(1) The statewide guidelines and standards for developments required to undergo development-of-regional-impact review provided in this section supersede the statewide guidelines and standards previously adopted by the Administration Commission that address the same development. Other standards and guidelines previously adopted by the Administration Commission, including the residential standards and guidelines, shall not be superseded. The guidelines and standards shall be applied in the manner described in s. 380.06(2)(a).
(2) The Administration Commission shall publish the statewide guidelines and standards established in this section in its administrative rule in place of the guidelines and standards that are superseded by this act, without the proceedings required by s. 120.54 and notwithstanding the provisions of s. 120.545(1)(c). The Administration Commission shall initiate rulemaking proceedings pursuant to s. 120.54 to make all other technical revisions necessary to conform the rules to this act. Rule amendments made pursuant to this subsection shall not be subject to the requirement for legislative approval pursuant to s. 380.06(2).
(3) The following statewide guidelines and standards shall be applied in the manner described in s. 380.06(2) to determine whether the following developments shall be required to undergo development-of-regional-impact review:
1. Any of the following airport construction projects shall be a development of regional impact:
a. A new commercial service or general aviation airport with paved runways.
b. A new commercial service or general aviation paved runway.
c. A new passenger terminal facility.
2. Lengthening of an existing runway by 25 percent or an increase in the number of gates by 25 percent or three gates, whichever is greater, on a commercial service airport or a general aviation airport with regularly scheduled flights is a development of regional impact. However, expansion of existing terminal facilities at a nonhub or small hub commercial service airport shall not be a development of regional impact.
3. Any airport development project which is proposed for safety, repair, or maintenance reasons alone and would not have the potential to increase or change existing types of aircraft activity is not a development of regional impact. Notwithstanding subparagraphs 1. and 2., renovation, modernization, or replacement of airport airside or terminal facilities that may include increases in square footage of such facilities but does not increase the number of gates or change the existing types of aircraft activity is not a development of regional impact.
(b) Attractions and recreation facilities.—Any sports, entertainment, amusement, or recreation facility, including, but not limited to, a sports arena, stadium, racetrack, tourist attraction, amusement park, or pari-mutuel facility, the construction or expansion of which:
1. For single performance facilities:
a. Provides parking spaces for more than 2,500 cars; or
b. Provides more than 10,000 permanent seats for spectators.
2. For serial performance facilities:
a. Provides parking spaces for more than 1,000 cars; or
b. Provides more than 4,000 permanent seats for spectators.
For purposes of this subsection, “serial performance facilities” means those using their parking areas or permanent seating more than one time per day on a regular or continuous basis.
3. For multiscreen movie theaters of at least 8 screens and 2,500 seats:
a. Provides parking spaces for more than 1,500 cars; or
b. Provides more than 6,000 permanent seats for spectators.
(c) Industrial plants, industrial parks, and distribution, warehousing or wholesaling facilities.—Any proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or distribution, warehousing, or wholesaling facility, excluding wholesaling developments which deal primarily with the general public onsite, under common ownership, or any proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing activity or distribution, warehousing, or wholesaling activity, excluding wholesaling activities which deal primarily with the general public onsite, which:
1. Provides parking for more than 2,500 motor vehicles; or
2. Occupies a site greater than 320 acres.
(d) Office development.—Any proposed office building or park operated under common ownership, development plan, or management that:
1. Encompasses 300,000 or more square feet of gross floor area; or
2. Encompasses more than 600,000 square feet of gross floor area in a county with a population greater than 500,000 and only in a geographic area specifically designated as highly suitable for increased threshold intensity in the approved local comprehensive plan.
(e) Retail and service development.—Any proposed retail, service, or wholesale business establishment or group of establishments which deals primarily with the general public onsite, operated under one common property ownership, development plan, or management that:
1. Encompasses more than 400,000 square feet of gross area; or
2. Provides parking spaces for more than 2,500 cars.
(f) Hotel or motel development.—
1. Any proposed hotel or motel development that is planned to create or accommodate 350 or more units; or
2. Any proposed hotel or motel development that is planned to create or accommodate 750 or more units, in a county with a population greater than 500,000.
