Title: Overview of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Process, Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00004775/00001
 Material Information
Title: Overview of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Process, Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Jake Varn Collection - Overview of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Process, Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes (JDV Box 39)
General Note: Box 29, Folder 2 ( Land Use and Water Planning Task Force - 1994 ), Item 16
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00004775
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text





Overview of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Process

Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes



Local Government Plans and Plan Amendments
Florida's land planning efforts are governed by Chapter 163, Part II, Florida
Statutes. Section 163.3174(1), F.S., directs each local government, through its designated
local planning agency, to prepare a comprehensive plan and subsequent plan amendments.
The local government comprehensive plan is to provide principles, guidelines, and standards
for the orderly and balanced future economic, social, physical, environmental, and fiscal
development of the area (section 163.3177(1), F.S.). These plans must be consistent with
the State Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 187, F.S.) and appropriate Strategic Regional Policy
Plan. As of November 1993, 419 Local Government Comprehensive Plans (or 91 percent
of Florida's 458 local governments) had been determined to be in compliance or subject to a
compliance agreement.
A local government may amend its plan twice a year as established through the plan
amendment review process. In the preparation and adoption of the plan amendment, the
local government is required to provide opportunities for public participation and notify
property owners of all official actions which will regulate the use of their property. In
order to facilitate public participation, local governments are required to hold a minimum of
two public hearings in which written and oral comments may be submitted. One public
hearing must be held at the transmittal stage and another when the local government adopts
the amendment.

The local government is required to transmit the completed proposed plan amendment
to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA), the appropriate regional planning council
and water management district, the Department of Environmental Protection, and the









Department of Transportation for review. A review of the plan amendment is coordinated
by the Department of Community Affairs and at the conclusion of the review process, the

Department submits an Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report to the

local government. Once the ORC Report is received, the local government has 60 days to

adopt or adopt with changes the proposed plan amendment.1 Once the local government
adopts the plan amendment, it must be submitted to the DCA within 10 working days for a
compliance determination. The adopted plan amendment does not become effective until it

is determined to be in compliance by the DCA or the Administration Commission.

Local governments are required to periodically evaluate and update their
comprehensive plans. This update is accomplished through the preparation and adoption of

Evaluation and Appraisal Reports (EARs). The EARs are intended to assess and evaluate

the success or failure of a local government's comprehensive plan, including the validity of

growth related projections, Iprogress toward local goals and objectives, and status of the

plan's policy implementation. Additionally, the EARs must identify local government
comprehensive plan changes needed to be consistent with any legislative amendments to the

State Comprehensive Plan (SCP) and applicable Strategic Regional Policy Plan (SRPP). In

conjunction with the submission of the EARs, each local government must propose and

adopt amendments to respond or update its plan to address the issues, problems or

deficiencies identified in its EAR.

The first submission of the EARs is required no later than 7 years after the adoption

of the comprehensive plan and every 5 years thereafter for local governments with a

population of 2,500 or more. For local governments with a population of 2,500 or less, the

initial EAR is to be submitted no later than 12 years after the adoption of the plan and every

10 years thereafter.

SPlan amendments resulting from the section 163.3191, F.S., Evaluation and
Appraisal process shall have 120 to be adopted. All other plan amendments shall
have 60 days to be adopted following the receipt of the ORC report.
2








Department of Community Affairs and Other State Agency Reviews

As required by section 163.3184(3)(a), F.S., local government plan amendments are
submitted to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA), Department of Environmental
Protection (DEP), Department of Transportation (DOT), and the appropriate regional
planning council and water management district. Chapter 93-206, L.O.F., sets forth a

streamlined plan amendment review process. The intent is to allow the state's review to be
focused on those plan amendments that are of state or regional significance. The DCA is

required to review the plan amendments upon the request of a regional planning council, an

affected person, or the local government transmitting the plan amendment if the request is

received within 45 days after transmittal of the proposed plan amendment, or if the DCA

gives notice within 30 days of transmittal of the proposed plan amendment.

