Working Paper 6

BioDistrict New Orleans

Alternative Plan Exploration
January 2011
2 Working Paper 6 Table of Contents January 2011

Table of Contents

Section:
01 02 03
Task 6 Overview Alternative Plan Additional Workshop
Concepts Findings
07
Format of the Physical 11 25
Planning Workshops Alternative Plan City and State
Concepts Government Physical
Planning Workshop
Comments

26
Institutional Physical
Planning Workshop
Comments

26
Community Physical
Planning Workshops
Comments

32
Other Questions /
General Comments
 3

04
Appendix

A
Stakeholder Sign-In
Sheets

Acknowledgement

The AECOM team would like to acknowledge

the GNOBEDD Board and staff for their input and
engagement during this Task. This report has also been
developed in coordination with the entire AECOM
team. The team includes: EDAW / AECOM, AECOM
Economics, AECOM Transportation, Bright Moments,
Cannon Design, CBRE, Chester Engineers and The
Ehrhardt Group.
4 Working Paper 6 Table of Contents January 2011
 5

Section 01:
Task 6 Overview:
Alternative Plan
Exploration
6 Working Paper 6 Task 6 Overview January 2011

BioDistrict New Orleans. The Louisiana Superdome, New Orleans Arena and key existing and
proposed institutional developments are shown in blue.

Task 6 Overview: Alternative Plan Exploration
The purpose of Task 6, Alternative Plan Exploration,
was to generate alternative development scenarios
for the BioDistrict based upon the programming
recommendations developed in Task 4, Programming,
as well as the overall vision for the BioDistrict. These
scenarios were developed during five physical planning
workshops held the week of November 1st.
Dates, times and locations of the various meetings are
provided below.
• November 2, 2010, 10am-1pm, City and State
Government Physical Planning Workshop,
Louisiana Endowment for the Humanities, First
Floor Conference Room, 938 Lafayette Street
# 300
• November 3, 2010, 5:30-8:30pm, Community
Physical Planning Workshop #1, Warren Easton
High School, 3019 Canal Street, Second Floor
Auditorium
• November 4, 2010, 10am-1pm, Institution and
University Physical Planning Workshop, Louisiana
Endowment for the Humanities, First Floor
Conference Room, 938 Lafayette Street # 300
• November 4, 2010, 5:30-8:30 pm, Community
Physical Planning Workshop #2, Warren Easton
High School, 3019 Canal Street, Second Floor
Auditorium
• November 6, 2010, 9am-12pm, Community
Physical Planning Workshop #3, International
House Conference Center, 221 Camp Street,
Fourth Floor Conference Room
Stakeholder sign-in sheets can be found in Appendix A.
7
Format of the Physical Planning
Workshops
During each of the physical planning workshops the
following topics were presented: (1) an overview of
BioDistrict New Orleans; (2) the purpose of the BioDistrict
Plan and how it differs from the City’s recently completed
2030 Master Plan; (3) where the planning process is to
date; (4) a summary of findings from the visioning session
meetings; and (5) the final vision statement for the
BioDistrict.
The presentation was followed by the physical planning
exercise during which stakeholders could draw on base
maps of the BioDistrict and share their ideas for how
the BioDistrict should develop in the future. To help
stakeholders visualize their suggestions and to ensure that
the plan ideas developed were realistic, the AECOM team
provided each group with paper tiles that corresponded
to the amount of square footage anticipated for each of
the following land uses: retail, research and development,
residential, light manufacturing, medical office, and open
space. These land uses and square footage requirements
were based on the programming recommendations made
during Task 4, Programming.
Near the end of each workshop, time was given to a
community representative to describe the intent and
decisions made on their respective table’s concept map.
Notes and reproductions of the maps from each of the
physical planning workshops can be found in Section
2. These ideas will be refined into three to four distinct
alternatives during Task 7 and will be presented to the
community in the near future.
8 Working Paper 6 Task 6 Overview January 2011

Stakeholder discussion during the City and State Government Stakeholder Physical Planning Workshop.
 9

Section 02:
Alternative Plan
Concepts
10 Working Paper 6 Alternative Concepts January 2011

Stakeholders participate during one of the physical planning workshops.

