This docum ent does not reflect the intent or official position of the bill sponsor or House of Representatives.
STORAGE NAME: h1177b.WMC
DATE: 2/7/2024
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES STAFF ANALYSIS
BILL #: CS/HB 1177 Land Development
SPONSOR(S): Local Administration, Federal Affairs & Special Districts Subcommittee, Duggan
TIED BILLS: IDEN./SIM. BILLS: SB 1110
REFERENCE ACTION ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR or
BUDGET/POLICY CHIEF
1) Local Administration, Federal Affairs & Special
Districts Subcommittee
13 Y, 1 N, As CS Mwakyanjala Darden
2) Ways & Means Committee Rexford Aldridge
3) State Affairs Committee
SUMMARY ANALYSIS
Each county and municipality is required to plan for future development and growth by adopting, implementing,
and amending as necessary a comprehensive plan. All elements of a plan or plan amendment must be based
on relevant, appropriate data and an analysis by the local government. Each comprehensive plan must include
a transportation element addressing traffic circulation, including the types, locations, and extent of existing and
proposed major thoroughfares and transportation routes, including bicycle and pedestrian ways.
Certain public facilities and services must be in place and available to serve new development no later than the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent by a local government. Local governments
may extend this concurrency requirement to additional public facilities such as transportation. Local
governments electing to repeal transportation concurrency are encouraged to adopt an alternative mobility
funding system. One method of funding local government transportation concurrency requirements is through
the adoption and imposition of impact fees to fund the infrastructure needed to expand local services to meet
the demands of population growth caused by new growth. Local governments may increase impact fees only
under limited circumstances, including upon a showing of extraordinary circumstances.
A Development of Regional Impact (DRI) is “any development which, because of its character, magnitude, or
location, would have a substantial effect on the health, safety, or welfare of citizens of more than one county.”
Any proposed change to a previously approved DRI must be reviewed by the local government.
Notwithstanding any provision of an adopted local comprehensive plan or adopted land development
regulations to the contrary, an adopted change to a development order for an approved DRI does not diminish
or otherwise alter any credits for a development order exaction or fee.
The bill:
Revises powers and responsibilities of counties and municipalities under the Community Planning Act;
Requires local governments implementing transportation concurrency to credit the fair market value of
any land dedicated and prohibits fees based on cumulative analysis of trips between project stages and
phases;
Removes exceptions from impact fee statute for water and sewer collection fees;
Revises application of credits against local impacts for DRIs;
Revises review requirements for changes to DRIs; and
Clarifies the application of vested rights in DRIs.
The Revenue Estimating Conference met on February 2, 2024, and determined the bill would have a negative,
indeterminate impact on local government tax revenues.
The bill is effective upon becoming law.
STORAGE NAME: h1177b.WMC PAGE: 2
DATE: 2/7/2024
FULL ANALYSIS
I. SUBSTANTIVE ANALYSIS
A. EFFECT OF PROPOSED CHANGES:
Present Situation
Comprehensive Planning
Every local government, defined as any county and municipality,
1
is required to plan for future
development and growth by adopting, implementing, and amending as necessary a comprehensive
plan.
2
All elements of a plan or plan amendment must be based on relevant, appropriate data
3
and an
analysis by the local government that may include surveys, studies, aspirational goals, and other data
available at the time of adopting the plan or amendment.
4
The data supporting a plan or amendment
must be taken from professionally accepted sources
5
and must be based on permanent and seasonal
population estimates and projections.
6
Each comprehensive plan must include a transportation element, the purpose of which is to plan for a
multimodal transportation system emphasizing feasible public transportation, addressing mobility
issues pertinent to the size and character of the local government, and designed to support all other
elements of the comprehensive plan.
7
The transportation element must address traffic circulation,
including the types, locations, and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares and
transportation routes, including bicycle and pedestrian ways.
8
The plan of a local government with a
population exceeding 50,000 that is not within the planning area of a metropolitan planning
organization (MPO)
9
also must address mass transit, ports, and aviation
10
and related facilities.
