Board of Zoning Adjustments Staff Report Monthly Meeting Monday, April 11, 2016

Transcription

1 Board of Zoning Adjustments Staff Report Monthly Meeting Monday, April 11, 2016 Docket Number: Prepared by: Brooke Perry Applicant or Agent: Donald Maginnis Architect, Inc., Eugene Hoskins, Joan Winter Property Location: 1032 Marais Street Zip: Bounding Streets: Marais St., St. Philip St., Ursulines St., & Tremé St. Zoning District: HMR-1 Historic Marigny/Tremé/Bywater Residential District Overlay District: RDO-2 Residential Diversity Overlay District Historic District: Tremé Planning District: 4 Existing Use: Single-Family Residence Square Number: 146 Proposed Use: Single-Family Residence Lot Number: B Request: This is a request for variances from the provisions of Article 9, Section 9.3A (Table 9-2) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. Request: This is a request to permit a single-family residence with insufficient minimum lot area, insufficient minimum lot width, and insufficient minimum permeable open space. (AFTER THE FACT) Requested Waivers: Article & Section Required Provided Waiver Article 9, 9.3.A (Table 9-2)- Minimum Permeable Open Space 15% 2.8% 12.2% Article 9, 9.3.A (Table 9-2)- Minimum Lot Area 1,500 sq. ft. 1,168 sq. ft. 332 sq. ft. Article 9, 9.3.A (Table 9-2)- Minimum Lot Width 25' 20' 5' Project Description: Figure 1: Subject Property The subject property is located on Marais Street in between Ursulines Avenue and St. Phillip Street in the Tremé neighborhood. The lot measures approximately twenty feet (20 ) in width, fiftyeight feet, four inches (58-4 ) in depth, and one thousand one hundred sixty-eight square feet (1,168 sq. ft.) in area. The subject lot is located in the HMR-1 Historic Marigny/Tremé/Bywater 1 BZA BZA Page 1 of 21

2 Residential District, which requires a minimum lot width of twenty-five feet (25 ) and a minimum lot area of one thousand five hundred square feet (1,500 sq. ft.) for single-family residences. The subject lot does not meet the minimum lot area or width requirement of the district. There is no minimum lot depth requirement. Article 25, Section 25.5 Nonconforming Lots allows single-family dwellings to be constructed on lots that are nonconforming, provided: The lot is in separate ownership, or does not abut a lot with similar ownership, It meets all other zoning district bulk requirements with the exception of lot area, lot width and lot depth. The subject lot, Lot B, abuts Lot A. According to the Orleans Parish Assessor s Office, both Lot A and B are owned by Joan S. Winter. 1 Since this abutting property has similar ownership, the exception for nonconforming lots does not apply and the applicant must seek a waiver for minimum lot width and area. Figure 2: Sanborn Maps The lot was originally developed with a small singlestory single-family residence and an accessory structure. It appears that accessory structure was converted into an addition sometime before 1909 and two new accessory structures were added. Sanborn Maps from 1940 to 1994 show a single-story singlefamily residence that occupied roughly half of the lot and a small accessory structure at the rear of the property. According to a letter submitted by the applicant, the structure was damaged during Hurricane Katrina and the property owner subsequently obtained an Emergency Permit to repair the structure. 2 Their letter states that the contractor, mistakenly demolished the frame part of the structure down to the foundations, and, a new similar structure was framed on the same masonry piers without approved plans. A stop work order was subsequently issued. The applicant applied to the Board of Zoning Adjustments in November of 2006 for a waiver of minimum open space under the former Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. According to the report, the applicant expanded the original building footprint by three hundred sixty-one square feet (361 sq. ft.), and was deficient in minimum open space by fifty-nine square feet (59 sq. ft.). The request, docket number , was denied without prejudice by the Board. In 2007, the Historic District Landmarks Commission issued a Certificate of Appropriateness for the property, however the applicant never obtained the necessary permits to begin construction. In 2008, the HDLC issued another stop work order for deviating from the plans originally approved plans. A permit was never obtained for the construction under the former Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and thus the owner is now seeking a permit under the current Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. The existing camelback structure is fifteen point three feet (15.3 ) wide by fifty-six point four feet (56.4 ) in depth and has a floor area ratio of one point twenty-two (1.22). The building measures seventeen feet, eight inches (17-8 ) in height at the front building façade and 1 Eugene R. Hoskins is also listed as an owner of the subject lot, Lot B. 2 According to the applicant, this permit number is 060NO-84633; however, the staff could not locate any record of the permit. 2 BZA BZA Page 2 of 21

