Coastal zone management plan 1975

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~bt.

AI~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I ~~COAST-A( SE '[Cg~'CENTERNAACasa
22M4,SO TH'-H'088SONAVENUE:. .
* Ct'~~AR1I&TON, Qo. 29405-24 1'3 Ni r g tr t1a

,Property of CSC, Librazyco

I VATT1MT~~~~~~. ~~-Sr1MMAr? REPOIRT

COASTAL. ZONE MANAhJ3MHNT PLAN

For 7be

CITY OF NEW ORLEANS'

VOLUME II I

SUMMARY VOLUME

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF NEW ORLEANS

MAYOR

COUNCILMAN-AT-LARGE
JOSEPII V. DIROSA
* ~~JAMES A. MOREAU

DISIRICT COUNCILMEN

FRANK FRIEDLER DISTRICT A
A. L. DAVIS DISTRICT B
I] ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CLARENCE 0. Dupuy. JR. DISTRICT C
JOHN D. LAMBERT, JR. DISTRICT D
I] I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PHILIP C. CIACCIO DISTRICT P.

CITY' PLANNING COMMISSION OF NEW ORLEANS

MEMBERS

WILLIAM B. BARNETT
CHAIRMAN
H. MORTIMER FAVROT, JR.
VICE -CHAIRMAN

ERNEST COLBERT, JR. CHARLES GRANDIIOUCHE

ANTHONY GENDIJSA PAUL MONTELEPRE

ALBERTIj. SAKUTO AUGUST PEREZ, JR.

ACKNOWLEDG EMENT

Tile City Planning Commission expresses its appreciation for their
assistance in the preparation of this report to Dr. J. Richard ShenkeJ,
Assistant Professor of Anthropology and Supervisor of Archaeology at the
University of New Orleans, and to R. Collins Vailee, John Hammond, J. Ross
Vincent, Dr. Sherwood Gagllano and Mrs. Bethlyn McCloskey. Dr. Shenkel
donated his time and resources to the City and identified the Archaeological
Sites shown In this report.

The Planning Commission also wishes to thank all those agencies,
organizations and individuals providing comments and advice In connection
with this report.

PREFACE
Loulsiana Stream Control Commission
. i, Louisiana Chapter, American Institute of Planners
This report was prepared to guide the City of New Orleans In the Metropolitan New Orleans, Section, American Institute of
attainment of the following goals: Planners
Am erlcan Society of Planning Officials
1. The maintenance of a high level of quality within estuary areas in Sierra Club, Delta Chapter
the City of New Orleans; Ecology Center of Louisiana, Inc.
Environmental Committee, Goals for Louisiana
2. the formulation of land use policies and management techniques Department of Environmental Affairs, University of New Orleans
appropriate to marsh-estuary areas; New Orleans, Center for Housing and Environmental Law
Tulane University, Environmental Action Committee
3. the formulation of an energy policy which does not adversely Impact Coastal Resources Unit, Center of Wetland Resources,Louislana
the environment; State University
Engineering Sciences Environmental Center, Tulane University
4. the provision of adequate open space and recreational areas for the School of Engineering
benefit of the citizens of the City of New Orleans, and the State of Louisiana; ' Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Tulane University
of Public Health and Tropical Medicine
5. to protect and maintain In perpetuity, the economic and ecologic Chamber of Commerce of the Greater New Orleans Area
resources of tile natural environment; Regional Planning Commission of Jefferson, Orleans, St.
Bernard and St. Tammany Parishes
6. coordination of governmental agencies, In the management of sensi- State of Louisiana, Office of State Planning
tive environmental areas; and, New Orleans Junior Chamber of Commerce
Young Men's Business Club of New Orleans
7. the establishment of land use guidelines and development priorities Louisiana State Parks and Recreation Commission
In estuary areas. New Orleans City Council, Budget Analyst and Research
New Orleans Chief Administrative Office
In order to receive as much input as possible from governmental agencies, New Orleans Department of Electronic Data Processing
civic groups, and the general public, this plan is being circulated to the agencies New Orleans Department of Finance
and organizations listed below and Is available to the general public upon re- New Orleans Department of Fire
!4 i quest. Prior to official consideration of this plan, at least one public hearing New Orleans Department of Law
will be held. New Orleans Department of Police
New Orleans Office of Policy Planning and Analysis
Agencies and Organizations from whom comments have been solicited: New Orleans Department of Property Management
New Orleans Department of Recreation
Mayor, City of New Orleans New Orleans Department of Safety & Permits
New Orleans City Council New Orleans Department of Sanitation
Forest Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture New Orleans Department of Streets
U. S. Army, Corps of Engineers New Orleans Department of Utilities
. Office of Coastal Environments, National Oceanic and Atmos- New Orleans Department of Welfare
pheric Administration New Orleans Office of Civil Defense
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, U. S. Department of interior New Orleans Board of Health
Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, U. S. Department of Board of Commissioners Orleans Levee District
Interior Board of Commissioners Port of New Orleans
Li: Loulsiana Society of Landscape Architects Orleans Parish School Board
Louisiana Air Control Commission Public Library Board
Environmental Protection Unit, Louisiana Attorney General's Sewerage & Water Board
Office Audubon Park Commission
Louisiana Conservation Department Civil Service Commission
Li
a1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

j ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PAGE

Acknowledgement ..... ..........~.......
Preface........ . ... ...........

Contento..................I....