 11

Alternative Plan Concepts

The following pages show the ten alternative plan concepts that were developed at each of the physical planning
workshops. The big ideas associated with each plan are also outlined. These concepts will form the basis of the draft
alternatives that will be presented to the public in early January.

Stakeholders participate during one of the physical planning workshops.

12 Working Paper 6 Alternative Concepts January 2011

Alternative Concept #1
Big Ideas:

• Parks throughout the

neighborhoods
• Connect Xavier with Gert
Town: College Town
• Street sections with bike
lanes
• Address how the justice area
fits into the neighborhood
• Gert Town needs development
energy
• Increase transit opportunities
• Create a strong node at
Tulane Avenue and Jeff Davis
Parkway
• More retail and organic
growth along Carrollton
Avenue. Strip malls are not
desired.
• Focus reconstruction energy
on Mid-city with (1) financial
incentives (2) technical
assistance (3) contractors
• Increase commercial along
Broad Street
• Tulane to operate as a local
road
• Potential for grocery store
near Falstaff Lofts at Broad
Street and Tulane Avenue
 13

Alternative Concept #2

Big Ideas:

• Use I-10 as a transit corridor/

boulevard to reconnect the
fabric of the city across it
• Include Zion City in the
BioDistrict
• A regional TOD hub could be
located at Carrollton Avenue
and I-10/ Tulane
• Shift the streetcar from
Loyola to Rampart creating a
pedestrian only street
• Redesign the Claiborne and
I-10 roadways to be more
accessible by multi-modal
transit and repair block
structure.
• Place a grocery store in Mid-
City
• Retail and Mixed-Use on
Broad Street
• Upgrade rail infrastructure and
re-plan the area to become an
amenity rather than a barrier
• Keep Xavier on the downriver
side of Washington Avenue
• Focus on neighborhood nodes
• Create neighborhood
amenities like parks, pools
and recreation centers
• Reconnect streetcar or LRT
along Carrollton
• Protect historic district
• BioDistrict planning should
begin around the existing
medical campuses
14 Working Paper 6 Alternative Concepts January 2011

Alternative Concept #3
Big Ideas:
• Higher density development
should be focused along
Canal Street at UMC and VA
hospital edges.
• Higher density housing
located in area across from
VA hospital (Galvez to
Broad; Tulane to Poydras)
Grocery store in Mid-City
neighborhood and near
Falstaff Lofts
• Strengthen small
neighborhood retail along
Broad Street with bike lanes
• Do not touch the core
neighborhood of Mid-City
except to enhance and rebuild
• Office, small retail should be
located along Tulane
• Locate a streetcar on Tulane
• Edge the Industrial area with
apartments near Xavier side
• Strengthen single family and
townhomes in Gert Town
• Remove concrete plant in
Gert Town
• Enhance Jeff Davis Parkway
• Increase the number of parks
throughout the neighborhoods
 15

Alternative Concept #4
Big Ideas:

• Development nodes should

focus on Tulane Avenue
• Identify sub-districts/
neighborhoods within the
BioDistrict
• Put parks and recreation
throughout the neighborhoods
for better access
• Small retail along Banks
Street is a good neighborhood
model
• Use existing capacity of
utilities to guide development
• Jeff Davis Parkway, Broad
Street and Galvez Street
should serve as better
connectors to the entire
district
• Remove elevated portion of
I-10 along Claiborne
• Develop a TOD node at Canal
and Claiborne
16 Working Paper 6 Alternative Concepts January 2011

Alternative Concept #5
Big Ideas:
• Create a tree canopy on every
street
• Focus high density mixed use
around medical campuses
• Develop a gateway to the
BioDistrict at Loyola and
Tulane Avenues and one at
Carrollton and Tulane Avenues
• Restore Claiborne Ave by
removing the I-10 connection
• Increase residential on Canal
Street
• Create civic node at Jeff Davis
and Tulane
• Support/ Protect Mid-City
neighborhood with residential
and retail development along
Tulane
• Create a positive identity for
the Justice area
• Create neighborhood nodes
at Canal Street / Jeff Davis
Parkway and Canal Street/
Broad Street
• Strengthen Gert Town with
redevelopment
• Widen existing overpasses
over I-10 to make them more
pedestrian / bike friendly
• Develop more parks in
neighborhoods
 17

