Council Kills Morgan Point Development

CENTRAL — Residents of Morgan Place subdivision won a big victory Tuesday night when the Central City Council voted down Morgan Point, a Planned Unit Development (PUD) proposed by developer Jeff Couvillion.

The project had been approved by the Central Planning & Zoning Commission, but residents of Morgan Place said it did not comply with the city’s Master Plan.

They objected to the fact that the new development would not have its own entrance onto Hooper or Sullivan roads.  Instead, residents of Morgan Point would enter and exit through Morgan Place.

They said the new subdivision would be too dense with 67 units.

The subdivision was out of compliance with the city’s low density building standards, according to Woodrow Mohammed, building officer with the City of Central.  He said the maximum number of units would be 55.  City Councilman Louis DeJohn tried to keep the project alive by reducing the number of units from 67 to 55 but that proposal died for lack of a second.

Jeff Couvillion introduced Morgan Point to the Council as a project of Acadiana Development which would have curbs and gutters and 3.5 acres of undisturbed property plus walking trails and bike paths.  He said he made every effort to comply with the UDC and the Master Plan.  He said that if he made the lots any larger, it would take away from the planned amenities.

No one from the public spoke in favor of the plan, but a number of residents of Morgan Place spoke against it:

• Johnny Anderson said Morgan Point should have its own entrance and utilities and not rely on Morgan Place.  He said the new project was not up to the standards of Morgan Place, that the traffic counts were flawed, and that the water pressure tests had not been updated since 2004. He also questioned the plans for sewer tie-ins for Morgan Point.  He said this proposal was part of a trend toward sub-par developments in Central.  He presented a petition signed by more than 200 residents of his subdivision in opposition to Morgan Point.

• David Thompson said Morgan Point was designated in the Master Plan as a low density development but the proposal did not meet that standard.  He said Morgan Point had quarter-acre lots, twice the density allowed.  In addition, the entrance to Morgan Point would have two rows of closely-spaced housing.  “This is not the sanctuary envisioned by the Master Plan,” he said.

• Brian Rowe said, “We trust our leaders to focus on smart growth and keeping our country environment” but that this proposal failed to do that.  “This development needs its own entrance from Sullivan Road and its own sewer system.”

• Tim Lazaroe objected to the lot size and the lack of its own entrance.  “This looks like the 4th filing of Morgan Place, but it doesn’t fit.”

• Lee Fawcett said he feared Morgan Point would ultimately be used to create a connection between Hooper and Wax roads, making Morgan Place a shortcut to Magnolia Bridge.  He also expressed concern about potential backups in the sewer system.

• Lee Bagot said her major concern is the safety of residents and their children and grandchildren.  She also expressed concern about Morgan Place becoming a highway connecting Hooper and Wax roads.

After the opponents had spoken, Councilman Aaron Moak attempted to return the proposal to the Planning & Zoning Commission for further review.  He said the Council does not have a final concept plan for the project.  That motion failed for lack of a second.

Mayor Mac Watts asked Jeff Couvillion what the net acreage of the project would be, and Couvillion said 28 or 29 acres.

When asked the maximum number of lots which the project could contain and still be considered low density, Woodrow Muhammad, planner for the City of Central, said from 49 to 55 lots.

Councilman Tony LoBue spoke against approval of the project.  He said, “I have a problem with a project when I see so many people coming out to speak against it.  We haven’t talked about correcting the fact that the project does not have its own entrance and exit.  If we say no, the developer can come back in a year and try again.  This plan in its present form is all we have to vote on.”

The Council voted to kill the vote 5-0.  DeJohn said it was the first time in seven years he had voted against a development.

Since it was defeated, the project cannot be brought up for at least one year.  Had it been sent back to the Planning & Zoning Commission, it could have returned to the Council within a few weeks.