11
The
transportation planning element for a local government with a population exceeding 50,000 located
within the area of a MPO specifically must address the following:
All alternative modes of travel, including public transportation, pedestrian, and bicycle;
Aviation, rail, and seaport facilities, access to those facilities, and intermodal transportation;
Capability to evacuate coastal population prior to a natural disaster;
Airports, projected airport and aviation development, and land use around airports; and
Identification of land use densities, building intensities, and transportation management
programs to promote public transportation.
12
1
S. 163.3164(29), F.S. For the purpose of the Community Planning Act, the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District may exercise the
powers of a municipality for the area under its jurisdiction. S. 163.3167(6), F.S. See also ch. 2023-5, Laws of Fla. (renaming the Reedy
Creek Improvement District to the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District).
2
Ss. 163.3167(2), 163.3177(2), F.S.
3
“To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that
particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue.” S. 163.3177(1)(f), F.S.
4
S. 163.3177(1)(f), F.S.
5
S. 163.3177(1)(f)2., F.S. The statute does not further define “professionally accepted sources.”
6
S. 163.3177(1)(f)3., F.S. Population estimates may be those published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research or may
be generated by the local government based upon a professionally acceptable methodology. Id.
7
S. 163.3177(6)(b), F.S.
8
S. 163.3177(6)(b)1., F.S.
9
A MPO must be designated as provided in 23 U.S.C. s. 450.310(a) for each urbanized area with a population of more than 50,000. S.
339.175(2), F.S. Florida MPOs are intended specifically to develop plans and programs in metropolitan areas for the development and
management of transportation systems and facilities, including pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities to function as
an intermodal transportation system. S. 339.175(1), F.S.
10
All local governments have the option to include within the transportation element an airport master plan, incorporated into the plan
through the comprehensive plan amendment process. S. 163.3177(6)(b)4., F.S.
11
S. 163.3177(6)(b), F.S.
12
S. 163.3177(6)(b)2., F.S. STORAGE NAME: h1177b.WMC PAGE: 3
DATE: 2/7/2024
The transportation planning element for a municipality with a population exceeding 50,000, or a county
with a population exceeding 75,000, must provide for moving people by mass transit, including:
Providing efficient, safe, and convenient public transit, including accommodation for the
transportation disadvantaged;
Plans for port, aviation, and related facilities; and
Plans for circulation of recreational traffic, including bicycle and riding facilities and exercise
trails.
13
In addition to the general requirements for data supporting a comprehensive plan or amendment, the
transportation planning element must include one or more maps showing the general location of
existing and proposed transportation system features and data, analyses, and associated principles
pertaining to:
Existing transportation system levels of service and system needs and availability of
transportation facilities and services;
Growth trends and travel patterns, as well as interactions between land use and transportation;
Current and projected intermodal
14
deficiencies and needs;
Projected transportation system levels of service and system needs; and
How the local government will correct existing facility deficiencies, meet the needs of the
projected transportation system, and advance the transportation purposes of the plan.
15
Generally, local government transportation and mobility planning should address providing mobility
options, such as automobile, bicycle, pedestrian, or mass transit, that minimize environmental impacts,
expand transportation options, and increase connectivity between destinations.
16
Transportation Concurrency
Certain public facilities and services must be in place and available to serve new development no later
than the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent by a local government.
17
Local governments may extend this concurrency requirement to additional public facilities such as
transportation.
18
Where concurrency is applied to transportation, the local government comprehensive
plan must provide the principles, guidelines, standards, and strategies, including adopted levels of
service, to guide its application.
19
The plan must show that the included levels of service may
reasonably be met.
20
Local governments utilizing transportation concurrency must use professionally
accepted studies to evaluate levels of service and techniques to measure such levels of service when
evaluating potential impacts of proposed developments.
21
While local governments implementing a
transportation concurrency system are encouraged to develop and use certain tools and guidelines,
such as addressing potential negative impacts on urban infill and redevelopment
22
and adopting long-
term multimodal strategies,
23
such local governments must follow specific concurrency requirements
including consulting with the Florida Department of Transportation if proposed amendments to the plan
13
S. 163.3177(6)(b)3., F.S.
14
“Intermodal transportation” is not defined in the statute but generally means the transportation by or involving more than one form of
carrier in a single journey, particularly for moving cargo. See “intermodal,” available at https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/intermodal (last visited Feb. 2, 2024); “intermodal transport,” available at
https://www.ups.com/us/en/supplychain/insights/knowledge/glossary-term/intermodal-transport.page (last visited Feb. 2, 2024). Part of
the intent in creating the Florida Strategic Intermodal System is to address the increased demands placed on the entire statewide
transportation system by economic and population growth and projected increases in freight movement, international trade, and tourism
designing and operating a strategic intermodal system to meet the mobility needs of the state. See s. 339.61(2), F.S.
