's sort of on the cusp of a residential neighborhood where it transitions to commercial. Again, a gas station which is to be renovated and the proposal is to add the sale of alcoholic beverages.

As stated before, the staff's general position is that there's no inherent difference in ABO sales compared to other products and that the appropriateness hinges mostly on the proper management of the

facility and so given that and given the commercial purpose of the zoning district, the staff finds this to be an appropriate location. I will note that it is within about a block of a daycare center

which will require the percentage of sales in display area to be quite limited under the city code and so there is a provisor that references that requirement. But again the staff recommendation is

approval. Ms. Weber you have two cards so you get to speak for four minutes. Thank you. Nicole Weber, 2131 B.M. Ville Street. So as Steven mentioned this is an existing gas station and mechanic shop.

We have proposed we've had two meetings with the neighbors, a few of whom are here today and we've had multiple emails and phone calls and communication with them so first I want to thank them for

being so willing to meet with us and to discuss the concerns and issues existing issues in the neighborhood and for us to address that as best as we can. The grocery store component is part of the

communications that we had. IDL or IDL would be the grocer to take the space. Obviously still asking for that alcohol provision. We're in conversations with the existing mechanic shop open that is

open Chuck to see if he will stay at that location and how that would be incorporated into the renovations of the site. As you can see in the plans it is in facade improvements to the building as well

as to the site increased landscaping just really to beautify the site. We through our meetings and through listening to the neighbors determined additional provisos that I would ask if we could vote

on today and I'll list those out. That would be operation hours of operation Monday through Saturday 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. closed on Sundays. Additionally no singles so no individual single-serve alcoholic

beverages will be sold and the requirement for fresh perishable food and produce items to be sold in the store at all times. There's additional concerns that we are in communication with them over

over traffic flow. There's concerns over not anything to do with the existing gas station or proposed sale of alcohol but just infrastructure type issues that we have said we would work out with DPW

signage stop signs those kind of things that are needed in the neighborhood and so we'll continue to work on that and to provide them with the final development plans as well as the sanitation plan

security plan and other items that we have promised. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Kenny Ritiff. Thanks for giving me the opportunity Kenneth Ritiff. I live at 7938 Breakwater Drive in New Orleans. Yes I'm

in support of it and any other questions that might come up thanks. Thank you. Are there any other cards in support? If not then we're gonna move to opposition. So Melissa Tabar and someone has a time

ceded to Melissa Fitzgerald. Okay people that ceded their time but I'm not gonna need okay if you just say your name and address I'll fix that here. Thank you. Melissa Tabik 1608 South Norman C

Francis Parkway. There's a five multiple neighbors and and thanks y'all for your time. Sorry it's hot in here and I'm like a little delirious. Yeah so there are five other properties and multiple

neighbors that are all on the block that are also in opposition. I couldn't be here. I live with my partner at the property who has lived in our space we're just two doors down from where the property

is and has lived there for 18 years. So I'm asking y'all to consider the impacts of the proposed conditional use for the alcohol sales directly across and right next door to the daycare center. I'm

just gonna read this because I'm not a good public speaker. So we've repeatedly expressed at planning meetings our concerns about increased commercial activity especially those alcohol related and its

effects on our quality of life. Alcohol sales would bring increased vehicle and pedestrian traffic at various hours. It's a very dangerous intersection where they are would bring a lot more traffic.