SECTION

I INTRtODUJCTION .. . .. .... . . . . .. .1.
if PROBLEMS &RECOMMENDATIONS ..... .... 2

~~~~I n 11 PILOGUE.., .

Appendix' .....~ . . '4

a-,
Li
13
1

Volumes I and it described the geologic development of Southern 1. The need to expand the economic base of the City of New Orleans.
Louisiana Including the area upon which the City of New Orleans Is situated. This need s attested to in the community Renewal Program pre-
Over a period of 5, 000 years, the Mississippi River deposited its load of slits pared under the auspicles of the City Planning Commission with the
and clays which formed natural levee ridges and adjacent swamps and marshes. assistance of Larry Smith & Company. Additonally, the city's
economic problems have been restated by Dr. James Bobo In his
Prehistoric Indians, the first men to Inhabit the area, left archaeological recent study entitled, "The New Orleans Economy; Pro Bono Publico".
evidence of their tenure on the natural levee ridges. Just as the colonists did
after them, both lived off of the abundance of seafood and wildlife o 2. The need to provide additiona flood protection for both residents and
Pontchartrain and Borgne, and connecting estuarine marsh areas which sur- property owners of the City of New Orleans. This need is being
rounded these limited grounds. pursued In accordance with plans, or modifications thereof, as pre-
pared by the U.S. Corps of Engineers concerning flood protection In
Since the French founded the City of New Orleans in 1718, the City has the New Orleans Metropolitan area.
steadily extended its limits from the natural levee ridges into once productive
swamps and marshes. These areas were not well suited for development be- 3. The need to retain and Increase middle Income families within the
cause of poor soils and drainage. Likewise, while swamps and marshes were Central City area of New Orleans. Failure to achieve this would
developed, valuable habitat for fish and wildlife disappeared potentially en- mean the continuation of a declining central city population with an
dangerlng the future of the city's seafood and sport industry and correspondingly increasing percentage of lower income and elderly families who
thile City's unique lifestyle. would demand Increased services. Declining central cities also
become target areas of heavy traffic and crime as reported In the
Although productive estuarine areas have been lost due to urbanization, study entitled "Growing and Declining Urban Areas: A Fiscal Com-
parlson" published by the Land Institute and prepared by Thomas
housing and economic opportunities have been created for the New Orleans
populus. At the same time, It is the development of former marsh and swamp Muller.
areas which has in part produced the unique New Orleans life style. New
Orleans Is now to the point that urbanization and environmental protection 4 The need to avoid the uncontrolled urban sprawl phenomenon. Costs
*must be balanced In the public Interest. associated with sprawl are documented in !!UD's publlcatlon "The
Cost of Sprawl". This need can be met by developing a reasonably
Today, little remains of the natural setting of the pre-Victorian City of compact urban area. In the case of New Orleans this could be
New Orleans. Yet, that which remains Is a highly viable and productive eco- accomplished by both preservation and rehabilitation of the older
system which Is a part of the Lakes Maurepas-Pontchartrain-Borgne estuary city and limited expansion to accommodate new growth, both In
complex. The map on the following page depicts the relationship of the City population and In economic opportunities. Therefore, In order for
of New Orleans to this estuary complex. This estuary complex yields approxl- urban areas toremaln viable It is imperative that newareas be
mately 25% of Louisiana's fisheries harvest. This fact is especially signifi- allowed to develop In order to allow for controlled residential and
cant because Louisiana's coastal marshes produce approximately one-third industrial expansion.
of the nation's fisheries harvest.
The region has not seen urban sprawl in any degree comparable to other
It Is Important therefore, that the City of New Orleans, the State of communities due to the fact that transportation requirements and reclamatioi
Louisiana and the nation formulate management programs to ensure that pro- processes have tended to limit this phenomenon. However, some symptoms
ductive estuarine areas, especially those described above, and other natural of this have been occurring on the Mississippi Gulf Coast and the Florida and
areas, maintain their ecological integrity. Equally Important Is the need to river parishes. Failure to provide for this growth In a contained and managed
2 accommodate additional growth in a planned and managed manner that will be urban pattern will encourage sprawl with possibly a more debilitating effect
responsive to the balanced needs of the City and the affected natural areas. on the total environment,

Although the primary emphasis of this report deals with coastal zone The remaining sections of this report discuss the developmental and
issues, they must be considered In balance with social, economic and other environmental needs of the City of New Orleans and will outline specific re -
factors as well as in the total environmental setting. This total view reflects commendations for accomplishing the goals expressed In the Preface to this
the following four major considerations. report within the constraints contained in this chapter.

X:-

IP~wb~en aolutions

2 Volumes I and 11 of this study demonstrated that the New Orleans area Area I
has an abundance ot natural resources. These resources, In tura, present
both natural constraints and challenging opportunities to the community. The Those camps located along Hayne Boulevard between the Lakefront i
[]: extent to which the community is dedicated to the task of conserving and pro- Airport and Paris Road are located on public property and thus limit
perly managing Its resources will determine how well It responds to existing public access to lake waters. The Board of Commisslonere of the New
natural constraints and how well It takes advantage of its limitless opportunities, Orleans Levee District has already adopted a policy prohibiting the
'Foremost among the tasks at hand are properly Identifying, measuring and issuance of permits for additional camp construction. Although this Is
At jjdsolving the major problems which threaten to limit or destroy these natural a significant action, it does not alleviate the current problem. There
resources. Problems sulh as unstable soils, water pollution, erosion, flood are two options available within the general police powers of the various
potential, destruction of archaeological sites, to mention but a few, are well public agencies to obtain relief. The first would consist of a mandatory
documented and require immediate attention. Some of these problems re requirequirement that each camp be connected to the municipal sewerage !
Intermediate or longer range approaches. Additionally, some problems must system which is available in the area; the second alternative would be
be dealt with by both short and long term actions, to require the removal of these camps.
The following sections define the problems derived from this study and Area I - Recommendation:
propose remedial actions. All these recommendations must be pursued with
equal diligence If New Orleans Is to effectively solve its major environmental In view of the public ownership of the land, the emerging develop-
problems. , If left unattended, these problems may Intensify and threaten future ment of the Lake Forest area and a corresponding Increase in demand i
remedial attempts-actions which may prove more difficult and costly. for a variety of recreational opportunities, the Board of Commissioners i
This report presents both the problems and recommendations in text of the Orleans Levee District should notify and grant all camp owners
ad This report presents both the problems and recommendations In text an eighteen (18) month period In which to terminate the use of, and re-
and in Illustrative map form as well. These maps are contained In the envelope move, said camps.
at the rear of the report. The reader In urged to review these maps In con-
