|
|
The 2025 Florida Statutes
|
|
|
|
|
F.S. 380.06380.06 Developments of regional impact.—(1) DEFINITION.—The term “development of regional impact,” as used in this section, means any development that, because of its character, magnitude, or location, would have a substantial effect upon the health, safety, or welfare of citizens of more than one county. (2) STATEWIDE GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS.—The statewide guidelines and standards and the exemptions specified in s. 380.0651 and the statewide guidelines and standards adopted by the Administration Commission and codified in chapter 28-24, Florida Administrative Code, must be used in determining whether particular developments are subject to the requirements of subsection (12). The statewide guidelines and standards previously adopted by the Administration Commission and approved by the Legislature shall remain in effect unless superseded or repealed by statute. The statewide guidelines and standards shall be applied as follows:(a) A development that is below 100 percent of all numerical thresholds in the statewide guidelines and standards is not subject to subsection (12). (b) A development that is at or above 100 percent of any numerical threshold in the statewide guidelines and standards is subject to subsection (12). (3) BINDING LETTER.—(a) Any binding letter previously issued to a developer by the state land planning agency as to whether his or her proposed development must undergo development-of-regional-impact review, whether his or her rights have vested pursuant to subsection (8), or whether a proposed substantial change to a development of regional impact concerning which rights had previously vested pursuant to subsection (8) would divest such rights, remains valid unless it expired on or before April 6, 2018. (b) Upon a request by the developer, a binding letter of interpretation regarding which rights had previously vested in a development of regional impact may be amended by the local government of jurisdiction, based on standards and procedures in the adopted local comprehensive plan or the adopted local land development code, to reflect a change to the plan of development and modification of vested rights, provided that any such amendment to a binding letter of vested rights must be consistent with s. 163.3167(5). Review of a request for an amendment to a binding letter of vested rights may not include a review of the impacts created by previously vested portions of the development. (c) Every binding letter determining that a proposed development is not a development of regional impact, but not including binding letters of vested rights or of modification of vested rights, shall expire and become void unless the plan of development has been substantially commenced within:1. Three years from October 1, 1985, for binding letters issued prior to the effective date of this act; or 2. Three years from the date of issuance of binding letters issued on or after October 1, 1985. (d) The expiration date of a binding letter begins to run after final disposition of all administrative and judicial appeals of the binding letter and may be extended by mutual agreement of the state land planning agency, the local government of jurisdiction, and the developer. (e) An informal determination by the state land planning agency, in the form of a clearance letter as to whether a development is required to undergo development-of-regional-impact review or whether the amount of development that remains to be built in an approved development of regional impact, remains valid unless it expired on or before April 6, 2018. (4) LOCAL GOVERNMENT DEVELOPMENT ORDER.—(a) Notwithstanding any provision of any adopted local comprehensive plan or adopted local government land development regulation to the contrary, an amendment to a development order for an approved development of regional impact adopted pursuant to subsection (7) may not amend to an earlier date the date until the local government agrees that the approved development of regional impact will not be subject to downzoning, unit density reduction, or intensity reduction, unless the local government can demonstrate that substantial changes in the conditions underlying the approval of the development order have occurred or the development order was based on substantially inaccurate information provided by the developer or that the change is clearly established by local government to be essential to the public health, safety, or welfare. The date established pursuant to this paragraph may not be sooner than the buildout date of the project. (b)1. A local government may not include as a development order condition for a development of regional impact any requirement that a developer contribute or pay for land acquisition or construction or expansion of public facilities or portions thereof unless the local government has enacted a local ordinance which requires other development not subject to this section to contribute its proportionate share of the funds, land, or public facilities necessary to accommodate any impacts having a rational nexus to the proposed development, and the need to construct new facilities or add to the present system of public facilities must be reasonably attributable to the proposed development. 