(g) Recreational vehicle development.—Any proposed recreational vehicle development planned to create or accommodate 500 or more spaces.
(h) Multiuse development.—Any proposed development with two or more land uses where the sum of the percentages of the appropriate thresholds identified in chapter 28-24, Florida Administrative Code, or this section for each land use in the development is equal to or greater than 145 percent. Any proposed development with three or more land uses, one of which is residential and contains at least 100 dwelling units or 15 percent of the applicable residential threshold, whichever is greater, where the sum of the percentages of the appropriate thresholds identified in chapter 28-24, Florida Administrative Code, or this section for each land use in the development is equal to or greater than 160 percent. This threshold is in addition to, and does not preclude, a development from being required to undergo development-of-regional-impact review under any other threshold.
(i) Residential development.—No rule may be adopted concerning residential developments which treats a residential development in one county as being located in a less populated adjacent county unless more than 25 percent of the development is located within 2 or less miles of the less populated adjacent county. The residential thresholds of adjacent counties with less population and a lower threshold shall not be controlling on any development wholly located within areas designated as rural areas of critical economic concern.
(j) Workforce housing.—The applicable guidelines for residential development and the residential component for multiuse development shall be increased by 50 percent where the developer demonstrates that at least 15 percent of the total residential dwelling units authorized within the development of regional impact will be dedicated to affordable workforce housing, subject to a recorded land use restriction that shall be for a period of not less than 20 years and that includes resale provisions to ensure long-term affordability for income-eligible homeowners and renters and provisions for the workforce housing to be commenced prior to the completion of 50 percent of the market rate dwelling. For purposes of this paragraph, the term “affordable workforce housing” means housing that is affordable to a person who earns less than 120 percent of the area median income, or less than 140 percent of the area median income if located in a county in which the median purchase price for a single-family existing home exceeds the statewide median purchase price of a single-family existing home. For the purposes of this paragraph, the term “statewide median purchase price of a single-family existing home” means the statewide purchase price as determined in the Florida Sales Report, Single-Family Existing Homes, released each January by the Florida Association of Realtors and the University of Florida Real Estate Research Center.
1. The proposed construction of any public, private, or proprietary postsecondary educational campus which provides for a design population of more than 5,000 full-time equivalent students, or the proposed physical expansion of any public, private, or proprietary postsecondary educational campus having such a design population that would increase the population by at least 20 percent of the design population.
2. As used in this paragraph, “full-time equivalent student” means enrollment for 15 or more quarter hours during a single academic semester. In career centers or other institutions which do not employ semester hours or quarter hours in accounting for student participation, enrollment for 18 contact hours shall be considered equivalent to one quarter hour, and enrollment for 27 contact hours shall be considered equivalent to one semester hour.
3. This paragraph does not apply to institutions which are the subject of a campus master plan adopted by the university board of trustees pursuant to s. 1013.30.
(4) Two or more developments, represented by their owners or developers to be separate developments, shall be aggregated and treated as a single development under this chapter when they are determined to be part of a unified plan of development and are physically proximate to one other.
(a) The criteria of two of the following subparagraphs must be met in order for the state land planning agency to determine that there is a unified plan of development:
1.a. The same person has retained or shared control of the developments;
b. The same person has ownership or a significant legal or equitable interest in the developments; or
c. There is common management of the developments controlling the form of physical development or disposition of parcels of the development.
2. There is a reasonable closeness in time between the completion of 80 percent or less of one development and the submission to a governmental agency of a master plan or series of plans or drawings for the other development which is indicative of a common development effort.
3. A master plan or series of plans or drawings exists covering the developments sought to be aggregated which have been submitted to a local general-purpose government, water management district, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, or the Division of Florida Condominiums, Timeshares, and Mobile Homes for authorization to commence development. The existence or implementation of a utility’s master utility plan required by the Public Service Commission or general-purpose local government or a master drainage plan shall not be the sole determinant of the existence of a master plan.
