177.071

Administrative approval of plats or replats by designated county or municipal official.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

177.071 Administrative approval of plats or replats by designated county or municipal official.—

(1)(a) A plat or replat submitted under this part must be administratively approved and no further action or approval by the governing body of a county or municipality is required if the plat or replat complies with the requirements of s. 177.091. The governing body of the county or municipality shall designate, by ordinance or resolution, an administrative authority to receive, review, and process the plat or replat submittal, including designating an administrative official responsible for approving, approving with conditions, or denying the proposed plat or replat.

(b) As used in this section, the term “administrative authority” means a department, division, or other agency of the county or municipality. For purposes of issuing a final administrative approval of a plat or replat submittal, the term also includes an administrative officer or employee designated by the governing body of a county or municipality, including, but not limited to, a county administrator or manager, a city manager, a deputy county administrator or manager, a deputy city manager, an assistant county administrator or manager, an assistant city manager, or other high-ranking county or city department or division director with direct or indirect oversight responsibility for the county’s or municipality’s land development, housing, utilities, or public works programs.

(2) Within 7 business days after receipt of a plat or replat submittal, the administrative authority shall provide written notice to the applicant acknowledging receipt of the plat or replat submittal and identifying any missing documents or information necessary to process the plat or replat submittal for compliance with s. 177.091. The written notice must also provide information regarding the plat or replat approval process, including requirements regarding the completeness of the process and applicable timeframes for reviewing, approving, and otherwise processing the plat or replat submittal.

(3) Unless the applicant requests an extension of time, the administrative authority shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the plat or replat submittal within the timeframe identified in the written notice provided to the applicant under subsection (2). If the administrative authority does not approve the plat or replat, it must notify the applicant in writing of the reasons for declining to approve the submittal. The written notice must identify all areas of noncompliance and include specific citations to each requirement the plat or replat submittal fails to meet. The administrative authority, or an official, an employee, an agent, or a designee of the governing body, may not request or require the applicant to file a written extension of time.

(4) Before a plat or replat is offered for recording, it must be administratively approved as required by this section, and evidence of such approval must be placed on the plat or replat. If not approved, the governing body must return the plat or replat to the professional surveyor and mapper or the legal entity offering the plat or replat for recordation. For the purposes of this part:

(a) When the plat or replat to be submitted for approval is located wholly within the boundaries of a municipality, the municipality has exclusive jurisdiction to approve the plat or replat.

(b) When a plat or replat lies wholly within the unincorporated areas of a county, the county has exclusive jurisdiction to approve the plat or replat.

(c) When a plat or replat lies within the boundaries of more than one county, municipality, or both, two plats or replats must be prepared and each county or municipality has exclusive jurisdiction to approve the plat or replat within its boundaries, unless each county or municipality with jurisdiction over the plat or replat agrees that one plat is mutually acceptable.

(5) Any provision in a county charter, or in an ordinance of any charter county or consolidated government chartered under s. 6(e), Art. VIII of the State Constitution, which provision is inconsistent with anything contained in this section shall prevail in such charter county or consolidated government to the extent of any such inconsistency.

History.—s. 1, ch. 71-339; s. 1, ch. 76-110; s. 1, ch. 77-152; s. 1, ch. 77-278; s. 103, ch. 94-119; s. 1, ch. 95-176; s. 6, ch. 98-20; s. 1, ch. 2025-164.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1982–1988 · leading case: City of Coconut Creek v. Broward Cty. Bd.

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

City of Coconut Creek v. Broward Cty. Bd. (1983) fladistctapp · cites it 3× “Another legislative pronouncement, section 177.071(1)(a), Florida Statutes, provides that the municipality has exclusive jurisdiction to approve plats; however, section 177.”

Kane Homes, Inc. v. City of North Lauderdale (1982) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “NOTES [1] Interestingly, the charter would prevail not only over a city ordinance but also over a state statute as can be inferred from section 177.071(2), Florida Statutes (1979), which is contained in the land boundaries chapter of the Florida Statutes and regulates the…”

Orange West, Ltd. v. City of Winter Garden (1988) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “While the ordinances at issue in this case refer to single owners, this language refers to mobile home parks, and not the formation of a subdivision as was accomplished in the instant case when the individual lands were sold.”

— 177.071(1)(a) — 1 case

City of Coconut Creek v. Broward Cty. Bd. (1983) fladistctapp “Another legislative pronouncement, section 177.071(1)(a), Florida Statutes, provides that the municipality has exclusive jurisdiction to approve plats; however, section 177.”

— 177.071(2) — 2 cases

Kane Homes, Inc. v. City of North Lauderdale (1982) fladistctapp “NOTES [1] Interestingly, the charter would prevail not only over a city ordinance but also over a state statute as can be inferred from section 177.071(2), Florida Statutes (1979), which is contained in the land boundaries chapter of the Florida Statutes and regulates the…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.