Download - Working Paper VII
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
1/53
Working Paper 7
BioDistrict New Orleans
Ref ned Alternative PlansFebruary 2011
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
2/53
2 February 2011Working Paper 7 Table o Contents
01 02
Task 7 Overview
07
Format o the Public
Meeting
Refi ned Alternative
Plans
12
Alternative A:
Civic/Institutional
Development Focus
16
Alternative B:
NeighborhoodDevelopment Focus
19
Alternative C:
Strategic Node
Development Focus
23
Alternative D:
Baseline Development
Focus
26
Plan Comparison
Section:
Table o Contents
03
Public Comments
29
General Comments
30
Alternative A Comments
32
Alternative B Comments
35
Alternative C Comments
37
Alternative D Comments
39
Previous Public
Comments
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
3/53
3
Acknowledgement
The AECOM team would like to acknowledge
the GNOBEDD Board and sta or 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.
04
Appendices
43
Appendix A:
Stakeholder Sign-In
Sheets
45
Appendix B:
Maps: StakeholderMark-ups
49
Appendix C:
Technical Comments:
Consultant Team
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
4/53
4 February 2011Working Paper 7 Table o Contents
This page intentionally let blank.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
5/53
5
Section 01:
Task 7 Overview
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
6/53
6 Working Paper 7 Task 7 Overview February 2011
BioDistrict New Orleans. The Louisiana Superdome, New Orleans Arena and key existing and proposed
institutional developments are shown in blue.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
7/53
7
Task 7 Overview: Ref ned Alternative PlansThe purpose o Task 7, Ref ned Alternative Plans, was to
evaluate and ref ne the alternate plan concepts created
during the Task 6 physical planning workshops. The
elements identif ed in these 10 plans were aggregated
into our alternatives, each with a di erent development
ocus. These plans were presented or public comment at
an open community meeting on Saturday, January 15, 2011.
The meeting was held rom 9 a.m. - 12 noon at Jesuit High
School on Carrollton Avenue, and was attended by almost
40 people. Stakeholder sign-in sheets can be ound in
Appendix A.
The our alternatives were also subject to a multi-disciplinary
technical review by the AECOM Team; these comments
regarding transportation, utility inrastructure, and market
economics can be ound in Appendix C.
.
Format of the Public MeetingThe public meeting used a combined presentation/small
group eedback ormat. James McNamara, President and
CEO o the BioDistrict New Orleans, began the meeting with
an overview o the BioDistricts history, responsibilities and
goals. Bill Vitek o AECOM ollowed this introduction with a
presentation o the our alternatives, which are detailed in
Section 2 o this working paper.
Following this presentation, the public was invited to
discuss each plan in small groups; plans o each alternativewere put on our tables, with a acilitator at each table.
The public was asked to draw directly on the plans and /
or discuss their ideas and concerns with the acilitator.
Comments rom these discussions are contained in
Section 3.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
8/53
8 February 2011Working Paper 7 Task 7 Overview
This page intentionally let blank.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
9/53
9
Section 02:
Ref ned Alternative
Plans
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
10/53
10 February 2011Working Paper 7 Alternative Plan Concepts
This page intentionally let blank.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
11/53
11
Alternative Plan ConceptsThe ollowing pages show the our alternative plans that emerged rom conceptual plans produced in the Task 6 physical
planning workshops. Each alternative explores a di erent development ocus, and the our plans together o er a spectrum o
development densities. The our plan oci are: civic/institutional, neighborhood, strategic node, and baseline. All alternatives
look to the uture land use plan adopted in the city s 2030 Master Plan to guide development options.
The our alternative plans explore varying levels o civic, retail, park and residential uses.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
12/53
12 February 2011Working Paper 7 Alternative Plan Concepts
Summary:
Alternative A ocuses development energy in the riversideportion o the BioDistrict, emphasizing civic and institutional
expansion as a catalyst to revitalize this area and the central
business district and to bring additional employment into
the area. A new allied Health Sciences Campus located in
the ormer Charity Hospital complex is a key driver o the
redevelopment in this area. The shared campus would be
used by UNO, SUNO, Dillard, Xavier, LSU, Tulane and other
institutions related to biotechnology/biomedical f elds o
study. A new civic center with a renovated and expanded
City Hall, redesigned Duncan Plaza and new municipal
courts is also proposed in this area. The resulting increase
in daytime activity rom both o these two signaturedevelopments will promote additional complementary retail
and commercial development to serve this expanding pool
o consumers.
Future expansion is shown or LSU and Tulane Medical
School. A redesigned Phase II o the University Medical
Alternative A: Civic/Institutional Development Focus
Center is shown lakeside o Claiborne between Tulane Avenue
and Canal Street. The redesign maintains the existing street
grid, ocuses development on Tulane Avenue and Canal
Street to reinorce an urban eel and includes a central park
space that aligns with the central greenway/pedestrian mall
proposed by Tulanes master plan.
A conceptual plan or a neuroscience / sports medicine center
is located on the corner o Claiborne Avenue and Poydras
Street. This use and associated plaza creates a gateway to the
redesigned Claiborne Avenue. A large park with a recreation
center is adjacent to this research complex and along I-10.
In addition to serving as a recreational amenity or theneighborhoods in and around the BioDistrict, the park would
also help manage stormwater runo rom rainstorms and
ood events.
The area bounded by Tulane Avenue and Galvez, Broad, and
Poydras streets is redeveloped with multiamily residential,
Alternative A Illustrative
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
13/53
13
mixed use, and research and development acilities to
complement adjacent institutional land uses. Research and
development uses are adjacent to LSU to enhance potential
synergies between the two uses. Multi-story higher density
residential is adjacent to the existing multi-amily residential
along Broad Street. Retail and mixed use buildings ront
Tulane Avenue with retail on the ground oor with either
residential or o ce above.
