Committee reviews 2022 statutory amendments to Sanibel plan on flood peril and property rights

At the July 15 meeting, planning staff reviewed two amendments adopted in 2022 to bring the Sanibel comprehensive plan into alignment with state statutory requirements: a peril-of-flood section that requires a redevelopment component for unsafe coastal development and a property-rights element that lists statutorily enumerated owner rights.

Paula McMichael, the city’s planning director, said the peril-of-flood amendment reflects state direction tied to the Resilient Florida grant and related vulnerability and adaptation planning. She proposed two minor edits: update a 2023 land-development-code review date to a recurring five‑year review and clarify an objective to maintain a FEMA Community Rating System (CRS) rating of 5 or better "to prevent, reduce and mitigate flood damage while providing a premium discount for residents."

Committee members asked whether the language about "removal of coastal real property from flood zone designations" meant buyouts or other acquisition strategies. McMichael answered that local approaches vary and cited examples such as repetitive-loss buyouts in Bonita Springs. "Recognizing that those properties are particularly susceptible to flood… that could be part of that strategy as well," she said.

The property-rights element, McMichael said, stems directly from state statutes and lists rights—possession, use, privacy and transfer—that the state requires be considered in local decision-making. Committee members stressed the adopted language does not alter the Sanibel Plan or charter hierarchy. As one member noted, property rights "don't trump the plan," and staff said the language was adapted to the Sanibel context.

Staff also addressed a May letter from resident Peter Pappas requesting protection of invested property rights. McMichael told the committee that staff research shows Pappas’s parcel on White Ibis was removed from the Interior Wetlands Conservation District in 2012 but remains subject to the underlying lowland-wetlands ecological zone, which carries an allowable development intensity of 0.05 units per acre (one dwelling unit). The staff report concluded the parcel is not entitled to additional density beyond that allocation.

Why it matters: The two amendments were enacted to comply with state law; clarifying their local interpretation and any minor wording changes helps avoid misperception among property owners and provides the committee a record for future hearings.

Next steps: Staff will incorporate the small technical edits and continue to include these amendments in the next phase of plan drafting and public review. The committee asked staff to make background documents (staff reports, historic plan excerpts) available on the project website and to cite specific plan pages when responding to resident inquiries.