OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

New Orleans Board of Zoning Adjustments Special Meeting - February 9, 2026

City Planning CommissionMonday, February 9, 2026
BodyNew Orleans, Louisiana
SessionCity Planning Commission
DateMonday, February 9, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 3:12:36

Transcript — Verbatim
5:06

Good morning.

5:08

I would like to call the Monday, February 9th special meeting of the Board of Zoning Adjustments to order.

5:13

We'll begin with roll call.

5:14

Candace Forrest.

5:16

Present.

5:16

Todd James.

5:18

Present.

5:19

Tamara Agens is absent.

5:21

Jose Alvarez.

5:22

Present.

5:23

Ramiro Diaz is absent.

5:25

Alfonso Gonzalez.

5:26

Present.

5:27

And Jason Richards.

5:28

Present.

5:29

At this time, would the board make a motion to adopt the minutes from the January meeting?

5:34

So moved.

5:36

Second.

5:37

It's been moved by Commissioner James, second by Commissioner Gonzalez to adopt our minutes from last meeting.

5:42

Uh vote your screens.

5:45

It was second by uh oh, I'm sorry, second by Commissioner Alvarez.

5:50

Vote your screens.

6:03

Five years, no nays.

6:04

The motion carries.

6:07

Please note that the board will recess at approximately 1 p.m.

6:11

if the meeting has not already been adjourned and will reconvene at approximately 2 p.m.

6:16

As a reminder to applicants, action that the board takes today will be released in the form of a disposition notice by February 19th and sent via email and mail to applicants as well as posted on the one-stop one-stop app for other interested parties.

6:31

Requests that the board votes to approve must show compliance with any noted provisos before the case is finalized and granted final approval.

6:39

Item 19, BZA 015-26 for the property at 937 Esplanade has been rendered moot.

6:47

We will now begin unfinished business for variances.

6:50

Will the chair please he please read the hearing rules for variances?

6:56

Yes, rules and procedures for public hearings, variance requests.

7:00

The following procedures shall be observed during the hearing.

7:04

Each speaker shall give their name and address prior to speaking on the proposal.

7:08

The applicant or representative will speak first.

7:11

The presentation shall be limited to a maximum of three minutes for each applicant or representative speaker.

7:18

But in no event shall the cumulative presentation total by applicants or their representatives exceed 10 minutes.

7:25

Proponents are persons in favor of the proposal will speak next and be allowed two minutes per speaker.

7:31

Opponents are persons in opposition of the proposal will speak next and be allowed two minutes per speaker.

7:37

The applicant or representative will be allowed a rebuttal.

7:41

The rebuttal shall be limited to a cumulative maximum of three minutes.

7:45

For an exceptional case, the time limitations may be extended by the presiding officer with the approval of the board.

7:52

As the board deems necessary, the case may be acted upon at this meeting or deferred for additional information or review.

8:00

If the case is deferred, it will be acted on at a subsequent meeting as provided by law.

8:06

All proper parliamentary procedures shall be followed, including recognition of speakers, relevance of argument, and absolute prohibition of applause or demonstration.

8:17

Standard of review.

9:36

Lastly, the request for Article 224A, Table 22-1 for bicycle parking was incorporated back into the request after having previously been withdrawn.

9:51

Based on this report, the staff believes the requested variance of Article 153A1 Table 15-2 for minimum lot area meets nine of the nine criteria of the standards for variances of Article 46F.

10:05

Therefore, the staff recommends approval of the requested variance of lot area, subject to two provisos.

10:11

However, staff believes that the requested variances of Article 153A1, Table 15-2, minimum permeable open space.

10:21

Article 153A1, Table 15-2 for interior side yard setback.

10:26

And Article 15, 3A1, Table 15-2 for a rear yard setback, fail to meet standards 6, 8, and 9 of Article 46F, and that strict adherence would not result in a demonstrable hardship.

10:39

The variance would be detrimental to public welfare.

10:43

And the variance will impair the adequate supply of light or air to adjacent property.

10:48

Additionally, staff believes that the requested variants of Article 224A, Table 22-1, bicycle parking fails to meet standards 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8 of the standards for variances of Article 46F, in that one, there are no special conditions peculiar to the land.

11:08

Two, literal interpretation would not deprive the applicant of commonly enjoyed rights.

11:13

Four, the variance would confer on the applicant special privilege.

11:17

Six, strict adherence would not result in a demonstrable hardship.