6: junction with the text for maximum understanding of this material. Area 11
The following is a list of major problems identified by this study and A second area of camps Is located along and in the wetlands
recommendations dealing with those problems. Though in sequential form, no adjacent to U.S. Highways 11 and 90. It should be recognized that these
priority ranking of those problems is Intended. camps serve either as residences or as recreational structures unique
to this area. This characteristic should not be eliminated. Yet, unless
PROBLEM: Lake Pollution modified. It will continue to have a detrimental effect on the wetlands
through the direct discharge of untreated sewage into the wetlands and
Pollution of the water in Lake Pontchartrain is a problem affecting both associated waterways. Additionally, uncontrolled expansion of fishing
wildlife and consumers of wildlife. Furthermore, pollution of the lake iBe camp communities into these wetlands, even with proper sewage dis -
potential hazard to the health of swimmers and thus limits the lake's use as posal facilities, could have a detrimental effect. This issue will be
a recreational resource. Three major sources of lake pollution have been dealt with more extensively In a later section of this report.
identified; they are:
-;, Options available to solve the pollution caused by existing camps
a) camps lacking adequate sewage disposal systems, In wetland areas Include either the provision of municipal sewerage
b) municipal storm water discharges from urban drainage systems, and, facilities (possibly a very expensive option), demolition of the camps,
c) direct sewage and other contaminate discharges from boats. or the placement of holding tanks to service individual structures, or i
other acceptable forms of technology (e. g. facilities such as incinerator
A. FISHING CAMPS: toilets, which cost between $300 and $900, and which eliminate the
most prominent source of lake pollution). I
The problem associated with the camps Is that they are not connected
to municipal sewerage facilities and usually do not have approved alternative Untreated sewage discharge is not untque to the City of New
sewage disposal systems. For 'reasons expressed In this report, the camp Orleans but is readily observable In many of the parishes within the
problem Is presented In three areas as follows: total estuary system. Therefore, the prime responsibility for correction
of such a problem should rest with the State of Louisiana. State programs
should reflect strenuous regulatory measures for all similar conditions

2 k

i 'i

In all parishes and programs of relief, as well as enforcement, should A 111 dton
Area III - Re'commendation:
:::.a | likewise be applied equitably.
,~:,.>rArea 11 - Recommendations Because Area 1I Is somewhat unique as compared to Areas I and
V Area I - Recommendations:
II both short and long range recommendations are made. The goal of
:- Within six months the Loulslana Ilealth and Human Resources these recommendations Is to allow continuance of these camps until
3:,; Administration and the New Orleans Sewerage and Water Board should such time as their sites are required for public purposes.
determine which camps can be served by existing sewers and into which
areas existing sewers can be reasonably extended. Where connections The Louisn ana Health and Human Retorces Administration
to existing sewer lines can be realized, financial provisions should be shld, within a six month period, establish the specifications for an
made to extend such facilities to ensure that the camps would connect chnology and within
with the provided sewer lines. Provision of sewer facilities for this one year the building code of the City of New Orleans should be amended
area of New Orleans alone Is estimated at $3, 5620, 00. This burden to require Installation of the acceptable sewerage disposal device.
should not be imposed on one parish and not on other parishes. There- I
-:1j ~ fore the State should adopt both regulations as well as a financial In the long term, the area n which these camps are located
assistance program and ensure Implementation. Financing of sewer should be acquired for public purposes.
connections should be accomplished in an equitable manner. Where such.
provisions cannot be accomplished, the Louisiana HIealth and human
Resources Administration should, within the same six month period, B. STORM WATER:
establish the specifications for an Incinerator type disposal system, or
X* other acceptable technology, and within one year the Building Code of rges carr
the City of New Orleans as well as those of other parishes should be pollutants from developed areas in both Orleans Parlsh and other parishes
amended to require all new construction in areas not serviceable by surrounding Lake Pontchartrain. Most notable of these pollutants are fecal
~iI ! public sewers to include such a disposal technology and to require existing bacteria and viruses ndicated by te presence of high concentrations of
:;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E. Colt bacteria . As in the case of camps, fecal bacteria creates health
structures to be retrofitted with such facilities. Where sewer facilities
are available, camp owners should be required to connect with sewer
lines, at their own expense, within one year or be required to remove chartraln.
.� i ~ their structure.
The Sewerage and Water Board of the City of New Orleans Instituted a
s Area fil program to treat storm water on an experimental basis in the London and
Orleans Avenue Canals, the Seventeenth Street Canal and at the St. Charles
A third area of camps Is located along the south shore of Lake Canal. Cost of the program was borne by a demonstration grant obtained from
A third area of camps is located along the south siore of LakePh
Pontchartraln adjacent to the Southern Railroad right-of-way between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This cost was approximately
Point Aux Herbes and Paris BRoad. These canlps sihare the characteristics 9$706, 500, excluding the cost of chemicals, and was conducted over a six year
of those camps In both Areas I and 11. Like the camps in Area I, these period The program met with a reasonable level of success; however, cur-
camps lack approved sewerage disposal systems and therefore contrai- tallment of the federal funds led to the discontinuance of the project. Here
0 bute to the pollution of Lake Pontchartraln. As is the case with the again this source of pollution Is not limited to Orleans Parish but applies to
camps in Area II1, many of those camps are located on private property.
However, as the City continues to develop, greater benefit may accure
to the public if the area is brought under public ownership. Area I is Recommendations:
/J adjacent to the now developing Lake Forest area, and therefore is
immediately needed for recreational purposes. Area II1, while now e State of Louisiana, through the Louisiana Healt
sources Administration, should within one year, adopt strenuous regulations
being relatively inaccessible, will be needed for recreational purposes
In the future as New Orleans East develops. Until New Orleans East
In thle future as New Orleans East develops. Until New Orleans East and a program to preclude biological pollutants from entering tie Lake Pont-
develops however, Area ilI camps can be allowed to remain provided chartrain Basin through storm drainage systems. Responsibility for corn-
that pollution eminating from these camps Is abated . pliance should be on each local parish or be assumed solely by the State of
Louisiana. The cost for such a program In Orleans Parish alone is estimated
*|~~~~~~~~~ I ~~~~~~~~~~at $7,500, 000 annually assuming existing outfall canals can be used without
modification. Tlis figure Includes an annual cost for amortization of expen-
*I at gr 0 0 aul asmn itn ufl nl a sD without

'~7.UL~~i."-. L:1- -_j ^1- =-- i e o a-: ^- 9 a t? ----. .t -

sive equipment necessary for the treatment of storm water and also the cost Salt water intrusion Into the Mississippi River is a natural occurrence
of chemicals. associated with river discharge volumes which vary seasonally. Channell-
zation and levee projects necessary for both navigation and .flood protection,
C. BOAT DISCHARGES: however, have altered natural processes, thus aggravating the salinity In-