Neighborhood redevelopment in Mid-City is limited, with
a modest amount o attached single amily units ronting
on and east o Broad Street. A new public space, sized to
accommodate community gatherings and events, ronts
a combined library and community center to act as both
a visual terminus to Banks Street and to provide a bu er
on the existing neighborhood and VA Hospital. A series
o recreational f elds and associated park space is also
proposed across the street rom Warren Easton High School.
Neighborhood redevelopment is also limited in Gert Town.
Key elements include the reopening o the Gert Town
Alternative A Key Development Areas
elementary school, replacement o the existing cement actory
with park space, and the creation o a mixed use village
across rom the Xavier campus. The uture buildout o Xavier
University is also shown on the plan.
A bioscience manuacturing business park is located in the
existing light industrial area uptown o I-10 and riverside o
Je Davis Parkway. Both new buildings and reuse o existing
buildings are proposed in this area and are arranged around
a new central park that connects into the greater greenway
system proposed in the plan.
New parkspace and enhancements o existing parkspace
are a key element o this plan. In addition to the new parks
mentioned above a new Rails to Trails multiuse trail links
Xavier and Gert Town with the other institutions in the
BioDistrict.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
14/53
14 February 2011Working Paper 7 Alternative Plan Concepts
Street Connectivity & Enhancements
The roadway ramework is similar in all our alternative
concept plans. All major arterial roadways receive enhanced
streetscapes, with an emphasis on sidewalk continuity and
regular street trees.
A signif cant component o this plan is the redesign o
Claiborne Avenue. The intersection with I-10 has been
reconf gured to limit the number o on/o ramps and the
elevated portion o I-10 over Claiborne Avenue has been
removed. This allows Claiborne Avenue to become a signature
street knitting together the riverside and lakeside ends o the
BioDistrict. It also allows or the assembly and development
o currently underutilized lands that are located under the
network o on/o ramps. Finally, the lakeside o Poydras is
redesigned into a street similar in character to the segment
riverside o Claiborne Avenue in ront o the Superdome.
Tulane Avenue transitions to a Smart Street, with both
above-and below-ground improvements. At the street level,
the street section will change rom three vehicular lanes ineach direction, to two lanes and a bike lane separated by a
median. Complementary behind-the-curb improvements
will establish an attractive, sae, inviting pedestrian realm.
These enhancements align with those recommended by the
Street Connectivity and Enhancements
Key Elements:
City Hall Revitalization and associated
redevelopment o Duncan Plaza.
A new Allied Health Sciences Campus in the
ormer Charity complex.
A new design or Phase II o the University
Medical Center Campus.
Expansion o Tulane Medical School.
Neuroscience / Sports Medicine Center.
Civic Center node with library and community
center at Broad Street and Tulane Avenue.
New Gert Town / Xavier Village development.
Reconf guration o I-10/Claiborne Avenue
interchange.
Claiborne Avenue at grade.
Rails to Trails multiuse trail between Xavier/Gert
Town and LSU and the other institutions in the
BioDistrict
Large park between I-10 and Poydras Street with
a recreation center and playing f elds
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
15/53
15
Pedestrian Connectivity
Regional Planning Commissions studies or the redesign
o the corridor. Below-ground upgrades will allow remote
monitoring and real-time assessments o underground utilities
such as sewer, water, electric and f ber optic.
Unique to this plan is the roundabout at the new eastern
terminus o Banks Street, creating a ocal point and entry
eature or the new library and community center. In tandem
with this modif ed intersection, two blocks o Banks Street
is removed to allow parcel aggregation or the library and
community center.
Pedestrian Connections
The enhancement o streets throughout the BioDistrict
with improved sidewalks allows or improved pedestrian
connectivity throughout the area. The large network o
greenspace and the creation o a new Rails to Trails multiuse
trail between Xavier and Gert Town with the other institutions
in the BioDistrict also creates new primary and secondary
linkages or pedestrian movement that currently do not exist.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
16/53
16 February 2011Working Paper 7 Alternative Plan Concepts
Alternative B: Neighborhood Development Focus
Summary:
Alternative B seeks to leverage public investment in the ormo neighborhood-scale amenities as a means to community
revitalization. LSU, Tulane, UMC and other area institutions
are let to develop on their own. The main development
shown on the riverside portion o the BioDistrict is the
renovation o City Hall and Duncan Plaza, similar to
Alternative A. A large plaza is located across rom the
Superdome to help create a gateway to Claiborne Avenue.
The plaza can to be used or pre-game and other events
throughout the year. The plaza connects to a regional park
along I-10 that o ers both active and passive recreational
uses. The Times-Picayune building is proposed to eventually
redevelopment into a community recreation center.Stormwater management eatures are incorporated into the
park as well.
Alternative B Illustrative
Within Mid-City, a small pocket o existing retail and
commercial is enhanced to create two blocks o Main Street
character, as a place or residents to meet and socialize.
A new park and townhomes and duplexes are proposed
between Rocheblave and Broad streets to serve as a
transition rom the VA to the rest o Mid-City. Nearby and
across Je Davis Parkway, an active-use park with athletic
f elds is created to serve the adjacent re-opened elementary
school, Warren Easton High School, and the community at
large.
Development in the area bounded by Broad, Poydras and
Galvez streets and Tulane Avenue, as well as Gert Town/Xavier, and the existing light industrial zone are similar
to what is proposed in Alternative A. Please reer to that
concept or details.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
17/53
17
Key Elements:
City Hall Revitalization.
A large central park with recreational acilities and
civic gathering space adjacent to Superdome.
New recreation f elds adjacent to existing schools.
Strategic inf ll o small-scale neighborhood
commercial uses.
Reconf guration o I-10/Claiborne Avenue
interchange.
Claiborne Avenue at grade.
Multimodal connector between Xavier/Gert Town and
other institutions in the BioDistrict.