Should a review be conducted, copies of the proposed plan amendment are distributed
by DCA to the appropriate state agencies including but not limited to the DEP, DOT, the

appropriate regional planning council and water management district. These agencies have
30 days after receipt of the plan amendment to submit their written objections,

recommendations, and comments to the DCA. The DCA then has 45 days to review those
agency comments and issue an Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report
to the local government. After the ORC report is received from DCA, the local government

has 60 days to adopt the plan amendment, adopt the amendment with changes, or determine

that it will not adopt the amendment. Adopted amendments are submitted to DCA and DCA

has 45 days to review the adopted amendment and determine its compliance with Chapter

163, Part II, F.S. The compliance review is based upon the DCA's written comments to the

local government as a result of agency review, and/or any changes made by the local

government to the plan amendment as adopted.

If DCA determines that no initial review of the amendment is necessary or if no
review is requested, the plan amendment is adopted by the local government. The adopted









amendment is then submitted to the DCA for a compliance review. The DCA compliance

review is to be completed within 45 days of receipt of the amendment and is based solely on

the plan amendment as adopted by the local government.


Water Management Districts

Section 373.0391, F.S., requires water management districts provide technical

assistance to local governments in the preparation of local plan elements and public facilities

reports related to water resource issues. Typically, this takes the form of assisting with data

and analysis for the sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water and natural

groundwater aquifer recharge element; the conservation element; the future land use element

and the coastal management element, where applicable. The water management districts are

required to provide information such as:
a description of regulations, programs, and schedules implemented by the
district;
identification of regulations, programs, and schedules undertaken or proposed
by the district to further the State Comprehensive Plan;
a description of surface water basins, including regulatory jurisdictions, flood-
prone areas, existing and projected water quality in water management district
operated facilities, as well as surface water runoff characteristics and
topography regarding flood plains, wetlands, and recharge areas;
a description of groundwater characteristics, including existing and planned
wellfield sites, existing groundwater areas, aquifer recharge areas, an
assessment of regional water resource needs and sources for the next 20 years,
and water quality;
the identification of existing and potential water management district land
acquisitions; and,
information reflecting the minimum flows for surface watercourses to avoid
harm to water resources or the ecosystem and information reflecting the
minimum water levels for aquifers to avoid harm to water resources or the
ecosystem.
Water management districts also review local plan amendments pursuant to section

163.3184, F.S. The district may suggest to the DCA any objections, recommendations and








comments in the compliance determination of a plan amendment with the State

Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C., or the pertinent regional policy plan. Although

DCA is not required to follow a water management district's recommendations, it frequently

does so.
The statutory linkages between local government comprehensive plans and planning

efforts of the water management districts are minimal. Section 163.3177, F.S., does not
require the Intergovernmental Coordination Element (ICE) of a local comprehensive plan to

address the relationship to or be consistent with the district water management plan. The

ICE rule does, however, include provisions for coordination with the water management

districts. The proposed amendments to the ICE Rule (noticed December 3, 1993, in the

Florida Administrative Weekly) "encourages" local governments to involve appropriate state,

regional (including water management districts), and local agencies in the intergovernmental

review of a development proposal that has been determined to have significant regional

impacts. Local governments are also encouraged, through section 403.0891, F.S., to

consult with the water management districts, the Department of Transportation and the

Department of Environmental Protection before updating their comprehensive plans.

As required by Chapter 17-40, F.A.C., the water management districts are in the

process of developing district water management plans, which are to be completed by

November 1, 1994. There is no existing requirement that local comprehensive plans or

amendments be "consistent" with district water management plans, nor is there a

requirement that district water management plans be "consistent" with local comprehensive

plans or amendments.


Regional Planning Councils

Regional Planning Councils (RPCs), among other things, act in an advisory capacity

to the constituent local governments in regional, metropolitan, county and municipal








planning matters (section 186.505(10), F.S.). RPC staffs provide technical assistance and

support to local governments.

Local government plan amendments are submitted to RPCs for review and comment.

Statutorily, the RPCs' comments and recommendations are limited to effects on regional

resources or facilities identified in the strategic regional policy plan (SRPP) and

extrajurisdictional impacts and inconsistencies with other local government plans within the

region.

