by SC Reporter Emilie Alfino
The recent Sanibel City Council and Planning Commission joint workshop requested that City staff evaluate a potential “Transfer of Development Rights” (TDR) program to provide a framework for selling units of density from one place to another, primarily to assist and incentivize the Resort Housing District to rebuild.
The matter came before the Planning Commission on December 9, 2025.
To institute a TDR program to transfer any development rights from one parcel to another, which would result in the receiving parcel having residential development density in excess of what is allowed (other than for Below Market Rate Housing), such transfer would require:
• An ordinance approved by City Council with subsequent approval by voter referendum, and
• Amendment of the Sanibel Plan and the Development Intensity Map.
There are four fundamental issues regarding any TDR program:
1. How does the program serve the goals, objectives, and policies of the Sanibel Plan or hurricane recovery?
2. Identify where TDRs may be generated and where they may be sent.
a. Review the status of the Resort Housing District recovery. Is there a “return on investment” problem? Are there unutilized “surplus” densities in the Resort Housing District?
b. Identify lands to expand the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Conservation District.
c. How can a program benefit the BMRH program?
3. Is the program to be voluntary or mandatory?
4. If mandatory, it is critical to evaluate the value of TDRs to determine fair compensation.
City staff offered the following conclusions:
Conservation. The City staff, in its Agenda Memorandum, concluded that there is strong support for conservation as a public policy purpose for the transfer of development rights in the Sanibel Plan.
Below-Market-Rate Housing is also supported by the Sanibel Plan and serves a legitimate public purpose. However, existing codes already provide a much more straightforward process for obtaining increased density for Below Market Rate Housing via a conditional use permit.
Resort Housing District. Increased densities in the Resort Housing District to aid redevelopment are not supported by the available evidence. Furthermore, Sanibel Plan policies restrict increased development intensity both in the Resort Housing District and in vulnerable coastal areas.
In its Agenda Memorandum, City staff noted the following upon review of post-disaster permit activity in the Resort Housing District:
• Nearly 88.6 percent of resort units are restored.
• There are 398 units (11.4 percent) at 93 properties in the Resort Housing District that have not been restored. Of those, 121 are currently in review for permitting or are under construction. Five units are single-family/duplex (Shell Basket Lane).
• Thirteen resort housing developments were demolished after Hurricane Ian.
◦ One completed redevelopment (Shalimar, 33 units)
◦ Two are presently under construction (Beachview Cottages, 22 units; and White Caps, nine units)
◦ Three filed for permitting (Island Inn Resort, 32 units; Kimball Lodge Condo, 31 units; and Waterside Inn, 27 units)
• 11 remaining properties may find use in buying density credits if it would support their return on investment on rebuild. City staff were asked to survey those owners to see if return on investment is, in fact, the reason they have not applied for a permit.
There does not appear to be a return-on-investment problem, according to the City staff memo, as there is no pattern of resorts failing to rebuild.
Properties that have yet to file for redevelopment face more complex circumstances, ranging from ongoing insurance claims to timeshares and associations with a large number of stakeholders, to balancing recovery costs and the logistics of multiple developments in common ownership.
In the Land Development Code, residential density is expressed as the number of dwelling units, with an average occupancy rate of 2.2 individuals per dwelling unit, permitted on a parcel. Hotels, motels, and resort condominiums have a higher rate of occupancy than non-resort units, with rates increasing with unit size and/or number of bedrooms.
Development intensity in the Resort Housing District is nearly double the allowed number, or 1,685 units in excess of permitted density. The City staff extrapolated presumed rates of occupancy for existing resorts to show the total presumed occupancy of the Resort Housing District, which is 7,753 people above the standard adopted to protect the carrying capacity of Sanibel’s beaches.
This high population density in a highly vulnerable coastal area poses significant life-safety risks and disrupts the beaches’ carrying capacity for wildlife. That goes against Sanibel’s Vision Statement and Hierarchy of Values. Any program or policy that could imperil Sanibel’s beaches’ environmental stewardship is a potential threat to the community’s economic sustainability.
Sanibel’s Plan for Development Intensity allows property owners to maintain the existing density, provided short-term occupancy continues. The provision does not recommend increasing or transferring densities within the Resort Housing District. Any action to proceed with the Resort Housing District TDR program would require an amendment to the Sanibel Plan – and therefore, a referendum – to identify a specific issue or policy purpose and prospective solution.
Regarding the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Conservation District, City staff’s initial review of potential “sending” lands (with density units going “from”) shows limited application and low cost-benefit for operation of such a program.
While the number of properties is notable, those that are more likely to participate in a program to send density elsewhere are far fewer. The residential density at such vacant properties averages 1.6 units per property, allowing for low-density single-family use. There are only a handful of vacant properties that qualify for more than one unit, including Sanibel Community Church (25), Clamshell Condo (8), and Sanibel United Congregational Church (6). Several other vacant lots are currently in development, namely Island Cow (11), Coastal Creek (6), and Dunn (5).
Existing lands within the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Conservation District do not have residential density that can be transferred based on the Sanibel Plan and City Charter. The Plan does provide for a mitigating circumstance: “Where there is a resultant, overall Citywide decrease in the number of permitted dwelling units, provided that the density decrease does not originate on lands in the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Conservation District.”
Furthermore, the Plan states that the City cannot sell, exchange, or donate any land within the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Conservation District … only by affirmative vote of a majority of the electors at a referendum called for that purpose.”
A TDR program can be effective in benefiting affordable housing. However, existing procedures to authorize increased density for BMRH through a conditional use permit are objectively more efficient and straightforward.
The Planning Commission asked City staff to reach out to John Lai, President of the Sanibel & Captiva Chamber of Commerce, to see what additional information he could provide to the discussion.
There is no clear public support for this program, said Craig Chandler, Deputy Planning Director. “It’s really a matter of time more than anything that these properties will be redeveloped. We expect all properties to redevelop, although it may be with a new buyer.”
Commissioner Tiffany Burns said the City has lost some resort housing that just is not coming back. She added that it’s a little late for a TDR program, “since so many people have built back already. But at least we can say we did everything we could.”
“It doesn’t seem that this really applies to Sanibel,” said Commissioner Kate Sergeant. “We don’t have a lot of donor properties, and the receiving properties are already pretty dense. This seems like a lot of effort and a lot of city time for 11 property owners, and none of them have even come to us.”
“I wonder if it’s worth the effort,” Commissioner Lyman Welch added. “There is no one here speaking for the owners.”
“At the time of the Sanibel Plan, there were many nonconforming overbuilt properties,” said Commissioner Larry Schopp. “There was no intent of ‘mixing and matching.’ There was no intent to make a major concession. This brings violence to the Sanibel Plan.”
The matter will be referred back to the Planning Commission for further discussion at a future date.
Leave a Comment