Alternative Concept #6
Big Ideas:
• Incorporate high density
mixed use in the following
areas: 1) along Canal Street
across from the new UMC
and VA hospitals; 2) uptown
Tulane Avenue across from
the new VA hospital; 3) on the
corner of Tulane Avenue and
Broad Street; and 4) on either
side of Jeff Davis Parkway by
Xavier University
• Reinvest in the historic
retail area on Galvez Street
between Canal Street and
Tulane Avenue
• Improve the pedestrian and
bicyclist experience along
Tulane Avenue, Galvez Street
and Jeff Davis Parkway
18 Working Paper 6 Alternative Concepts January 2011

Alternative Concept #7
Big Ideas:
• Renovate, reuse and infill at
Charity Hospital and former
Veteran’s Hospital locations
• Higher density in area across
from new UMC and Veteran’s
Hospital locations (Galvez to
Broad Streets; Tulane Avenue
to Poydras Street)
• Locate mid-higher density
mixed use along Canal Street
• Maintain existing
neighborhood fabric
• Enhance pedestrian crossings
at overpasses
• Add retail to Broad Street
• Add small scale retail in
neighborhoods
• Enhance Gert Town through
the re-opening of the pool,
renovating /re-opening the
school, encouraging home
ownership, and removing
toxic businesses (e.g. cement
plant)
• Enhance Jeff Davis Parkway,
especially the overpass over
I-10
• Explore the idea of a possible
shared student recreation
center
 19

Alternative Concept #8
Big Ideas:
• Locate higher density
residential end retail on Canal
Street
• Add trees along Tulane
• Improve overpasses at Broad
Street and Jeff Davis Parkway
for pedestrian and bikes
• Incorporate “mom and pop”
historic corner grocery stores
every 4 blocks
• Include theatres, movies,
community centers, parks,
urban agriculture, pools,
pedi-cabs throughout the
neighborhoods
• Put high-end retail on
Carrollton and Tulane Avenues
• Explore a pedestrian
connection over I-10 to
connect to Xavier
• Incorporate recreation areas
and facilities for children and
adult exercise
• Keep Comisky park
• Use water as a design feature
throughout the District; have it
exposed like the Netherlands
• Include such facilities as
holistic healing facilities;
steam baths, saunas and spas
near medical district
• Incorporate a grocery store
at Washington and Carrollton
Avenues
• Include a farmer’s market near
Tulane and Carrollton Avenues
20 Working Paper 6 Alternative Concepts January 2011

Alternative Concept #9

Big Ideas:
• Preserve the Mid-City
neighborhood
• Maintain pockets of historic
buildings in the District as
circled in turquoise.
• (*) Identifies where tail gating
for football games is located
 21

Alternative Concept #10

Big Ideas:
• Put more trees and safe
bike lanes on Galvez Street,
Banks Street, Tulane Avenue,
and enhance the existing
streetscape along Jeff Davis
Parkway
• Include community urban
gardens downriver of Tulane
Avenue
• Incorporate high-density
mixed-use development
across from the new VA
hospital and along Tulane
Avenue
• Add more entertainment and
retail to Tulane Avenue
• Allow no institutional
development beyond
Rocheblave Street
• Protect the neighborhood and
restore the homes
• Do not expand the Justice
Area
• Keep and enhance the
industrial area as an asset
• Gert Town is an opportunity
zone
• Incorporate greenways on
major streets
• Maintain the character
of Canal Street; do not
incorporate big box
development
• Use water as an amenity
• Use parks as stormwater
retention areas
22 Working Paper 6 Alternative Concepts January 2011

A stakeholder presents an alternative concept for the BioDistrict during one of the community physical planning workshops.
 23

Section 03:
Additional Workshop
Findings
24 Working Paper 6 Workshop Findings January 2011

Stakeholders participate by drawing alternative concepts during one of the community physical planning workshops.