11:21

Seven, the request is primarily for the convenience or profit of the owner.

11:27

And I think we lost one one of it.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning And Land Use█████████████████████████████████████████████74%
Procedural████████13%
Community Engagement███5%
Public Safety██3%
Historic Preservation2%
Public Engagement2%
Technology and Innovation1%
Summary of Proceedings

New Orleans Board of Zoning Adjustments Special Meeting - February 9, 2026

The Board of Zoning Adjustments held a special meeting on February 9, 2026, to consider multiple variance requests and appeals. The meeting included roll call, adoption of January minutes, and deliberation on 14 docket items. Key actions included approvals, denials, and deferrals.

Consent Calendar

  • Approved the minutes from the January meeting unanimously (5-0).

Public Comments & Testimony

  • BZA 079-25 (restaurant variance): Applicant Angela Dix requested approval for side and rear yard setbacks and bicycle parking. Board asked clarifying questions about bicycle parking options and ADA ramp placement.
  • BZA 101-25 (canopy variance): Applicant requested a 30-day deferral to work with an architect; no other public comment.
  • BZA 105-25 (sign variance): Applicant argued the sign is a replica of a historic sign. Opposition was led by Aaron Holmes (VCPora), who stated the sign is not historically designated and would undermine sign standards. The applicant rebutted that the sign would restore Bourbon Street character.
  • BZA 001-26, 002-26, 003-26 (fence height variances): Applicant Ron Lazel presented evidence of neighbor support and referenced a similar approved variance at Royal Street. He requested an increase from 9 feet to 10 feet. Commissioners raised concerns about proper notice for the amended request.
  • BZA 005-26 (front-yard setback variance): Applicant’s representative explained the need for a front porch and noted that over 75% of neighboring properties have front-yard encroachments. Staff clarified that only properties developed under current CZO were analyzed.
  • BZA 007-26 (fence height after-the-fact): Applicant stated the fence was installed for security cameras; staff found 7 of 10 comparable fences were non-compliant.
  • BZA 008-26 (accessory structure variances): Applicant argued the structure has a long history on the property and agreed to fire-rate walls and remove windows. Commissioners questioned whether the second story was originally built.
  • BZA 013-26 (billboard appeal): Extensive public opposition from District E council member, homeowners, and neighborhood groups (ENoNAC, Lake Barrington HOA). Opponents cited negative impacts on property values, light pollution, safety, and procedural defects in notice. The applicant claimed the billboard meets all zoning requirements and was mischaracterized by staff. Over 20 residents spoke in opposition.

Discussion Items

  • BZA 079-25 (937 Esplanade area – restaurant variances): Applicant reduced side-yard setback on one side to 5 feet and requested a 2-foot waver on the other side, rear-yard setback, and bicycle parking waiver (later withdrawn for off-site provision). Staff recommended approval for lot area, permeable open space, and one side-yard, but denial for bicycle parking. Board approved the four items with two provisos and denied bicycle parking (5-0).
  • BZA 101-25 (3205 Charter Street – canopy): After-the-fact request for an 11-foot excessive canopy encroachment. Applicant asked for a 30-day deferral to March 16; granted (5-0).
  • BZA 105-25 (235-241 Burban Street – sign): Requested variances for sign projection, area, and floor location. Staff recommended denial; board deferred to March 16 for applicant to provide dimensions of comparable signs (5-0).
  • BZA 001-26, 002-26, 003-26 (3513, 3517, 3521 Charter Street – fence height): Applicant sought 9-foot fences (later requested 10 feet) for short-term rental properties. Board deferred to late February agenda to allow resubmission with correct height (5-0 each).
  • BZA 004-26 (6020 St. Charles Avenue – parking pad): Applicant did not appear; board deferred to late February (5-0).
  • BZA 005-26 (8 Maryland Drive – front porch setback): Applicant requested 18’3” setback vs. required 20’. Board deferred to March agenda for better documentation of adjacent properties (5-0).
  • BZA 006-26 (235-237 Charter Street – mechanical equipment): Approved unanimously (5-0) with two provisos, finding all nine criteria met.
  • BZA 007-26 (Audubon – fence height): Approved (5-0) with one proviso, acknowledging marginal height difference (7’3” vs. 7’) and difficulty measuring grade.
  • BZA 008-26 (5015 South Saratoga – accessory structure): Board deferred to March 16 to allow applicant to submit historical evidence of original structure and address roof overhang issues (5-0).
  • BZA 009-26 (1229 Cadis/4534 Perrier – pool location): Approved (5-0) with two provisos, finding all nine criteria met.
  • BZA 010-26 (600 New Orleans Hammond Hwy – accessory use for worship): Approved (5-0) with one proviso, finding all nine criteria met.
  • BZA 011-26 (3627 Alfred Street – parking): Approved (5-0) with one proviso, finding all nine criteria met.
  • BZA 108-25 (homestead exemption appeal): Board upheld the Director of Safety and Permits’ decision, denying the appeal (5-0).
  • BZA 012-26 (1901-1941 Canal Street): Deferred to late February at applicant’s request (5-0).
  • BZA 013-26 (10563 N. I-10 Service Road – billboard appeal): After debate, board deferred to March agenda for staff to clarify the zoning verification status and ensure complete record (5-0).
  • BZA 014-26 (3929 Canal Street): Deferred to late February at staff’s request (5-0).