15
S. 163.3177(6)(b)1., F.S.
16
Dept. of Commerce, “Transportation Planning,” available at https://www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-
development/programs/community-planning-table-of-contents/transportation-planning (last visited Feb. 2, 2024), herein Commerce
Transportation Planning.
17
S. 163.1380(2), F.S. The only such services for which concurrency is mandatory are sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, and
potable water supplies.
18
S. 163.3180(1), F.S.
19
Ss. 163.3180(1)(a), 163.3180(5)(a), F.S. See Commerce Transportation Planning, supra n. 16.
20
S. 163.3180(1)(b), F.S.
21
S. 163.3180(5)(b)-(c), F.S.
22
S. 163.3180(5)(e), F.S.
23
S. 163.3180(f), F.S. STORAGE NAME: h1177b.WMC PAGE: 4
DATE: 2/7/2024
affect the Strategic Intermodal System, exempting public transit facilities from concurrency
requirements, and allowing a developer to contribute a proportionate share to mitigate transportation
impacts for a specific development.
24
An applicant for a development-of-regional-impact development order, development agreement,
rezoning, or other land use development permit satisfies the requirements for transportation
concurrency if the applicant in good faith offers to enter into a binding agreement to pay for or construct
its proportionate share of transportation improvements required to mitigate the impact of the proposed
development and the proffered proportionate share contribution or construction is sufficient to
accomplish one or more mobility improvements benefitting a regionally significant transportation
facility.
25
The plan for transportation concurrency must provide the basis on which landowners will be
assessed a proportionate share,
26
which must include a compliant formula for calculating the
proportionate share.
27
The proportionate share may not include additional costs to reduce or eliminate
existing transportation deficiencies.
28
Local governments electing to repeal transportation concurrency are encouraged to adopt an
alternative mobility funding system. Such an alternative system may not be used to restrict or deny
certain development approval applications provided the developer agrees to pay for the development’s
transportation impacts using the funding mechanism implemented by the local government. Local
government mobility fee systems must comply with all requirements for adopting and implementing
impact fees. An alternative funding system that is not mobility fee based may not impose on new
development any responsibility for funding existing transportation deficiencies.
29
Impact Fees
One method of funding local government transportation concurrency requirements is through the
adoption and imposition of impact fees on new development. Local governments impose impact fees to
fund infrastructure
30
needed to expand local services to meet the demands of population growth
caused by new growth.
31
Impact fees must meet the following minimum criteria when adopted:
The fee must be calculated using the most recent and localized data.
32
The local government adopting the impact fee must account for and report impact fee
collections and expenditures. If the fee is imposed for a specific infrastructure need, the local
government must account for those revenues and expenditures in a separate accounting fund.
33
Charges imposed for the collection of impact fees must be limited to the actual costs.
34
All local governments must give notice of a new or increased impact fee at least 90 days before
the new or increased fee takes effect, but need not wait 90 days before decreasing, suspending,
or eliminating an impact fee. Unless the result reduces total mitigation costs or impact fees on
an applicant, new or increased impact fees may not apply to current or pending applications
24
S. 163.3180(5)(h), F.S. See Commerce Transportation Planning, supra note 16.
25
S. 163.3180(5)(h)1.c., F.S.
26
S. 163.3180(5)(h)1.d., F.S.
27
S. 163.3180(5(h)2.a.-d., F.S.
28
S. 163.3180(5)(h)2., F.S. For purposes of s. 163.3180(5), F.S., “transportation deficiency” means a facility or facilities on which the
level of service standard adopted in the comprehensive plan is exceeded by the number of existing, projected, or vested trips together
with additional trips originating from any source other than the development project under review, and trips forecast by established
traffic standards. S. 163.3180(5)(h)4., F.S. Local governments may resolve existing transportation deficiencies within an identified
transportation deficiency area by creating a transportation development authority with specific powers to implement a transportation
sufficiency plan funded through a formula of tax increment funding. Adopting a transportation sufficiency plan is deemed as meeting
transportation level of service standards, and proportionate fair-share mitigation is limited to ensure developments within the
transportation deficiency area are not responsible for additional costs to eliminate deficiencies. S. 163.3182, F.S.