4. The voluntary sharing of infrastructure that is indicative of a common development effort or is designated specifically to accommodate the developments sought to be aggregated, except that which was implemented because it was required by a local general-purpose government; water management district; the Department of Environmental Protection; the Division of Florida Condominiums, Timeshares, and Mobile Homes; or the Public Service Commission.
5. There is a common advertising scheme or promotional plan in effect for the developments sought to be aggregated.
(b) The following activities or circumstances shall not be considered in determining whether to aggregate two or more developments:
1. Activities undertaken leading to the adoption or amendment of any comprehensive plan element described in part II of chapter 163.
2. The sale of unimproved parcels of land, where the seller does not retain significant control of the future development of the parcels.
3. The fact that the same lender has a financial interest, including one acquired through foreclosure, in two or more parcels, so long as the lender is not an active participant in the planning, management, or development of the parcels in which it has an interest.
4. Drainage improvements that are not designed to accommodate the types of development listed in the guidelines and standards contained in or adopted pursuant to this chapter or which are not designed specifically to accommodate the developments sought to be aggregated.
(c) Aggregation is not applicable when the following circumstances and provisions of this chapter are applicable:
1. Developments which are otherwise subject to aggregation with a development of regional impact which has received approval through the issuance of a final development order shall not be aggregated with the approved development of regional impact. However, nothing contained in this subparagraph shall preclude the state land planning agency from evaluating an allegedly separate development as a substantial deviation pursuant to s. 380.06(19) or as an independent development of regional impact.
2. Two or more developments, each of which is independently a development of regional impact that has or will obtain a development order pursuant to s. 380.06.
3. Completion of any development that has been vested pursuant to s. 380.05 or s. 380.06, including vested rights arising out of agreements entered into with the state land planning agency for purposes of resolving vested rights issues. Development-of-regional-impact review of additions to vested developments of regional impact shall not include review of the impacts resulting from the vested portions of the development.
4. The developments sought to be aggregated were authorized to commence development prior to September 1, 1988, and could not have been required to be aggregated under the law existing prior to that date.
(d) The provisions of this subsection shall be applied prospectively from September 1, 1988. Written decisions, agreements, and binding letters of interpretation made or issued by the state land planning agency prior to July 1, 1988, shall not be affected by this subsection.
(e) In order to encourage developers to design, finance, donate, or build infrastructure, public facilities, or services, the state land planning agency may enter into binding agreements with two or more developers providing that the joint planning, sharing, or use of specified public infrastructure, facilities, or services by the developers shall not be considered in any subsequent determination of whether a unified plan of development exists for their developments. Such binding agreements may authorize the developers to pool impact fees or impact-fee credits, or to enter into front-end agreements, or other financing arrangements by which they collectively agree to design, finance, donate, or build such public infrastructure, facilities, or services. Such agreements shall be conditioned upon a subsequent determination by the appropriate local government of consistency with the approved local government comprehensive plan and land development regulations. Additionally, the developers must demonstrate that the provision and sharing of public infrastructure, facilities, or services is in the public interest and not merely for the benefit of the developments which are the subject of the agreement. Developments that are the subject of an agreement pursuant to this paragraph shall be aggregated if the state land planning agency determines that sufficient aggregation factors are present to require aggregation without considering the design features, financial arrangements, donations, or construction that are specified in and required by the agreement.
(f) The state land planning agency has authority to adopt rules pursuant to ss. 120.536(1) and 120.54 to implement the provisions of this subsection.
History.—s. 46, ch. 85-55; s. 16, ch. 86-191; s. 3, ch. 88-164; s. 3, ch. 89-375; s. 3, ch. 89-536; s. 2, ch. 93-135; ss. 54, 55, ch. 93-206; ss. 347, 482, ch. 94-356; s. 13, ch. 95-149; s. 10, ch. 95-322; s. 4, ch. 95-412; s. 12, ch. 96-416; s. 93, ch. 98-200; s. 31, ch. 2002-296; s. 973, ch. 2002-387; s. 31, ch. 2004-357; s. 13, ch. 2006-69; s. 9, ch. 2006-220; s. 9, ch. 2007-198; s. 18, ch. 2008-240.