Key Outcomes

  • Approved variances: BZA 079-25 (partial), 006-26, 007-26, 009-26, 010-26, 011-26 – all with provisos.
  • Denied variances: BZA 079-25 (bicycle parking portion), BZA 108-25 (appeal denied).
  • Deferred items: BZA 101-25 (to March 16), 105-25 (to March 16), 001-26/002-26/003-26 (to late February), 004-26 (to late February), 005-26 (to March), 008-26 (to March 16), 012-26 (to late February), 013-26 (to March), 014-26 (to late February).
  • Item deemed moot: BZA 015-26 (937 Esplanade).
  • Meeting adjourned: Approximately 5-0 vote after completing all items.

Meeting Transcript

Good morning. I would like to call the Monday, February 9th special meeting of the Board of Zoning Adjustments to order. We'll begin with roll call. Candace Forrest. Present. Todd James. Present. Tamara Agens is absent. Jose Alvarez. Present. Ramiro Diaz is absent. Alfonso Gonzalez. Present. And Jason Richards. Present. At this time, would the board make a motion to adopt the minutes from the January meeting? So moved. Second. It's been moved by Commissioner James, second by Commissioner Gonzalez to adopt our minutes from last meeting. Uh vote your screens. It was second by uh oh, I'm sorry, second by Commissioner Alvarez. Vote your screens. Five years, no nays. The motion carries. Please note that the board will recess at approximately 1 p.m. if the meeting has not already been adjourned and will reconvene at approximately 2 p.m. As a reminder to applicants, action that the board takes today will be released in the form of a disposition notice by February 19th and sent via email and mail to applicants as well as posted on the one-stop one-stop app for other interested parties. Requests that the board votes to approve must show compliance with any noted provisos before the case is finalized and granted final approval. Item 19, BZA 015-26 for the property at 937 Esplanade has been rendered moot. We will now begin unfinished business for variances. Will the chair please he please read the hearing rules for variances? Yes, rules and procedures for public hearings, variance requests. The following procedures shall be observed during the hearing. Each speaker shall give their name and address prior to speaking on the proposal. The applicant or representative will speak first. The presentation shall be limited to a maximum of three minutes for each applicant or representative speaker. But in no event shall the cumulative presentation total by applicants or their representatives exceed 10 minutes. Proponents are persons in favor of the proposal will speak next and be allowed two minutes per speaker. Opponents are persons in opposition of the proposal will speak next and be allowed two minutes per speaker. The applicant or representative will be allowed a rebuttal. The rebuttal shall be limited to a cumulative maximum of three minutes. For an exceptional case, the time limitations may be extended by the presiding officer with the approval of the board. As the board deems necessary, the case may be acted upon at this meeting or deferred for additional information or review. If the case is deferred, it will be acted on at a subsequent meeting as provided by law. All proper parliamentary procedures shall be followed, including recognition of speakers, relevance of argument, and absolute prohibition of applause or demonstration. Standard of review. Lastly, the request for Article 224A, Table 22-1 for bicycle parking was incorporated back into the request after having previously been withdrawn. Based on this report, the staff believes the requested variance of Article 153A1 Table 15-2 for minimum lot area meets nine of the nine criteria of the standards for variances of Article 46F. Therefore, the staff recommends approval of the requested variance of lot area, subject to two provisos. However, staff believes that the requested variances of Article 153A1, Table 15-2, minimum permeable open space.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com