Additional Workshop Findings
During each of the physical planning workshops,
facilitators noted questions and comments that arose
during the workshops. These are presented below. For
consistency with Working Paper 5, Visioning BioDistrict
New Orleans, these comments have been categorized
based on the following eight themes: (1) Jobs; (2)
Education; (3) Housing & Neighborhoods; (4) Community
Serving Facilities; (5) Character & Identity; (6) Parks &
Recreation; (7) Traffic, Parking, Walking and Transit; and • Create a hierarchy of streets not just land use.
(8) Community Engagement.
City and State Government Physical
Planning Workshop Comments:
Housing & Neighborhoods
• Existing utility capacity should drive where
development occurs within the BioDistrict and
how it is phased over time. For example, water
pressure and capacity is low in some areas.
• Strong neighborhood nodes or centers should be
created.
• Gentrification is a real issue; affordable housing
should be protected.
• Repurpose existing buildings where possible.
Community Serving Facilities
• There is a need for a new grocery store
downtown. (Note, a new Rouses is planned for
the former Sewell Cadillac building at Girod and
Baronne.)
• A fire station should be located in the BioDistrict.
(Note, the AECOM team confirmed that there
is an existing fire station located within the
BioDistrict.)
• The perception of the area around the criminal
justice facilities is negative. New development
should strive to reposition this area as a safe place
to be.
25
• Need healthy food choices.
Character & Identity
• Possibly create sub-districts within the BioDistrict
defined by the unique character and identity of
different areas.
• Organize the plan around public spaces.
Parks & Recreation
• Parks should be located throughout the
neighborhoods. Look to vacant properties as
possible locations.
Traffic, Parking, Walking and Transit
• The thought immediately after Katrina was to
rebuild major street routes (Tulane, Canal, Earhart);
however, the repair of smaller streets is necessary
to create reinvestment in the neighborhoods. All
streets to some degree need sidewalk and utility
repairs, trees, etc.
• Tulane is a key street within the BioDistrict. New
development should embrace it rather than turn its
back on it.
• Poydras Street has the potential to be a great
connector within the BioDistrict and will become
more important as new construction begins.
• The highways around the BioDistrict create a
psychological barrier.
Other
• Investment within the BioDistrict should be
concentrated to make a strong impact in key
locations rather than spreading investment too thin.
26 Working Paper 6 Workshop Findings January 2011

Institutional Physical Planning Community Physical Planning Workshop

Workshop Comments: Comments:

Housing & Neighborhoods Questions that need to be addressed:

• Maintain the existing character of Mid-City.
• Strive to revitalize Gert Town through ownership of
rehabilitated homes.
• Remove the Concrete plant in Gert Town.
Community Serving Facilities
• Give Gert Town a center by improving the parks
and reopening the school and former Gert Town
pool or similar facility.
Character & Identity
• What about Xavier University and partnerships?
Student teaching? Giving back to the community?
• BioDistrict New Orleans needs to continue to
educate the public as to what types of industries
are supported in the field of biosciences. There is
concern regarding potential pollution resulting from
new land uses being sited in the BioDistrict.
Community Benefits Agreements (CBAs):
• CBAs should encourage the use of local labor, job
training and the refurbishment of existing homes.

• Renovate and reuse existing buildings when

possible.
• Higher density land uses should be placed near
the new VA hospital and University Medical
Center.
• New light industrial land uses should be located
where they exist today along Earhart Boulevard.
This area could be rebranded to reflect the
biosciences industry.

Parks & Recreation

• Institutions support the idea for a shared student
recreation center.
• Create and enhance green ways on Jeff Davis and
Bank Streets.

Traffic, Parking, Walking and Transit

• Improvements should be made to the public
rights-of-way and buildings along Tulane Avenue
and Canal and Broad Streets.
Sample notes taken during the physical planning workshops.