29
S. 163.3180(5)(i), F.S.
30
“Infrastructure” means the fixed capital expenditure or outlay for the construction, reconstruction, or improvement of public facilities
with a life expectancy of five or more years, together with specific other costs required to bring the public facility into service but
excluding the costs of repairs or maintenance. The term also includes specific equipment. S. 163.31801(3), F.S.
31
S. 163.31801(2), F.S. Water and sewer connection fees are not impact fees. S. 163.31801(12), F.S.
32
S. 163.31801(4)(a), F.S.
33
S. 163.31801(4)(b), F.S.
34
S. 163.31801(4)(c), F.S. STORAGE NAME: h1177b.WMC PAGE: 5
DATE: 2/7/2024
submitted before the effective date of an ordinance or resolution imposing a new or increased
impact fee.
35
A local government may not require payment of the impact fee before the date of issuing a
building permit for the property that is subject to the fee.
36
The impact fee must be reasonably connected to, or have a rational nexus with, the need for
additional capital facilities and the increased impact generated by the new residential or
commercial construction.
37
The impact fee must be reasonably connected to, or have a rational nexus with, the
expenditures of the revenues generated and the benefits accruing to the new residential or
commercial construction.
38
The local government must specifically earmark revenues generated by the impact fee to
acquire, construct, or improve capital facilities to benefit new users.
39
The local government may not use revenues generated by the impact fee to pay existing debt or
for previously approved projects unless the expenditure is reasonably connected to, or has a
rational nexus with, the increased impact generated by the new residential or commercial
construction.
40
The types of impact fees charged and the timing of their collection after issuing a building permit are
within the discretion of the local government or special district authorities choosing to impose the
fees.
41
In general, a building permit must be obtained before the construction, erection, modification,
repair, or demolition of any building.
42
A development permit pertains to any building permit, zoning
permit, subdivision approval, rezoning, certification, special exception, variance, or any other official
action of local government having the effect of permitting the development of land.
43
Local governments
providing an exception or waiver of impact fees for the development or construction of affordable
housing are not required to use any revenues to offset the impact of such development.
44
Local governments must credit against impact fee collections any contribution related to public facilities
or infrastructure on a dollar-for-dollar basis at fair market value for the general category or class of
public facilities or infrastructure for which the contribution was made. If no impact fee is collected for
that category of public facility or infrastructure for which the contribution is made, no credit may be
applied.
45
Credits for impact fees may be assigned or transferred at any time once established, from
one development or parcel to another within the same impact fee zone or district or within an adjoining
impact fee zone or district within the same local government jurisdiction.
46
Local governments may increase impact fees only under limited circumstances. A fee may be
increased no more than once every four years, may not be increased retroactively, the increase may
not exceed 50 percent of the current impact fee amount, and any increase must be consistent with a
statutorily-compliant plan for the imposition, collection, and use of the fees. An increase not exceeding
25 percent of the current fee amount must be implemented in two equal annual increments, while an
increase greater than 25 percent but not exceeding 50 percent of the current amount must be
35
S. 163.31801(4)(d), F.S.
36
S. 163.31801(4)(e), F.S.
37
S. 163.31801(4)(f), F.S.
38
S. 163.31801(4)(g), F.S.
39
S. 163.31801(4)(h), F.S.
40
S. 163.31801(4)(i), F.S.
41
See s. 163.31801(2), F.S.