We have accidents there all the time and there are kids there a lot of us walk our dogs. There's a lot of pedestrian traffic in that area. So like you know they said in the previous like alcohol sales

also public and tax occasion, drunk driving, loitering, increased noise litter, trespassing and other like public health and safety concerns like this is these aren't like abstract things. We actually

already live with this. We have the rending in around the corner. We're getting impacted by this and like the car dealership. Is that two minutes already? You're gonna have another two minutes. So

we're constantly dealing with this in the commercialization and the amended proposed plan like we appreciate the conversation that they've had and that they've been open to talking with us but for the

convenience store with limited groceries it doesn't resolve the concerns. It lacks efficient parking. People will be parking on our streets bringing like I said additional traffic and parking pressure

and you know there's like a broader issue here. The owner has talked about how he can not he can't profit like this is the only way that he's going to be able to make a profitable business and I

understand like that's it's difficult to do business and I hear that but he's not the one that's gonna have to live there and deal with the consequences of what happens and I just like I it doesn't

sit right with me that us living there like that we have to bear the burden and the consequences to help somebody else make money and like I would love for there to be something good for our

neighborhood like I'm not against development or supporting or businesses but it's for alcohol and I just I you know like we have a nursery and that's great I'm happy that we have that business on our

street on our block but we're the ones that are gonna have to live there and deal with the consequences. Thank you for your time. Thank you. So can I ask just so I get it straight in my head so you

have around the corner toward Fountain Blow on the other on the other side not on Van Dome but on the on the does Norman C Francis go to the left and then keep going to Fountain Blow? It kind of like

whoops around but I live we live directly across the street from where the nursery is and it's just to properties down from where it is. Anything else? Thank you. Eric Brown are you still here? Oh you

actually had six minutes then. Do you have anything else to say? Tim Martin and that's the last card that I have speaking on this matter I believe. Mr. Martin please state your name and address. Tim

Martin I own the property of 1521, 1519, 1515, 1517, and 1511 South Norman C Francis adjacent to Mr. Retief's building. It's a garden center and I leased out 1519 to Mr. Nicole and she's running a

daycare center now. I believe there's an ordinance that says you can't have cell alcohol within 300 yards and she's within 300 yards so I'm talking on hubby half. I'm all about Mr. Retief renovating

that facility is way overdue matter of fact my company cuts the grass for free I just cut it Monday morning but the alcohol is a no-no we already have alcohol being sold at CNAs we always have it at

the Shell station we have it around the corner rendering in we don't need to sell it in my alcohol. My biggest fear is that someone gonna go buy a beer they either drunk and get a refill or they're

gonna get alcohol to go get drunk and there's kids coming out of that place money through Friday. I don't care if he's closed on Sunday so is the nursery what I'm concerned about is the alcohol. I

want him to renovate the building I think it's way overdue but that's how I feel about situation. Thank you for you Tom. Thank you. Ms. Weber. I wait for the new time to come up on the screen. You've

got two minutes. So to address the concerns about public intoxication the grocery store yes it will be selling alcohol but it will not be selling singles it will not be geared towards somebody walking

in and grabbing a beer it would be geared towards the neighbors going and having a place to pick up fresh food and supplies and if you haven't been to ideal or IDL please go check one out they're

amazing they're wonderful they sell items that you can't find in most grocery stores and they have the best trace leches I've ever even tried. The commercialization we're not increasing the commercial

aspect what we're doing is asking for this secondary use which would be limited to no more than 10% of display area and no more than 15% of sales contributed to alcohol so that's why having more fresh

food than alcohol I think is a great balance to have and would be tied to the property so if ideal is no longer the the the grocer there any grocer that would come in would be required to follow that

same requirement. I also wanted to point out that Mr. Ratiff he not only owns the gas but he also owns gas stations all throughout the Greater New Orleans area and there are no issues with them you

look up his gas stations or any of them they're they're not nuisances to the neighborhood he runs a tight ship 447 North Rampart is a property that this Commission had approved back in I think it was