2. Selection of a contractor or design professional for any aspect of construction or design related to the construction or expansion of a public facility by a nongovernmental developer which is undertaken as a condition of a development order to mitigate the impacts reasonably attributable to the proposed development is not subject to competitive bidding or competitive negotiation. (c) Notice of the adoption of an amendment to an adopted development order shall be recorded by the developer, in accordance with s. 28.222, with the clerk of the circuit court for each county in which the development is located. The notice shall include a legal description of the property covered by the order and shall state which unit of local government adopted the development order, the date of adoption, the date of adoption of any amendments to the development order, the location where the adopted order with any amendments may be examined, and that the development order constitutes a land development regulation applicable to the property. The recording of this notice does not constitute a lien, cloud, or encumbrance on real property, or actual or constructive notice of any such lien, cloud, or encumbrance. This paragraph applies only to developments initially approved under this section after July 1, 1980. If the local government of jurisdiction rescinds a development order for an approved development of regional impact pursuant to s. 380.115, the developer may record notice of the rescission. (d) Any agreement entered into by the state land planning agency, the developer, and the local government with respect to an approved development of regional impact previously classified as essentially built out, or any other official determination that an approved development of regional impact is essentially built out, remains valid unless it expired on or before April 6, 2018, and may be amended pursuant to the processes adopted by the local government for amending development orders. Any such agreement or amendment may authorize the developer to exchange approved land uses, subject to demonstrating that the exchange will not increase impacts to public facilities. This paragraph applies to all such agreements and amendments effective on or after April 6, 2018. (5) CREDITS AGAINST LOCAL IMPACT FEES.—(a) Notwithstanding any provision of an adopted local comprehensive plan or adopted local government land development regulations to the contrary, the adoption of an amendment to a development order for an approved development of regional impact pursuant to subsection (7) does not diminish or otherwise alter any credits for a development order exaction or fee as against impact fees, mobility fees, or exactions when such credits are based upon the developer’s contribution of land or a public facility or the construction, expansion, or payment for land acquisition or construction or expansion of a public facility, or a portion thereof. (b) If the local government imposes or increases an impact fee, mobility fee, or exaction by local ordinance after a development order has been issued, the developer may petition the local government, and the local government shall modify the affected provisions of the development order to give the developer credit for any contribution of land for a public facility, or construction, expansion, or contribution of funds for land acquisition or construction or expansion of a public facility, or a portion thereof, required by the development order toward an impact fee or exaction for the same need. (c) Any capital contribution front-ending agreement entered into by a local government and a developer which is still in effect as of April 6, 2018, as part of a development-of-regional-impact development order to reimburse the developer, or the developer’s successor, for voluntary contributions paid in excess of his or her fair share remains valid. (d) This subsection does not apply to internal, onsite facilities required by local regulations or to any offsite facilities to the extent that such facilities are necessary to provide safe and adequate services to the development. (6) REPORTS.—Notwithstanding any condition in a development order for an approved development of regional impact, the developer is not required to submit an annual or a biennial report on the development of regional impact to the local government, the regional planning agency, the state land planning agency, and all affected permit agencies unless required to do so by the local government that has jurisdiction over the development. The penalty for failure to file such a required report is as prescribed by the local government. (7) CHANGES.—(a) Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in any development order, agreement, local comprehensive plan, or local land development regulation, any proposed change to a previously approved development of regional impact shall be reviewed by the local government based on the standards and procedures in its adopted local comprehensive plan and adopted local land development regulations, including, but not limited to, procedures for notice to the applicant and the public regarding the issuance of development orders. However, a change to a development of regional impact that has the effect of 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, and if the development would have been consistent with the comprehensive plan in effect when the development was originally approved, the local government may approve the change. If the revised development is approved, the developer