The Captiva Community Plan

Captiva is a small barrier-island community immediately north of Sanibel, bordered by the Gulf on the west and Pine Island Sound on the east. Reached by a single road through Sanibel and across Blind Pass, Captiva is known for white-sand beaches, Gulf sunsets, shelling and a relaxed island atmosphere.

Boating, fishing, kayaking and wildlife viewing are central to life on Captiva. Its beaches, coastal vegetation and surrounding waters are fundamental to both the island’s environment and its appeal, while longstanding establishments such as ’Tween Waters contribute to its historic resort character.

With limited land, sensitive coastal resources and constrained access, the scale and character of development are particularly important on Captiva. Protecting natural resources and maintaining development compatible with a small barrier island remain central community concerns.

Demographics

Community Population Median Age Median Household Income
Captiva 318 66.3 N/A

Note: Demographic data are based primarily on the latest available U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey estimates. Lee County Community Planning Areas and overlay boundaries do not always correspond with Census geographic boundaries; figures therefore represent the closest appropriate Census geography and should be considered estimates. Small-area estimates may have relatively large margins of error.

What’s Changing

Click Here for Lee County-Generated Comparison

Analysis: Proposed Revisions to Captiva Community Plan

By Allie Pecenka, Sanibel-Captiva Conservation Foundation Policy Associate

In recent weeks, Lee County released a proposed amendment to the county’s comprehensive plan, CPA-2026-00005. If approved, this amendment would eliminate the individual community plans for 17 unincorporated areas of Lee County, including Captiva.

The stated rationale for this amendment was to condense the community plans into the general Lee Comprehensive Plan to “eliminate redundancy” and “make the plan simpler to use.” The concern is that this shift would result in losing detailed policies in each community plan, which are based on the unique needs of the areas they serve.

Because of strong community advocacy, the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) passed a motion at this week’s meeting to pause the current schedule for this amendment, allowing more time to address resident questions and hold requested meetings with the board. The motion also called for an improved public communication plan to ensure Lee County residents understand the specific nature of these changes.

How Captiva’s Community Plan Would Change

Guidelines in Captiva’s community plan, for example, were written with specific goals in mind, such as preserving dark skies to support sea turtle nesting, keeping building heights low to prevent overdevelopment, and promoting native vegetation throughout the island.

The amendment to eliminate all community plans has faced substantial public scrutiny as it moved through a rushed approval process, with various committees hearing it before an eventual vote by the BOCC.

After one public information meeting just days after public notification of this amendment, the Local Planning Agency (LPA) considered the changes. Public turnout was strong, and more than 40 Lee County residents took the podium to voice concerns about the sweeping changes in this amendment.

Community members spoke in support of community plans, citing years of hard work local experts put into drafting them and the unique needs of each area they serve.

Speakers shared concerns about the rushed approval timeline, saying they lacked adequate time to understand the dense, 344-page amendment, which could significantly affect local planning.

A recurring request was for side-by-side comparisons showing how policies lost by removing community plans would be adequately replaced by the Lee County Comprehensive Plan. One speaker summed up this sentiment by stating “if policies are redundant, show us where.”

Last week, Lee County began releasing those comparisons in an attempt to showcase these stated redundancies. The potential transfer of policies from each community plan to the general Lee Plan can be viewed on the County’s Community Development Page, with the Captiva-specific changes accessible here.

Significant Loss of Language

It is clear from the outlined transfer of Captiva Plan policies that significant language changes are poised to take place, the impacts of which are yet to be known. Some examples of discrepancies or lost key words/phrases in these changes are as follows.

The Captiva Community Plan objective (Goal 23) is stated as duplicative of Resource Protection (Goal 123) in the Lee Plan, though the language relating to dark skies is lost in this potential transfer.

Captiva Plan Policy 23.1.1, “Mangrove Fringe” is allegedly duplicative of Policy 123.2.12 in the Lee Plan, though the language outlining mangrove protections changes from “to the greatest extent possible” to “adequate.”

The Building Height regulation in the Captiva Plan (23.2.3) is stated to be duplicative of the Land Development Code’s height limitation policy, though a significant language change is being proposed. The proposed new Comprehensive Plan policy would limit building heights on Captiva to 35 feet, unless part of a planned development.

Captiva Plan Policy 23.2.4 “Historic Development Pattern” is allegedly duplicative of Lee Plan Policy 161.1.5, though language relating to the Captiva-specific, low-density development pattern is lost in this transition.

Objectives 23.4 and 23.4.1 of the Captiva Plan, requiring opportunities for public input during comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning processes, along with the hosting of a public information meeting by applicants, are being proposed for complete deletion under this transfer.

In addition, many more policies under the Captiva Plan face significant language changes under the proposed melding of community plans into the Lee Plan.

Language within the Lee Plan is significantly more vague than the Captiva Plan in relation to protections for wildlife habitat, light pollution, water quality, and maintaining low-density development on the island. Though the impacts highlighted here focus only on Captiva, a side-by-side language comparison has now been released for each of the 17 impacted communities, with every one requiring extensive analysis of it’s own. The incredibly wide range of potential impacts from these changes necessitates further questions to County staff and a lengthy public participation process to ensure all concerns are heard.

Advocacy Critical for Keeping Community Plans

SCCF remains strongly in support of maintaining the Captiva Plan, along with the other 17 community plans designed to protect the unique needs of the areas they serve. Though the schedule for this amendment is currently paused, it is expected to return for a vote by the BOCC at a later date.

In the meantime, please use this opportunity to contact county commissioners with questions and concerns arising from the potential changes to your community plan.