2019 or 2020 before he took it over it was not the greatest location now that gas station is probably one of the nicest looking gas stations in the city like I said earlier I dumped you ugly and and

so you know he has a history of operating good businesses and being a good he ain't being a good neighbor and I think that was all I needed to add thank you can staff talk about the daycare and the

distance the buffer yeah so there's a regulation that lives in the city code that says you can't have a bar or an packaged outlet within 300 feet of a daycare of schools churches playgrounds etc but

there's an exception written in that says if the package ABO has less than and I'm blanking on the exact numbers but it's like ten percent of its stock no more than ten percent of its stock is alcohol

so ninety percent of stock is other thing that that restriction doesn't apply and so there is a proviso that's included in the staff report that would say if this is approved it has to comply with

that city code limitation so it's not you know without the city code and who enforced that I think it would be enforced by safety and permits they you know the ABO office lives within them they do the

license issuance and so they would do the enforcement as well thank you that our commissioners you have any questions I guess just the question I have for the applicant is just to confirm what's this

what's the status of the negotiation right now with EDL I'm familiar with them as a market and so just yes so they would be the tenant so they would operate or eat the grocery store got it so you have

an agreement I was just wanted to clarify okay we need a motion staff recommendation is approval we've heard from the applicant I'm gonna make a motion I suspect it's gonna go down to defeat I'm gonna

make a motion for denial I'm pretty familiar with the area and it's the gateway to two nice and and mixed residential areas and I just think the addition of alcohol is not necessary and be a detriment

to the neighborhood in terms of traffic etc so I'm gonna move for denial thank you Commissioner see is there a second I second thank you Commissioner a bear any discussion questions I think given that

it's a grocery store I don't see that as if it was something else that would it be different in that neighborhood and also it's an intersection that's quite busy it's surrounded by gas stations and

isn't there like a fried chicken place or a seafood place across the streets you know and it's a very very busy intersection so I feel that if it was a if it was like a standalone bar or if it was a

just a liquor store that would be different that this is a grocery store which is different my opinion from being a standalone bar is why we have discussion Commissioner Jackson do you have any

questions okay well we have a motion on the floor for denial I'll go ahead and call the vote Commissioner see yes Commissioner Jordan I know we've had some tough ones today I'm gonna say no only

because I know I know the product that EDL produces and trust it as an operator an effective neighbor like a good neighbor okay Commissioner see it's going against recommendations and I'm saying I'm

no okay I'm a yes Commissioner yes Commissioner you're no Commissioner to go she Josie Gupta's a no I'm going with Steve he's a no yes he's a commissioner see as a no and Commissioner Jackson no yes

do I need to do that again yeah yeah we start over please is the air conditioning off okay I think it stops 5 o'clock okay we're gonna restate our motion and motion was for denial okay staff

recommendation Steve is voting for his motion and against as a no I'm voting yes Commissioner flick I'm voting yes Commissioner Josie Gupta no Commissioner a bear I'm voting for denial because you

were the second as well okay Commissioner Jackson no okay so we have one two three four we have four yeses we have three noes so that doesn't that is an effective denial so we either are sending that

to City Council or we are coming up with a new ocean okay I guess then we're it's an effective denial because there's no new motion on the floor that anyone's willing to take up at this time yeah that

was four yeses for denial and then three noes thank you for coming and spending the afternoon with us I wish I could offer you air conditioning or bottled water all right we are moving on to zoning

docket 10826 good afternoon commissioners zoning docket 108 - 2 6 as a request to amend the Conference of Zoning Ordinance to remove the portion of the magazine Street use restriction overlay between

Washington Avenue and Napoleon Avenue the proposed amendment would eliminate additional conditional use requirements for standard restaurants associated alcohol sales and secondary live entertainment

in this segment while retaining the underlying zoning regulations the amendment is consistent with the master plan and the findings of the land use barrier study which identified the overlays broader

application as an unnecessary constraint on economic activity along this established commercial corridor staff recommends approval of zoning docket 0 1 0 8 - 2 6 with the additional recommendation to

clarify the ordinance by removing the reference to Maple Street from the overlay provisions the councilmember office for a district B has requested a deferral of this item until December 8th miss