may proceed as provided in s. 163.3167(5). For any proposed change to a previously approved development of regional impact, at least one public hearing must be held on the application for change, and any change must be approved by the local governing body before it becomes effective. The review must abide by any prior agreements or other actions vesting the laws and policies governing the development. Development within the previously approved development of regional impact may continue, as approved, during the review in portions of the development which are not directly affected by the proposed change. (b) The local government shall either adopt an amendment to the development order that approves the application, with or without conditions, or deny the application for the proposed change. Any new conditions in the amendment to the development order issued by the local government may address only those impacts directly created by the proposed change, and must be consistent with s. 163.3180(5), the adopted comprehensive plan, and adopted land development regulations. Changes to a phase date, buildout date, expiration date, or termination date may also extend any required mitigation associated with a phased construction project so that mitigation takes place in the same timeframe relative to the impacts as approved. (c) This section is not intended to alter or otherwise limit the extension, previously granted by statute, of a commencement, buildout, phase, termination, or expiration date in any development order for an approved development of regional impact and any corresponding modification of a related permit or agreement. Any such extension is not subject to review or modification in any future amendment to a development order pursuant to the adopted local comprehensive plan and adopted local land development regulations. (8) VESTED RIGHTS.—Nothing in this section shall 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, by recordation pursuant to local subdivision plat law, or by 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. If a developer has, by his or her actions in reliance on prior regulations, obtained vested or other legal rights that in law would have prevented a local government from changing those regulations in a way adverse to the developer’s interests, nothing in this chapter authorizes any governmental agency to abridge those rights.(a) For the purpose of determining the vesting of rights under this subsection, approval pursuant to local subdivision plat law, ordinances, or regulations of a subdivision plat by formal vote of a county or municipal governmental body having jurisdiction after August 1, 1967, and prior to July 1, 1973, is sufficient to vest all property rights for the purposes of this subsection; and no action in reliance on, or change of position concerning, such local governmental approval is required for vesting to take place. Anyone claiming vested rights under this paragraph must notify the department in writing by January 1, 1986. Such notification shall include information adequate to document the rights established by this subsection. When such notification requirements are met, in order for the vested rights authorized pursuant to this paragraph to remain valid after June 30, 1990, development of the vested plan must be commenced prior to that date upon the property that the state land planning agency has determined to have acquired vested rights following the notification or in a binding letter of interpretation. When the notification requirements have not been met, the vested rights authorized by this paragraph shall expire June 30, 1986, unless development commenced prior to that date. (b) For the purpose of this act, the conveyance of, or the agreement to convey, property to the county, state, or local government as a prerequisite to zoning change approval shall be construed as an act of reliance to vest rights as determined under this subsection, provided such zoning change is actually granted by such government. (9) VALIDITY OF COMPREHENSIVE APPLICATION.—Any agreement previously entered into by a developer, a regional planning agency, and a local government regarding a development project that includes two or more developments of regional impact and was the subject of a comprehensive development-of-regional-impact application remains valid unless it expired on or before April 6, 2018. (10) AREAWIDE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT.—Any approval of an authorized developer for an areawide development of regional impact remains valid unless it expired on or before April 6, 2018. (11) ABANDONMENT OF DEVELOPMENTS OF REGIONAL IMPACT.