Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/05/2014

Home

April 25, 2014 I Volume 8 I Issue 8 Zoning Bulletin "renovation." However, the Road Home Program did not schedule their loan closing until November, 2012. After the loan closing, the Homeowners went to the City's Department of Safety and Permits ("DSP") to again obtain a building permit to repair their Duplex. They were denied a new permit based on the DSP Director's interpretation of the LRS-1, Art. 9A, § 9A.1.3.2A, as halting the restoration of existing doubles effective August 16, 2011. Section 9A.1.3.2A (the "Zoning Ordinance") provided as follows: a. Two-family dwellings, where the two-family residential use is the immediate previous use of the structure, shall be permitted to be re-established .... b. Two-family residen- tial structures described above may be demolished and rebuilt, provided that they obtain [necessary permits] . . ..c. With regard to the standard time limitations in subsection (b) above regarding demolition and building permits, properties that were established as legal two-family dwellings as of August 29, 2005 (the date of Hurricane Katrina) shall retain two-family dwelling status for three years follow- ing demolition or until August 29, 2010, whichever is earlier. These Katrina dam- aged two-family dwellings that have not obtained a building permit by August 29, 2010 will lose two-family status and revert to the underlying single-family status. The Homeowners appealed their building permit denial to the City's Board of Zoning Adjustments ("BZA"). The Homeowners contended that the Zon- ing Ordinance did not set forth any time limitation for owners applying for permits to renovate their two-family dwellings. They pointed out that subsec- tion (c) of 9A.1.3.2A, which imposed a five-year deadline on owners of two- family dwellings applying for permits, referred to subsection (b) regarding de- molition only. Thus, the Homeowners contended that because the Duplex was never demolished, subsection (b) and (c) did not apply. Rather, they contended that subsection (a) was the only applicable provision. Subsection (a) unequivo- cally provided, under permitted uses, that "[t]wo-family dwellings, where the two-family residential use is the immediate previous use of the structure, shall be permitted to be re-established." Thus, the Homeowners contended that when they applied to the DSP in 2012 they should have been granted a new permit to renovate their Duplex. The City countered that the five-year period in subsection (c) of the Zoning Ordinance applied to both owners of two-family dwellings applying for permits regarding demolition and owners of two-family dwellings applying for permits regarding renovation or repairs. Thus, the City contended that the Homeowners were correctly denied a permit in 2012, as it was two years after the five-year grace period expired; hence, their two-family dwelling no longer enjoyed legal nonconforming use status. The BZA upheld the City's denial of the permit application to repair the Duplex. The Homeowners appealed to civil district court. The court affirmed the BZA's decision to deny the permit. The Homeowners again appealed. DECISION: Judgment of district court reversed. The Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit, agreed with the Home- owners' arguments and held that the Zoning Ordinance, which provided a five-year deadline for owners of two-family dwellings applying for permits "regarding demolition and building," applied only to owners of two-family dwellings who desired to demolish and rebuild the dwelling from hurricane damage, not to owners applying for permits to renovate two-family dwellings which were not going to be demolished. 10 ©2014 Thomson Reuters