Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance Deck topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board approves zoning variance for deck at 510 Glendale Lane after reconsideration; trustees cite permitting concerns

5451736 · July 22, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After a motion to reconsider, the village board approved a zoning variation for a deck at 510 Glendale Lane. The homeowners built the deck without a permit; trustees discussed precedent, fines and a condition that the owner obtain the required permits and inspections and pay associated fees (double fee penalty discussed).

The village board reconsidered and then approved a zoning variation July 21 to allow an existing deck at 510 Glendale Lane to remain in its current location.

Homeowner Marius Poplowski told trustees the deck was built without a permit last November and said he believed a permit was unnecessary because the structure was not attached to the house. Poplowski said he obtained signatures from surrounding neighbors and that the neighbors raised no objection. He described the deck as built to code and said an engineer had inspected it; he estimated materials cost about $7,800 and said demolition and replacement would be costly.

Trustees expressed concern that the homeowner had not followed the permit or variance process before construction. Trustee Kinane said the rules require applicants to seek approval before construction and noted the board had recently denied another variance where the petitioner followed the process. Trustee Kinane added a reminder for residents: "If you're planning on doing something, all you have to do is come and see us or call us. We'll be more than happy to help you, to guide you, to tell you what you need." Trustee Plafis and other trustees asked whether the homeowner would obtain the required permits and whether fines would apply.

Village Manager O'Malley and staff said the applicant would be required to obtain a building permit and that the permit fee would be doubled as a penalty for the violation; the transcript records an approximate doubled fee of "300 and something." Staff and trustees then voted to approve the variance. The roll call showed a majority in favor; the mayor voted aye. Trustees cautioned residents to check with the village before building.

Why it matters: The decision resolves a code-enforcement matter concerning a structure built without a permit and raises the board's enforcement stance: trustees voiced concern about precedent and emphasized the need for residents to obtain approvals before construction. The homeowner committed to working with village staff to obtain permits and inspections.