Panama City planning board approves 1-foot variance for dock access at 1206 East Third Street

The Panama City Planning Board approved a variance allowing a 6-foot access (gangway) where the land development code limits access to 5 feet for the property at 1206 East Third Street.

The board voted 4-0 to approve the variance request (case BA VAR2512), which the applicant, Brent Robbins, sought after inspections found the installed gangway to be 6 feet wide. The applicant and multiple speakers addressed the board during a quasi-judicial hearing.

The variance matters because the city's land development code sets a 5-foot maximum width for the access portion of residential docks. Planning staff told the board the applicant submitted an as-built survey and that state and federal permits had been granted; however the city code review identified two provisions not met: the access-width limit and a dock-length provision tied to mean low water depth. Staff noted the submitted survey showed the dock reaches about 4.5 feet at mean low water, while the code provision calls for a maximum reach to 4 feet.

Neighbors objected. Kevin Rohan, who said his property at 1160 Cove Point Drive abuts the site, told the board he had hired a hydrologist and gathered drone footage and sonar data that he said show code and regulatory violations. Rohan said, “The request seeks to increase the access width of his dock by an additional 1 foot beyond the 5 foot maximum permitted under the current building code,” and argued the application did not demonstrate a legitimate hardship.

Another neighbor, Mike Rowan, said the gangway’s welded aluminum construction and appearance were out of character with nearby homes and could harm adjacent property values. Rowan said the structure “doesn't at all fit with the surrounding homes down there.”

Brent Robbins, the property owner and applicant, said he received a general-permit approval from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and had been contacted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Robbins said he intends to live in the house under construction and described the dock and gangway as part of a family home project, noting “we have it in email, which I have submitted that, the that they don't have a problem with it.” He also said a stop-work order had been issued and later clarified, and that he returned an as-built survey to the city after the stop-work action.

Board members discussed whether the variance request was limited to the access width and not the dock length; staff repeated the hearing’s legal scope was the access-width variance only. After discussion, a board member moved to approve the variance; another board member seconded. In a roll call, Board member Carroll voted yes; Board member Parker yes; Board member Rich yes; and Chairman Neubauer yes. The motion passed 4-0.

The board’s approval applies only to the access-width variance documented in case BA VAR2512. Staff and neighbors noted other compliance questions — notably the dock length/depth measurement disagreement — that could be addressed separately in enforcement or in future applications.

The decision resolves the immediate matter of the gangway width; any subsequent permits, inspections or enforcement actions tied to dock length, state permits or other technical concerns remain subject to review by the applicable agencies and the city.

Details from the hearing, including the applicant’s as-built survey and the neighbor’s submitted sonar and drone data, remain part of the municipal record and may be used in follow-up reviews.