Alternative B Key Development Areas
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
18/53
18 February 2011Working Paper 7 Alternative Plan Concepts
Street Connectivity & Enhancements
The roadway ramework is similar in all our plans; please
see the description o streetscape enhancements and
Tulane Avenue Smart Street upgrades in the Alternative A
description.
Unique to this plan is a raising o I-10, in order to allow more
visual and physical connectivity and permeability between
the uptown and downtown portions o the BioDistrict.
Raising I-10 would also allow or parking underneath
or the Justice Center and Research and Development
Manuacturing business park. Similar to Alternative A, theportion o I-10 above Claiborne Avenue is dropped to grade.
The I-10/Claiborne Avenue intersection (and associated
highway ramps) is redesigned to an at-grade roundabout.
Another key connection is the creation o a multimodal
connector which would link Xavier and Gert Town with other
institutions in the BioDistrict. The corridor would include a
dedicated bioscience shuttle, multiuse bike and pedestrian
trail.
Pedestrian Connections
Similar to Alternative A, the enhancement o streets
throughout the BioDistrict with improved sidewalks allows
or improved pedestrian connectivity throughout the area.
The creation o a new multimodal connector between Xavier
and Gert Town with the other institutions in the BioDistrict
also creates new primary and secondary linkages or
pedestrian movement that currently do not exist.
Street Connectivity and Enhancements
Pedestrian Connectivity
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
19/53
19
Summary:
Alternative C directs redevelopment to a number o highly
active, pedestrian-oriented nodes. These nodes have
been located at key intersections within the BioDistrict
and are def ned by a f ve-minute walking radius. This
system o nodes o ers the opportunity to create distinct
character areas within the larger BioDistrict, and to create
gateways and identity eatures specif c to these new micro-
neighborhoods.
Similar with the previous alternatives, the I-10 Claiborne
Avenue intersection has been redesigned and the overhead
I-10 connection along Claiborne Avenue removed. Claiborne
Avenue is now a signature street with new roundabouts/gateway eatures located at the intersections with Poydras
Street and Canal Street. These roundabouts are the center
o two new nodes in the BioDistrict. The node at Canal Street
and Claiborne Avenue emphasizes an institutional/civic
character. Phase II o UMC has been redesigned to maintain
the existing street grid and enhance pedestrian connectivity.
The node at Poydras Street/Claiborne Avenue ocuses energy
on the Superdome and proposed neuroscience sports center
as anchors. A new civic center is proposed riverside o these
two nodes. The City Hall has been moved into the block that
is currently Duncan Plaza. This creates three new blocks o
potential downtown commercial development along Poydras
Street. A smaller Duncan Plaza is redesigned to f t the new
design o City Hall.
Two nodes are located along Tulane Avenue at Broad Street
and Je Davis Parkway. The node at Broad Street is anchored
Alternative C: Strategic Node Development Focus
Alternative C Illustrative
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
20/53
20 February 2011Working Paper 7 Alternative Plan Concepts
by a new commercial retail on two corners, the existing
courthouse and a renovated school. A small roundabout islocated at Broad and Banks street to serve as a gateway to
both the Mid-City neighborhood and the revitalized retail
along Broad Street towards Canal Street. The node at Je
Davis Parkway is anchored by a new grocery store located
riverside o Tulane Avenue at Je Davis Parkway. Retail and
multi-amily residential is also located within this node.
No new development is shown within the historic core o
the Mid-City neighborhood. Another node is located at
the redesigned intersection o Carrollton and Washington
avenues. This node acts as gateway to both Gert Town and
Xavier University.
Another key element o the plan is the transormation o the
rail yard associated with the Union Passenger Terminal into
a signature park or the community. Single-amily housing
anchors the uptown end o the park providing eyes on
Alternative C Key Development Areas
the park or increased security and saety. The park will be a
large amenity or the entire BioDistrict as well as the ormerBW Cooper housing development which is currently being
redeveloped.
Similar to Alternative B, a multimodal connector corridor with
a bioscience shuttle and multiuse trail or both bikes and
pedestrians links Xavier University and Gert Town with the
other institutions in the BioDistrict.
Beyond the nodes identif ed, much o the proposed
development is similar to the alternative concepts previously
described. It should be noted that this scheme
also identifi es numerous areas of potential futuredevelopment, well beyond the 20 year program
currently foreseen for the BioDistrict. As such, this
scheme can be viewed more as a capacity study for
the BioDistrict.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
21/53
21
Street Connectivity & Enhancements
The roadway ramework is similar in all our plans; please see
the description o streetscape enhancements and Tulane
Avenue Smart Street upgrades in the preceding Alternative
A description.
Unique to this plan is a town-green type treatment o theBanks Street/Broad Street intersection, creating a ocal point
or the node development in this area.
Two new streetcar alignments are proposed to link the
di erent areas within the BioDistrict. One line has the
ollowing alignment: Tulane Avenue, Claiborne Avenue,
MLK Boulevard, Washington Avenue and Carrollton Avenue.
The second line connects to the unded streetcar line that
will soon be running down Loyola Avenue. From there it
runs down MLK Boulevard, Washington Avenue, Carrollton
Avenue, and Canal Street. These streetcar lines would bring
reliable, accessible transit opportunities to the BioDistrict.
Like Alternative B, this plan raises I-10 to promote BioDistrict
connectivity at grade. I-10 structure over Claiborne
Avenue is also dropped to grade, with a streamlined I-10/
Street Connectivity and Enhancements
Key Elements
City Hall Redevelopment.
Institutional gateway at Canal Street and Claiborne
Avenue.
Poydras Street gateway anchoring the Superdome
and neuroscience sports center.
Redevelopment at Broad Street and Tulane Avenue.
Neighborhood commercial redevelopment at Je
Davis Parkway and Tulane Avenue.
New gateway to Xavier University and Gert Town.
Reconf guration o I-10/Claiborne Avenue
interchange.