Landrieu yes thank you and it's been a long day for everybody remember state your name and address yes Shelly Landrieu representing the Garden District Association first of all we're here to ask for

deferral and we didn't it with Councilman Parris to ask her she would defer this so that we would have a lot more time to work this out this basically came as a surprise to us and the rest of the

organizations the associations that are border magazine Street and just as a little bit of a background many years ago we were redoing the CZO this group got together from Lake Avenue all the way from

the over overpass to Lake Avenue all the members of the associations across next to magazine Street got together and tried to put in this overlay and we were successful in doing so because magazine

Street is its own animal it's not like other HUB ones across the city it's very narrow it's very compact it's already congested it's a destination zone it's got lots of things that don't match of

these types of zones across the city and so we were very concerned about it and that's why we put in the overlay so when she came forth and with all good intentions because magazine Street is

suffering from commercial development it's got a lot of vacancies we understand that we just don't think that the solution to this is to lift the overlay and it's not the whole overlay but it's

between Washington and Napoleon which is obviously the Garden District it fits the the Turo Bouloni and Deloshais and also the Farber Merengo and all of them are in in agreement with us that we would

like to have a lot more time to look at it get down to the nitty-gritty of it and sit with Councilman Harris and restaurant owners and other places this just came as a surprise to us so we don't want

it to be lifted we would like for our we would like some input to have the conditional uses go forth so that we can have some say so and NPPs and all that stuff that goes with it and so right now

we're asking for December 8th correct are you okay anything else no Julie Graybill okay did you want to say anything else no she just wanted me to let you know that Farber Merengo was here as well and

is in is in consent with us perfect we're gonna let the record note thank you is anyone else here to speak on this matter if not then Commissioner Jackson are you going to vote or make a motion I want

to make a motion for the push for the for is there a second till December 8 December 8th all right Commissioner a very seconded yes all right now let's vote mr. C yes Commissioner Jordan yes

Commissioner Whitley's yes mr. Flick yes mr. Josie Gupta Commissioner a bear yes Commissioner Jackson yes thank you okay so we have a subdivision docket 10826 yes this subdivision would reconfigure

four lots into one single lot of record that would result in that lot having frontage on two parallel streets which makes it a through lot the reason it is in front of you is because there's not

really a common pattern of through lots in the area so I'm sorry ultimately there's only one house that is fronting one of the streets then that is under common ownership so the second lot that is

fronting the second street is vacant and used as the backyard for that residence the proposal would not have any negative effect it's not in conflict with the master plan or any of the CZO regulation

so we are recommending approval perfect um are you mr. Richard please do would you like to say anything thank you for being here thank you this has been very interesting today these tell all the

friends yeah quite the lots behind my house the lot next door program and it's been wonderful and I'd just like to get it all put together into one piece and that works great for me but I'll have to

say about that can you say your address please eight zero zero four daniel brode and I also have eight zero zero seven mullet thank you anything else nope so there's no opposition so there's no

rebuttal approval all right we have an approval is there a second I'll second Commissioner flick second so any discussion if not we're gonna vote Commissioner see Commissioner Jordan Commissioner

Whittrey yes Commissioner flick Commissioner Josie Gupta mr. a bear yes Commissioner Jackson yes oh yes all right good luck thank you for spending the afternoon with us and now we have to

consideration of updates to the public hearing rules is not ready correct or is it my understanding is that there's a draft but I believe it's mr. ever since okay so we're gonna defer that until

October 27th if somebody would make a motion I'll make a motion for deferral October 27th thank you is there a second thank you all right any discussion if not we'll vote mr. Jackson yes mr. a bear

yeah Commissioner Josie Gupta Commissioner flick yes mr. Whittrey yes Commissioner Jordan yes mr. C yes alrighty the motion carries and then we have the subdivision ratifications that Commissioner

Jordan would you like to make a motion I'll make the motion if you want every these are for your approval I'll make the moment to approve subdivision ratification and any discussion if not we'll vote

all in favor all right let's do in a motion to adjourn all right thank you it's been a very long day the motioned I made the motion mote Commissioner Jackson and the