truslon problem. As a result, salt water ia intruding farther and farther up-
Lake Pontchartraln also receives bacterial and viral pollutants through river.
:] the discharge of sewage by commercial and private water craft, Such dise-
charges are unjustifiable given present technology. Salt water Intrusion into the Mississippi River is potentially a significant
threat because the river Is the source of potable water for the City of New
Recommendation: Orleans. The salt water wedge is approaching municipal water intake locations,.
i.r and municipal water purification facillties are not equipped to purify saline
Within one year, the Loulalana Health and Human Resources Administra- water. It is unclear whether salt water would eventually foul city water it
tion and the Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission should jointly de- supplies, however the possibility should not be Ignored.
termine acceptable means for the disposal or treatment of sewage on water
craft. Within one year following such a determination the installation of such The Sewerage and Water Board of New Orleans has initiated a program
sewerage disposal or treatment equipment on all water craft equipped with to providefor an additional water. Intake further up the Mississippi River. The
heads should be required. All marinas should further be required, within the intake relocation-is primarily to provide supplementary water supplies and to
same time period, to submit and have approved plans to install facilities for ensure a source of potable water in the event that the existing primary water p
the transfer of sewage wastes into approved land based disposal systems. Intake Is damaged. The estimated cost of this project Is approximately i8. 5
million.
PROBLEM: River Pollution
Recommendation:
Pollution of the Mississippi River Is derived from three sources:
Since the overall problem has been recognized and a solution Is being
a. municipal sewage discharges; diligently pursued It is recommended that the present course of action be
b. agricultural and Industrial wastes, and, continued. It Is recommended that the goal of the Federal Water Pollution '
c. salt water Intrusion from the Gulf of Mexico. Control Act should be vigorously pursued and all regulations pursuant to the �
act should be strictly enforced.
Municipal, industrial, and agricultural discharges are the products of
human activity. The pollution problem in this regard Is ' addressed by the It Is further recommended that EPA make available to all local governing
Federal Water Pollution Control Act which requires the elimination of pollution bodies the same levels of funding as made available to the City of New
discharges by the early 1980'S. Orleans for sewage treatment facilities and impose similar timetables for
Implementation. Further, EPA should vigorously pursue the implementation
Industrial and agricultural pollution of the Mississippi River Is docu- of compliance measures to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
imented and the Incidence and concentrations of heavy metals and pesticides
are attested to in numerous reports published by the U. S. Environmental It is further recommended that the Sewerage & Water Board proceed
Protection Agency. Vigorous enforcement of regulations pursuant to the expeditiously to construct an additional water Intake to ensure that the City's
Federal Water Pollution Control Act should minimize this problem by the water supply Is not interrupted.
Congressional target year 1983.
PROBLEM: Flooding
The Sewerage and Water Board of New Orleans with U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) grant assistance. Is currently constructing secondary The threat of floods has traditionally plagued New Orleans. Not only Is
sewage treatment facilities. These facilities, costing approximately $3a the threat of flooding a problem, but measures designed to reduce the threat
million, will effectively eliminate the discharge of municipal effluents Into the often create additional problems. Specific problem areas related to flooding
Mississippi River from the City of New Orleans. If EPA were to make comr- Include:
parable levels of funding available to other Louisiana parishes bordering the
Mississippi River and to all counties along the river above Louisiana, and 1. Areas exterior to the levee system which are subject to normal tidal
* mandate the construction of sewage treatment facilities In these areas, inundation;
river pollution could be satisfactorily controlled. 2. Areas internal to the levees, and;
4 , 3. The flood protection system itself.

I ' 4

A. Areas Outside the Levees: acreages of wetland and encourages development in such areas. Additionally,
by leveeing wetlands, economic losses occur by reducing wildlife and fisheries
Areas subject to normal tidal unundatlon are outside of the hurricane habitat and production. Wetlands also buffer storm tides and reduce hurricane
protection system and are as yet substantially undeveloped. Problems damage. On the other hand, flood protection Is needed for a population of over
associated with these areas are discussed under the "Wetland Development one million residing around the shores of Lake Pontchartrain. The cost in lives
Pressures" section. and property should severe flooding occur would be astronomical and therefore
flood protection works designed to protect currently developed areas should
B. Areas Within the Levees: be encouraged. At the present time, existing levees provide flood protection
to developed areas of the City of New Orleans to the extent of about 100 year
Areas subject to storm-related flooding include all lands in Orleans storm probability. Additionally, new hurricane protection works have been
Parish wichl are not only exterior to the hurricane protection system but also authorized by Congress and are now In the planning stage, which would extend
certain other areas internal to the levee system. The problem areas Internal such protection to the approximate level of a 200 year storm.
to the existing levee system are Identified on the maps accompanying this re-
port. Protection from flooding In these areas is accomplished by existing The proposed Lake Pontchartrain and vicinity Hurricane Protection Plan
levees and by the City's drainage system. The City of New Orleans depends includes the construction of flood control structures at the Chef Menteur Pass
heavily on its levees and pumping stations. In the older areas of the city, and at The Rigolets. These structures are essentially tide gates designed to
pumping stations could be flooded and become inoperable should the levee reduce tidal surges in Lake Pontchartrain. There is concern that the con-
system fall. Levee failure itself could be disastrous even If the pumps re- structlon of these control structures will restrict the interchange of water be-
main operable since the drainage system could not remove water as quickly tween Lakes Pontchartrain and Borgne and slow water circulation and prevent
as it enters the city via a break in the levee. Although the New Orleans benthic organisms from entering Lake Pontchartrain. Discussions with the U. S.
Sewerage & Water Board Is now constructing raised pumping stations, older Corps of Engineers, however, reveal their Intent to enlarge the control
pumps have neither been replaced nor raised. The Sewerage & Water Board, structures from previous dimensions so as to maintain a 90% natural tidal
however, Is now in the process of upgrading existing older pumping stations. flow and to design the structure's sills so as not to Create a barrier to the rI
This should be accomplished and costs for this project estimated by the movement of benthic organisms through the passes.
Sewerage & Water Board are $2, 880. 000. This project should "flood proof"
pumping stations through the renovation of electrical systems and the provision Recommendations: t
of water proof emergency electrical sources. Correspondingly, it should be
noted that some levees are not up to project design elevations and therefore 1. That levee construction be restricted to those areas that have some
should be raised. This should apply to all levees in the area, Including river protection now and which would permit some reasonable amount of growth.
levees.
2. That construction of the Lake Pontchartrain and vicinity Hurricane
