Steering committee reviews future land use element, weighing workforce housing, TDRs and town-center ideas

The Sustainable Plan Update Steering Committee met June 17 to review the city’s future land use element and to discuss housing, development rights and town-center ideas that could shape Sanibel’s growth and resilience.

Paula McMichael, planning director, opened the committee’s presentation by outlining state requirements for the future land use element and by citing county-level population projections from the University of Florida’s Bureau of Economic and Business Research. She noted the planning department’s own local data: an average daily causeway volume reported by the Florida Department of Transportation of about 14,000 vehicles in 2025 and a dwelling-unit inventory change from 8,451 units in 2020 to 7,822 units as of January 1, 2026, with some losses attributed to Hurricane Ian. “Although we are not accommodating that population growth here on Sanibel, that does have effects for the community,” McMichael said.

Committee members pressed staff on how ecological remapping, overlay districts and past settlement agreements affect private property rights. McMichael cautioned that remapping ecological zones on the ground does not by itself change the land-use zones in the plan or the development rights associated with mapped parcels; altering mapped zones, she said, would change property and development rights and requires deliberate process and review.

Housing and density dominated the discussion. Members debated policies aimed at preserving “sanctuary” characteristics while addressing workforce needs. One member urged treating workforce housing as infrastructure and preserving workforce-housing bonuses within commercial districts, arguing incentives and mixed-use development could help middle-income workers who earn too much for CHR but cannot afford typical market housing. McMichael described an incentive adopted in recent years: when developers build additional units and place them into the below-market-rate program, they do not have to reduce commercial square footage by 1,000 square feet per unit and may receive up to a 25% floor-area ratio on the commercial portion rather than the typical 10–12% figure.

The committee discussed transfer-of-development-rights (TDR) frameworks. Some members said TDRs could be limited to transfers within the Resort Housing District or within commercial districts; others warned against using donor sites drawn from conservation land, which would increase residential density in resort areas. McMichael said the TDR framework will return to the planning commission for fuller review before city council consideration.

Public commenters and stakeholders weighed in. Stephanie Burns, a planning commission member, urged clarity: “What is being discussed is transfer of development rights within the district — resort housing to resort housing, essentially,” she said, adding that district-limited transfers have broad support. Erica Steiner, president of Community Housing and Resources, asked that the plan’s background language be updated to remove outdated phrasing that she said casts affordable housing in a negative light.

Committee members also requested updated statistics for acreage held in conservation (one committee member said SCCF holdings are nearly 2.8 square miles), causeway counts for recent years, and a beach carrying-capacity study referenced in the plan but not yet completed. McMichael agreed that refreshed data would help the committee formulate recommendations.

Next steps: staff will bring the TDR framework and updated data back to the planning commission and then to city council for further discussion. The steering committee will reconvene July 15 at 9 a.m.