by SC Reporter Emilie Alfino
An after-the-fact variance request to allow a dock and boat lift with a reduced setback at 784 Limpet Drive was denied by the Sanibel Planning Commission at its August 25 meeting. Crocker Marine Services submitted the application on behalf of James W. Flannery and Tari Lynn Flannery, the property owners.
The property, which includes a single-family residence, is located in the Shell Harbour neighborhood. One dock with no more than two boat mooring areas is permitted for a single-family lot. The city issued the building permit for a dock with two boat lifts on January 30, 2026, based upon a site plan designed to meet the Sanibel Code standards for accessory marine structures.
The constructed dock and boat lifts were not installed consistent with the approved site plan.
An as-built survey must be submitted to the city before the final Planning Department inspection to verify compliance with the issued permit and the Sanibel Code standards. When Crocker Marine Services received the as-built survey, they contacted the Planning Department because it showed the dock had been constructed in the wrong location: 13.9 feet from the west property line (1.1 feet closer than permitted) and 16.8 feet from the east property line.
The applicant requested the location of the dock and boat lift from the west property line be reduced 1.1 foot from the standard 15 feet to 13.9 feet
The original development of the Shell Harbour neighborhood included the installation of cantilevered docks. The location of these cantilevered docks varies. When residents update their docks in this neighborhood, some choose to incorporate a cantilevered dock, while others remove part or all of the dock to accommodate their needs.
Planning staff found no unusual conditions specific to the lot or structure, and that multiple other properties in the Shell Harbour neighborhood have similar situations.
It is the responsibility of the contractor designing and constructing a permitted structure to verify the property corners to ensure the structure is built in the correct location. The only way to verify a property corner is by having it located and marked by a licensed professional surveyor.
The Planning staff determined the action was self-imposed because the contractor did not verify the property corner locations.
The conclusion: the variance request is due to a construction error.
Variance requests have to meet all seven variance standards of the Sanibel Code. In this case, only six of the seven standards were met.
“I’m very sympathetic, but we have to follow the seven standards. Staff decided six of the seven were not met. I would move to deny the variance,” said Commissioner Lyman Welch.
The city received one public comment via email from Cathy Lanier. “I received notice of the variance request for a dock that protrudes 1.5 ft. into the setback for the neighboring property of 784 Limpet Drive, Sanibel. I have no personal interest in this matter and do not know the property owners, but I feel the need to speak up due to the City’s overreach in denying this small variance. I would hope these owners might do the same for my properties or those of anyone else when the City is engaging in unnecessary prevention of progress for us to fully utilize our properties, and attempting to force additional costs and difficulties to get something as simple as replacing a dock accomplished. … When confronted with such questions, I always ask myself, “What is the worst-case scenario – what harm could be done by allowing a slight variance?’ In this case, I’m hard-pressed to find one and it appears to be a situation of the City leveraging its power for no good reason. What possible difference could 1.5 ft. make to the neighboring property’s ability to fully utilize their seawall space? Probably none.”
Commissioner Tiffany Burns said if the city had received such a request “before the fact,” the project could have been redesigned.
“I feel horrible for this man, I do,” said Commissioner Ken Colter. “We have been very consistent with contractors.
The Commission unanimously denied the after-the-fact variance request.
Leave a Comment