Board approves variance for unpermitted gazebo at 1197 Maplestone Drive despite staff objection

The Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance on June 9, 2025 for a gazebo constructed without permits at 1197 Maplestone Drive, despite a staff recommendation against the request. The board voted 3-0 to approve the petition (filed as BCA2024-062) and directed corporation counsel to draft findings of fact for formal adoption at the next meeting.

Petitioner Avtar Singh, represented in English by translator Mandeep Singh, told the board the gazebo was installed on the only relatively flat area of a steep, triangular 0.33-acre lot and said the family had relied on contractor guidance when they built it. “This is just a humble request. That's all. It's a family of 4 ... we have invested the money in it,” the translator told the board on the family’s behalf.

Planning staff provided background that a stop-work order was issued after construction in October 2023 and that multiple issues were outstanding: the structure lacked the required building permit, it encroached on a drainage utility easement and the site is partly in a floodplain. Staff reported the property has a Department of Natural Resources (DNR) letter of authorization dated Aug. 25, 2024, and an encroachment authorization from the Board of Public Works for the drainage/utility easement, but staff still recommended denial, characterizing the situation as largely self-created and noting alternative locations may exist on the lot.

Board members questioned the topography and whether a practical difficulty existed given the lot shape and slope. The board heard that site contours in available documentation showed roughly a one-foot slope across parts of the property and that staff had not had an opportunity to review the site before construction because the gazebo was built without a permit. Staff told the board that a local floodplain permit would still be required and could not be issued if outstanding violations remained.

Petitioner representatives acknowledged they did not obtain a permit and said they had relied on contractor advice; they also added oral testimony about the steep slope as a practical constraint that was not in the written submission. Translator Mandeep Singh explained the family's circumstances, including that one child has autism and the family has limited resources, as part of a request for leniency.

After admitting the evidence into the record, the board approved the variance with no additional conditions recorded on the motion. The board’s approval did not change the requirement that the petitioner still obtain any outstanding local floodplain permits or resolve other outstanding issues before final administrative approvals can be completed. Board members instructed planning staff and the petitioner to coordinate on remaining permitting steps and to complete any required forms; staff indicated there is no fee for the final local floodplain form once outstanding items are cleared.

The board also directed corporation counsel to draft findings that incorporate the staff report and evidence for adoption at the next meeting.