—(a) There is hereby established a process to abandon a development of regional impact and its associated development orders. A development of regional impact and its associated development orders may be proposed to be abandoned by the owner or developer. The local government in whose jurisdiction the development of regional impact is located also may propose to abandon the development of regional impact, provided that the local government gives individual written notice to each development-of-regional-impact owner and developer of record, and provided that no such owner or developer objects in writing to the local government before or at the public hearing pertaining to abandonment of the development of regional impact. If there is no existing development within the development of regional impact at the time of abandonment and no development within the development of regional impact is proposed by the owner or developer after such abandonment, an abandonment order may not require the owner or developer to contribute any land, funds, or public facilities as a condition of such abandonment order. The local government must file notice of the abandonment pursuant to s. 28.222 with the clerk of the circuit court for each county in which the development of regional impact is located. Abandonment will be deemed to have occurred upon the recording of the notice. Any decision by a local government concerning the abandonment of a development of regional impact is subject to an appeal pursuant to s. 380.07. The issues in any such appeal must be confined to whether the provisions of this subsection have been satisfied. (b) If requested by the owner, developer, or local government, the development-of-regional-impact development order must be abandoned by the local government having jurisdiction upon a showing that all required mitigation related to the amount of development which existed on the date of abandonment has been completed or will be completed under an existing permit or equivalent authorization issued by a governmental agency as defined in s. 380.031(6), provided such permit or authorization is subject to enforcement through administrative or judicial remedies. All development following abandonment must be fully consistent with the current comprehensive plan and applicable zoning. (c) A development order for abandonment of an approved development of regional impact may be amended by a local government pursuant to subsection (7), provided that the amendment does not reduce any mitigation previously required as a condition of abandonment, unless the developer demonstrates that changes to the development no longer will result in impacts that necessitated the mitigation. (12) PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS.—(a) A proposed development that exceeds the statewide guidelines and standards specified in s. 380.0651 and is not otherwise exempt pursuant to s. 380.0651 must be approved by a local government pursuant to s. 163.3184(4) in lieu of proceeding in accordance with this section. However, if the proposed development is consistent with the comprehensive plan as provided in s. 163.3194(3)(b), the development is not required to undergo review pursuant to s. 163.3184(4) or this section. (b) This subsection does not apply to:1. Amendments to a development order governing an existing development of regional impact. 2. An application for development approval filed with a concurrent plan amendment application pending as of May 14, 2015, if the applicant elects to have the application reviewed pursuant to this section as it existed on that date. The election shall be in writing and filed with the affected local government, regional planning council, and state land planning agency before December 31, 2018. History.—s. 6, ch. 72-317; s. 2, ch. 74-326; s. 5, ch. 75-167; s. 1, ch. 76-69; s. 2, ch. 77-215; s. 148, ch. 79-400; s. 3, ch. 80-313; s. 22, ch. 83-222; s. 4, ch. 83-308; s. 1, ch. 84-331; s. 43, ch. 85-55; s. 15, ch. 86-191; s. 1, ch. 88-164; s. 1, ch. 89-375; s. 1, ch. 89-536; s. 52, ch. 90-331; s. 20, ch. 91-192; s. 20, ch. 91-305; s. 1, ch. 91-309; s. 15, ch. 92-129; s. 2, ch. 93-95; s. 52, ch. 93-206; s. 345, ch. 94-356; s. 1029, ch. 95-148; s. 11, ch. 95-149; s. 9, ch. 95-322; s. 3, ch. 95-412; s. 114, ch. 96-410; s. 10, ch. 96-416; s. 1, ch. 97-28; s. 7, ch. 97-253; s. 52, ch. 97-278; s. 8, ch. 98-146; ss. 26, 31, ch. 98-176; s. 71, ch. 99-251; s. 7, ch. 99-378; s. 27, ch. 2001-201; s. 95, ch. 2002-20; s. 30, ch. 2002-296; s. 1, ch. 2004-10; s. 16, ch. 2005-157; s. 4, ch. 2005-166; s. 13, ch. 2005-281; s. 17, ch. 2005-290; s. 12, ch. 2006-69; s. 8, ch. 2006-220; s. 73, ch. 2007-5; ss. 8, 9, ch. 2007-198; s. 6, ch. 2007-204; s. 17, ch. 2008-240; s. 12, ch. 2009-96; s. 16, ch. 2010-4; s. 73, ch. 2010-5; s. 90, ch. 2010-102; s. 11, ch. 2011-14; ss. 54, 80, ch. 2011-139; s. 258, ch. 2011-142; s. 4, ch. 2011-223; s. 2, ch. 2012-75; s. 60, ch. 2012-96; s. 17, ch. 2012-99; s. 40, ch. 2014-218; s. 35, ch. 2015-2; s. 18, ch. 2015-30; s. 7, ch. 2016-148; ss. 1, 24, ch. 2018-158; s. 5, ch. 2021-195.
| |
Annotations, Discussions, Cases:
Cases Citing Statute 380.06
Total Results: 63
399 So. 2d 1374, 16 ERC 1766, 11 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20992, 16 ERC (BNA) 1766, 1981 Fla. LEXIS 2652
Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 16, 1981 | Docket: 309918
Cited 65 times | Published
development of regional impact (DRI) pursuant to section 380.06, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1974).[1] Estuary's
353 So. 2d 1199, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 17273
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 22, 1977 | Docket: 424266
Cited 21 times | Published
impact which is subject to regulation under Section 380.06, Florida Statutes (1975). GDC urges that the
351 So. 2d 1062, 8 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 10, 1977 | Docket: 1671578
Cited 19 times | Published
control of developments of regional impact, Section 380.06.
Geographic areas of critical state concern
184 So. 3d 1155
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 8, 2015 | Docket: 3011061
Cited 16 times | Published
allocated to Parcel 208/308.