Claiborne Avenue at grade.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
22/53
Claiborne Avenue intersection to allow greater parcel area
or a regional park at the southwestern quadrant o this
intersection.
Also consistent with Alternative B, this plan proposes the
creation o a multimodal connector which would link Xavier
and Gert Town with other institutions in the BioDistrict. The
corridor would include a dedicated bioscience shuttle,
multiuse bike and pedestrian trail.
Pedestrian Connections
Similar to the previous alternative concepts, theenhancement o streets throughout the BioDistrict with
improved sidewalks allows or improved pedestrian
connectivity throughout the area. The creation o a new
multimodal connector between Xavier and Gert Town with
the other institutions in the BioDistrict also creates new
primary and secondary linkages or pedestrian movement
that currently do not exist.
22 February 2011Working Paper 7 Alternative Plan Concepts
Pedestrian Connectivity
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
23/53
23
Alternative D: Baseline Development Focus
Summary:
Alternative D o ers a conservative development approach,with limited redevelopment in the riverside and uptown
portions o the BioDistrict. This alternative is also distinct in
that it does not propose the redesign o I-10 and Claiborne
Avenue.
Institutional expansion at Tulane Medical School and LSU
arranges itsel around urban green spaces, in order to
provide increased amenity to the public realm as well as the
institutions themselves. As in Alternative A and B, City Hall
is redesigned and revitalized, with additions to the existing
building creating an urban street edge along Poydras Street.
Duncan Plaza is also redesigned in this option.
By maintaining the existing I-10 ramp conf guration, land
assembly or new research and development related
buildings is limited to between Broad and Galvez streets
just downriver o I-10. Poydras Street has limited street
enhancements in this area. Development opportunities in
the area bounded by Tulane Avenue and Broad, Galvez, and
Poydras streets is similar to that shown in the other alternative
concepts with a mixture o higher density multi-amily
housing, mixed-use and research and development buildings.
Improved existing and new park spaces are proposed in this
area to serve as an amenity or area residents.
Much o the remaining development in this scheme is limited
to strategic inf ll parcels along key arterials. Expansion o
Xavier University is limited to the area bounded by I-10,
Je Davis Parkway, Carrollton and Washington avenues.
Development within Gert Town seeks to create a mixed-useedge joining Xavier University and the community, providing
exible spaces that may be used by both. Development in the
manuacturing business park is similar to that proposed in the
previous concepts.
Alternative D Illustrative
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
24/53
24 February 2011Working Paper 7 Alternative Plan Concepts
Alternative D Key Development Areas
Key Elements:
City Hall Redevelopment.
Institutional expansion centered around urban
greens.
Enhanced open space along Washington Avenue
Canal and old rail spur in Gert Town.
Claiborne Avenue at grade.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
25/53
25
Street Connectivity & Enhancements
The roadway ramework is similar in all our
plans; please see the description o streetscape
enhancements and Tulane Avenue Smart
Street upgrades in the preceding Alternative A
description.
No changes to I-10 or Claiborne Avenue are
included in this alternative. However, the
overpasses or Je Davis Parkway and Broad Street
are signif cantly enhanced through widening to
increase saety and riendliness or pedestrian and
bicyclists and help knit together both the uptown
and downtown portions o the BioDistrict. Similar
to Alternative A, a new Rails to Trails multiuse trail
is also proposed that links Xavier and Gert Town
with the other institutions in the BioDistrict.
Pedestrian Connections
Similar to the previous alternative concepts, the
enhancement o streets throughout the BioDistrict
with improved sidewalks allows or improved
pedestrian connectivity throughout the area. The
creation o a new Rails to Trails multiuse trail
creates a strong pedestrian/bicycle connection
between Xavier and Gert Town with the other
institutions in the BioDistrict.
Street Connectivity and Enhancements
Pedestrian Connectivity
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
26/53
AltA AltB AltC AltD
Civic/Institutional Neighborhood Node Baseline
Residential 2,116,000 1,809,000 2,272,500 2,209,500 963,000
1763 1508 1894 1841 803
155,000 314,000 320,500 626,500 447,000
Office,R&D,Mfct 1,600,000 3,544,500 1,730,500 5,240,000 3,601,000
Office 1,417,500 408,000 1,573,500 1,156,000
academic 1,180,500 327,000 904,500 939,000
other 237,000 81,000 669,000 217,000
R&D 1,687,500 901,500 3,126,000 1,990,000
Office&Lab 1,260,000 2,721,000
SportsRehab 427500 405,000
Manufacturing 439,500 421,000 540,500 455,000
55,000 0 0 126,000 0
TOTAL 3,926,000 5,667,500 4,323,500 8,202,000 5,011,000
AdditionalElements
Civic n/a 250,000 86,000 247,500 40,000
Park,acres 20 76 122 64 55
Notes
1.Includesrecreationcenters(allAlts)andnewtownhall(AltC)
2.ResidentialSFdoesnotincludetownhomes.
3.ResidentialnumbersincludeGertTown/Xaviervillage.
4.AltB:Alternateresidentialproductmixof1,215,000SF(1012DU)and132townhomes.
5.AltA:Alternateresidentialproductmixof1,431,000SF(1192DU)and96townhomes
6.Assumedheightsareasfollows:residential,3;retail,1;office,2;R&D,3;Manufacturing,1;Civic,1;Hotel,3
DU&1200SFgross
Retail
Hotel
DesiredProgram
26 February 2011Working Paper 7 Alternative Plan Concepts
Summary:
The table below shows the desired program, as established in Task 4 Programming. Numbers shown as desired programrepresent aggregated 5-, 10- and 20-year numbers, represented as square eet.
