Fernandina Beach Board of Adjustments approves small front‑setback variance for South 5th Street home

At its May 2025 meeting, the Fernandina Beach Board of Adjustments approved a variance allowing a proposed front landing and steps to encroach roughly 0.5 feet farther into the front setback at a single‑family home on South 5th Street so the entry can meet Florida building‑code requirements for a safe landing.

Margaret Pearson, senior planner with the planning department, summarized staff’s analysis and recommendation. Pearson said the house is a legal nonconforming structure built before the current land‑development code; the existing steps already encroach and the replacement landing would move the finished elevation to about 16.6 feet from the front property line, about 0.5 feet closer than the current configuration. "Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the variance," Pearson said, adding staff found the application met the six variance criteria, including safety and minimum necessary expansion of the nonconformity.

Why it mattered: Rebuilding the entry to meet the Florida Building Code requires a landing that meets minimum depth and width standards. The applicant’s representative, Stephanie Lagos of MCG Homes, told the board the existing steps are a safety hazard with uneven risers and that the design used the 36‑inch minimum landing depth to allow safe door operation and package handling. "They have different heights, different depth," Lagos said, describing the existing condition and the rationale for the new landing.

A neighbor, Mike Espino of 317 South 5th Street, urged approval and said many homes on the block already sit close to the street. "I strongly encourage you to approve this 6‑inch variance," Espino said.

Board questions focused on two points: whether granting variances creates an unfair "special privilege," and whether the proposed change is truly the minimum needed to meet building code requirements. Member Krieger said the special‑privilege concept has been a recurring concern, and asked staff to consider the criterion further in future reviews. Pearson and other staff explained that the code allows property owners to request relief and that the board’s role is to determine whether the specific criteria are met in each case.

Motion and conditions: A board member moved to approve BOA case 2025‑0001, incorporating the staff findings and comprehensive‑plan policies cited in the staff report, and to condition approval on constructed dimensions not exceeding the architectural drawings submitted with the application (the motion specified the landing depth shown on plan page A‑5 as 5 feet 2 1/4 inches). The board voted unanimously to approve the variance.

Next steps and appeals: Staff and counsel reminded the board that this hearing was quasi‑judicial and that the board’s decision is supported by the record; the decision becomes effective following the required signing and any appeal rights provided by code and statute. The meeting then moved to other business and adjourned.