Terrebonne council to revisit controversial land buy

A moratorium on development in the northern part of Terrebonne Parish and a controversial land purchase on tonight’s council meeting agenda could have a drastic impact on Terrebonne Parish’s future. This meeting may resolve many of the issues that caused a December meeting to descend into a fracas of ethics allegations and finger pointing.

The moratorium is rooted in heated objection by residents of the Southern Estates neighborhood to a proposed mixed-used affordable housing development that’s slated for a 77-acre parcel of land adjacent to their subdivision. The council is also expected to vote on a $4.8 million appropriation for a parcel of land in Gray for a government complex.

Residents of the Southern Estates, who faced rain-related flooding twice last year, said the Three Oaks development would make existing drainage problems worse. The construction freeze would last 120 days or until work is completed on the CCC ditch, which drains northern and western parts of the parish. Although a moratorium would not stop the Three Oaks development from eventual construction, it would extend through May, which typically sees the most flooding.

The development halt was proposed by Councilwoman Teri Cavalier, who represents Southern Estates. Cavalier said that development in the northern part of the parish has outpaced drainage infrastructure, and that a moratorium is necessary to keep her constituents’ homes dry.

Although the entire council has expressed concerns over drainage, the Three Oaks development has wide support. Several council members have repeatedly highlighted the need for affordable housing in the parish and the advantages of Three Oaks, which would include two hotels, retail space and a golf course.

The moratorium is seen as a good way to assuage the concerns of residents, but allowing the development to ultimately move forward. The Three Oaks project would likely be well short of the construction phase when the freeze ends, and was already given unanimous approval by the council.

“I think the moratorium is a smart move,” said Councilman Kevin Voisin. “It’s short enough so that it won’t devastate property value, but it’s long enough to let us make some headway on drainage.”

While the idea has support on the council, Parish President Michel Claudet has said that the moratorium could face legal retribution.

“To pass a [moratorium] right now is contrary to a federal ruling out of St. Bernard’s Parish,” said Claudet at a town hall meeting in Schriever earlier this month. “I think at the present time this development is too far along to stop.”

The proposed halt on construction has also drawn the ire of area developers.

“I’ve got every developer in town calling me and trying to stop this thing,” said Voisin.

The clamoring of residents near the proposed development has already yielded results. The parish council passed a resolution that disallows developers to change a projects drainage plan after it’s been approved by the council at a meeting earlier this month, and Cavalier has also brought forth a resolution to get rid of stub out streets that would connect the Three Oaks development to Southern Estates. A vote on that issue is not expected until Feb. 10.

The council will also be voting on $4.8 million to buy and improve a parcel of land in Gray for a new government complex that would include a Public Works yard, a new juvenile justice complex, and a headquarters for the Office of Emergency Preparedness.

The council split over the property Claudet favors near U.S. Highway 90 and La. Highway 24, and an alternate piece of land offered by developer S.P. LaRussa.

That issue had the council lobbing allegations back and forth at the last meeting of 2009. Councilman Billy Hebert accused Claudet of threatening to slow down projects in his district if he didn’t vote for the measure.

He also accused Claudet of moving on this piece of land to avoid a lawsuit from Henry Richard, although those connections were not immediately clear. Claudet strenuously denied all allegations, and none of Hebert’s charges could be confirmed.

Later in that meeting, Hebert and Councilman Clayton Voisin were called out for lobbying against the piece of property lauded by Claudet. That piece of land is owned by rival developer Ronald Shaw.

Clayton Voisin and Hebert were both photographed at a Saints’ game with LaRussa just days before LaRussa offered an alternate property to the parish.

“I find it ironic that the next meeting after you were photographed at a Saints game with LaRussa, the first or second thing on the agenda is an alternative piece of land from his company,” said Kevin Voisin at the December meeting.

Hebert, Clayton Voisin, and four other council members voted to table the land purchase, citing drainage concerns. That measure should receive a final yes or no from the council tonight.

The resolution to purchase the Shaw property was initially tied to over $4 million in funding for other parish projects, but those projects were separated from the land purchase and approved at a council meeting earlier this month.

Although most on the council agree that the government complex is a good idea, some view the conflict as a struggle between two of the area’s most prominent developers.

“You have this kind of like clash of the titans of developers with the council, and it’s playing out with us being the mouthpieces,” said Kevin Voisin. “If every project comes down to who’s land is it on and who’s making a buck, we’re not going to get anything done.”