The strategic regional policy plans must, pursuant to section 186.507, F.S., address

affordable housing, economic development, emergency preparedness, natural resources of

regional significance, regional transportation, and may include issues which relate to the

particular needs and circumstances of the comprehensive planning district as determined by

the regional planning council. Section 163.3177(9), F.S., requires that the local government

plan amendments be consistent with the appropriate SRPP, however, an inconsistency

between the local plan amendment and the regional plan cannot be the sole basis for finding

a local plan amendment not in compliance.








The Local Government Comprehensive

Plan Amendment Process
(Section 163.3184, F.S.)


Local Gov't
Holds Public
Hearing to
Transmit Proposed
Plan Amendment
to DCA,RPC,
WMD, DEP and
DOT
I


Days


L


45
Days


Affected Person(s),
RPC, or Local Gov't
Determines
Whether to Request
DCA Review


DCA
Determines
Whether to
Review Plan
Amendment
I ,


NO .


SDCA Sends
SProposed Plan
Days Amendment to
SReview Agencil


I State and I


If No Review,
Local Gov't
Adopts Plan
Amendment
and Sends
to DCA


45
Days


Local Gov't
Adopts Plan
Amendment
and Sends to
DCA for a
Compliance
Review


DCA Makes a
Compliance
Determination
based solely on
the Amendment
as adopted


45 DCA Makes
Compliance
Days Determination


SOURCE: 1000 Friends of Florida, July 1993.


/








Flrd dwataie eky Vl 9 o 4,DcmL .19


level of service standards. These level of service standards shall
be adopted to ensure that adequate facility capacity will be
provided to serve the existing and future land uses as
demonstrated by the supporting data and analysis in the
comprehensive plan.
2. Control of the connections and access points of
driveways and roads to roadways;
3. Establishment of parking strategies that will promote
transportation goals and objectives:
4. For existing or future transportation rights-of-way
and corridors designated in the local government
comprehensive plan, establish measures for their acquisition,
preservation, or protection;
5. Establishment of land use and other strategies to
promote the use of bicycles and walking;
6. Establishment of transportation demand management
programs to modify peak hour travel demand and reduce the
number of vehicle miles traveled per capital within the
community and region;
7. Establishment of transportation system management
strategies as appropriate to improve system efficiency and
enhance safety:
8. Coordination of roadway and transit service
improvements with the future needs of seaports airports, and
other related public transportation facilities;
9. Establishment of land use, site and building design
standards for development in exclusive public transit corridors
to assure the accessibility of new development to public transit.
10. Establishment of numerical indicators against which
the achievement of the mobility goals of the community can
be measured, such as modal split, annual transit trips per
capital, automobile occupancy rates:
11. Establishment of strategies, agreements and other
mechanisms with applicable local governments and regional
and state agencies that demonstrate the areawide coordination
necessary to implement the transportation, land use, parking
and other provisions of the transportation element:
12. A coordinated and consistent policy with the future
land use element to encourage land uses which promote public
transportation in designated public transportation corridors;
13. Establishment of strategies to facilitate local traffic
to use alternatives to the Florida Intrastate Highway System
to protect its interregional and intrastate functions; and
14. Development of strategies to promote rail/roadway
crossing safety.
15. Meet the requirements of subsections 9J-5.007(3Xc),
9J-5.008(3(c) and 9J-5.009(3Kc) of this Chapter.
(5) FUTURE TRANSPORTATION MAP.
(a) The general location of the following transportation
system proposed features shall be shown on the future
transportation map or map series:
1. Road System:
a. Collector roads;
b. Arterial roads;
c. Limited and controlled access facilities:
d. Local roads, if being used to achieve mobility goals:
e. Parking facilities that are required to achieve mobility
goals;
2. Public transit system:


