The Fort Myers Beach Town Council unanimously approved Ordinance 24-10 on Dec. 1, adopting a revised Comprehensive Plan 2045 after reviewing amendments compiled following a joint meeting with the Local Planning Agency.

Staff planner Eddie presented a consolidated packet of edits that the council had discussed at a joint LPA session Nov. 25; town attorney Nancy and community development staff walked the council through three late “whereas” clauses and a set of substantive changes to multiple plan elements. Councilors debated language clarifying how public benefits will be recorded: the adopted text states that “where accepted, public benefits shall be included in their respective development orders, planned developments, and development agreements,” and adds that compliance with the town’s code requirements shall not itself be considered a public benefit.

Council members focused on several substantive items during the hearing. The council removed an ambiguous reference to counting the first parking level as a story by striking “two stories” language and retaining a 30-foot height limit measured from base flood elevation or freeboard. Staff said the change resolves inconsistencies between “stories” and feet and that development details will be addressed in the land development code. Conservation language was clarified to rename ‘wetlands’ as a conservation district and to restate prohibited activities (placement of fill, dredging boat basins and channels, installation of seawalls and removal of native vegetation). Council discussed, but deferred specific policy direction on, living shorelines vs. seawalls; the town attorney recommended leaving the adopted policy language and addressing living-shoreline details in the land development code.

Other modifications the council adopted included clarifying how public benefits would be documented in development orders or agreements, adding titles to policies for consistency across elements, small editorial and capitalization fixes, and adjustments across housing, transportation and utilities sections. Staff noted one numeric correction to a level-of-service figure after internal review and a recommendation to remove an unnecessary adoption date to avoid confusion.

The town attorney explained the post-adoption process: staff will submit the adopted plan to state review (multiple agencies and adjacent jurisdictions) and, if no party files an objection within the state’s review period, the plan will take effect following that review clock. Council first voted to approve the specific amendments discussed in the meeting and then voted to adopt the ordinance as amended; both votes were unanimous.

The council directed staff to carry forward a scrivener’s correction (a date typo) during final ordinance preparation. The plan’s transmittal to the state was slated to be formatted and sent within roughly two to three weeks after the council vote.

The most recent formal next steps are (1) staff will finalize text and formatting with the town attorney and planner, (2) submit the adoption package to the state review process, and (3) track any agency or adjacent-jurisdiction comments during the statutorily required review period.