Recommendations: Protection Plan Control Structures should proceed, assuming a 9A0 tidal inter-
change can be maintained in the affected passes.
1. As planned, all existing floodable pumping stations should be reno-
vated in such a manner as to raise electrical components above projected 3. That flood protection, to a project storm level of 200 years, be
flood levels. All pumping stations should be equipped with independent gene- provided.
rators for emergency use.
PROBLEM: Wetland Development Pressures
2. All levees protecting the city should be elevated to project height
and adequately maintained to ensure that failures do not occur, and there Wetlands are under several types of development pressures. These
should be assurance that there will be continued financial support for the pro- pressures Include:
grams of the New Orleans Sewerage & Water Board and Board of Commissioners
of the Orleans Levee District. (A) Expansion of urban development.
(B) Expansion of fishing camp developments.
C. Flood Protection System: (C) Mineral exploration activities.

A third problem associated with flooding Is the provision of flood pro- Wetland areas subject to development pressures are exterior to the
tection while, at the same time, avoiding or minimizing adverse environmental levee system and are also prone to regular flooding through normal tidal
effects. The construction of levees around undeveloped areas destroys vast action. If development is to be accommodated in these areas, building eleva-

t tions must be of sufficient height to avoid flooding both during normal high tides 1, Seek public purchase of those properties most subjected to severe
and also during tropical storms. In order to accopish this, buildings must development pressures and where the ecological system Is most strained;
either. be constructed on elevated platforms or lots must be filled to proper
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~elevation. ~2. Adopt regulations that will permit minimal development in areas
which are not experiencing severe development pressures In a masnner that
Another technique for avoiding flooding Is the construction of levees. will not unduly strain ecological systems ad not simultaneously cream
Both extensive filling and levee construction destroy viable wetlands and legal impediments.
therefore should be discouraged In areas beyond the limits of those already
constructed. Solely from an environmental conservation viewpoint, all It th dual aproacwhich reflected n th oatage-
development and construction should be prohibited In unleveed areas. This meat Plan for the City of New Orleans.
viewpoint, however, creates a conflict which must be resolved.
Recommendations:
As alluded to In the foreword, there are few options left to the City 1, A. Undeveloped and unleveed wetland areas currenty subject to severe
except to contemplate a reasonable level of continued development (develop- At pee nd eIediel bro nt ublc w er
ment needed should the city elect to retain and increase its percentage of
: - went needed should the city elect to retain and Increase ite percentage of development pressures should be Immediately brought into public ownership,
middle income families residing in Its geographical limits). A ceased develop- Areas recommended for acquisition Include:
ment program could result In a further population decline, leaving a citizenry
composed of the elderly, the handicapped, and low Income or unemployed (I) The unieveed wetlands west of Chef lenteur Pa8a east of
U. S. Highway It, north of Bayou Sauvage but excluding the South Point/Irish
families. This would require a sharp Increase In the demand for services Bayou area and its camps.
with an erosion In the ability to financially support these demands.
Another alternative would be to contain development and increase density
* within the developed sections of the city. This approach has not met with (it) The area between the Chef Menteur Pass and The Rigoets
positive response from the citizenry. but is recognized that those areas capable excluding those properties Immediately adjacent to U. S Highway 90, subject
to the retention of all mineral rights and leases by the current owners.
-; of sustaining increased density (such as Algiers, Uptown, Mid -City, and Lake- mineral rights and leases by the current ow
front areas) have zealously resisted zoning proposals permissive of an in-
creased density. Many other areas, such as Central City, Marigny, the
Garden District, Treme' and Algiers Point, not only have reflected a decline (lii) Remalinng undeveloped parces exterior to the le
in population, but have expressed Interest in stabilizing the area at a residentialuird as fiscal rsources become available,
density below that currently permitted. This Is reflected In the current
Interest in historical zoning districts and historic districts for architectural
B. The cost for the total program above could possibly exceed $15
million. The State Coastal Zone Management Plan should reflect these acqul-
tAnother ption would foster the growth of the metropolitan area outside itons and should outline steps for their Inclusion into the public domain. Once
Another option would tooter the growth of the metropolitan area outside-- acquited, the wetlad area should be preserved, ad in some instances
any environmentally sensitive areas. Tis concept, however, in the absence acquired the weand areas should be preserved, and I some nstances
of strong regulatory measures where such development may occur, would developed as limited recreational sites for the State e benefit in keeping with
tend to foster urban sprawl with the possibility of a more deleterious effect their natural condition.
on the total environment and a worsening of current transportation problems.
This has already been evidenced by development moving Into fringe areas
1j where land is cheaper because of excluded pre -service costs, and less re - may not be acquired in the immediate future should be subject to development
restrictions incorporating the following standards (see appendix ).
strictive construction standards which reduce building costs. restrictions corporating the following standards see appendix
(I) Not more than 5% of a tract or lot area may be devesyped.
The ability to prevent or effectively limit the development of wetlands (1) Not more than 5% of a tract or lot a roe y be developed.
by regulatory action raises serious legal Issues, and such efforts nay be con- All construction shall be elevated (to prohibit major restrict
trary to basic tenents of law imbedded In the state as well as the national of water flow) above flood elevations and oud aow sulig
cnstitution: "Confiscation without just compensation". Furthermore, total to penetrate underneath the structures
w w ol i(it) Limit, If not prohibit, any sewerage discharge Into wetland
prohibitions could eliminate camp activities which are a way of life unique to areas.
. iq coastal areas. A more realistic approach appears to be: (iv) Limit the disturbance of wetlands during and after construction.

94 6

significant impact on the environment. When considered collectively In highly
concentrated areas they do cause pollution problems, filling of wetlands, and
in some instances roadside blight Since camps have a part In the heritage and
character of Coastal Orleans Parish, it is recommended that existing camps
in the above be allowed to remain, but that they be upgraded by the recommen-
dations of this report.

I ncluded in the appendix Is the draft of a proposed amendment to the
zoning ordinance oriented to protect such areas but not to their utilization
wholly In private ownership. It is recommended that said proposal be reviewed
by all Interested groups and Individuals and formally be considered. -i

3. Mineral exploration activities should be strictly controlled by requiring that
pipelines utilize existing waterways where possible. When this is not feasible
canalb should be designed to accommodate multi-lines and should have environ-
mental measures (such as back-filling canals, etc. ) Incorporated In their plans.
The Building Code should be amended to require these features.

PROBLEMS: Faults

;9~ I The City of New Orleans and all of Coastal Louisiana Is In a tectonically
active region. The area Is underlain by several existing (Type A) faults and