3 twenty-eight feet, five inches (28-5 ) at the rear camelback portion. The structure is built to the front property line, with steps leading up to its front entrance that project three feet (3 ) into the right-of-way and a small overhang that projects two point five feet (2.5 ) into the right-of-way. On the Ursulines Avenue side of the property, a side yard width of one point five feet (1.5 ) is provided and on the St. Phillip Street side a side yard width of three point two feet (3.2 ) is provided. The structure is built one point five feet (1.5 ) from the rear property line. The existing structure is subject to the bulk and yard regulations of Article 9, Section 9.3A. (Table 9-2). The structure complies with the maximum floor area ratio requirement of one point three (1.3). Currently, there is only two point eight percent (2.7%) of permeable open space, which does not meet the requirement that fifteen percent (15%) of the lot area be permeable open space. 3 Thus, a waiver of twelve point two (12.2%) is required. The HMR-1 District has no front, side, or rear yard requirements. Historic District Landmarks Commission The staff spoke with the Executive Director of the Historic Landmarks Commission regarding the variance request. The HDLC has no objection to the design of the current residence, provided that they meet all applicable zoning requirements. If the variance request is approved, no rereview of plans by HDLC is necessary. Surrounding Development The subject property is located near the major streets of North Claiborne Avenue, North Rampart Street, Orleans Avenue, and Esplanade Avenue in the Tremé neighborhood. The area consists of single-family, two-family, and multi-family residences, as well as a few historic corner commercial structures and institutional uses. Joseph A. Craig Charter school is located across the street from the subject property, Armstrong Park is located one block from the petitioned site, and St. Augustine Church is located two blocks away. The petitioned site is located within an HMR-1 Historic Marigny/Tremé/Bywater Residential District with an RDO-2 Residential Diversity Overlay. The HMR-1 District is generally bounded by St. Ann Street, North Rampart Street, Esplanade Avenue, and North Claiborne Avenue. Within this area, there are several spot zones of HMC-1 Historic Marigny/Tremé/Bywater Commercial District, which contain historic corner commercial structures. An HMC-2 Historic Marigny/Tremé/Bywater Commercial District is located upon lots that front on North Rampart Street on the Tremé side and a VCC-2 Vieux Carré Commercial District is located along the Vieux Carré side. The properties along Claiborne Avenue and Orleans Avenue closest to the subject property are zoned HMC-2 Historic Marigny/Tremé/Bywater Commercial District. 3 Council Motion M established an Interim Zoning District named the Open Space Permeability IZD, the intent of which was to delete standards for Minimum Open Space Ratio and to add standards for Minimum Permeable Open Space where applied in the Site Design Standards of the Bulk and Yard Tables of Article 9, Historic Core Neighborhoods Residential Districts, Table 9-2 and other zoning districts throughout the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. 3 BZA BZA Page 3 of 21

4 The surrounding area is Figure 3: Zoning Map composed of rectangular squares of generally consistent size; however there is significant variation in the size of lots, as the area was originally subdivided in the 19th century, long before the adoption of subdivision regulations. The majority of the lots in the area are developed with historic single-story, shotgun-style residences or creole cottages; however, there are several instances of twostory townhouse structures and contemporary construction. Most residences are built along the front property line with narrow side yards and small rear yard areas. The staff surveyed thirty-six (36) singlefamily residences in the area and found significant variation in the width of lots, with some as narrow as ten feet (10 ) and some as wide as sixty-one feet (61 ). There was also diversity in the depth of lots, which ranged from twenty-six feet (26 ) to one hundred eighty-eight feet (188 ) in depth. As expected, lot area also fluctuated from five hundred twenty-two square feet (522 sq. ft.) to four thousand nine hundred sixty square feet (4,960 sq. ft.). On average, lots measured approximately thirty feet (30 ) in width, ninety feet (90 ) in depth, and two thousand five hundred eighty square feet (2,580 sq. ft.) in area. Of single-family residences surveyed, twentyfive percent (25%) did not meet the minimum lot width requirement of twenty-five feet (25 ) and nineteen percent (19%) did not meet the minimum lot area requirement of one thousand five hundred square feet (1,500 sq. ft.). Due to the dense development pattern in the area, the staff was unable to determine the minimum permeable open space for twelve (12) of the thirty-six (36) properties surveyed. Assuming that these properties have a permeable open space of zero (0), fifty-eight percent (58%) of properties meet the minimum requirement that at least fifteen percent (15%) of lot area be permeable open space. Since the Table 1: Analysis of Nearby Single-Family Residences Dimension # % Lot Width < 25 ft. 9 25% Lot Width 25 ft % Lot Area < 1500 sq. ft. 7 19% Lot Area 1500 sq. ft % Permeable Open Space < 15% 15 42% Permeable Open Space 15% 21 58% (Source: Orleans Parish Assessor s Office; All estimates are approximate based upon legal descriptions staff measurements taken from Orleans Parish Tax Assessor s online maps, and in-field observations) permeable open space requirement took effect in August 2015, any existing properties with deficient permeable open space would be grandfathered. 4 BZA BZA Page 4 of 21