See
§ 380.06(19), Fla. Stat. (2015) (addressing procedures
374 So. 2d 1046
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 7, 1979 | Docket: 430258
Cited 16 times | Published
sections of this property in accordance with Section 380.06(12) Florida Statutes (1973), and was not subject
429 So. 2d 1260
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 31, 1983 | Docket: 1222358
Cited 15 times | Published
Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners. § 380.06(6), Fla. Stat. Because a DRI impacts on more than
563 So. 2d 117, 1990 WL 67338
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 22, 1990 | Docket: 1682855
Cited 14 times | Published
impact to undergo a review and approval process. § 380.06, Fla. Stat. (1989). Nothing in chapter 380, Florida
723 So. 2d 199, 1998 WL 732936
Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 22, 1998 | Docket: 469528
Cited 12 times | Published
developments-of-regional-impact applications." § 380.06(22)(c), Fla. Stat. (1983).
Chapters 160 and 163
560 So. 2d 782, 15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 244, 1990 Fla. LEXIS 593, 1990 WL 55944
Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 26, 1990 | Docket: 1477710
Cited 12 times | Published
developments-of-regional-impact applications." § 380.06(22)(c), Fla. Stat. (1983).
*785 Chapters 160 and
456 So. 2d 904
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 25, 1984 | Docket: 1731931
Cited 12 times | Published
held "in the same manner as for a rezoning." Section 380.06(1). Case law instructs that procedures relating
384 So. 2d 1369
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 3, 1980 | Docket: 1269163
Cited 12 times | Published
of the 60-day period allowed by the statute (Section 380.06(4)(a), Florida Statutes), within which it must
535 So. 2d 302, 1988 WL 123678
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 23, 1988 | Docket: 1306125
Cited 11 times | Published
Fla. Stat. (1987).
[7] Chapters 334, 335, 336; § 380.06(15), Fla. Stat. (1987).
562 So. 2d 322, 15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 169, 1990 Fla. LEXIS 442, 1990 WL 87296
Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 29, 1990 | Docket: 1256525
Cited 10 times | Published
sufficient to vest development rights under section 380.06(12), Florida Statutes (1973). Ridgewood offered
381 So. 2d 1126
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 17, 1979 | Docket: 1723025
Cited 10 times | Published
County Commissioners of Lee County, pursuant to Section 380.06, after due consideration of the consistency
346 So. 2d 1049
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 31, 1977 | Docket: 177542
Cited 10 times | Published
pursuant to subsection (8) of this section."
Section 380.06(11), Florida Statutes (1975).
Accordingly,
333 So. 2d 472
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 4, 1976 | Docket: 1687249
Cited 10 times | Published
grant initial approval of DRI's under Fla. Stat. § 380.06. Both Lake Padgett and Pasco County view the Cypress
360 So. 2d 388
Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 31, 1978 | Docket: 1738857
Cited 9 times | Published
District Court of Appeal Case No. BB-69.
[3] See § 380.06(1), Fla. Stat.
[4] § 120.57, Fla. Stat.
[5]
801 F. Supp. 684, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13566, 1992 WL 196864
District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 31, 1992 | Docket: 1773767
Cited 8 times | Published
the state may have caused.
Pursuant to Fla.Stat. § 380.06(12), the Planning Council only makes recommendations
438 So. 2d 876
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 13, 1983 | Docket: 1445833
Cited 8 times | Published
order in the instant case makes no mention of section 380.06 or any of the substantive standards contained
325 So. 2d 45
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 14, 1976 | Docket: 1670643
Cited 8 times | Published
of regional impact,'" as defined in Fla. Stat. § 380.06 (1973). GDC had obtained from the City an order
322 So. 2d 655
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 26, 1975 | Docket: 1413604
Cited 8 times | Published
protected by the explicit *658 requirements of Florida Statute 380.06(8) in that within 30 days of receiving
833 So. 2d 215, 2002 WL 31833708
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 19, 2002 | Docket: 1675506
Cited 7 times | Published
as a building permit or zoning decision is. See § 380.06(15), Fla. Stat. (1995) (setting forth the procedure
890 So. 2d 256
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 25, 2004 | Docket: 1285978
Cited 6 times | Published
require further regional review. See § 380.06(1), and § 380.06(19), Fla. Stat. (2001).