probable (Type B) faults. (See map I for approximate location). The signi-
ficance of these faults, as to whether they do or do not represent a potential
danger, has not been determined.

Recommendation: ;

The State Coastal Zone Management Study should determine the significance
of these fault lines which may affect coastal Loulsiana and the New Orleans area
and if deemed necessary, initiate steps to prevent or reduce potential hazards.

PROBLEM: Soil Conditions

Many areas of the City of New Orleans, both developed and undeveloped,
are reclaimed wetlands having poor, unstable soils. Poor soils In the area
tend to subside when drained and necessitate periodic refilling of lots. Struc- :
tural damage to buildings and utilities may occur as a result of subsidence.
Little can be done to ameliorate problems In already developed areas, however,
the major impact of such subsidence has already occurred and acceptable com-
pensatory measures are being used. Alternative construction and/or develop-
ment techniques, however, can substantially reduce problems associated with
poor soil conditions These alternatives Include:

(a) Use of a wet drainage (open canals, lagoons, and small ponds) method
that lowers but maintains the water table at a specified level. The area being
developed would be drained and the water table drawn down to the desired level;
the land surface would then be allowed to subside to the point of becoming stable.
Once surface organic soils have stabilized, the area would be filled with mineral
soils and time would be allowed for stabilization. Only after a sufficient time
period has been provided for stabilization would development be permitted to
occur. 7
. t ' E F'~~~~~~~~

/8 ~~~~~~LEGEND
~~\ ~~ VAULTS WITH SURFACE 0ISPLACE
IFN ~ MNT.WT o APPARENT
87~~~~l rURFAOEMIS"LACEMEKT,
UvIN6SL71A.~AL... r4~ 04/ AXMAN ---C LAINEATON OI4 PROBABLE
m. gwrm0 SUBSURFACE FAULTS.

1-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~01

~~LA~QUEM1NESo

TRRE~~~~~~c~~~ffE 1M~~~~~~~~1r~~~~x I ~~~~~~LT LINES~~~~~~.0

PLANNING C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~oMISN.neW"REN.L.IPAEIISAEII~Ig

8~~~~07A4 Kna

preservable sites and the existence of, as yet, unknown sites.

(b) Traditional "dry" drainage filling of an area would occur but in , 2. Appropriate legislation should be enacted to ensure the protection
:L E lieu of building on a slab, buildings would be constructed on small piers, as and acquisition of major sites and the recovery of artifacts from other sites.
was the practice during earlier times, A desirable Improvement of this alter- When construction activity uncovers an archaeological site, the contractor
native would be the placement of piers over foundation caps and pilings. should be required to suspend operation for two days to allow for an archae-
ological examination. Should the site be of archaeological signlficance, the
(c) A third alternative would entail drainage and filling as currently State of Louisiana should Idemnify any losses due to a construction delay
practiced but would require that no construction take place until the major necessary to artifact recovery.
portion of anticipated subsidence has ceased.
PROBLEM: Erosion
;� r ~(d) A fourth alternative would entail drainage and filling as currently
lj practiced but surcharging the land with approximately six feet oif river sand to Rapid shoreline erosion along Lakes Pontchartrain and Borgne, especially
expedite the anticipated subsidence, between the Chef Menteur Pass and the Rigolets, is simultaneously destroying
productive wetlands and reducing land area dimensions. Erosion ultimately
r (e) A fifth alternative would be to encourage other land uses such as reduces the effectiveness of wetlands as a natural buffer to storm generated
open space and recreation for those sections which might be subject to the waves and causes a net loss In habitat vital to the production of nutrients sup-
most subsidence. portive of both commercial and sport fishing productivity. It is Important
therefore, to embark on an erosion abatement program Erosion can be stopped
Recommendation: or reduced through the employment of two alternative measures. First, the
shoreline can be stabilized by the placement of rip-rap or the construction of
1. The New Orleans Department of Safety and Permits should institute levees or seawalls. While this first alternative would prevent erosion, It
a study of alternative construction technologies to determine the best feasible would also restrict or prevent nutrients from flowing Into the eco-system and
construction techniques to be utilized In reclaimed wetland areas. thus might be more damaging than the erosion itselL The second alternative,
the construction of artificial barrier Islands, would reduce erosion without
2. The Sewerage & Water Hoard should conduct a study of alternative destroying the land-water Interface necessary to allow nutrients to disperse
drainage methods to determine which methods should be used In the leveed, Into the eco-system.
but undeveloped areas.
Recommendations:
PROBLEM: Loss or Damage to Archaeological Sites
1. Barrier Islands, where most needed and feasible, should be constructed
Orleans Parish is rich In archaeological heritage. Currently, 35 by the Corps of Engineers and the Board of Commissioners of the Orleans
archaeological sites are known to exist and local archaeologists believe that Levee District to prevent rapid shoreline erosion. These islands, once con-
at least that many more remain as yet undiscovered.Archaeological sites are structed, could be utilized as a recreational resource,
very valuable In terms of educational opportunity, local recreation, and as
tourist attractions. Construction activities, natural processes, and vandalism 2. It is further recommended that the State of Louisiana, as a part of
often destroy these valuable assets. Every effort should be made to preserve its Coastal Management Program, study the feasibility of diverting water from
these sites, and when preservation is not feasible to insure the recovery of the Mississippi River In order to restore eroding marsh areas in Orleans
their artifacts. Parish.

The New Orleans City Planning Commisslon and the Louisiana State PROBLEM: Lack of Statewide Coastal Zone Management Legislation and Co-
Parks and Recreation Commission are currently exploring the possible acqul- ordination
sition of two Important archaeological sites: Big and Little Oak Islands, both
of which are briefly described In Volume L Thle current property owner has Legislation:
offered these sites to the City of New Orleans. If acquired, these sites would
become important educational and recreational facilities and should be linked Several Coastal Zone Management bills have been introduced In the
together with a greenbelt or other open space feature (See map 2 ). State Legislature since 1973. The Legislature, however, has yet to act on
any such legislation,
Recommendation:
in order for a Coastal Zone Management Program to be effective In one
1. The State, as part of the Coastal Zone Management Study, should location, It must be a part of a regional or statewide program. Although this
conduct a survey of the entire city to determine the location of major
Ali X 9 ;�-

report is limited to Orleans Parish, many recommendations suggest aware-9. That the Commission formlate gidelines and spervisory proced-
ness on a larger or regional area if we are to obtain a reasonable level of monitor local governing bodies who wouldd p
protection of our coastal areas and not unduly burden those citizens of any one r toacpt
; t&'tjurisdiction, This Is Important because the fragile coastal eco-system Is ad administer nds and grants.
,:, ,,, affected by conditions and actions In other areas over which the affected juris-
.<~~di~~~~~cti~on has no control. (See map 3 )10. That tile Commission formulate guidelines and supervisory pro-
diction has no control. (See map 3 ). Therefore, statwide coordination
Is needed for any successful Coastal Zone Management Program. acquir e land. to

Recommendation on State Legislation: a
11. That an office of Coastal Zone Management within the Louisiana
It is recommended that the State Legislature adopt Coastal Zone Manage , Wildlife and Fisheries Commission be established to aid the State Planning