a. Public transit routes or service areas:
b. Public transit terminals and transfer stations;
c. Public transit rights-of-way and exclusive public
transit corridors;
3. Transportation concurrency management areas
pursuant to Rule 9J-5.0055(5), F.A.C.. if any;
4. Transportation concurrency exception areas pursuant
to Rule 9J-5.0055(6), F.A.C., if any;
5. Significant bicycle and pedestrian facilities;
6. Port facilities;
7. Airport facilities including clear zones and
obstructions;
8. Freight and passenger rail lines; and
9. Intermodal terminals and access to such facilities.
(b) The future transportation map or map series shall
identify the following:
1. The functional classification and maintenance
responsibility for all roads;
2. The number of proposed through lanes for each
roadway;
3. The major public transit trip generators and
attractors based upon the future land use map or map series;
4. Projected peak hour levels of service for all
transportation facilities for which level of service standards
are established; and
j 5. Designated local and regional transportation facilities
critical to the evacuation of coastal population prior to an
impending natural disaster.
Scific Authority 163.3177 FS. Law Implemented 163.3177, 163.3178 FS. History-Ne

9J-5.021 Consistency of Local Government
Comprehensive Plans With Comprehensive Regional Policy
Plans and With the State Comprehensive Plan.
Specific Authority 163.317719)el.IOI PS. Law Implemented 1I3.317713.1U41.46.1.19c.17 )..I01.
163.3178 FS.. Chapter 85517. Laws of Florida. Section 2. History-New 34-86. Amended
10-20-86.
NAME OF PERSON ORIGINATING PROPOSED RULE:
Robert Pennock, Chief, Bureau of Local Planning, Department
of Community Affairs, 2740 Centerview Drive, Tallahassee,
Florida 32399-2100
NAME OF SUPERVISOR OR PERSON WHO APPROVED
THE PROPOSED RULE: Charles G. Pattison. Director,
Division of Resource Planning and Management, Department
of Community Affairs, 2740 Centerview Drive. Tallahassee,
Florida 32399-2100
DATE PROPOSED RULE APPROVED: November 23.1993

8. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
Division of Resource Planning and Management
RULE CHAPTER TITLE: RULE CHAPTER NO.:
Minimum Criteria for Review of Local
Government Comprehensive Plans and
Determination of Compliance 9J-5
RULE TITLE: RULE NO.:
Intergovernmental Coordination Processes 9J-5.015
PURPOSE AND EFFECT: The purpose of the rulemaking
is to comply with the statutory mandate of Section 6 of
Chapter 93-206, Laws of Florida (to be codified at 163.3177,
Florida Statutes), enacted during the 1993 Legislative Session.


1*0
Vol. 19, No. 48, Decembc, .7. 1993


Florida Admimstrat~ive Weekly









Fr A


a. The Intergovernmental Coordination Element shall
generally describe the criteria or standards for appropriate
mitigation of significant impacts on each identified resource,
facility and community characteristic located within the local
government's jurisdiction. The criteria or standards shall be
designed to ensure that the identified resources, facilities and
community characteristics are protected andlor maintained in
accordance with the provisions of the adopted local
comprehensive plan.
b. Mitigation should be accomplished in the jurisdiction
in which the impacts occur, with an option for regional
mitigation when preferable. Regional mitigation alternatives
may be determined to be preferable by the local government
in which the development is located based on the
intergovernmental review process described in paragraph
5.a.(III), below.
4. Intergovernmental Compatibility.
a. This Element must demonstrate consideration of the
particular effects of the local plan upon development within
adjacent and other affected local governments. Local
governments are encouraged to accomplish this by
demonstrating compatibility between local government
Intergovernmental Coordination Elements, including the
compatible identification of resources, facilities and community
characteristics, definition of significant impacts, and description
of mitigation criteria or standards, pursuant to above
paragraphs (4)(a)., 2. and 3., in one or more of the following
ways.
(I) Local governments can and are encouraged to
demonstrate compatibility through incorporation of any
relevant portions of th Strategic Regional Policy Plan(s) (SRPP)
(or the Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan until adoption of
the SRPP) which includes the compatible identification of
resources, facilities and community characteristics, definition
of significant impacts, and description of mitigation criteria or
standards, pursuant to above paragraphs (4a)1., 2. and 3. Local
governments can utilize the provisions of paragraphs 4.a.(II
4.a.(III). and/or 4.b., with respect to any identified local
resources, facilities and community characteristics.
(II) Local governments can demonstrate compatibility
by submitting a joint resolution executed by the local
government and one or more other local governments which
certifies that the final proposed Intergovernmental
Coordination Elements are compatible. Such certification shall
establish that the local governments have reviewed the
contents of the Elements and agree on the compatible
identification of resources, facilities and community
characteristics, definition of significant impacts, and description
of mitigation criteria or standards, pursuant to above
paragraphs (4)(a)1., 2. and 3.
(III) Local governments can demonstrate compatibility
through completion of the cross-acceptance negotiation process
established by the applicable regional planning councils)
pursuant to ss. 186.503(2) and 186.505(22). F.S., or through other
local proceed res..
b. If compatibility is not demonstrated pursuant to
paragraph 4.a.. above, then at a minimum. this Element, when
transmitted to the D!epartmelnt for compliance review must be
accompanied by documentation which clearly demonstrates