Jobs
• Jobs related to holistic and alternative medicine
could also be explored; saunas, acupuncture,
spas, etc.
• Promote real job opportunities and access to
those jobs.
• It is important to be invested in the success of the
BioDistrict so that jobs are created and associated
job training is provided.
Education
• Establish a Prince’s Foundation School for the
Building Trades in New Orleans, preferably the
BioDistrict.
• Establish a GED preparation program in the
neighborhood; possibly link to the institutions.
Housing & Neighborhoods
• Is the BioDistrict boundary right?
• BioDistrict development should only include the
hospitals and universities, so that development is
restricted beyond Galvez or Broad Streets. There
is concern about additional encroachment by the
institutions (VA, LSU, UMC) into the neighborhood,
as well as lack of funding for the construction of
these developments. Growth of these institutions
should be limited.
• There is also concern about institutions creating
“dead zones” on the rear of their campuses; and
becoming a 9-5 district.
• Why isn’t Zion City included? How can Zion City
be included?
• The Mid-City historic district should be called
out on the maps and protected or left out of
the BioDistrict. If this area in included in the
BioDistrict, there is a fear that it could be
27
developed later. It should remain low density;
however, neighborhood retail could be allowed as it
has been historically.
• Rebuild and reinvest in downtown first, especially
the area around Charity and the Old VA to create a
dense vibrant place.
• Higher density development should occur near
Tulane, the new VA , UMC and LSU.
• If Charity hospital isn’t suitable for a hospital and
if City Hall doesn’t want to be there, identify what
other uses could be in the building.
• The neighborhood needs to be organized into nodes
so that retail isn’t spread too thin.
• Encourage energy efficiency standards and other
green building strategies for renovations and new
developments.
• Affordable housing and home ownership concerns:
• How do we increase home ownership, not just
rental?
• Encourage and/or create incentives for people to
buy and renovate existing single-family residential
homes, so new development does not consist of
only high rise, multi-family developments. Can sales
tax help for renovations of existing buildings?
• First time home buyers often buy doubles and then
rent out the other side to offset costs; incentivize
this more.
• Many people do not want the headache of
renovating a home; but would buy a newly
renovated home on a good street.
• New residential development that replaces the
blighted homes should be affordable, be of quality
construction and look the same as the homes that
currently exist so they fit well into the neighborhood.
• Gentrification could be an issue if a number of
28 Working Paper 6 Workshop Findings
new homes are built. The existing population
is primarily African-American, elderly and low-
income. There should be equity for existing
residents.
• There is a shortage of fair market and senior
housing in the area.
• There are few renters in the neighborhood after
Katrina.
• Identify where workforce housing will exist.
• Concerns regarding blighted and abandoned
buildings:
• What is the ACTUAL density of Mid-City given the
number of vacant buildings?
• Adaptive re-use should be utilized whenever
possible. For example, could abandoned
warehouses be used for new housing or artist’s
lofts? Demolition should be selective and
architectural salvage from vacant and abandoned
buildings should be encouraged.
• Development should be focused on blighted
abandoned properties only; paying close attention
to appropriate zoning and land uses
Community presentation of alternative concepts at Warren Easton
High School.
January 2011
• Rezone the neighborhood areas so that no
other noxious uses can be located in the
neighborhoods; there should be no non-conforming
in neighborhoods. For example, the Concrete
plant in Gert Town and Tree Medic area should be
removed, if possible. Are there other changes that
the community can begin to institute to phase out
non-conforming uses? How does the community
initiate that process?
• Xavier University Challenges:
• There is concern that people could be
displaced if the University keeps expanding
(“encroaching”) into the neighborhood. Some
stated that the University should not cross
Washington Avenue.
• What are the alternatives if they do not expand
into the neighborhood?
• The campus is too suburban with big parking lots
and sprawling buildings.
• Security officers at Xavier can be difficult to deal
with.
• Concerns specific to Gert Town
• Some of the houses that should be removed due
to blight and vacancy remain and are depressing
the neighborhood
• Good development that enhances the
neighborhood should be encouraged in Gert
Town.
• Gert Town should try to develop a relationship/
partnership with Xavier
• Can it become a student town – more active
center?
• The area needs more single family homes and
senior housing
• Gert Town residents need to have buy-in on
 29

development and how they leverage their that farmers market and urban agricultural amenities
identity could be partnered with civic institutions.
• Civic facilities, such as a new school and
pool, are desired in the area. Character & Identity

• Can the convalescent home become the • Reflect/ incorporate New Orleans architecture into
home for a new pool in Gert Town? new developments.