The definition
678 So. 2d 356, 1996 WL 180069
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 17, 1996 | Docket: 1470729
Cited 6 times | Published
the Development of Regional Impact process. See § 380.06, Fla.Stat.[12] The law of nuisance is not intended
625 So. 2d 831, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 476, 1993 Fla. LEXIS 1450, 1993 WL 347762
Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 9, 1993 | Docket: 474084
Cited 6 times | Published
development of regional impact (DRI) pursuant to section 380.06, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1974). The developer
908 F.2d 885, 1990 WL 103583
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 21, 1990 | Docket: 2139303
Cited 6 times | Published
Planning Council.
See
Fla.Stat.Ann. § 380.06(10) (development of regional impact application
605 So. 2d 469, 1992 WL 167624
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 20, 1992 | Docket: 1701990
Cited 5 times | Published
Development of Regional Impact reviews pursuant to section 380.06, Florida Statutes. Id., at 130. The court in
546 So. 2d 451, 1989 WL 77499
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 13, 1989 | Docket: 1442346
Cited 5 times | Published
Chapter 160, Fla. Stat. (1983). And third, from section 380.06, Fla. Stat. (1983), of the "Florida Environmental
534 So. 2d 419, 1988 WL 96447
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 22, 1988 | Docket: 1358911
Cited 5 times | Published
of Regional Impact (DRI) process pursuant to section 380.06, Florida Statutes, prior to March 31, 1987
866 So. 2d 707, 2003 WL 22900537
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 10, 2003 | Docket: 1273783
Cited 4 times | Published
specifically provided for in the statute. See § 380.06(20), Fla. Stat. (1997).[4] The Landowners do not
658 So. 2d 163, 1995 WL 421151
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 19, 1995 | Docket: 1525137
Cited 4 times | Published
requires application for review and approval. Section 380.06(19)(e)(3). The entry of the order of taking
402 So. 2d 1251
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 5, 1981 | Docket: 1313397
Cited 4 times | Published
development permit with the local zoning authorities. § 380.06(6). This application must not only request approval
819 So. 2d 200, 2002 WL 1049732
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 28, 2002 | Docket: 1456450
Cited 3 times | Published
[2] §§ 163.3161-.3245, Fla. Stat. (1999).
[3] § 380.06, Fla. Stat. (1999).
[4] § 163.3184, Fla. Stat
629 So. 2d 161, 1993 WL 382986
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 1, 1993 | Docket: 1677252
Cited 3 times | Published
with the appropriate local zoning authorities. § 380.06(6), Fla. Stat. (1991). This application must request
424 So. 2d 787
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 21, 1983 | Docket: 1297053
Cited 3 times | Published
interpretation" which states the application of section 380.06 regional impact standards to proposed developments
350 So. 2d 802
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 5, 1977 | Docket: 1757857
Cited 3 times | Published
(Supp. 1976), concerning the applicability of Section 380.06(1), Florida Statutes (1975) and Section 380
386 So. 2d 879
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 18, 1980 | Docket: 1518335
Cited 2 times | Published
International Paper Realty Corp. (IPRC) pursuant to Section 380.06(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1977), determining
88 So. 3d 296, 2012 WL 1314404, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 6040
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 18, 2012 | Docket: 60308223
Cited 1 times | Published
stated:
The circuit court correctly applied section 380.06(19)(b), Florida Statutes (2005), when it determined
816 So. 2d 687, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 4714, 2002 WL 537041
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 12, 2002 | Docket: 1753397
Cited 1 times | Published
under review, approved, or vested pursuant to section 380.06, or other activities regulated under part IV
666 So. 2d 1003, 1996 WL 20860
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 23, 1996 | Docket: 1510892
Cited 1 times | Published
1993, Leon County petitioned the DCA under section 380.06(4)(c), Florida Statutes (1991), to require
633 So. 2d 1119, 1994 WL 57931
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 1, 1994 | Docket: 1296632
Cited 1 times | Published
extension of the buildout date in accordance with section 380.06(19), Florida Statutes (1993). The city denied
379 So. 2d 376, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 16326
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 27, 1979 | Docket: 64574091
Cited 1 times | Published
of Community Affairs’ binding letter under Section 380.06, Florida Statutes, determining that Units Five
372 So. 2d 159
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 12, 1979 | Docket: 1325407
Cited 1 times | Published