42
S. 553.79, F.S.
43
S. 163.3164(16), F.S.
44
S. 163.31801(11), F.S.
45
S. 163.31801(5), F.S.
46
S. 163.31801(10), F.S. In an action challenging an impact fee or a failure to provide proper credits, the local government has the
burden of proof to establish the imposition of the fee or the credit complies with the statute, and the court may not defer to the decision
or expertise of the government. S. 163.31801(9), F.S. STORAGE NAME: h1177b.WMC PAGE: 6
DATE: 2/7/2024
implemented in four equal annual installments. However, a local government may increase a fee more
than once in four years or for more than 50 percent of a current impact fee amount if it has:
Prepared a demonstrated-need study within 12 months before adopting the increase showing
extraordinary circumstances necessitating the need for the increase;
Conducted at least two publicly noticed workshops on the extraordinary circumstances
justifying the increase; and
Approved the increase by at least a two-thirds vote of the governing body.
47
A local government that increases an impact fee must still provide the holder of any impact fee credit
the full benefit of the density and intensity prepaid by the credit balance.
48
With each annual financial report or audit filed
49
a local government must report specific information on
impact fees imposed, including the specific purpose of the fee, the impact fee schedule describing the
method of calculating the fee, the amount assessed for each purpose and for each type of dwelling, the
total amount of fees charged by type of dwelling, and each exception or waiver to the imposition of
impact fees provided for construction of affordable housing.
50
Additionally, the chief financial officer or
executive officer (if there is no chief financial officer) must submit with the annual financial report an
affidavit attesting that all impact fees were collected and expended by the local government, or on its
behalf, in full compliance with the spending period provisions in the local ordinance and that funds
expended from each impact fee account were used to acquire, construct, or improve those specific
infrastructure needs.
51
Developments of Regional Impact (DRIs)
A DRI is “any development which, because of its character, magnitude, or location, would have a
substantial effect on the health, safety, or welfare of citizens of more than one county.”
52
The DRI
statutes were created in 1972 as an interim program intended to be replaced by comprehensive
planning and permitting laws.
53
The program provided a process to identify regional impacts stemming
from large developments and appropriate provisions to mitigate impacts on state and regional
resources.
54
The process to review or amend a DRI agreement and its implementing development orders went
through several revisions
55
until repeal of the requirements for state and regional reviews in 2018.
56
Affected local governments are responsible for the implementation and amendment of existing DRI
agreements and development orders.
57
Currently, an amendment to a development order for an
approved DRI may not amend to an earlier date until the local government agrees not to impose
downzoning, unit density reduction, or intensity reduction, unless:
58
The local government can demonstrate that substantial changes in the conditions underlying the
approval of the development order have occurred;
The development order was based on substantially inaccurate information provided by the
developer; or
47
S. 163.31801(6), F.S.
48
S. 163.31801(7), F.S.
49
See ss. 218.32, 218.39, F.S.
50
S. 163.31801(13), F.S.
51
S. 163.31801(8), F.S.
52
S. 380.06(1), F.S.
53
The Florida Senate, Committee on Community Affairs, Interim Report 2012-114, September 2011, citing: Thomas G. Pelham, A
Historical Perspective for Evaluating Florida’s Evolving Growth Management Process, in Growth Management in Florida: Planning for
Paradise, 8 (Timothy S. Chapin, Charles E. Connerly, and Harrison T. Higgins eds. 2005),
https://www.flsenate.gov/PublishedContent/Session/2012/InterimReports/2012-114ca.pdf (last visited Feb. 2, 2024)
54
Ch. 72-317, s. 6, Laws of Fla.
55
See ch. 2015-30, Laws of Fla. (requiring that new DRI-sized developments proposed after July 1, 2015, must be approved by a
comprehensive plan amendment in lieu of the state review process provided for in s. 380.06, F.S.) and ch. 2016-148, Laws of Fla.
(requiring DRI reviews to follow the state coordinated review process if the development, or an amendment to the development,
required an amendment to the comprehensive plan).
56
Ch. 2018-158, Laws of Fla.
57
S. 380.06(4)(a) and (7), F.S.
58
S. 380.06(4)(a), F.S. STORAGE NAME: h1177b.WMC PAGE: 7
DATE: 2/7/2024
The change is clearly established by local government to be essential to the public health,
safety, or welfare.
Any proposed change to a previously approved DRI must be reviewed by the local government based
on the standards and procedures in its adopted local comprehensive plan and local land development
regulations.