• Public right-of-way improvements and new • Preserve the neighborhoods by protecting their
development should be focused along Tulane character, identity and scale and encouraging new
Avenue and Canal and Broad Streets. development to be of the same.
• Build community, not just homes.
Community Serving Facilities • Could Gert Town be a pilot neighborhood for
• Desire to see new neighborhood serving retail, sustainability and development? What could be the
such as bars and bakeries, to be developed economic driver in Gert Town?
through organic growth. • Entertainment could be located along Canal Street
• A good diversity of retail is desired not just chain
stores.
• Retail should be walkable with access to
parking.
• There is a desire to have an anchor store like
Target in the Gert Town area, perhaps along
Earhart Boulevard.
• First floor retail should be considered on parking
decks.
• Carrollton Avenue is a dead-zone around Tulane
Avenue with failing retail. Any new retail
should not consist of strip malls. Retail is also
failing along Tulane Avenue between Jeff Davis
Parkway and Carrollton Avenue.
• Neighborhood retail should be supported by the
income of the area. Many residents are on a
fixed income; don’t out price your customers.
• Incorporate place-based planning strategies such
as locating/ rehabilitating schools which could
serve as community centers for residents.
• Develop urban agriculture with the possibility
Sample of development alternative exercise.
30 Working Paper 6 Workshop Findings January 2011

and Carrollton Avenue. • There is a need to understand the current sewer and
• Encourage renovation of old theatres and water capacity of Broad Street and Tulane Avenue.
nightclubs. The area was built for small commercial and homes
so the infrastructure needs to be planned reflecting
• Foster art and culture within the BioDistrict. higher density development.
• Create public spaces, such as areas for festivals • Consider safety concerns in large scale
and markets, and make them the center of the developments.
neighborhoods.
• Tulane Avenue is an underutilized corridor. It is ready
• Concentrate development on major streets/ for well-designed new development.
corridors. They should be zoned for a possible
anchor store like Macy’s or Target – this is what • Jeff Davis is a well designed street. Tulane should
the neighborhood had in the past and it was a feel more like Jeff Davis with more street trees.
thriving neighborhood. • Broad Street is a busy street and is a good place
• Planted trees should be Oaks and other native for investment. It could be a vibrant retail corridor.
species that are reflective of the area However, the riverside of Broad Street seems to
have been forgotten.
• Zion City should NOT be considered part of an
industrial use zone. • Broad Street should be re-designed with bike lanes,
trees and on-street parking.
• The bail bond lenders along Tulane Avenue are
currently an eye-sore. It is recognized that they are • New developments should no longer result in street
necessary, but the area around them, including closures. The existing grid should be maintained.
their architecture should be improved with the • Review the streets near the prison; what streets are
passage of new development standards. closed, barricaded, etc.?
• Promote water as a sustainable identity and • Review the streets near Xavier University; which
development/ economic driver in the BioDistrict.
• Increase permeable surfaces to reduce water run-
off.
• Develop a water strategy around the Dutch
Dialogues, which stresses the use of parks and
streets for stormwater management.
• The water should drive development opportunities.
Match the right development with the appropriate
infrastructure.
• Waterways should be planned as amenities. For
example, the canal along Washington Avenue and
others should be enhanced so that it becomes an
area to stop, visit and enjoy rather than a liability.
Table discussion and presentation at Community Alternatives Workshop.

