- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: In fight over a 2,000-lot subdivision, Livingston settles lawsuit with developer
Posted on 7/31/23 at 3:46 pm to Bronson2017
Posted on 7/31/23 at 3:46 pm to Bronson2017
quote:
District 5 residents later won a tenuous victory in court, requiring the Deer Run developer to follow current zoning laws that say the subdivision must have 1-acre lots, instead of lots 40-feet wide.
That's a solid start. Needs to be carried over into most of the rest of the parish.
0
Posted on 7/31/23 at 3:51 pm to member12
quote:
The Advocate
quote:
Such a terrible paper.
Yep
Posted on 7/31/23 at 5:34 pm to frequent flyer
quote:
Zachary's problem is that there are areas in their school district that are out of their control from a development perspective. They've been fighting the good fight against one of the DR Horton shite shows though. Impressed with their political pull on that. Good for them!
True. The Zachary School district is largely unincorporated areas of EBR that do not fall within the City of Zachary zoning and planning. EBR is required to send a Zone of influence to Zachary P and Z anytime something comes up in these areas. It isn't binding if Zachary rejects the ZOI.
I have been in Zachary since 2003. I have 3 more years and I'm out. My youngest goes to Silliman so we will probably move to E. Feliciana once our son finishes at Zachary High. The city is poorly run and it's not getting better.
Posted on 7/31/23 at 5:39 pm to lsufan1971
Read three articles and not one mentions the developer by name.
Which developer is this?
Which developer is this?
Posted on 7/31/23 at 5:43 pm to lsufan1971
quote:
I have been in Zachary since 2003. I have 3 more years and I'm out. My youngest goes to Silliman so we will probably move to E. Feliciana once our son finishes at Zachary High. The city is poorly run and it's not getting better.
Dude, E Feliciana is a joke. Their proximity to Baton Rouge should make them a huge, powerful suburban parish.....but their public schools are so crappy that nobody will go near them.
You are right to wait until after your kids are done with Zachary High school.
Posted on 7/31/23 at 5:59 pm to member12
There are dozens upon dozens of neighborhoods being developed with hundreds of lots in each one.
The school system is already strained and it's only going to get worse! Of course they're not being proactive and thinking about the future infrastructure of the Parish, they're only thinking about the pay raises they're going to get instead of the teachers, support staff and first responders should be getting.
The school system is already strained and it's only going to get worse! Of course they're not being proactive and thinking about the future infrastructure of the Parish, they're only thinking about the pay raises they're going to get instead of the teachers, support staff and first responders should be getting.
Posted on 7/31/23 at 9:29 pm to goofball
quote:
but their public schools are so crappy that nobody will go near them.
My youngest goes to Silliman in Clinton. I had to take her out of Zachary. It was getting bad. They run 2 buses to Zachary every day. It’s not Catholic High but it’s a pretty good school. No liberal indoctrination.
People are moving to East Feliciana. Land prices keep rising and new homes being built. I know 2 1 acre lots in Ethel just sold for 50K each.
This post was edited on 7/31/23 at 9:31 pm
Posted on 7/31/23 at 10:32 pm to Saunson69
quote:
but limiting housing development just hurts US home buyers as we need all the new houses being developed as possible to raise supply which lowers prices for all
When they build neighborhoods like this, those neighborhoods turn into slums within 10-15 years.
Posted on 7/31/23 at 11:34 pm to Saunson69
quote:
I think a few people here will say "YAY big greedy corporation doesn't get to make it's money", but limiting housing development just hurts US home buyers as we need all the new houses being developed as possible to raise supply which lowers prices for all
This isn’t San Francisco or Austin TX. Zero lot line future ghettos are not needed for supply. People buying these houses should by and large be renting. Not owning.
Posted on 7/31/23 at 11:41 pm to member12
If only you guys had a Mary Hawkins Butler down here.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 5:43 am to member12
The parish is not the good guy as they try an portray themselves. There are plenty of large, high density newly and poorly constructed builds in and near Denham they authorized all in the name of tax revenues.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 6:27 am to Bronson2017
quote:This is good for everyone imo.
developer to follow current zoning laws that say the subdivision must have 1-acre lots, instead of lots 40-feet wide.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 6:51 am to RidiculousHype
quote:
Literally everyone you talk to despises the street-facing garage, zero lot line, 40 ft lots.
But yet they sell just fine
If people would not buy, developers would not develop and builders would not build
Posted on 8/1/23 at 6:59 am to Saunson69
quote:
I think a few people here will say "YAY big greedy corporation doesn't get to make it's money", but limiting housing development just hurts US home buyers as we need all the new houses being developed as possible to raise supply which lowers prices for all
No... this is about infrastructure. They allow all these subdivisions and apartments to be built without considering the impact in everything else.
There are new areas being built up that cause existing homes to deal with drainage issues/flooding. Not to mention the impact on traffic. Just look at the DS exits at I12 now.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 8:18 am to terd ferguson
I think flood insurance will be the great deciding factor for this. Looking at the flood map, most of DS, watson etc are in AE zones, the X zones are mostly filled up.
Insurance companies are already doubling home insurance and are backing out of entire states flood insurance-wise. with the already inflated house prices, mortgage rates and living at the whims of insurance companies, who's affording these new houses? we were looking at a house in watson, nice house etc, but just flood insurance was going to add $150-200 a month to the note. frick that.
Insurance companies are already doubling home insurance and are backing out of entire states flood insurance-wise. with the already inflated house prices, mortgage rates and living at the whims of insurance companies, who's affording these new houses? we were looking at a house in watson, nice house etc, but just flood insurance was going to add $150-200 a month to the note. frick that.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 8:25 am to RT1941
quote:
Who wants to hear their neighbor fart in his sofa cushion
This is modern home building. Cram as many houses in a single lot as possible, rush the construction using suspect crews and materials, overcharge by six figures and count your money while people will have to move in 10 years because their papermache house falls apart.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 9:01 am to Solo Cam
Larger lots means more green space and less hard surface coverage as a proportion of available land. So it’s easier to manage runoff than in a densely packed neighborhood.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 9:18 am to Macfly
quote:
The parish is not the good guy as they try an portray themselves. There are plenty of large, high density newly and poorly constructed builds in and near Denham they authorized all in the name of tax revenues.
The parish has been rubber stamping any new development for years which has led to low income housing, overcrowding, traffic, and flooding. They are finally getting push back from the locals with this huge development proposal. Hopefully things will be more thought out going forward.
This post was edited on 8/1/23 at 9:20 am
Posted on 8/1/23 at 9:21 am to prplhze2000
quote:
If only you guys had a Mary Hawkins Butler down here.
This right here. Probably about 25 years too late though. Local leadership only sees immediate tax dollars and campaign contributions instead of long term health/growth of the parish.
This post was edited on 8/1/23 at 9:23 am
Posted on 8/1/23 at 9:24 am to EvrybodysAllAmerican
quote:
parish has been rubber stamping any new development for years which has led to low income housing, overcrowding, traffic, and flooding. They are finally getting push back from the locals with this huge development proposal. Hopefully things will be more thought out going forward.
The political infrastructure that killed this needs to be exercised more in other parts of LP.
And don’t be anti-development. Just be a force against shitty, high density development.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News