News -> INDReporter THU, SEP 9 11:06AM by Nathan Stubbs

Controversial downtown development plans modified

The Lafayette City-Parish Council voted unanimously Tuesday night to endorse the Joie De Vivre affordable housing development being sponsored by Acadiana Outreach Center. The proposed development is to be centered at West Second and South Pierce streets, across Congress from downtown's IberiaBank tower, in the historic Mills Addition subdivision. The majority of the funding for the development is contingent upon the successful application of Federal Housing Administration tax credits. Greg Gachassin of the The Cartesian Group, the lead consultant on the project, says his group plans to submit its tax credit application next Friday. The tax credits will be awarded in December.

Plans for the project were first presented to the public in May. Gachassin says those plans have since been adjusted based on funding limitations, some unsuccessful property acquisitions and feedback from area residents. The total price tag for the project has dropped from approximately $25 million to $16.5 million. Gachassin says the number of apartments in the complex also has been reduced from 118 to 72, additional parking has been added, and some design features have changed. "We really changed the elevations, the looks, the facade of the development," he says. "We added some brick into it. It's not as modern a design as originally proposed. And that was based on feedback from people in the community who felt it was too modern a design and needed to be toned down a little bit."

Planners have kept the new designs under wraps until after Joie De Vivre makes its tax credit application, which is a competitive process. Gachassin says the new plans will likely be unveiled at a public meeting sometime next month. The tax credit application obligates Joie De Vivre to rent affordable units to tenants at or below 60 percent of Lafayette's annual Area Median Income of $57,500. In order to score additional points, the application also states Joie De Vivre will cater to individuals with children — requiring that 20 percent of tenants have a child living with them. For more on Joie De Vivre, and some of the controversy it has sparked among Mills Addition residents, read The Independent's May cover story, "A Fighting Chance."


Comments (17)add
...
written by Odessa Goodwin , September 09, 2010 - 11:56 am
Sounds better but it still sucks.
...
written by ragin_cajun , September 09, 2010 - 01:10 pm
My councilman voted for this? I wanna hear why. Because it sucks. :)
...
written by realitychecks , September 09, 2010 - 02:45 pm
HUD funding determines who gets to live there. All HUD programs come with strings attached. Louisiana has put even more severe restrictions like must give preference to Katrina evacuees. Landrieu wants to scatter her 9th ward all over Louisiana and the La restrictions on community block grants is just the vehicle to do it. Then, when AOC takes over, it will be all "sustainable" housing for it's clients, fresh out of rehab! People with mental illness and drug problems are people with "special needs"; just like their building permit requests! Some, might, incidentally happen to have children......
...
written by Ayeyayaye , September 09, 2010 - 03:21 pm
Let's keep in mind that the council ENDORSED this without seeing the plans. None. Oh, maybe Shelvin did because we all know he's in AOCs back pocket, but the rest of em? Haven't seen the presentation, just like the community that it affects hasn't seen the new version of the development/presentation.

Also, the way Gachassin spun it to the council was: After listening to the community's concerns, we scaled back, made it more congruent to the local aesthetic and did it all because of community voices being heard. Mhhmmmm. Of course it wasn't because of the lack of funding, (un)feasibility or the other big issue that there are owners that refuse to sell in his site-plan. His company really has a heart, don't you see?

Our council is a joke. They might as well have a pitcher of beer and cigars up there during the meetings. Snickering, cocking back in chairs, whispering amongst each other, reacting with sarcasm to the very constituents they serve. Disrespectful. Maddening. Unprofessional.
...
written by pulsarlake , September 09, 2010 - 04:32 pm
There has been a need for additional housing in the Downtown area for many years!
...
written by ragin_cajun , September 09, 2010 - 08:02 pm
" Snickering, cocking back in chairs, whispering amongst each other, reacting with sarcasm to the very constituents they serve."