streets are closed permanently or just temporarily
during construction?
• Link the BioDistrict to the Broadway corridor.
• Revitalize Canal Street.
Parks & Recreation
• Parks and public recreational facilities are needed
throughout the BioDistrict to provide opportunities
for active recreation, including a new swimming
pool to replace the Gert Town pool.
• Use blighted properties as opportunities for green
space such as parks and community gardens.
• Cominsky Park is busy even though it is just a
field. Improvements to this park would make it
even more valuable to the neighborhood.
• Parks are an amenity that could also be utilized for
water management through the use of daylighting
canals, rain gardens, native trees and other plants.
Traffic, Parking, Walking and Transit
• Does RTA have enough capacity to meet transit
needs at build out?
• Provide a variety of transportation choices to
neighborhood residents.
• New development, regardless of land use, should
be close to transit options to make it easily
accessible.
• Determine whether the abandoned rail spur to
Gert Town can be transformed into a “greenway”.
• More greenways should be developed throughout
the BioDistrict.
• Develop a long-term rail plan. Issues to be
addressed should include: reuse of existing rail
lines; streetcar or light rail on Carrollton or Tulane
Avenues, or on the abandoned rail spur to Gert
Town; and rerouting railcars that carry any toxic
31
materials through the neighborhoods.
• Bike path needs to connect the BioDistrict
to surrounding neighborhoods as well as to
destinations both within and outside of the district.
• The bike path on Jeff Davis Parkway is very good.
• Shade from street trees makes biking nicer and
more comfortable.
• Change traffic lanes to bike lanes on appropriate
streets.
• I-10 creates a psychological and physical barrier
between the neighborhoods. Encourage
improvements to I-10 such as improved crossings,
and raising or lowering the highway as this might
help create connections back to the neighborhoods.
• The combination of streetcars and bicycle routes
on the same street reinforces alternative modes of
transportation.
• Improved and additional trails and sidewalks are
desired. Permeable paving is important to the area,
especially for stormwater management.
• Banks Street is good for bikes except the connection
with the VA; it needs a better connection.
• Carrollton Avenue should have some kind of mass
transit, preferably light rail or a street car.
• A transit oriented development hub should be
located at Carrollton Avenue near Xavier/ Gert Town
that can serve as a regional transit hub.
Community Engagement
• There aren’t enough partnerships. Public Private
Partnerships should be at the forefront of these
discussions.
• Partnerships should include: the justice center
complex, Dillard University Nursing Facility, and
Loyola nursing program.
32 Working Paper 6 Workshop Findings January 2011

• A neighborhood resident should sit on the • Create “pre-permitted” building blocks where the
BioDistrict Board. program for water and density are already met so
• Be clear with homeowners about the plans for that developers know what they can build with the
their neighborhoods. infrastructure that exists.

• Why isn’t the City at these meetings? We need • Take the statement “A City of Choice” out of the
partnerships with the City; the city should be here Vision statement.
to answer questions that we have
• Ensure inclusion with the neighborhood by
keeping an open process and dialogue during
and after the master plan is completed. The
neighborhoods feel they had very little input in
the previous planning process with the VA and
UMC developments. Public consultation on new
development is essential for trust and moving
forward.

Other Questions/ General Comments

• Are the biosciences the right type of economic
driver for the area? What if it fails? What happens
to the neighborhood then?
• When will this project realistically start
(understanding that some hospital work has
already begun)?
• What about zoning and land use? How were those
decisions made?
• What do we actually have for resources? Is this
boundary too ambitious? Shouldn’t we start
smaller just in case? Where are the funding
opportunities?
• How do the existing plans get incorporated/ how
will this connect to the C20?
• A long range approach to some projects and a
shorter range approach to other projects should
be figured out so that we understand what is
possible now – a framework for development is
needed.
 33

Appendix A:
Stakeholder Sign-In
Sheets
34 Working Paper 6 Appendices January 2011