Plan Comparison
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
27/53
27
Section 03:
Public Comments
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
28/53
February 2011Working Paper 7 Public Comments28
This page intentionally let blank.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
29/53
29
Public CommentsDuring the public meeting, acilitators noted questions and
comments that arose during general project discussion, as
well as in regards to each alternative plan. These comments
are summarized below. For consistency with Working
Papers 5 and 6, these comments have been categorized
based on the ollowing eight themes: (1) Jobs; (2) Education;
(3) Housing & Neighborhoods; (4) Community Serving
Facilities; (5) Character & Identity; (6) Parks & Recreation;
(7) Tra c, Parking, Walking and Transit; and (8) Community
Engagement.
General Comments & QuestionsJobs
No comments or questions.
Education
No comments or questions.
Housing & Neighborhoods
A physical survey o vacant and abandoned
properties is needed; using the criteria o lack o
postal or utility service is not necessarily correct.
Do these plans align with the land use plans (zoning)
already approved by the City? The consultant team
conf rmed to the public that this was the case.
New development is shown where peoples houses
are; were concerned that people will be moved
against their will.
Community Serving Facilities
No comments or questions.
Character & Identity
No comments or questions.
Parks & Recreation
No comments or questions.
Traffic, Parking, Walking and Transit
No comments or questions.
Community Engagement
We would like to see community representatives on the
BioDistrict board.
We would like to be inormed o meetings through
non-web based means: radio, television, printed iers.
The consultant team stated that non-web based meansare used to communicate the meeting inormation
including yard signs and door hangers, newspaper
notices and yers.
Are these plans available on-line? When they are on-
line, wed like to be able to comment electronically.
Plans can be ound on the BioDistrict website.
It seems like my comments rom the previous
meeting have not been incorporated. On this
summary o the last meeting, you should be able to
list everyones comments individually.
Wed like you to attend our neighborhood meeting.
Other Why was the BioDistrict identif ed as 1,500 acres; isnt that
a lot?
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
30/53
February 2011Working Paper 7 Public Comments30
Alternative A: Civic/Institutional Focus
Jobs
No comments.
Education
We like the idea o reopening the school in Gert Town.
Consider opening a Technology School in Gert Town
village.
Housing & Neighborhoods
No more our story housing.
Are the homes moved rom the VA site rental or
owner-occupied?
Put high-density housing, not a park, adjacent to I-10.
Rehab housing money is needed or Gert Town.
Review the 2008 Gert Town plan.
Want renovation/re-use like Dixie, Falsta , Blue Plate.
Walk the neighborhood block by block to create plan.
Will new plans result in a property tax increase?
Community Serving Facilities
We do not want the community center/library shown at
Broad and Banks Streets. Keep the existing community
as is and do not close the street.
Concern regarding blight at Charity Hospital site.
Strengthen existing commercial in the area o Broad and
Canal Streets.
Alternative A Illustrative with Public Comments
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
31/53
31
Character & Identity
No comments.
Parks & Recreation
Connect Je Davis Parkway green spaces to Laf tte
Greenway.
Create pedestrian nodes along Je Davis Parkway.
Parks should be no bigger than one city block.
Traffic, Parking, Walking and Transit
Maintain the street grid.
Need to maintain the Amtrak turnaround uptown o
I-10 (shown as bike path in this plan).
Concerns regarding increased tra c in relation to
the Xavier expansion into the community.
Community Engagement
No comments.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
32/53
February 2011Working Paper 7 Public Comments32
Alternative B: Neighborhood Focus
Jobs
No comments.
Education
No comments.
Housing & Neighborhoods
Increase home ownership, not rental.
There is a new single-amily development on Bienville,
between Je Davis Parkway and Broad Street. The
homes are all shotgun, but new construction; wed
like to see that same type o thing to f ll in our
neighborhood.
No more high density, particularly between Carrollton
Avenue and Broad Street, and between Tulane Avenue
and I-10.
We dont want retail in the neighborhood, we dont
need it, (particularly as shown on Banks Street).
We want more single amily and double amily housing.
High density should only go on main roads, not within
neighborhoods.
Existing high density residential is su cient; its only
partially rented; the wait lists are or the subsidized
units, not the market rate units.
We really want to see architectural standards and
controls that will govern the quality o new buildings in
our neighborhoods.
Alternative B Illustrative with Public Comments
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
33/53
33
We dont want high density (4+ stories) residential.
High-density attracts a stressed population, and that
increases crime. High density should go in the Broad Street/Galvez
Street/Tulane Avenue/Poydras Street area f rst.
We dont like the redevelopment drawn between
Canal Street and Tulane Avenue, between Broad
Street and the VA property. We dont need a bu er;
were f ne with single amily abutting institutional
uses. There are historic homes there, and the VA just
moved our historic houses rom their property to one
o those blocks.
Nothing thats a house now should be anything else,
ever. Gert Town needs single amily housing.
Dont re-invent Gert Town; look at the 1997 and 2003
plans and just update them.
Community Serving Facilities
We want big box retail on Tulane Avenue. It can be
anywhere on Tulane, but since the institutions control
properties at the riverside end, its more likely to be
near Je Davis Parkway or Broad Street. We could
accommodate 5, even 10 big boxes; Wal-Mart, Target.
We need retail and commercial in Orleans Parish;big box would serve neighboring parishes, too, and
bring them into our neighborhood. The Mid-City
neighborhood organization has discussed big box,
and we all agree.
Where will parking or the courthouse complex go?
Direct retail to Carrollton Avenue.
Broad Street retail is blighted; we need
redevelopment there.
The commercial along Carrollton Avenue in Gert
Town wont change; you have it shown yellow, as
residential.
The concrete plant is willing to relocate, but we cant
get the job done.
Character & Identity
A portion o Broad Street is designated a Cultural Arts
District; not sure how ar the designation goes, it mayextend the whole way to Tulane Avenue. Original art
can be bought tax ree, and the historic restoration tax
credit can extend to commercial properties. This would
be a good place or an arts district.
Parks & Recreation
We dont need any more parks; we have City Park and
Laf tte greenway.
