The Variance Review Board on Dec. 9 issued a split ruling for property owner Maria Rosabella at 1011 West Mohawk Avenue. After a contested hearing with neighbor testimony, the board approved formal recognition of a preexisting rear solid‑roof lanai — reducing the rear-yard setback to 14.7 feet — with a condition that the cover remain unenclosed and not later used as living space.

Owner Maria Rosabella testified that the rear cover "was there before my parents originally purchased the home" and said she did not intend to alter neighbors' use; she asked the board to regularize the feature so her family could continue living in the home. A board motion to approve the rear‑cover variance passed after members noted the structure appeared to predate recent ownership and the requested relief only formalizes an existing condition.

The same hearing included a second request to legalize an unpermitted side‑addition that reduces the side-yard setback to about 2.1 feet. Neighbor Charlene Diaz Williams said she objected, told the board the property had earlier hosted a barbershop with customer parking and described traffic and child‑safety concerns adjacent to Mohawk Avenue. Williams told the board: "They placed a sign out front … he was using it as a barbershop," noting on‑street parking and increased traffic near a child's play area.

Board members split on the side‑addition. After extended discussion over whether the footprint preexisted the current owner and whether the enlargement was a self‑created hardship, a motion to deny the side‑setback reduction did not secure a majority and the board recorded a tie; under board rules a tie vote does not carry and the item was recorded as not approved by the board. Staff advised that, per procedure, applicants may appeal to City Council within 14 days of the board's written decision.

What to watch: The rear‑cover approval is conditioned on it remaining unenclosed; any attempt to enclose the space in the future will require a new application. The unresolved side‑addition may be appealed to City Council or the applicants may return with additional documentary evidence demonstrating that the side‑difference is not self‑created.