Board deadlocks on rear-yard variance for enclosure at 1046 Grandview Avenue

The Grandview Heights Board of Zoning Appeals was unable to approve a variance on Jan. 14, 2026, that would have allowed an owner to enclose a rear deck at 1046 Grandview Avenue with a 0-foot rear-yard setback.

Applicant John C. Rosnus (name appears in filings with minor variants) requested a variance from Grandview Heights Planning and Zoning Code §11.55.02(c)(2)(c) to reduce the required rear-yard setback — normally 20% of lot depth — so an existing deck could be enclosed and become part of the main structure. Staff described the irregular parcel, existing encroachments, and calculated lot coverage at about 27% of roughly 7,000 square feet. Staff said the lot configuration could present a hardship and offered a neutral recommendation while highlighting potential building-code separation issues that the building department would address.

Board members spent extensive time debating whether to grant approval as applied for, condition approval on the applicant obtaining a minimum 5-foot no-build easement from the neighboring Lot 147, or table the case to allow the applicant to negotiate with the neighbor. The applicant said he had discussed easement options with his neighbor and preferred a conditional variance or clarity from the board to know what to negotiate. Several members warned that conditioning approval on a private easement shifts a perpetual burden to a neighboring property owner and noted variances run with the land.

The board considered narrower motion language suggested by staff or members — for example, limiting the enclosure so it does not extend more than 2.7 feet beyond the rear plane of the house or setting a maximum depth measured from the rear of the house — as an alternative to an outright 0-foot variance.

A motion to approve the variance with language limiting the enclosure (read into the record) was made and seconded. Roll call produced two yes votes and two no votes; the transcript records the tally as "2 yes and 2 nays." The transcript does not show a fifth recorded vote or a declaration that the motion carried; the motion therefore did not pass by the recorded tally.

Because the motion failed, the board did not grant the requested rear-yard variance at the hearing. Staff and the applicant discussed next steps: the applicant may revise the proposal, pursue an easement or purchase agreement with his neighbor and return to the board, or proceed with building-permit plans to see what the building department requires for fire separation and other code compliance.