Meeting with Neighborhood Leaders

November 1, 2010
 35

City & State Government Physical Planning Workshop

November 2, 2010
36 Working Paper 6 Appendices January 2011

Community Physical Planning Workshop 1

November 3, 2010

Physical Community Planning Meeting 1 Attendance

November 3, 2010

Name Organization Phone Email

Anthony Gabriel TCA 504-373-6374 anthony.gabriel@tca-nola.org
Mike Brewood citizen 504-494-2260
Jean Schencter citizen 504-821-7055
Rachel Lyons 504-237-7801
Lisa Amosr Broad Communication Connection 504-669-0435 LMAmoss2@gmail.com
Mary Howell 504-822-4455 maryhowell316@gmail.com
Paul TroyanoPax Christi 504-628-2020 ptroya@cox.net
Lavon Wright HRA 504-566-3087 lwright@wrpoperties.com
Kenny Ruffin 504-450-0524
Lana Roye savecharityhosp.com danaroye@hotmail.com
Kaseem Short Gert Town CDC 504-302-7879 kaseem@gerttowncdc.org
Rev. Lois Dejean Gert Town Rev. 504-655-1159 loisdejean@bellsouth.net
Pillow Housing 504-872-5550 pillowhousing@yahoo.com
Paul T. West 504-329-6445 pwest@chesterengineers.com
Jim Lynn consultant 303-406-8348 james.lynn@jacobs.com
Maggie Tishman NEWCITY 504-821-7236 mtishman@ccano.org
Mario Padilla 504-715-5616 padillo.omario@yahoo.com
Pattye Brignac MCNO 504-481-8412 pnbis@cox.net
Paul Richard Latter & Blum 504-569-9329 prichard@latterblum.com
Alvin Smith 504-827-2727 asnomi_asapno@yahoo.com
Floyd Simeon Crescent City Green Council 504-708-4144 Sales@crescentcitybuildersllc.com
D Adrian Marquez MCNO 303-916-4380 communications@mcno.org
Margaret Runyon 504-485-5854 m-runyon@msn.com
Gensey Dengel 504-460-5572 hittitempire@yahoo.com
L. Bryan Francher FQC
Siri Golom Resident 857-891-4449 sjcolom@gmail.com
Marietta Ruffin resident 504-289-5485
 37

Community Physical Planning Workshop 2

November 4, 2010

Physical Community Meeting 2

November 4, 2010

Name Organization Number Email

Lee Marcello C. James, LLC 504-430-5897 silverfox22638@bellsouth.net
Alton Pierce 504-430-9009 apierce@bellsouth.net
Brad Vogel National Trust For Hist. Preservation 920-860-6199 Bradlet-Vogel@utup.org
Siri Colom sjcolom@gmail.com
Steven Kennedy 504-782-0702 stevenkennedy@gmail.com
George Harker Univ. of New Orleans 504-280-2004 gharker@uno.edu
Chrisy Pritchard 504-638-6609 nolagypsy@hotmail.com
Michelle & Kimbell Schlefly residents 504-482-7943 kimballmichelle@bellsouth.net
Roux Merlo resident
Kyle Ambler resident/HANO 872-259-0072 kabmler28@gmail.com
Roosevelt M YP 504-352-3579 conciousino@gmail.com
Patty Brignoc MCNO 504-481-8412 pnbis@live.com
Zoe Knesl AECOM 504-592-3580 zoeknesl@aecom.com
Leon F. Bradford Board Member St. Joseph Parish 504-521-2680
Marla Nelson Univ. of New Orleans 504-259-1435 mnelson@uno.edu
Justin Pitaro 504-913-6752 jepitard@gmail.com
Mario Padilla 504-715-5616 padilla.omario.yahoo.com
Tenille Harris Warren Easton, H.S. 504-366-1947 builditcorp@aol.com
Lovell Benulien Journalist onpwritesnow@yahoo.com
LeonettaTerell FOLC 504-737-8461 leonettaterrell@hotmail.com
Eileen Comiskey SURE's Reentry 504-344-0290
Jeb Bruneau Advantos 504-459-6628 Jobruneau@advantos.com
Eugene Ben 504-400-2435 gene_ben6@yahoo.com
38 Working Paper 6 Appendices January 2011

Institution Physical Planning Workshop 1

November 4, 2010
 39

Community Physical Planning Workshop 3

November 6, 2010