There was a good turn-out for the meeting last night and the Upper Audubon Association President, Tre Roux, handled the meeting well. The current overall plan for the Batture development in the form presented by developers is at first glance a visually appealing substitute for the industrial detritus left with the closure of Bisso Marine. In my opinion, however, it is not a viable plan as it stands. My opinion is shared by a majority of my neighbors, I believe.
Anyone who has ever been involved intimately or even just on the sidelines of commercial developments knows that to be financially successful, easy automobile access from all four sides is mandatory. The project as proposed would only have one way in and out and that one entry/exit would be fraught with problems. New Orleanians might patronize a restaurant once, but development history has demonstrated that if there are any problems either with the product or the ease of getting there, they just won’t be bothered to try a second time. There are too many other great alternatives in the immediate vicinity.
And these developers will not be asking for another ramp across the levee for a second access/egress. The only logical place for a
second ramp would be at the river end of Broadway and that would be an even more dangerous ramp location, right at a big bend in the street
as Magazine turns into Leake Avenue. An already dangerous traffic situation.
I would point out here that far more experienced developers—Rodger Ogden and Daryl Berger—looked at the property for a possible development and concluded that the property for many reasons is not suitable for such a development and passed on purchase of the property.
in fact, the audio-visual presentation given in itself demonstrates that these development partners have no experience in a development of this scale, involving a massive array of permitting issues from various federal, state and city agencies. Their previous projects all have been small, mostly one-building renovations for such commercial enterprises as a single coffee shop for French Truck Coffee. And only one of the questions asked about financing was answered. They do not plan on asking for public money grants, they say, but have shed absolutely no light on whether their pockets are deep enough to complete the project. They also failed to answer questions with regard to who is funding the project, who their underwriters are and the levels of insurance to protect people and property in our neighborhood from damage they cause.
One serious problem with the plan is that the most attractive part of it, the fact that very few buildings, only 8, are planned means that few spaces will be available for revenue from rent by restaurants and other services, which in turn means that rents will necessarily be high if the developers are not to go broke. And down stream, those renting will have to have to have high customer streams if they are not forced to close. The result, likely would be revolving tenants, which are not satisfactory for long term success of such a development. Many, in fact most, of those present at the meeting fear that this will lead to a future request on the part of the development partners for a permitting change to allow a conversion to high rise buildings, which no ione wants to see at this location. Asked several times, he refused to commit to having a permanent covenant placed on the property banning future high rises for any purpose including condos, hotels, or offices.
The presenting partner for the developers, Ben Jacobson, while an attractive and articulate young man, was either deliberately dodging the issues or these guys really don’t know what they are doing. Ben seems sincerely motivated himself to accomplish a commercial development in tune with the neighborhood (he lives up here), which as he describes it would be a riverfront park with food and wine available on site, a market, and several other commercial service providers.
He tried to convince those at the meeting that there will be little if any impact on the neighborhood from traffic in and out of the development. Jacobson either has his head in the clouds about it or is deliberately lying about anticipated increases in traffic issues, etc. They supposedly are to have a completed traffic study in the next 30 to 60 days but by now they should have more definitive ideas about what traffic will be required to make the the development succeed financially.
And since he says they are not applying for a second access across the levee to the property, severe traffic snarls at Walnut and Magazine would be inevitable. Increased traffic across the existing ramp would be very dangerous and the life quality of the two existing high rises at the foot of Walnut would be destroyed. Residents of these buildings are opposed to the project because of the damage it would do to their ability to access their property, etc. It appears that the residents of Lambeth House are militantly up in arms about the project, too.
The only permit the developers have applied for so far is with the Corps of Engineers and this permit has not been awarded yet. The Corps and other permitting agencies must have public hearings and the requesting party must present possible alternative land uses of the property in question. Since by law, the project cannot move forward without public hearings and subsequent approvals by the City Planning Commission, City Council, The Department of Public Works, The Department of Safety and Permits, the New Orleans Levee Board, the Public Belt Railroad, etc., it behooves all of us to request complete written information about the project from the developers and to read it carefully,
Then, we should make our individual positions known to the Upper Audubon Association through the President.
All property owners who are UAA members will have a vote on the final position taken by the UAA. That is not sufficient, however. As soon as possible, it is important to make your position about the project known at a minimum to City Councilman Giarrusso, Councilman Morrell and Councilwoman at large Helena Moreno, as developers say they already have spoken to them; the City Planning Commission, the Department of Public Works, the Department of Safety and Permits, the Mayor, U.S. and State Representatives and Senators. A single-page letter with your backing or opposition concisely stated is recommended, possibly with any attachments you believe to be pertinent.