a `Binding Letter of Interpretation' under Section 380.06(4), Florida Statutes, that the proposed project
370 So. 2d 447
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 9, 1979 | Docket: 1722588
Cited 1 times | Published
connection with the discharge of its duties under Section 380.06, Florida Statutes. The primary issue for our
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 12, 2025 | Docket: 69632236
Published
requirements under
section 163.3225, Florida Statutes, section 380.06, Florida
Statutes, the Walton County Land Development
124 So. 3d 1007, 2013 WL 5925093, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 17581
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 6, 2013 | Docket: 60235279
Published
and hold that the recent statutory change in section 380.06, Florida Statutes (2012), eliminates the possibility
Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Nov 5, 2010 | Docket: 3256423
Published
substantially the following question:
Does section 380.06, Florida Statutes, as amended by Chapter 2010-147
Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Nov 24, 2009 | Docket: 3257001
Published
substantially the following question:
Does section 380.06, Florida Statutes, require a permit holder
707 So. 2d 361, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 1202, 1998 WL 56417
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 13, 1998 | Docket: 64779599
Published
“Development of Region*362al Impact” under section 380.06, Florida Statutes; therefore, it required approval
623 So. 2d 771, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 8457, 1993 WL 309145
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 16, 1993 | Docket: 64698523
Published
terms of the DO itself, because nothing in section 380.06, Florida Statutes (1975), under which the DO
614 So. 2d 1164, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 2042, 1993 WL 40397
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 17, 1993 | Docket: 64694729
Published
resolution of this matter is controlled by section 380.06, Florida Statutes, part of the Florida Environmental
144 B.R. 552, 6 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 215, 1992 Bankr. LEXIS 1443, 1992 WL 229027
United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. | Filed: Jul 2, 1992 | Docket: 65780423
Published
Myakka Estates DRI pursuant to Florida Statutes § 380.06(26). Thus, Sarasota County has filed the instant
Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Jun 11, 1992 | Docket: 3255875
Published
issues based upon specified review criteria.
5 Section 380.06(12)(c), F.S.
6 See, s. 380.07(2), F.S.
7 Jennings
595 So. 2d 1101, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 3313, 1992 WL 57149
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 1992 | Docket: 64666128
Published
July 1, 1973 appellant had vested rights under section 380.06(20) of the Florida Statutes (1989) to complete
586 So. 2d 80, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 9077, 1991 WL 183014
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 16, 1991 | Docket: 64661700
Published
to apply the statutory criteria required by section 380.-06(14), Florida Statutes (1987); and (2) whether
Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Jul 11, 1991 | Docket: 3256245
Published
duties under s. 380.06, F.S.
Section 380.06, F.S. (1990 Supp.)
Section 380.06, F.S. (1990 Supp.), provides
558 So. 2d 76, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1166, 1990 WL 16881
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 26, 1990 | Docket: 64648755
Published
Impact. We affirm.
In October 1984, pursuant to Section 380.06(6)(a), Florida Statutes (1983), Bab-cock filed
424 So. 2d 102, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21922
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 16, 1982 | Docket: 64594377
Published
Airport does not possess vested rights status. See § 380.06(18), Fla.Stat. We disagree and affirm.
Specifically
360 So. 2d 388, 1978 Fla. LEXIS 4826
Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 31, 1978 | Docket: 64565231
Published
District Court of Appeal Case No. BB-69.
. See § 380.06(1), Fla.Stat.
. § 120.57, Fla.Stat.
. § 120
Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Jan 25, 1977 | Docket: 3257398
Published
governmental agency to abridge those rights. Section 380.06(12), F. S.
When a property owner acquires a
330 So. 2d 737, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 15053
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 28, 1976 | Docket: 64553430
Published
binding letter of interpretation under Florida Statute 380.06(4)(a). Upon consideration, we remand this
Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Apr 28, 1976 | Docket: 3256307
Published
Question 2 is answered in the affirmative. Section 380.06(12), F. S., in essence provides that if a local
Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Dec 3, 1974 | Docket: 3258983
Published
regional impact of a proposed development. Section 380.06(8). In preparing its report and recommendations