ment measures encompassing the following: Office with long-range planning functions and to aid Louisiana State Unlversll
nment measures encompassing the following:
:j with long-range research projects concerning the State's coastal zone. *l
1. That the State's Coastal Zone Management Program consist of three
12. That all coastal zone regulatory' functions be consolidated into a
programs: management, long range planning, and long range research, all . at all coastal one regulatory functons be consoldated nto a
under the supervision of a Coastal Resources Commission.
n ' 2. That the Coastal Resources Commission membership contain not 14. That the authority vested In the Commission become effective oneI
less than ten (10) members nor In excess of fifteen (15) members. upon adoption of a Coastal Zone Management Plan (or part thereof) and upon
adequate funding (both operational and capital) t permit plan mplementatio
3. That pariash Chief Executive Officers be authorized to designate a
representative to serve on the Coastal Resources Commission. Such designee
so represented be granted full membership powers with respect to Issues
affecting his parish. That the local representative have an initial veto over any To facilitate coordination on the local level It it recommended that I
proposal affecting said parish, with the veto capable of being over-ruled by the governing bodies establish coordinating councilsmade up of government offii
Commission on appeal after a 30 day delay and public hearing within the parish and representatives of appropriate academic disciplines. In the case of N! r
so affected. Orleans, it is suggested that the Planning Advisory Committee might be expanded
' <' so affected.
to include representatives of appropriate Federal and State agencies and aca
4.. That the Commission be granted the powers to promulgate rules, demic disciplines and therefore act as such a coordinating council. This c
4.'That the Commission be granted could act as a local clearinghouse for reviewing permit applications and iundLJ
regulations, criteria and standards to properly manage the Coastal Zone. o reieingpet aiation and
use proposals. This council could also coordinate the administration and en-
i- 5. That no rules, regulations, criteria, standards, etc. be promulgated - forcement of regulations or, at a minimum, serve as an advisory agent to t'
..< i which would affect existing rules, regulations, criteria, standards, etc. CityAdministrationandCityCouncil.a
governing previously leveed or drained areas.

6. That the Commission be granted the powers to establish goals,
priorities, and objectives for the Louisiana Coastal Zone after Input from local
governing bodies.

7. That local governing bodies be authorized to formulate, Inact, and
enforce local Coastal Zone Management plans which are formulated, enacted,
and enforced under State guidelines and supervision, and that such local plans
be incorporated into the State Coastal Zone Management Plan provided that such
local plans are consistent with the objective of the Act.

8. That the Commission formulate guidelines and supervisory procedures
to monitor local governing bodies who would be granted the power to hear and
rule on permit application. 1

i ,My~~'.j~~~~ I ~10
,y~i

E~~~~~~~~~l .~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~EGE

- - 4- - - - - - - - . - -4-~~IMATAL EGITER..
-~ -- - - -- .4- ***~ - .0 -.
4- - - 4-4-~4- 4-4-I4-4-AO.4-S.
* a - - - - - - 4- 4- 4- - .4. - 4- - .4- 4A-CHA4- -CA
YOM SITE-.-

- .4

-~~~~~~~~~~o RI

- -.i. *. J'ARCAEMOIC-AK RL EL~
PREPARED By THE CITY PLANNINS C O M M I S~~: SIO.NWRLASL.IPATE2or

LEGEND
{LJ L~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IAKE MAUREFASIPO#ITCHARTIRAIN/

.Co~~t~~1 ~~4@n~~ M ~~\f~m4~~fi~~t jono~ MARS ESTUARYCOPE
* - PREPARED DY THE CIT~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Y PANN OMSSO.NW RLNS LA PATEMBIsae ~~nt

12AAN

EEl

El
El
7]
El
El
El
dl
El

il@ae
LI

EPILOGUE:
Although Congress has in recent years reflected an interest in the lssu
This Coastal Zone Management Plan for the City of New Orleans establishes of land use, this has no materialized In any positive action. It Is strongly
a framework and direction from which to base additional study and Implementation urged that a major task force, highly representative of urbanized areas be
actions necessary to enhance the quality of the natural environment. The approach formed to evaluate existing programs and policies, to formulate goals and bb-
taken Is one which is designed to protect property owners while, at the same jectives, and to recommend legislation for the achievement thereof.
time, allow maximum human use of the natural environment In a way which
minimally disrupts the natural system. The recommendations of this report
should be utilized as a guide to future Coastal Zone Management decisions at . . .
all governmental levels.

This report should not signal the end of Coastal Zone Planning in New
Orleans, but rather this report should act as a stimulus for further studies
aimed at establishing an environmental management system.

Should this report, after due public hearings be determined to be In the
public Interest, the New Orleans City Planning Commission could consider Its
adoption as a report of the Commission and direct Its staff to do the following:

1. Use said report to guide and direct land use, development, and
capital program evaluations.

2. Seek councilmanic approval to consider amending the Zoning
Ordinance.

3. Pursue inclusion of necessary studies within the Coastal Zone
Management Study as well as studies called for by other agencies.

4. Pursue funding sources for Implementing recommendations contained
In this report.

5. Support necessary State Legislation to Implement the Coastal Zone
Management Program for the City of New Orleans.

Throughout this endeavor there has been an awareness of the multiplicity
of federal regulations Involved In Coastal Zone Management. This Included
Congressional Acts, departmental regulations, court rulings, and financial
programs. Many of these actions were conceived to relieve current problems
or to promote a more desirable environment. Yet there are distinct indications
that the collective Impact Is not attaining these goals and, In fact, may be con-
tributing to a move-in the opposite direction. Examples:

a) financial programs for single-family low density sprawl is readily
available, but financial programs for the maintenance and retention of the cur-
rent housing stock Is limited at best.

b) funds for highway construction are known to be budgeted and are
capable of being programmed, yet the bulk of existing transit funds are depen -
dent on inter-city competition and "grantsmanship".

c) large scale planned developments are subject to a multiplicity of re-
views and regulations, yet many small scale sprawl and piece-meal develop- 3
ments escape all but minimal reviews. 13
A~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1

ELi
N.
El

4
Apaxdicts

exposure to sunlight and rain, or will not disrupt the natural current and tidal
ORDINANCE flows, and that the area under the first floor elevation shall not be used for
storage purposes or parking of vehicles (less and except the mooring of a boat)
CITY OP NEW ORLEANS unless the natural ground elevation Is above the mean high tide; 4) that no filling
of the land and no excavation or dredging is permitted except as otherwise pro-
CITY HALL vided for in Section 30. 4 Permitted Conditional Uses; 5) that there is only a
minimal discharge of buman waste material into wetlands with provision for the
CALENDAR NO. installation of a holding tank or an electric head (reducer) as may be required
by the Department of Iealth: i

NO. MAYOR COUNCIL SERIES 1. Public and private open space areas, wildlife reservations, and
similar conservation projects.
BY:
2. Public or private fishing or hunting preserves.

AN ORDINANCE to amend Ordinance No. 4264 M. C. S. known and re- 3. Single family residences or fishing camps.
ferred to as the Comprehensive Zoning Law of the City of New Orleans, being
an Ordinance to protect and conserve the remaining natural and environmentally 4. Two family residences.
sensitive areas within the City of New Orleans to ensure a sound and wise balance
between their development and their preservation and continued viability as re- 5. Multi-family residences.