59
However, a proposed change reducing the originally approved height, density, or
intensity of the development must be reviewed by the local government based on the standards in the
local comprehensive plan at the time the development was originally approved.
60
If the proposed
change would have been consistent with the comprehensive plan in effect when the development was
originally approved, the local government may approve the change.
61
Any new conditions contained in
amendment to the development order must address impact directly created by the proposed change
and must be consistent with the local government’s adopted comprehensive plan, land development
regulations, and transportation concurrency.
62
Current provisions concerning DRIs do not limit or modify the rights of any person to complete any
development that was authorized by:
Registration of a subdivision pursuant to former chapter 498, F.S.
Recordation pursuant to local subdivision plat law, or
A building permit or other authorization to commence development on which there has been
reliance and a change of position and which registration or recordation was accomplished, or
which permit or authorization was issued, prior to July 1, 1973.
63
If a developer has obtained vested or other legal rights in reliance on prior regulations that prevent the
local government from changing those regulations in a way adverse to the developer’s interest, those
rights may not be abridged.
If a development has conveyed, or agreed to convey, property to a state or local government as a
prerequisite for a zoning change approval, such change is considered an act of reliance to vest rights,
provided the zoning change is actually granted by the government.
64
Impact Fee Credits
Notwithstanding any provision of an adopted local comprehensive plan or adopted land development
regulations to the contrary, an adopted change to a development order for an approved DRI does not
diminish or otherwise alter any credits for a development order exaction or fee as against impact fees,
mobility fees, or exactions if the credits are based upon the developer’s contribution of land, a public
facility, or the construction, expansion, or payment for land acquisition or construction or expansion of a
public facility or portion of a public facility.
65
If a local government imposes or increases impact fees, mobility fees, or exactions by local ordinance,
developers may petition the local government to modify the affected provisions of the developer’s
development order to give the developer credit for any contribution required by the development owner
toward an impact fee or exaction for the same need.
66
This provision does not apply to internal, onsite facilities required by local regulations and any offsite
facilities necessary to provide safe and adequate services to the development.
67
Effect of Proposed Changes
59
S. 380.06(7)(a), F.S. These procedures must include notice to the applicant and public about the issuance of development orders.
60
Id.
61
Id.
62
S. 380.06(7)(b), F.S.
63
S. 380.06(8), F.S.
64
S. 380.06(8)(b), F.S.
65
S. 380.06(5)(a), F.S.
66
S. 380.06(5)(b), F.S.
67
S. 380.06(5)(d), F.S. STORAGE NAME: h1177b.WMC PAGE: 8
DATE: 2/7/2024
Comprehensive Planning
The bill revises the scope of the Community Planning Act to clarify that incorporated municipalities and
counties have the power and responsibility to evaluate transportation impacts, apply concurrency, and
assess any fee related to transportation improvements. The bill also provides that counties and
municipalities, notwithstanding any other provision of general law, exclusively hold the powers and
responsibilities assigned to those units of government under the Community Planning Act.
The bill provides that a local government that continues to implement a transportation concurrency
system must comply with existing statutory requirements notwithstanding any provision in a
development order, an agreement, a local comprehensive plan, or a local land development regulation.
The bill revises those requirements by:
Requiring local governments that implement a transportation concurrency system to credit the
fair market value of any land dedicated to a governmental entity for transportation facilities
against the total proportionate share payments computed pursuant to general law; and
Removing the authority for local governments to cumulatively analyze trips from a previous
stage or phase of development that did not result in impacts for which mitigation was required
when determining whether mitigation for a subsequent stage or phase of development is
required.
Impact Fees
The bill clarifies that a special district may only levy impact fees if authorized to do so by special act.
The bill requires local governments to provide credit against the collection of the impact fee for any
contributions related to public facilities or infrastructure, notwithstanding the provisions of any
agreement.
The bill removes the exception for water and sewer connection fees from. s. 163.31801, F.S., making
water and sewer connections subject to the impact fee requirements in statute.
Developments of Regional Impact (DRIs)
The bill revises the exceptions pertaining to credits against local impact fees when amendments are
made to a development order. The exceptions apply to:
Internal, private, onsite facilities required by local regulations; and
Offsite facilities necessary to provide safe and adequate services solely to the development
and not the general public.
