GOVERNMENT & ACCOUNTABILITY
The Fourth Circuit found the Board of Zoning Adjustments reconsidered a denied variance in a way its own rules did not allow. On August 17, the 75-unit project returns to the board it started with.
By Kim M. Braud | August 10, 2026
The Board of Zoning Adjustments will take up a 75-unit apartment proposal at 1100 Sere Street on Monday, August 17. It is the same request the board first heard in February 2024. It is back because an appeals court found the board broke its own parliamentary rules to approve it.
The Louisiana Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal ruled on March 4, 2026, that the 2024 approval could not stand. It vacated that decision and ordered the board to issue a new one that matches the vote it took first. That first vote was a denial.
Encampment St., LLC wants to build a multi-family development on a triangular 1.15-acre lot bounded by Encampment Street and Interstate 610, in an Educational Campus District. To do it, the developer asked the board for two waivers: permission to build on 1.15 acres where the ordinance requires 2, and 71 parking spaces where it requires 75.
What happened in the room
On February 19, 2024, board member Tamara Agins moved to approve both waivers with staff conditions. Jason Richards seconded. The motion failed, two votes to three. A variance needs four concurring votes to pass, so under the board's own rules that failure was a denial.
Then Richards raised what the record calls an "alternative motion." Chairperson Candice Forest allowed it. Richards moved to grant the lot-size waiver, add a traffic-study condition, and deny the parking waiver. That motion carried, five votes to one. The board's written decision, recording the second vote, was filed February 28, 2024.
The problem is who was allowed to reopen the vote. Under Robert's Rules of Order, which the board follows where its own procedures are silent, only a member who voted on the prevailing side of a motion may move to reconsider it. The first motion failed, so the prevailing side was the side that voted no. Richards had voted yes. He was not entitled to bring it back.
The BZA committed a legal error.
The court's language was direct. By allowing the second vote, it wrote, the board "committed a legal error and deprived the public of having an opportunity for a fair hearing under the applicable parliamentary rules."
There was a second flaw. Richards's motion to reconsider was never seconded or taken up by the full board before the chair moved straight to its merits. Neither the neighbors nor any member of the public was given a chance to object before the second vote proceeded.
Why the procedure carried the case
Zoning boards get deference from the courts. Their decisions are presumed valid, and judges do not second-guess whether a given variance is wise. What courts will police is whether a board followed the rules it set for itself. Here the Fourth Circuit never reached the question of whether 75 units belong at 1100 Sere. The procedure decided the appeal on its own.
The court leaned on a 2003 case, Old Carrollton Neighborhood Association, for the principle that procedural errors can change substantive outcomes, and that setting aside a valid vote can be a due-process violation for the neighbors who opposed a variance. Disregarding the first vote, the court wrote, "gives the appearance that a certain result was desired by the Board."
The neighbors who brought the challenge are the Pilotland Neighborhood Association and five residents of the abutting subdivision. They opposed the waivers over density, congestion, traffic, and the size of the lot. A district court sided with the board in April 2025 before the Fourth Circuit reversed.
What the return actually decides
The August 17 hearing is not a fresh look at the merits. The agenda lists 1100 Sere under unfinished business and repeats the court's instruction: issue a decision in line with the February 19 vote. That vote was a denial. The board's resolution on the matter is due by August 27.
The board that returns to the case is not the one that decided it. Richards is still seated. Forest is still chair. The two members who helped form the five-to-one majority are no longer among the board's members, and two of the seven seats sit vacant. A variance still requires four concurring votes, and five members are currently seated.
A denial does not necessarily end the project. The one-year window that once barred the board from rehearing the same request has long since passed, which leaves the developer free to file again. What the remand settles is narrow but real. The approval the developer has relied on since 2024 no longer exists.
How to follow this
The Board of Zoning Adjustments hears the matter Monday, August 17, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. in the City Council Chamber, 1300 Perdido Street, first floor. 1100 Sere Street is Item 1, Docket BZA011-24, under Variances, Unfinished Business.
Any member of the public may speak. Fill out a speaker card and place it in the box provided. Comment on a variance is limited to two minutes.
The board's written resolution is due by August 27, 2026, and will be posted at onestopapp.nola.gov. A decision may be appealed to the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans within 30 days of its filing. The project planner of record is Valerie Goines, Valerie.Goines@nola.gov.
The meeting streams at cityofno.granicus.com and airs on Cox Channel 6 in Orleans Parish.
Verify it yourself
- Fourth Circuit opinion: Pilotland Neighborhood Association v. City of New Orleans, No. 2025-CA-0563 (La. App. 4 Cir. Mar. 4, 2026). LINK
- August 17, 2026 BZA final agenda, Item 1. LINK
- February 19, 2024 BZA hearing video, Granicus. LINK
Kim M. Braud is the Founder & Editor of Evans Cutchmore Press, an independent newsroom covering Louisiana and the Gulf South. Her reporting focuses on government accountability, infrastructure, business, culture, and the public policies that shape communities. Her work combines investigative journalism, public records research, and documentary storytelling.
© 2026 Evans Cutchmore Press. All rights reserved.