newable economic, recreation and open space resources through the creation of
a "CM-Coastal Management District". 6. Townhouses.

B SECTION 1. TnlE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS HERE- 7. Private clubs, lodges, and/or meeting halls, excepting those the
BY ORDAINS, tat Ordinance No. 4264 M. C. S., known and referred to as the the chief activity of which Is a service customarily carried on as a
Comprehensive Zoning Law of the City of New Orleans, be, and it is hereby business.
amended by Inserting In Article 5, the following section designated Section 30:
30. 3 Permitted Accessory Uses and Signs
SECTION 30. "CM-Coastal Management District".
1. Any accessory uses and sign permitted In RS-= and RS-2 Single
30. 1 Purpose of the District Family Residential Districts.

The purpose of this district Is to provide a classification for those 30. 4 Permitted Conditional Uses
coastal areas of a marsh, wetland, estuary or waterway nature which are in
a natural or pristine state or which have been minimally Impacted by man or In order to provide for certain uses, which may be desirable to be
the works of man; which, by their nature, provide refuge or habitat for species located in Coastal Management Districts but which because of their unique
of wildlife, fowl, and fisheries; or which provide or affect sources of sustenance characteristics may expose said area to strain, the City Council under the
for species of wildlife, fowl, and fisheries, either directly or indirectly; and provisions of Article 15 and specifically Section 2. 6 shall authorize the following
further to assure that land uses permitted In the district are consistent with conditional uses:
traditional development In these areas and are designed to ensure the continued
environmental and ecological viability of natural processes operating within the When it is determined by the City Council that such conditional uses
district. will promote the public welfare, public safety, and public health, and that the
proposal Is In general compatibility with adjacent or nearby land uses, appil-
30. 2 Permitted Uses cations for the following conditional uses shall be transmitted to the City
Planning Commission for a public hearing and action in accord with the provisions
A building or land shall be used only for the following purposes subject of Article 15 and subject to:
to: 1) a maximum lot coverage for all structures, of 5%; 2) the first floor ele-
vation shall meet the minimum elevation required under Chapter 32 of the Code a) a maximum lot coverage for all structures, of 5%0;
of the City of New Orleans, (Ord. 828 M. C, S. ) - Land Use and Control Measures; b) the first floor elevation shall meet the minimum elevation required
3) that the building or land use shall not totally Interfere with the land's under Chapter 32 of the Code of the City of New Orleans,
(Ord. 828 M. C. S. ) - Land Use and Control Measures;
14

'iii '~ c) that the building or land use shall not totally interfere with the land's
exposure to sunlight and rain, or will not disrupt the natural current
and tidal flows, and that the area under the first floor elevation shall Article 9. Regulations for Large-Scale Developments.
not be used for storage purposes or parking of vehicles (less and ex- Article 13. Board of Adjustments, Exceptions and Variances.
cept the mooring of a boat) unless the natural ground elevation is above Article 14. Definitions.
the mean high tide; Article 15. Administrative Provisions.
d) that no filling of tile land and no excavation or dredging is permitted
except as otherwise provided for In Section 30. 4 Permitted Conditional Article 3, Districts and District Maps.
Uses;
e) that there Is no discharge of human waste material Into wetlands with Under Special Districts include: CM-Coastal Management District
provision for the installation of a holding tank or an electric head
(reducer) as may be required by the Department of Health; Under Special Historic Districts Include:
f) compliance with the Performance Standards of Article 5, Section 20;
I MB R-1 and 2 llistoric Marigny Residential Districts
1. Any permitted use which may Involve excavation, dredging HIMC-I asnd 2 Historic Marigny Commercial Districts
or filling for any purpose.
'Sal ' 2. Those commercial uses, accessory uses and signs permitted Article 13, Board of Adjustments, Exceptions and Variances.
,X ~ In a B-I Neighborhood Business District.
3. Those Industrial uses, accessory uses and signs permitted Section 10 Special Exceptions.
In a LI Light Industrial District.
4. Mixed commercial/residential or mixed Industrial/residential Second paragraph: Delete In its entirety and substitute in lieu thereof:
uses, accessory uses and signs permitted in the B-1 and LI
5] i Ad Districts respectively. "Special Exceptions may not be granted for Conditional uses,
Large Scale Developments (Residential Planned Community,
30. 5 Height, Area and Bulk Requirements Shopping Center or Special Industrial) which are approved by
the City Council, or for Coastal Management District Permitted
The maximum height of structures Is 50 feet above mean sea level or Uses."
U ground elevation or 35 feet above the first floor elevation whichever Is the lesser.
Section 11o Variances.
30. 6 Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations
Item 3, delete In its entirety and substitute In lieu thereof:
; Where road access Is available, off-street parking spaces for residential r
uses shall be provided on a 1:1 ratio; i.e. 1 parking space for each dwelling unit "The development standards of Conditional Uses, Large-Scale Develop-
3 B (to be included In the 5% lot coverage). ments (Residential Planned Community, Shopping Center, or Special
Industrial District) and Coastal Management District Permitted Uses
1- Where road access Is available, off-street parking and loading spaces shall not be subject to waivers, variances or exceptions that could be
i for commercial and Industrial uses shall be provided for as Indicated In the granted under the provisions of Article X11I, Board of Zoning Adjustments.
;. W Tables of Article 7 and 8 for low density districts (to be Included In the 5% lot
7!-i [ coverage),

Where road access Is not available, off-street parking may be waived ' n. ,
or required at an off-site location where road access Is available.

30.7 Reference to Additional Regulations

The regulations contained In this Article are supplemented or modified
by regulations contained in other Articles of this Ordinance, especially the
following:

15 V

iiC

u ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ADOIPTED By Tile CITY COUNCIL (17 Tile CITY 01 NEW ORLEANS

[j ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PRE~SIDENT OU (IUUNf;L

Delivered to the Mayor on

Approved-
Disapproved:

MAYOR

Returned by the Mayor
[I . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~on a

COUNCIL CLERK

HAROLD R. KA'IHER -DIRECTOR SECRETARY
WILLIAM R. RAPP ASSISTANT DiftECTIOR
BOBBIE L. ABERNATHY - PRINCIPAL. PLANNER
P LA NN IN G SECTIONS

-~~~ GENERAL PLANNING PLANNING SERVICES

ROBERT DECKER CHIEF PLANNER PATRICIA FRI3TWELL CHIRF.PLANNER
JAMES LEWIN ASSOCIATE PLANNER PAUL MAY ASSOCIATE PLANNER
EUGENE3 MEUNIER ASSOCIATE PLANNER JOHN WISNASSOCIATE PLANNER
RICHARD REEIMANN ASSOCIATE PLANNER SHIRLEY HASTMAN.. PLANNING AIDE

PHYSICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSmdRTAUO

-ANDRE NEFF -CHIEF PLANNER MEANDBELL CHIEF PLANNER
IRANDOLPH CLEMEWI' .-.ASSOCIATPJ3 PLANNER WILLIAM GUSTAFSON ASSOCIATE PLANNER
lIARRIET SRIDLER R ASSOCIAtit PLANNER CARLO H-ERNANDEZ ASSOCIATE PLANNER
* ~~~GREGG MIRANNE ASOIATE PLANNER' JACQUELYN PRICK ASSISTANT LNE
SUSAN DIUDE. ASSISTANT PLANNER
SUSAN MARSTON - PLANNING AIDE
.~~~~' SPPO R T' SER VI CERS

TECHNICAL CLERICAL STENOGRAPHIC
LAWRENCE P. CONNOLLY ENGR. TECH. JOSETTE GASPARD - ADMIN. ANALYST VERTA LUCIEN - SECRETARY
HARRY MINDS DftAffTSM44 III THELMA HULBERT - CLERK II SHARON JOSEPH - STENO III
MERLE REDFORD DRAFTSMAN III MARIE YOUNG CLERK II SUSAN ABADIE - STENO II
STANLEY CHATMAN DRAFTSMAN II PAULETT7E SMITH- TRAINEE EVANGELINE BELL - STE NO II
PHILIP COOPER. - )RARTSMAN .11 DEIDRE DOMINO - STENO It
KARL HELWICK. ~DRAFTSMAN 1I TITLE lI~ ANNIE GEORGE - STENO II
E3RIC SMITHl DRAFTSMAN Ill DIANNE HENSLEY - STENO II
JOSEPH WATSON - DRAFTSMAN II ELVIRA TAYLOR - STENO II
MARK CRUANES TRAINEE