Small pocket parks would be okay, but need to be
maintained.
Wed like to see more pedestrian amenities on Je Davis
greenway; multi-use trail, seating nodes, etc.
The park across rom the high school is too big, and
takes out street grid.
The park lakeside o the high school (and downtown o
Canal Street) is okay.
The park on Broad Street next to the Brewery (between
Gravier and Perdido Streets) is a nice idea.
Get rid o the park shown between I-10 and Earhart
Boulevard; introduce service and support uses in this
area. No one will use the park between I-10 and Earhart
Boulevard, except or drug dealers. It will be unsae.
Dont close any more streets.
We want you to coordinate with the VA and re-open the
segment o Banks Street thats been closed between
Rocheblave and Galvez Streets.
The tailgating plaza at I-10, Claiborne Avenue
and Poydras Street is a good idea---lots o people
tailgatebut it would need to be coordinated with the
Superdome management/owners. They like to keep
that kind o activity on their own property.
Traffic, Parking, Walking and Transit
Keep the street grid.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
34/53
February 2011Working Paper 7 Public Comments34
Wed like to see improved streetscape on Pine and
Olive Streets in Gert Town; these two streets are the
center o the community. Tulane Avenue and Broad Street need improved
landscaping and sidewalks. Canal Street and Je
Davis Parkway are f ne.
Broad Street is a national designated Main Street
wed like to enhance it.
Community Engagement
No comments.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
35/53
35
Alternative C: Strategic Node Focus
Jobs
No comments.
Education
No comments.
Housing & Neighborhoods
Concern about environmental issue related to cement
actory in Gert Town. The plan shows it replaced with
a park which is a good idea.
Community Serving Facilities
No objection to large ormat retail along Tulane
Avenue between Tulane Avenue and I-10 and Justice
Center and Carrollton Avenue. The orm should be
walkable and not a typical strip center. This area could
also include low-to-mid density housing.
Existing buildings including the Justice Center and other
governmental buildings should be renovated instead o
building new. Work with what weve got!
Character & Identity
Keep small scale retail character along Broad Street
between Banks and Canal Streets.
Large scale multi-amily apartments are not needed. Theydo not have the character o the existing abric.
Parks & Recreation
Like the idea o connected network o greenways/
Alternative C Illustrative with Public Comments
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
36/53
February 2011Working Paper 7 Public Comments36
pocket parks throughout the area.
Concern about large park uptown between I-10 and
BW Cooper housing redevelopment. Many see this asa potential crime area especially with lack o ronting
uses.
Like the idea o smaller pocket parks verses large park.
This would help give ownership to the parks and help
maintain the parks.
A new park along Broad Street is a good idea.
Park adjacent to Warren Easton High School should
be some sort o public amenity but not necessarily a
park.
Community gardens should be developed at pocket
parks.
Traffic, Parking, Walking and Transit
Reconnect street grid where possible, people
particularly sighted Banks Street between Broad and
Galvez Streets. Banks Street should reconnect with
Tulane Avenue and become a signalized intersection.
Round-a-bouts at Claiborne and Carrollton Avenues
will not work. However, the participants did like the
idea o round-a-bouts to calm tra c, acilitate bike/
pedestrian movements and as an entry eature within
neighborhoods.
Improve pedestrian connections across Je Davis
Parkway.
Community Engagement
Facilitate dialogue between Xavier University
and Gert Town. There was concern about Xaviers
development within the Gert Town boundary.
Other
No more tax exemptions or large scale development.There needs to be help or the small owner to
renovate existing properties.
Encourage home ownership in area.
Use Tax Increment Financing to update blighted
properties within neighborhoods and not big
developers. Make sure existing Gert Town studies are
incorporated.
Make sure land uses adjacent to study area boundary
align.
There is concern about the economic vitality o all the
nodes identif ed in the plan.
Node #4 should be moved rom the intersection
o Broad Street and Tulane Avenue to Broad Street
between Tulane Avenue and Canal Street.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
37/53
37
Alternative D: Baseline Focus
Jobs
No comments
Education
Develop a school at lakeside/downtown corner o
Tulane Avenue and Broad Street that has tech tie-in.
Housing & Neighborhoods
Research and development riverside o Claiborne
Avenue should be phase 1 and lakeside o Claiborne
Avenue should be phase 2.
Interesting alley that the community likes (Monassis
Place) running between Tulane Avenue and Banks
Street just riverside o Broad Street keep it and build
identity around it. Consider extending Monassis to the
blocks uptown o Tulane Avenue and build into new
development concepts.
Area uptown o Tulane Avenue between Broad and
Galvez Streets is the right place or higher density
(although some people think the historic neighborhood
character should be restored here instead), relocate
existing homes into vacant lots in Mid-City or lakeside o
corrections complex on same side o Tulane Avenue.
Include inf ll bonuses in Mid City, much like density
bonuses that developers get. Spread incentives that willbe given to high density developers uptown o Tulane
Avenue into Mid-City (i.e. use them to acilitate inf ll
compatible with historic district character)
Good that research and development is backed up onto
Alternative D Illustrative with Public Comments
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
38/53
February 2011Working Paper 7 Public Comments38
I-10. Research and development architecture/use not
compatible with livable neighborhoods.
No high density in neighborhoods uptown o TulaneAvenue and lakeside o justice complex. High density
OK on Tulane Avenue and Je Davis Parkway, but not
interior blocks urther o o Tulane/Je Davis Parkway.
Maintain historic density there. Inf ll this area with
usable shotguns rom redevelopment area riverside o
Broad Street and south o Tulane Avenue.
Community Serving Facilities
New high tech community center in Gert Town
within proposed park (ormer cement plant) is part o
CBA.
Character & Identity
Enhance existing mixed use along Je Davis Parkway
in Mid-City.
Example o what not to do architecturally is at the
lakeside/uptown corner o Canal and S. Clark Streets.