5 Table 2: Raw Data for Single-Family Residences Surveyed Address Square Lot Lot Width Depth Area % Permeable Open Space 1322 Governor Nicholls St. 145 C % 1015 Henriette Delille St %* 1017 Henriette Delille St. 139 A %* 1023 Henriette Delille St % 1018 Marais St. 146 C % 1024 Marais St %* 1026 Marais St. 146 A %* 1105 Marais St. 171 A % 1115 Marais St. 171 B % 1126 Marais St % 1135 Marais St % 1139 Marais St %* 1205 St. Phillip St % 1227 St. Phillip St % 1010 Treme St. 139 M % 1011 Treme St %* 1015 Treme St %* 1018 Treme St. 139 A % 1019 Treme St % 1023 Treme St % 1109 Treme St. 145 B %* 1115 Treme St % 1119 Treme St % 1123 Treme St %* 1211 Ursulines Ave. 140 C %* 1221 Ursulines Ave. 140 B % 1222 Ursulines Ave. 139 B % 1223 Ursulines Ave. 140 A % 1227 Ursulines Ave % 1228 Ursulines Ave. 139 B % 1233 Ursulines Ave A %* 1314 Ursulines Ave %* 1318 Ursulines Ave % 1322 Ursulines Ave % 1326 Ursulines Ave. 146 C % 1330 Ursulines Ave. 146 C % *Could not determine; assumed to be zero (0) for the purposes of this analysis (Source: Orleans Parish Assessor s Office; All estimates are approximate based upon legal descriptions staff measurements taken from Orleans Parish Tax Assessor s online maps, and in-field observations) 5 BZA BZA Page 5 of 21

6 Impact and Analysis According to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, the Board of Zoning Adjustments must consider the following criteria in order to determine what impact the requested variance would have on adjacent properties if it were approved. The procedure affords an applicant relief from the strict requirements of the zoning law when unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty exists. 1. Do special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same zoning district? Minimum lot width and minimum lot area Yes. Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure or building that are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. The petitioned site is unusually shallow and narrow compared to other properties in the vicinity. This special condition is a result of how the subject square was historically subdivided. Minimum permeable open space No. Special conditions and circumstances do not exist which are peculiar to the land, structure or building that are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. While the lot is unusually small for the area, a single-family residence was historically built on the site that provided a large open space area. The new single-family residence that has been constructed occupies almost the entirety of the lot and provides almost no open space. A sizable new residence could have been constructed on the site without necessitating a waiver. In addition, the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance recognizes that in areas such as the Tremé the dense development pattern may pose a difficulty in meeting the minimum permeable open space requirement. In the Historic Marigny/Treme/Bywater Residential Districts, the area of a green roof may be included as permeable open space. Thus, any impact that the substandard lot size may have on the applicant s ability to meet the requirement could be mitigated via the use of a green roof. Figure 4: The subject property in January of 2004 (left) and January of 2015 (right). Source: Pictometry 6 BZA BZA Page 6 of 21

7 2. Will the literal interpretation of the provisions of the ordinance deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district? Minimum lot width and minimum lot area Yes. The literal interpretation of the ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district. As Table 1 suggests, there are several instances of single-family residences that do not meet the minimum lot width or lot area required by the HMR-1 District. Minimum permeable open space No. The literal interpretation of the ordinance would not deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district. While the staff could not determine exact measurements for twelve (12) properties, the majority of properties surveyed met the requirement that at least fifteen percent (15%) of lot area be permeable open space. Since the requirement is relatively new, any existing properties with deficient permeable open space would be grandfathered. 3. Do any special conditions and circumstances result from the actions of the applicant or any other person who may have (or had) an interest in the property? Minimum lot width and minimum lot area No. No special conditions or circumstances result from the actions of the applicant or any other person who may have an interest in the property. The special condition, which is the subject site s unusually small width, depth and area, is a historic condition which predates the applicant s ownership of the property. Minimum permeable open space Yes. Special conditions and circumstances result from the actions of the applicant or any other person who may have (or had) an interest in the property. The applicant created the deficiency in minimum permeable open space by excessively adding onto the existing building without obtaining a building permit. 4. Will the granting of the variance confer on the applicant any special privilege which is denied by this ordinance to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district or similarly situated? Minimum lot width and minimum lot area No. The granting of the variances for lot width and lot area will not confer on the applicant any special privilege which is denied by this ordinance to other lands, 7 BZA BZA Page 7 of 21

