This is for all you administrator/government-types out there:

I am working on a case that involves altering the appeals process in an
existing preservation ordinance.  Here is the situation:

Currently, the Design Review Commission (DRC) renders a "recommendation."
(Powerful, eh?)  That then goes to the Commissioner of Licenses and
Inspections, who may either agree or disagree, and grant (or not grant) the
permit in accord with that decision.  Once an applicant then gets the permit
(with or without the blessing of DRC), there is a 5-day appeal period to the
Zoning Board of Adjustment for the nay-sayers.  During this 5-day period,
with permit in-hand, the applicant is free to act.

The proposal, then, is to increase the appeal period to 10 days and to
institute a moratorium on action taken on the permit until the appeals
period has expired.  This, of course, leaves it up to the discretion of the
applicant to decide whether they will wait for the appeal period to expire
before acting on the permit that they hold in their hand, or whether they
will be sneaky or claim ignorance and demolish the building/take off the
mansart roof/put in vinyl windows as soon as they step out the door.

The question is this:  In your experience, are there generally moratoria on
activities once a permit is issued (for the duration of the appeal period),
or, is the permit not granted until the appeal period has expired?  Common
sense would dictate the latter, but I am somewhat familiar with the fact
that common sense does not always prevail.

So far, I have been told that Philadelphians do not get their permits from
L&I until the Historical Commission has given the "OK" AND the appeal period
has expired.  Can anyone give me any other examples?

Thanks in advance for your insights!

Sign me - Needy Lurker