Intersection o Pine and Olive Streets is main corner o
Gert Town. Include Gert Town central park near that
intersection.
Olive Street and Je Davis Parkway is gateway to Gert
Town.
Parks & Recreation
Dont orient park in Research and Development area
along Claiborne Avenue toward Claiborne in this
scenario, back building onto Claiborne Avenue and
orient park to the lakeside. (but current orientation
could help put eyes on Claiborne Avenue underpass).
New park master plan or Je Davis Parkway is
needed.
Like the idea o connected network o greenways
through the BioDistrict and connected to Laf tte
Greenway/Bayou St. John.
Consider native plant/biodiversity/urban wildlie
network concept throughout the BioDistrict restore
the yway. Bayou Saint John and Je Davis Parkway
enhanced with native plants or urban wildlie corridor
balanced with other park uses. Include native plant nursery with tree nursery in the
BioDistrict.
Traffic, Parking, Walking and Transit
Dont tear down the good parking structure that
currently exists at corner o Canal Street and Claiborne
Avenue.
Fix intersection at Banks Street and VA. Dump riverside-
bound Banks Street tra c onto Broad Street and make
Banks Street between Broad Street and the VA into
a green street. Interesting alley that the communitylike (Monassis Place) running between Tulane Avenue
and Banks Street just riverside o Broad Street. Tie in
greenstreet with this and create an interesting walkable
neighborhood character.
Consider transit connection rom Tulane Avenue to Je
Davis Parkway to Xavier.
Widen Je Davis Parkway overpass over I-10.
Community Engagement
No comments.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
39/53
39
Prior Public Comment
There are some discrepancies between the needs anddesires expressed at this public meeting, and those
expressed at prior public meetings. Approximately 36
people signed in at this public meeting; o this group,
slightly more than one-third o those present had attended
one o the previous public meetings held in September and
November o 2010.
Di erences in what we heard all into our broad
categories: parks, community acilities, retail and
housing.
ParksPrior public input emphasized the need to increase
access to public parks and open space, with 6 o the 10
alternatives produced in the November meetings specif cally
mentioning a need or more parks. Stakeholders also
commented that parks should be spread throughout the
neighborhoods, and should o er both active and passive
recreational opportunities.
Most recent comments expressed a reversal o this opinion,
noting that Mid-City has su cient access to open space
and does not need additional open space. City Park and
Laf tte Greenway were mentioned in particular as nearby,
accessible amenities. Commenters expressed a concern that
no one would maintain new parks, and that homes should
not be removed to create park spaces.
Community Facilities
Participants at prior public workshops identif ed a need
or more community acilities such as a library and a
community center. These amenities, shown in Plans A and
B, were rejected by stakeholders at the most recent public
meeting. Community members did not communicate
whether these acilities were still desired but the locations
shown were unacceptable, or i the acilities were altogether
unnecessary. Stakeholders did not identiy alternate
locations or these acilities.
Retail
Prior stakeholder input promoted the revitalization o existing
retail along Broad Street, near Canal Street. Less stronglysupported but also noted was a desire or neighborhood-
serving retail within the neighborhoods, revitalization o
historic retail on Galvez Street between Canal Street and
Tulane Avenue and even a desire or a mom and pop grocery
store every our blocks.
Most recent input o ers di erent opinions on both the
location and quantity o retail. Stakeholders very vocally
expressed that retail within the neighborhoods was
unacceptable, and that there was no need or additional retail.
Community members di ered on whether retail should be
directed to Broad Street, or i it should simply be concentratedon Carrollton Avenue, Tulane Avenue and Canal Street.
Housing
Prior public comments underlined the need or a ordable,
workorce and senior housing within the BioDistrict.
These types o housing are typically multi-amily, multi-story
dwellings, and although not explicitly identif ed as such in the
most recent alternatives, the multi-amily, medium-density
residential development shown in the current plans was not
supported by the community. Stakeholders expressed a ear
that more rental dwellings would bring more crime, and wouldalso discourage restoration o existing vacant and blighted
single-amily dwellings as potential home-owners would
choose to rent instead.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
40/53
February 2011Working Paper 7 Public Comments40
This page intentionally let blank.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
41/53
41
Section 04:
Appendices
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
42/53
42 February 2011Working Paper 7 Appendices42
This page intentionally let blank.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
43/53
43
Public MeetingSaturday, January 15, 2011
Addresses and contact inormation have been removed to protect privacy.
Appendix A
Stakeholder Sign-In Sheets
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
44/53
44 February 2011Working Paper 7 Appendices44
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
45/53
45
Appendix B
Maps:Stakeholder Mark-ups
Alternative A Illustrative with Public Comments
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
46/53
46 February 2011Working Paper 7 Appendices46
Alternative B Illustrative with Public Comments
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
47/53
47
Alternative C Illustrative with Public Comments
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
48/53
48 February 2011Working Paper 7 Appendices48
Alternative D Illustrative with Public Comments
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
49/53
49
Appendix C
Technical Comments: Consultant TeamGeneral Comments
Jobs
No comments.
Education
No comments.
Housing & Neighborhoods
No comments.
The three plans are not distinctly di erent.
Need to discuss accurate assessment o recorded
property vacancy.
Retail/commercial nodes which are not on
major spines are di cult to tenant and unlikely
to be successul.
Community Serving Facilities
No comments.
Character & Identity No comments.
None o the three plans place su cient emphasis on
preservation o existing neighborhood abric.
All three plans preserve (but do not enhance; see
previous comment) existing neighborhoods o Gert
Town and Mid-City.
Plans should emphasize historic structures.
o Dixie Brewery, Pan Am Building
o Falsta Brewery
o Churches: St. Marks Baptist; St. Joseph
Catholic; Society o Vincent de Paul
o Warren Easton High School
o Galvez Street between Tulane Avenue and
Canal Street---
shotgun vernacular buildings; not
remarkable individually but together a
consistent historic abric.
Re-use o buildings should be emphasized more.
Need a revised vacant/abandoned property plan, along
with a strategy to revitalize.
Parks & Recreation
Need to discuss replanting tree canopy.
Redeveloping concrete plant into park would bedi cult.
Traffic, Parking, Walking and Transit
Existing Tulane Line (RTA) serves almost all o proposed
destinations in BioDistrict; problem is headways and
reliability. These should be improved to address transit
needs.
The private shuttle between Tulane University and LSU
exist because the public system is insu cient, thereore
it doesnt really connect with public system.
Lowering Claiborne is potentially unrealistic.
o Currently, only anticipated downriver o
Canal.
o Upriver o Canal only or transition.
o At-grade Claiborne Avenue would require
discontinuation o passenger rail
because at-grade crossing not possible.
Cannot eliminate or have negative impact on UPT
without a strategy.
Parking plan needed; draw parking structures on map.
Would be useul to show 15 minute walking boundary
o BioDistrict acilities on all plans.
Community Engagement
No comments.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
50/53
50 February 2011Working Paper 7 Appendices50
Alternative A: Civic/Institutional Focus
Jobs
No comments.
Education
No comments.
Housing & Neighborhoods
Increased density would require evaluation
to determine i power, water, sewer and
telecommunications upgrades would be needed.
Xavier expansion may require expansion o
Universitys central plant to include BioDistrict Energy.
New high density development (including Louisiana
State University, research and development, LSU
student housing, and neuroscience/sports medicine
center) proximate to Entergy Thermal (1661 Gravier,
just riverside o Claiborne Avenue) may make shared
power easible.
Broad is not the best place or a retail corridor.
Not sure that light manuacturing is in the mostappropriate location.
Mixed use, high-density redevelopment between
Tulane Avenue & Poydras Street, lakeside o Galvez
Street: not in ideal location.
Residential square oot looks achievable, but average
unit size too large. (currently, 1200 SF gross. 800-
1000 SF gross more likely).
O ce/R&D/Manuacturing square ootage is high and
may not be achievable.
Community Serving Facilities
Block (southeast quadrant o Poydras Street/Galvez
Street intersection) should be site or new coroners
o ce and crime lab. Could extend to Galvez
Street(City owns most o land between Broad Street,
Poydras Street, Galvez Street, I-10).
Church complex (ull block) on Canal Street between
Rendon & Lopez is closed; some buildings could be
re-used (library, etc).
Allied science complex reuse o Charity/Old VA seems
unlikely.
Retail corridor within University Medical Center
complex: retail is better on Canal Street or Tulane
Avenue. Retail SF is high and may not be achievable.
Character & Identity
No comments.
Parks & Recreation
Good block or park & rec site: Cleveland/Palmyra/
Rendon/Lopez (block S o church block).
Good block or park (better than inserting in midst
o manuacturing): (bounded by) Canal, Earhart, Je
Davis Parkway, Calliope---only northwestern building
is occupied, all others vacant or abandoned.
Transorming existing concrete plant into park is
ambitious.
Traffic, Parking, Walking & Transit
No comments.
Community Engagement
No comments.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
51/53
51
Alternative B: Neighborhood Focus
Jobs
No comments.
Education
No comments.
Housing & Neighborhoods
Increased density would require evaluation
to determine i power, water, sewer and
telecommunications upgrades would be needed.
Xavier expansion may require expansion o
Universitys central plant to include BioDistrict Energy.
New high density development proximate to Entergy
Thermal (1661 Gravier, just riverside o Claiborne
Avenue) may make shared power easible.
Broad Street is not the best place or a retail corridor.
Tulane Avenue and Broad Street are better options.
Retail within neighborhood (on Banks Street): not a
good place or retail.
Residential square oot looks achievable, but average
unit size too large. (currently, 1,200 gross SF. 800-
1,000 gross SF gross more likely).
O ce/R&D/Manuacturing square ootage seems
appropriate.
Community Serving Facilities
Retail SF is high and may not be achievable.
Character & Identity
This plan is the most e ective o the three in
strengthening neighborhood identity (represented
in urban abric, edge boundaries and neighborhood
centers) through schools, neighborhood retail and
green space.
Parks & Recreation
Transorming existing concrete plant into park is
ambitious.
Traffic, Parking, Walking & Transit
Would need to insert telecommunication duct bank or
Tulane to be a Smart Street.
Community Engagement
No comments.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
52/53
52 February 2011Working Paper 7 Appendices52
Parks & Recreation
No comments.
Traffic, Parking, Walking & Transit
This plan is the best o the three in providing and
emphasizing connectivity, through the emphasis o
main bisecting streets and direction o retail to nodes
on these streets.
Would need to insert telecommunication duct bank or
Tulane Avenue to be a Smart Street.
.
Community Engagement
No comments.
Alternative C: Strategic Nodes Focus
Jobs
No comments.
Education
No comments.
Housing & Neighborhoods
Real Mid-City town center is on Carrollton Avenue,
not on Broad Street as drawn.
Increased density would require evaluation
to determine i power, water, sewer and
telecommunications upgrades would be needed.
Xavier expansion may require expansion o
Universitys central plant to include BioDistrict
Energy.
New high density development (including
Louisiana State University, research and
development, LSU student housing, and
neuroscience/sports medicine center proximate
to Entergy Thermal (1661 Gravier, just riverside
o Claiborne Avenue) may make shared power
easible.
Residential square oot looks achievable, but
average unit size too large. (currently, 1,200 gross
SF. 800-1,000 gross SF more likely).
O ce/R&D/Manuacturing square ootage may not
be achievable.
Community Serving Facilities
Retail SF is high and may not be achievable.
Character & Identity
No comments.
-
8/7/2019 Working Paper VII
53/53
53
Alternative D: Baseline Focus
The consultant team did not review this alternative.