8 structures, or buildings in the same district. There are several examples of properties in the area that do not provide the required minimum lot width or area. Minimum permeable open space Yes. The granting of the variance for minimum permeable open space will confer on the applicant a special privilege which is denied by this ordinance to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. The majority, or fifty-eight percent (58%), of properties provided the required minimum permeable open space of fifteen percent (15%) of lot area. While there are some instances of properties that do not meet this requirement, these properties were constructed prior to the current permeability requirement. 5. Will the variance(s), if granted, alter the essential character of the locality? Minimum lot width and minimum lot area No. If the variances for minimum lot width and area are granted, it will not alter the essential character of the locality. The neighborhood is composed of a mixture of single-, two-, and multi-family residences. The applicant has constructed a single-family residence on a lot that is substandard in width and area. Several properties in the vicinity share a similar deficiency. The lot was historically developed with a single-family residence, thus the new structure will maintain the historic use of the property. Minimum permeable open space No. If the variance for minimum permeable open space is granted, it will not alter the essential character of the locality. While the new residence that was constructed on the property is substantially larger than the historic structure, the Historic District Landmarks Commission has approved the design of the structure. Due to the position of the structure, any change to minimum permeable open space would likely not be visible from the public right-of-way. 6. Will strict adherence to the property regulations result in a demonstrable hardship upon the owner, as distinguished from mere inconvenience? Minimum lot width and minimum lot area Yes. Strict adherence to the property regulations would result in a demonstrable hardship upon the owner because it would limit the use of the property. Observance of the regulations would prevent the owner from constructing a single-family residence similar to the structure that was historically developed on the site. 8 BZA BZA Page 8 of 21

9 Minimum permeable open space No. Strict adherence to the property regulations will not result in a demonstrable hardship upon the owner, as distinguished from mere inconvenience. The applicant could remove existing impervious cover in the side and rear yards and replace it with vegetative cover or permeable surfaces. Additionally, the applicant could construct a green roof to meet the minimum permeable open space requirement. 7. Is the purpose of the variance based exclusively upon a desire to serve the convenience or profit of the property owner, or other interested party(s)? Minimum lot width and minimum lot area No. The purpose of the variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to serve the convenience or profit of the property owner or other interested party. The applicant constructed a single-family residence which is consistent with the historic use of the property. Minimum permeable open space Yes. The purpose of the variance is based exclusively upon a desire to serve the convenience or profit of the property owner or other interested party. The property owner constructed the structure without obtaining a building permit. The applicant could have built a reasonably sized residence on the lot without requiring a waiver. Instead a new residence with an excessive building footprint was constructed to serve the convenience of the property owner. 8. Will the variance be detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located? Minimum lot width and minimum lot area No. The variances, if granted, will not be detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. A single-family residence on the petitioned lot contributes favorably to the aesthetic and property values of the surrounding neighborhood. Minimum permeable open space Yes. The variance will be detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood. The excessive amount of impervious surfaces on the lot increases the amount of stormwater run-off on adjacent properties as well as into the municipal stormwater system. Impervious surfaces do not allow for stormwater infiltration and groundwater recharge. Stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces picks up pollutants such as trash, dirt, oil, pesticides, fertilizers, and metals, and directs them into the municipal stormwater system, which is eventually discharged into natural water 9 BZA BZA Page 9 of 21