The bill removes the requirement that a local government review a proposed change to a DRI based
on the local comprehensive plan at the time the development was originally approved. The bill
provides that a change to a DRI that has the effect of reducing the originally approved height, density,
or intensity of the development or that changes only the location or acreage of uses and infrastructure
or exchanges permitted uses must be administratively approved and is not subject to review by the
local government.
The bill provides that any local government review of any proposed change to a DRI and of any
development order required to construct developments in the DRI must abide by any prior agreements
or other actions vesting the laws and policies governing the development.
The bill removes the requirement that any new condition in an amendment to a development order
approving or denying an application for a proposed change to a DRI must be consistent with the local
government’s comprehensive plan and land development regulations.
STORAGE NAME: h1177b.WMC PAGE: 9
DATE: 2/7/2024
The bill requires any proposed change to a DRI that includes a dedicated multimodal pathway suitable
for bicycles, pedestrians, and low-speed vehicles
68
along any internal roadway must be approved if the
right-of-way remains sufficient for the ultimate number of lanes of the internal road. The bill requires
approval of any proposed change to a DRI substituting a multimodal pathway suitable for bicycles,
pedestrians, and low-speed vehicles in lieu of an internal road if the change does not result in any road
within or adjacent to the DRI falling below the local government’s adopted level of service and does not
increase the original distribution of trips on any road analyzed as part of the DRI by more than 20
percent. The bill requires a local government to return any interest it may have in the right-of-way to
the developer if the developer has dedicated the right-of-way to the local government for proposed
internal road ways as part of the approval process for the amendment.
The bill clarifies that comprehensive plans and land development regulations adopted after a DRI has
vested do not apply to proposed changes to an approved DRI or to development orders required to
implement the DRI.
The bill provides that the conveyance of property or compensation, or the agreement to convey
property or compensation, to the state or local government is an act of reliance to vest rights, removing
the requirement that the conveyance be part of a zoning change.
B. SECTION DIRECTORY:
Section 1: Amends s. 163.3167, F.S., relating to the scope of the Community Planning Act.
Section 2: Amends s. 163.3180, F.S., relating to concurrency.
Section 3: Amends s. 163.31801, F.S., relating to impact fees.
Section 4: Amends s. 380.06, F.S., relating to developments of regional impact.
Section 5: Provides that the bill is effective upon becoming a law.
II. FISCAL ANALYSIS & ECONOMIC IMPACT STATEMENT
A. FISCAL IMPACT ON STATE GOVERNMENT:
1. Revenues:
None.
2. Expenditures:
None.
B. FISCAL IMPACT ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:
1. Revenues:
The Revenue Estimating Conference met on February 2, 2024, and determined the would have a
negative, indeterminate impact on local government tax revenues.
2. Expenditures:
None.
C. DIRECT ECONOMIC IMPACT O N PRIVATE SECTOR:
None.
68
Low-speed vehicle means any four-wheeled vehicle whose top speed is greater than 20 miles per hour but not greater than 25 miles
per hour. S. 320.01(41), F.S. STORAGE NAME: h1177b.WMC PAGE: 10
DATE: 2/7/2024
D. FISCAL COMMENTS:
None.
III. COMMENTS
A. CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES:
1. Applicability of Municipality/County Mandates Provision:
The county/municipality mandates provision of Art. VII, section 18, of the Florida Constitution may apply
because the bill makes various changes regarding impact fees and impact fee credits that could result
in a reduction in authority to raise revenue; however, an exemption may apply because the bill may
have an insignificant fiscal impact.
2. Other:
None.
B. RULE-MAKING AUTHORITY:
None.
C. DRAFTING ISSUES OR OTHER COMMENTS:
None.
IV. AMENDMENTS/COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE CHANGES
On January 25, 2024, the Local Administration, Federal Affairs & Special Districts Subcommittee adopted
an amendment and reported the bill favorably as committee substitute. The amendment provides that a
DRI change must be approved administratively when it changes only the location or acreage of uses and
infrastructure or exchanges permitted uses.
The analysis is drafted to the committee substitute as passed by the Local Administration, Federal Affairs &
Special Districts Subcommittee.