Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Dock Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Development Review Commission approves dock variance to allow boat lift at Lot 4 on Ninth Avenue South
Summary
The city Development Review Commission approved a variance allowing installation of a boat lift and associated pilings at a water lot on Ninth Avenue South, after hearing survey disputes and neighbor concerns; the dock permit remains subject to county permitting and staff conditions.
The Development Review Commission voted to approve a dock variance that will allow the installation of a boat lift and associated pilings at Water Lot 4 off Ninth Avenue South after a contested hearing.
Jordan Elmore, planner with Development Review Services, told the commission the applicant had an approved dock permit but sought a variance for side‑setback relief to place pilings and a lift in the narrow water lot. Elmore said staff had recommended denial because the proposal would encroach inside the usual minimum setback for lots that are 20 feet or narrower, and noted an objection letter from a neighbor at Water Lot 8.
Applicant Dan Warren and his surveyor said the proposed pilings fall on the applicant's extended water lot line after a recent survey. Neighbor Justin Matthews testified that he had no objection to the applicant placing pilings on the shared lot line, but raised a dispute about the location of several existing pilings and about a nearby dock that was built in a different configuration than a prior permit showed.
The hearing included survey evidence and a review of multiple plats and field monuments. David Swaggerty, a surveyor, testified that earlier plats and physical markers supported the applicant's interpretation of the water‑lot boundary and the "witness" line on the seawall used to reestablish lot corners.
Commission members asked whether county permitting and additional reviews would still be required. Staff confirmed that the dock length and waterway authorization remain subject to Pinellas County review and that city staff stamps dock plans before county processing. Staff also noted that electric service or other infrastructure to support a lift would require further permitting and coordination.
After public testimony and discussion, the Development Review Commission voted to approve the variance "to allow the installation of a boat lift," subject to the conditions listed in the staff report; the roll call on the motion was unanimous. The commission's approval permits the applicant to proceed with the adjusted dock/piling configuration but does not abrogate county permitting or civil claims between riparian owners.
Ending note: Staff reminded the commission that county navigation permitting and, if necessary, additional city approvals (for electric or other infrastructure) remain prerequisites to constructing any lift; neighbors were advised that disputes about existing pilings or encroachments are civil and county enforcement matters.