Yeah, I've picked up on their attitude, too. Never quite able to put my finger on why it looked that way until now. This is exactly what it is.
...
written by Follow the Money , September 09, 2010 - 08:37 pm
How much are the developer fees and who's sharing the fees?
...
written by realitychecks , September 10, 2010 - 08:14 am
Like all endorsements for this project, the developer simply says "whatever" and no one checks the facts, like what will this cost the city? For instance, in the LA plan for HUD projects, "points" are given for certain government concessions that go along with the endorsement; little things like the City donating land, waiving permit fees, waiving water and sewer fees, even waiving property taxes!! Just wait until Joey presents the bill for this one!!

Sponsorship by the "nonprofit" means it pays no taxes, but looky below at the Palates logo. That's tradmarked in an individual name, isn't it? It's all in the marketing.....

Once filled with PERMANENT SPECIAL NEEDS PEOPLE, there will be no vacancies, as these people don't ever move, hence the term "sustainable" housing.


...
written by The Original Northsidian , September 10, 2010 - 08:23 am
Follow the Money!!
...
written by ragin_cajun , September 10, 2010 - 08:46 am
"There has been a need for additional housing in the Downtown area for many years!"

So what. State subsidized real estate ventures are the answer? There is plenty of housing all over town. Plenty of rental property. For government to spend borrowed money it doesn't have is corrupt.
...
written by Kris Williams , September 10, 2010 - 12:35 pm
Think, Housing Authority. Yes, we need to waste more taxpayer dollars.
...
written by LookSomeThings , September 10, 2010 - 03:04 pm
"There has been a need for additional housing in the Downtown area for many years!"

Please qualify this "need."
...
written by realitychecks , September 10, 2010 - 04:28 pm
written by Follow the Money , September 09, 2010
How much are the developer fees and who's sharing the fees?

Developer's fees: About $5 Million! Developer's Investment: About $5,000!! HUD makes the incentive very high for these projects because "mixed use" is just a new name for projects and after they get started, they ultimately become all low income. HUD also allows for the developer to continue making money over time and might make money off of the eventual sale but we don't know if that is the case here. But it would be allowed (indeed, maybe highly recommended) under HUD guidelines. (this can all be verified online)

Cost to the City: we'll see what we have to "waive" to get the extra points to be the "winning" applicant. Non profits are tax exempt. So, does the 1% ownership now by AOC make it fully tax exempt? Wonder if Conrad knows? How many streets and adjudicated properties will the City turn over to the developer? And, what is the ultimate cost to the city of concentrating poverty on one side of town and so close to the downtown area?

I believe this mayor would cheerfully abuse property owners rights and seize property to turn it over to developers. Play close attention UPPER LAFAYETTE!! Growing the poverty industry in one section of town is actually against HUD guidelines; not to mention discrimination.
...
written by Unempirical Observer , September 10, 2010 - 09:59 pm
Blah Blah Blah ranh ranh ranh ranh.

Is that all the motivated readers of this blog have to say.
God help me. You people would berate George Washington for accepting the surrender of Cornwallis.
Nothing's ever good enough.
Makes me want to stop reading this paper online just to avoid all the nattering negativists.
...
written by The Original Northsidian , September 11, 2010 - 02:18 pm
Observer, just read the articles and not the comments. Then your perfect world will never change! I know that if you stop reading online the world would end. And we don't want that do we? Like they say IN THE LAND OF THE NORTH (where the streets don't flood), if you disagree take your marbles and GO HOME!!
...
written by school district , September 11, 2010 - 05:02 pm
Did anyone check the school district? Isn't that in a failing district?
...
written by NORTHSIDIAN SHOTGUN , September 13, 2010 - 08:40 am
This is the same reason the local little Druglords swarm all over the Upper Lafayette area, they are not disturbed,for every market there has to be seller and the need is throughout Lafayette and the well-to-do's market is nicely situated far from the well-to-do's home but a short jaunt across town to obtain their needs as in this asinine project to corral the drug sellers, to keep them at a distance away from the sound barrier wall but near enough to allow for available goods and encourage private enterprise. Our politicians are very on top of it all, always devising projects to make a pie available for sharing for their cohort-crony, fund raisers. The Green Man, the Unleveled Surveyor, and the lackey wanna be " President, councilman.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in using your Facebook account or register if you do not have an account yet.

busy 
LA LA Land
Advertisement
Most Read
Advertisement
Advertisement
in case you missed it