Council advances plan to allow ticketed performances at The Josephine amid neighborhood objections

Council members voted to approve a motion that would allow The Josephine, a renovated church at 2400 Napoleon Avenue, to pursue a plan-development amendment permitting periodic ticketed live performances, but the action stops short of final ordinance approval.

The motion (M26196), moved by Council Member Leslie Harris and seconded by Council Member Freddy Green, passed on the council floor by a 4–1 tally, according to the meeting record. Harris emphasized the vote authorizes a motion-level approval subject to provisos and further neighborhood–applicant negotiations; she also noted the ordinance may sit up to 90 days before any final council ordinance vote.

Neighbors opposing the change described persistent traffic and parking problems on Lasal and surrounding blocks and said a larger entertainment use would worsen noise, safety and trash issues. “Traffic on Lasal Street is horrendous already,” said Julie Peggy Little John, who identified herself as living at 2334 Napoleon Avenue. Janice Dearmmas, another nearby resident, urged the council to require a traffic and parking plan before approving live music and to beware that approval would be effectively permanent without added safeguards.

Speakers for the applicant and venue operators said the proposal would expand cultural programming and that the owners had negotiated provisos intended to limit neighborhood impacts. “We have secured off‑street parking nearby, including a parking lot on Napoleon Avenue to keep guest vehicles out of residential blocks,” said Jordie Brower, who described guest‑management plans, ride‑hail encouragement and a neighbor hotline. Mike Sherman, representing the applicant, said the operator has added acoustic measures, a closed‑door policy and limits on courtyard use during ticketed events.

Public testimony was mixed: arts organizations told the council the venue fills an Uptown performance-space gap and has hosted successful community events, while preservation and neighborhood advocates said notification and outreach had been insufficient and recommended a traffic feasibility study before expanding live events. Opponents repeatedly raised the venue’s proposed capacity—residents cited figures around 800–850 people for standing-room events—and questioned where patrons would park or stage ride‑hail pickups.

The City Planning Commission had reported both support and opposition and said it could not record a final favorable recommendation due to procedural votes at the commission. CPC staff described proposed provisos discussed with the applicant, including limits on attendees and hours of operation (applicant‑proposed hours discussed in the CPC summary included a 10:45 p.m. closing Sunday–Thursday and up to 1:00 a.m. Friday–Saturday), but said no final legal action was taken at the commission due to a lack of a seconded motion.

Harris told the council she supports additional conversation between neighbors and the developer and framed the council’s motion as a step that preserves time and process: “Just because this council approves a motion does not mean that we will approve the zoning docket by ordinance,” she said on the floor.

What happens next: The motion-level approval means the application will return for further review; any final zoning ordinance would be a separate council step, and council members said they expect ongoing negotiations on provisos, parking and operational safeguards.