Thanked publicly for “taking the lead in doing what is right,” Commissioner Mark Hosty won the approval of his colleagues and received permission to adjust the roof line of his new home at 7419 Warren. The village council’s unanimous decision was the final step of a bizarre home renovation for which much of the work was done before permits were issued.

Council members were acting on a recommendation from Director of Public Health and Safety Mike Boyle to approve the zoning relief that would allow for a new dormer on Hosty’s home. According to local ordinances, the roof structure was too close to a neighboring property.

The dormer was already installed at the time of the Jan. 12 vote. In fact, village officials acknowledged early on that much of the renovation at the home had been completed without the proper permits. According to Hosty, a contractor he hired to do the work ignored village ordinances while Hosty was out of town and unable to supervise. When the commissioner returned, the contractor had disappeared.

It was then that Hosty contacted Boyle with his concerns about the work done at his home, the commissioner has claimed.

“Thank you for taking a proactive approach on this,” Commissioner Mike Curry, who oversees the building department, said during Monday’s council meeting.

Hosty abstained from voting on whether he should be granted a variance to the zoning codes. During a brief discussion of the matter, Hosty stepped down from his seat and stood before the council to explain what had happened.

Mayor Anthony Calderone said that, to varying degrees, contractors and homeowners have historically skirted the permitting process and in that respect, Hosty’s case is not unusual. When scofflaws are caught, the priority of the municipality is to bring the project into compliance, the mayor said.

At a later point in the meeting, Calderone publicly asked for Curry’s assistance in drafting an ordinance that would grant a blanket approval to certain renovations – similar in nature to Hosty’s – that might otherwise violate setback requirements. So long as the footprint of a building is not being changed, Calderone suggested, there’s no reason not to allow those improvements.

“Because that effects your department, you and I are going to work on that and we’re going to have that,” Calderone said to Curry.