Court supports Brusly

• By KORAN ADDO
• Advocate Westside bureau
• Published: Jun 25, 2009 - Page: 4B

• Print
• Email
• Save
• Reprints
• Twitter
• Share

• Del.icio.us
• Digg
• Facebook
• Reddit
• 

BRUSLY — A state appeal court sided with the town of Brusly in a long-running dispute with a real-estate developer wanting tenants to live in his commercially zoned building.

The ruling made by a three-judge panel of the Louisiana 1st Circuit Court of Appeal upholds a lower court ruling prohibiting developer George M. “Skipper” Grady from renting part of a building he owns to residential tenants.

The area is zoned commercial, but Grady’s property, 557 E. Main St., is surrounded by single-family houses that were “grandfathered” in when the area’s zoning was changed to commercial more than a decade ago.

Grady appealed the lower court’s ruling to the 1st Circuit. The case was heard by Circuit Judges Page McClendon, Jewel E. “Duke” Welch and Randolph Parro.

In the appeal court ruling issued June 19, McClendon wrote that the lower court was correct in determining that Grady was in violation of the town’s zoning ordinances.

“We cannot say that a reasonable basis for the finding of the (lower court) … is clearly wrong or erroneous. … The record on appeal provides sufficient support for a finding that the property was zoned (commercial) … and that the use for residential purposes was sporadic, informal (and) of uncertain duration.”

Mayor Joey Normand said the 1st Circuit decision is a victory for the town, although the town has set aside money in anticipation of possible future legal wrangling involving Grady.

Grady’s attorney, Steve Irving, said the ruling, which was based partially on Brusly’s zoning classification of “low-density” housing, has a loophole.

Noting that McClendon wrote, “We do not find that the zoning ordinance clearly prohibits all residential housing,” Irving said he interprets that to mean the court did not specifically prohibit medium- and high-density housing in the area.

Michael Frugé, the attorney representing Brusly, said his interpretation of the 1st Circuit’s ruling and Brusly’s zoning laws, is that no loophole exists allowing Grady to rent residential housing in the commercial area.

“Hopefully, this will be the end of this and the town can get back to spending its resources on town matters, but we are prepared to continue arguing this in court,” Frugé said.

The building in question was once a restaurant. The owner prior to Grady was a contractor who used a portion as his home and the rest as office space.

The dispute between Grady and the town stems from the town’s objection in 2005 to residential tenants living in the commercially zoned area.