10 bodies, such as Lake Pontchartrain. New Orleans relies on natural water bodies for fishing and recreation, so allowing pollution into these water bodies has a negative impact on health and quality of life. The City relies on pumps to convey stormwater which lowers groundwater levels and causes land to subside. Subsidence can lead to infrastructure failure of streets, underground pipes and utilities, and buildings which could cost the City billions of dollars to repair. In addition, granting this variance may establish an undesirable precedent for allowing excessive impervious cover of properties. Thus the requested variance would be detrimental to the public welfare and injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood. 9. Will the variance impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, substantially increase traffic congestion in the public street, increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety? Minimum lot width and minimum lot area No. None of these impacts are associated with the proposed project. The construction of a residence on a site which was previously developed with a residence should not impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, increase traffic congestion in the public street, increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety. Minimum permeable open space No. None of these impacts are associated with the proposed project. While the structure that has been erected on the site may diminish the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or increase the danger of fire, the existing structure would be allowed to remain if the yard areas were permeable or if a portion of the roof was converted to a green roof. Staff Recommendation Based on this report, the staff believes the requested variance of Article 9, 9.3.A (Table 9-2)- Minimum Permeable Open Space, fails to meet seven (7) of the nine (9) criteria of the Standards for Variance of Article 4, Section 4.6.F of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, in that: There are no special circumstances which are peculiar to the land, Literal interpretation of the ordinance will not deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the district, The special circumstances were caused by the applicant, The variance will confer on the applicant special privileges, The property regulations will not result in a demonstrable hardship, The change is exclusively for the convenience and profit of the owner, and The variance will be detrimental to public welfare. 10 BZA BZA Page 10 of 21

11 Therefore, the staff recommends DENIAL of the requested variance of Article 9, 9.3.A (Table 9-2)- Minimum Permeable Open Space. *** However, the staff believes the request satisfies the nine criteria as they pertain to the requested variances of Article 9, 9.3.A (Table 9-2) - Minimum Lot Area and Article 9, 9.3.A (Table 9-2) - Minimum Lot Width Therefore, the staff recommends APPROVAL of the requested variances subject to the following provisos: 1. Prior to the issuance of a building permit by the Department of Safety and Permits, the applicant shall submit site, floor and elevation plans to the City Planning Commission staff for review and approval. These plans shall show compliance with the minimum permeable open space requirement. These plans shall be the plans for which the building permit is issued. 2. The applicant shall obtain a lease of servitude from the Department of Property Management's Division of Real Estate and Records for all encroachments into a public right-of-way adjacent to the site. 11 BZA BZA Page 11 of 21

12 Zoning Map BZA Page 12 of 21

13 1940 Sanborn Map Subject Property BZA Page 13 of 21

14 BZA Page 14 of 21

15 TREME ST. (SIDE) MARAIS ST. EXIST BUILDING FENCE 3 2 SLOPE 1 LAND. ST. PHILIP ST. (SIDE) URSULINES ST. (SIDE) TREME ST. (SIDE) URSULINES ST. (SIDE) SLOPE SLOPE LAND. EXIST BUILDING ST. PHILIP ST. (SIDE) 1 - PORCH SURVEY SLOPE SLOPE RAMP 2-1'-4" + 3'-2" ALLEY 3 - EXISTING BRICK FOUNDATIONS SLOPE 4 ROOF PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0" MARAIS ST. 5 GATE WINTER RESIDENCE - AS-BUILT 1032 MARAIS ST. NEW ORLEANS, LA DONALD A. MAGINNIS ARCHITECT 1111 ST. MARY ST. NEW ORLEANS LA tel. (504) fax (504) BZA Page 15 of OF SITE/PLANS

16 TREME ST. (SIDE) EXIST BUILDING TREME ST. (SIDE) EXIST BUILDING 4'-6" FENCE '-2" 4'-6" FENCE '-2" KITCHEN PORCH REF LAND. CLOSET BEDROOM LAND. PAN. URSULINES ST. (SIDE) 54'-6" (VERIFY) LIVING ROOM DW BATH LAND. EXIST BUILDING ST. PHILIP ST. (SIDE) URSULINES ST. (SIDE) 54'-6" (VERIFY) DN BATH CLOSET STUDY LAND. EXIST BUILDING ST. PHILIP ST. (SIDE) 4 - STREET VIEW CL. RAMP RAMP SLOPE SLOPE BEDROOM SLOPE 5 - STREET VIEW 4 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0" MARAIS ST. 5 GATE MARAIS ST. GATE WINTER RESIDENCE - AS-BUILT 1032 MARAIS ST. NEW ORLEANS, LA DONALD A. MAGINNIS SECOND FLOOR PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0" ARCHITECT 1111 ST. MARY ST. NEW ORLEANS LA tel. (504) fax (504) BZA Page 16 of OF FLOORPLANS

17 SANBORN MAP VOLUME 1, SHEET 26 SANBORN MAP VOLUME 2, SHEET 133 SANBORN MAP VOLUME 2, SHEET 108 WINTER RESIDENCE - AS-BUILT 1032 MARAIS ST. NEW ORLEANS, LA DONALD A. MAGINNIS ARCHITECT 1111 ST. MARY ST. NEW ORLEANS LA tel. (504) fax (504) OF SANBORN MAPS BZA Page 17 of 21

