Jacksonville Beach Board Rejects Driveway Variance Request

In a recent meeting of the Jacksonville Beach Board of Adjustment, a variance request for increased lot coverage to accommodate a circular driveway and pool decking for a single-family dwelling was denied. The applicant, Emily Pierce, sought to increase the lot coverage from the permitted 35% to 39.7%. The board expressed skepticism regarding the hardship claimed by the applicant, primarily questioning the necessity and timing of the changes made to the driveway design.

Pierce presented her case, citing the property’s unique location at the intersection of three busy roads, which she argued necessitated a circular driveway for safety reasons. She emphasized that the wider turning radius was essential for trucks and larger vehicles. Despite these claims, a member of the board suggested that the hardship may have been self-imposed and questioned why the need for additional coverage was not addressed earlier in the planning process.

The builder, Cor Johnston, admitted that the driveway design was modified on-site after the construction of the house, which raised further doubts among the board members. They debated the legitimacy of the hardship and the intent behind the after-the-fact changes. The board remained unconvinced that the situation presented a true hardship, which is a critical criterion for the granting of a variance.

In contrast, the board approved a separate variance request involving another property seeking to address nonconformities with a new permeable driveway and pool.

Another approved case pertained to proposed improvements to a single-family dwelling, including adjustments to the rear yard setback and block coverage. The applicant was seeking to install a new gable roof to remedy foundation damage caused by a tree. Part of the argument included the relocation of pavers to the front of the property, which the board found compelling and granted the requested variance.

In administrative matters, the planning department notified the board of upcoming dates for the comprehensive plan’s review by the Planning Commission and the City Council.

Note: This meeting summary was generated by AI, which can occasionally misspell names, misattribute actions, and state inaccuracies. This summary is intended to be a starting point and you should review the meeting record linked above before acting on anything you read. If we got something wrong, let us know. We’re working every day to improve our process in pursuit of universal local government transparency.

Receive debriefs about local meetings in your inbox weekly:

is discussed during:
in these locations: