The drip-edge specification, for anyone specifying a re-roof

“Section R 905.1.1 Underlayment Adopt When a roof is installed to IBHS Fortified Standards the following shall be required: Provide (minimum 26 gauge for steel) corrosion-resistant metal drip edge and fasteners at eaves and gables of shingle roofs. Overlap is to be a minimum of 3 inches (76 mm). Eave drip edges shall extend 1/2 inch (13 mm) below sheathing and extend back on the roof a minimum of 2 inches (51 mm). Drip edge shall be installed over the underlayment.”

Note the trigger: the requirement bites “[w]hen a roof is installed to IBHS Fortified Standards.” It is not a universal Louisiana roofing requirement; it is the code catching up to the standard that drives Louisiana insurance discounts. An architectural committee reviewing a re-roof specification in a coastal Louisiana community will increasingly see Fortified specifications, and this is now what the code says about them.²

Three layers, and an ADU has to clear all of them

This is the useful frame for a Louisiana ADU question, because each layer has a different decision-maker.

The construction code. LAC 17:I.107 requires the ADU to be designed and built to the LSUCC, with plan review and inspection by a registered state inspector. Note the reach: the code's scope provision makes enforcement mandatory as to “new construction, reconstruction, additions to homes previously built to the International Residential Code, and extensive alterations” — and a new ADU is new construction.

Local zoning. Whether an ADU is a permitted use at all is a parish or municipal question, and Louisiana has no statewide ADU mandate. There was no statewide ADU bill in either the 2025 or 2026 session; a full-text sweep of both sessions for “accessory dwelling” returns nothing.

The declaration. Which is the layer an association controls, and where the Planned Community Act now sets the arithmetic. Two provisions decide it:

• Tightening a use restriction to prohibit an ADU requires a supermajority under R.S. 9:1141.14(C)(1) — more than eighty percent of the voting interest in the association, not of those present — and an existing use commenced before the amendment is recorded is grandfathered under (C)(2), subject to the twelve-month abandonment rule in (C)(3).
• Tightening design standards takes only a two-thirds vote of those present under (C)(6), but with two hard limits: no restriction “shall impose a duty on a lot owner to act affirmatively or remove or renovate any existing improvements,” and tougher standards reach only work that increases the improvements' value “by more than forty percent,” proved by a qualified appraiser's estimate the owner supplies before starting.

Clearing the architectural committee does not clear the code. Clearing the code does not clear the covenants. And a state inspector's sign-off says nothing about either.

A Louisiana case that shows exactly how these layers collide

In Lake Terrace Property Owners Association v. City of New Orleans, Board of Zoning Adjustments, No. 2024-CA-0577 c/w 0758 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2/18/2025), the City's permit director determined that a rear pool cabana at a Lake Terrace property had been used as a separate dwelling for over five years, gave it “Established Two-Family Dwelling” status under the zoning ordinance, and issued a renovation permit that included a new kitchen in the rear structure — in a subdivision whose restrictions required that all lots “be devoted to single family dwelling.”

The court recorded the association's position and the neighbours' support for it:

“Several neighbors submitted letters in support of LTPOA's appeal arguing the Property was subject to the building restrictions in the Lake Terrace Subdivision, which mandated all lots be devoted to single family dwellings.”

The association had to appeal the zoning verification to the Board of Zoning Adjustments, lose there on a procedural threshold — a motion to overturn drew three votes where four concurring votes were required — and then win on judicial review, where the Fourth Circuit converted the appeals to supervisory writs, granted them, and rendered judgment. On the vote-count point the court added: “There is no rule or law that requires the vote of the entire Board.”

The holding rests on the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, not on the subdivision's private restrictions. Writ status is not established.³

What a board can do

• Ask for the state plan review on any ADU application. It is required by the code and it tells you what is actually being built.
• Know your amendment arithmetic before promising anyone an outcome. More than eighty percent of the whole association is a different proposition from two-thirds of a meeting.
• Watch the zoning file, not just the ARC file. Lake Terrace is what happens when a use designation is granted by a city while nobody from the association is contesting it.
• Note the appeal deadlines are the city's, not yours. Judicial review of a zoning-board decision runs under R.S. 33:4727(E), on the city's calendar.

What to watch next

Whether the June 2026 emergency rule is made permanent before it lapses around November 28, 2026, and whether the ADU definition survives the proposed wholesale replacement of LAC 17:I.101 through 117 for the 2024 I-Codes, effective January 1, 2027 if adopted. A repeal-and-replace of the whole chapter is exactly the moment a definition can quietly change.