18 EXIST. BLDG 6" 1 2 ROUND GUTTER & 4" ROUND DOWNSPOUT 4'-6" EXIST. BLDG DS MARAIS ST. ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0" DS DS DS ST. PHILIP ST. (SIDE) ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0" 12 6 EXIST. BLDG RATED WALL - 2 HRS HARDI BOARD SIDING 1/2" PLYWOOD 2x6 16" O.C. 1/2" PLYWOOD 5/8" F.R. GYP. BOARD EXIST. BLDG 4'-6" 12 8 DS DS DS EXIST. FOUNDATION TREME ST. (SIDE) ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0" DS EXIST. FOUNDATION URSULINES ST. (SIDE) ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0" DS DS WINTER RESIDENCE - AS-BUILT 1032 MARAIS ST. NEW ORLEANS, LA OF 4 DONALD A. MAGINNIS ARCHITECT 1111 ST. MARY ST. NEW ORLEANS LA tel. (504) fax (504) ELEVATIONS BZA Page 18 of 21

19 DONALD MAGINNIS ARCHITECT 1111 SAINT MARY ST. UNIT A NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA (504) FAX Board of Zoning Adjustments JAN. 13, Perdido St., 7th floor New Orleans, LA RE: 1032 Marais St. Members of the Board: The Owner of the above noted property requests a variance to retain the building and lot conditions of the single family structure at 1032 Marais St. The original wood frame one story building was in good condition prior to the storm but was severely damaged. An Emergency Permit (060NO-84633) was applied for and issued for Katrina Repairs. However, during construction the contractor (Reynaldo Construction Inc.) mistakenly demolished the frame part of the structure down to the foundations. A new similar structure was framed on the same masonry piers without approved plans. The Owner needs to obtain a new construction permit under the new CZO, since the permit was never obtained under the former CZO and the time to be granted one has passed. The residence (existing zone: HMR-1) requires variances for the following regulations present in the newly adopted Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance: Minimum Lot Area: 1,500 SF required, 1,168 SF provided as existing Minimum Lot Width: 25 required, 20 provided as existing Minimum Permeable Open Space: 15% of lot area required, 2.8% provided We are addressing the nine review standards and procedures as follows: 1. Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same zoning district. The lot size is unusually small, both for the area and as a single family residence. Adjacent lots in Square 146 are similar in size, which has remained consistent and unchanged since at least 1896 (see Sanborn maps). 2. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Ordinance. A literal interpretation of the ordinance would result in a much smaller residence. The existing occupied residence has 2 bedrooms and is approximately 1,360 SF. 3. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant or any other person who may have or had interest in the property. BZA Page 19 of 21

20 The conditions are partially the result of a mistake by a contractor and not by the intent of the current owner or architect. Since 1908, the building footprint has consistently covered the majority of the lot (see Sanborn maps). 4. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant and special privilege which is denied by this Ordinance to others lands, structures, or buildings in the same district or similarly situated. The variances will restore the structure to the original footprint as prior to the accidental demolition. Most adjacent neighboring houses are similar. 5. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The character and scale of the area will remain unchanged. The street façade will be minimally altered and all facades have been reviewed by the HDLC. 6. Strict adherence to the regulations for the property would result in a demonstrable hardship upon the owner, as distinguished from mere inconvenience. Strict adherence would result in demolition of existing occupied spaces and an unusually small structure. 7. The purpose of the variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to serve the convenience or profit of the property owner or other interested party(s). The proposal has no profit or commercial considerations. The property will be used by the owner and family, not for rental purposes. 8. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. The variance will restore and upgrade the building and will not encroach upon or adversely affect any public property, right of way, or any adjacent private properties. 9. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or increase substantially the congestion in the public street, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety. The variance will not impair any light or air to or drain any water onto adjacent properties. There will be no impairment to any public property or rights of way. The exterior walls will be fire rated with no openings within 3-0 of adjacent structures as per the New Orleans Building Code (IBC). The owner, Ms. Joan Winter, owns a similar house at the immediate right (1024 Marais St.) and owns and resides in the house at the immediate rear (1322 Ursuline St.), which is connected by the respective rear and side yards. The proposed use of the new house is for family members. Please look favorably on this proposal. DONALD MAGINNIS ARCHITECT BZA Page 20 of 21

21 BZA Page 21 of 21