Panel says Rouzan filings OK

• By CHAD CALDER
• Advocate business writer
• Published: Nov 10, 2009 - Page: 1B

• Print
• Email
• Save
• Reprints
• Twitter
• Share

• Del.icio.us
• Digg
• Facebook
• Reddit
• 

The East Baton Rouge Parish Planning and Zoning Commission’s board said Monday the legal problems of developer Tommy Spinosa are not the board’s concern and, with some debate, decided the developer could meet filing requirements for the controversial Rouzan project one building at a time.

The board voted 5-3 with one abstention to grant final site plan approval for the proposed public library building at Rouzan and a three-story, 25 unit apartment building there at Glasgow Avenue and Perkins Road.

Residents turned out to question what they called a piecemeal approach to the filings and Metro Councilman Rodney “Smokie” Bourgeois called the liens by contractors and attempted foreclosure by lenders on Spinosa’s Perkins Rowe development the “elephant in the room” that “is trumpeting  and no one wants to hear it.”

Bourgeois, whose district includes Rouzan, spoke during the public hearing and asked commissioners to consider Spinosa’s legal problems with Perkins Rowe — at Perkins Road and Bluebonnet Boulevard — and “please don’t bring this up Perkins Road to District 12.”

Spinosa took to the lecturn a few moments later, saying he does not discuss legal issues publicly and chastised Bourgeois for not calling him personally to ask about Perkins Rowe’s problems, which include liens by a number of contractors for nonpayment and a group of lenders who have asked a federal judge to seize the development for not making interest payments on $170 million in loans.

Spinosa said after the meeting he would not discuss the legal issues and, when asked about the possible financial problems behind them, pointed to public statements in September by the president of the parish Library Board that two lenders told him financing for Rouzan is in place.

“Rouzan is moving forward,” he said.

Several commissioners said those issues are outside the call of the Planning Commission.

“It’s not our job as planning commissioners to inquire into the finances of developers,” Commissioner Kathleen Callaghan said.

Commissioner W.T. Winfield pointed out the commission approves plans all the time without looking into the applicant’s financial background.

The other issue was whether Spinosa is violating the spirit of the rules that require so-called traditional neighborhood developments like Rouzan to file plans for a phase every year.

For example, an approved traditional neighborhood development with four phases would have to file a plan for a different phase each year to provide evidence the development is proceeding.

Tad Hardy and Angela Angelloz, who represented the Southside Civic Association, pointed out the library filing, which is Phase 1B, retroactively turned the already-approved Phase 1 into Phase 1A, and the apartment filing was for Phase 4A and was only for a single building.