that during the preparation of the Intergovernmental
Coordination Element, all adjacent and other affected local
governments were provided an adequate opportunity to review
and comment upon the proposed Intergovernmental
Coordination Element. This documentation must clearly
demonstrate that the final proposed Element was transmitted
to all adjacent and other affected local governments. A certified
return receipt for U.S. Mail shall be prima facie evidence of
transmittal. The documentation must also demonstrate
consideration of the particular effects of the local plan upon
development within these other local governments, including
consideration of their comments upon the proposed Element.
An explanation of the points of agreement and disagreement,
and the comments from other local governments shall be
included in the documentation.
5. Development Review Process.
a. The Intergovernmental Coordination Element shall
expressly provide for and clearly establish a development
review process, to be implemented by the local government
in which the development is located, to determine if
development proposals would have significant impacts on the
identified resources, facilities or community characteristics.
and to mitigate such impacts. This intergovernmental
coordination review process should-be incorporated into the
local government's usual development review process. Multiple
development orders for the same project shall not be
individually subject to this review, provided that one review
is conducted prior to the approval of an application for a
development order or permit which contains a specific plan of
development, including the densities and intensities of
development. Any subsequent changes to the plan of
development which are likely to result in significant impacts
also shall be subject to this development review process. The
development review process shall include, at a minimum, the
following provisions.
(I) The development review process shall include an
impact analysis by the local government of a proposed
development's potential for significant impacts upon an
identified resource, facility or community characteristic. The
local government is encouraged to coordinate with appropriate
local, regional and state agencies n conducting the analysis.
An impact analysis must be prepared for all development
proposals, except for those developments identified in the
Intergovernmental Coordination Element which shall be
deemed not to cause a significant impact. The definition of
significant impact used in the impact analysis shall be the
definition contained in the Strategic Regional Policy Plan(s)
(SRPP) (or th Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan until
adoption of the SRPP), or the local government comprehensive
plan where the resource, facility or community characteristic
is located.
(II) If the local government determines, based on the
impact analysis, that a development proposal will not result
in significant impacts, this finding shall be included in a listing
of development applications. The listing shall include, at a
minimum, a general description of the development proposal
and the geographic location of the project. This listing shall
he transmitted to adjacent and other affected local
governments (as described paragraph a., above) and made


7209


II" i %2- I


Florida Administrative WeEekly


Vol. 19, No. 48. December 3. 1.99







Existing Land And Water Planning Consistency Linkages


FLOW2C.XLS


State, Regional, and Local Plans

STATE
LAND USE PLANNING State Comprehensive Plan WATER PLANNING
Chapter 187, F.S.
State Water Policy
State Land Development State Water Policy
Ch. 17-40, F.A.C.
Plan*
s. 380.031(17), F.S. s. 373.026 10), F.S.
s. 186.021(4) F.S. s. 373.0261(3310), F.S.


). 3s. 373.039, F.S.
s. 17-40.510, F.A.C. **

State Water Use Plan* W Quality I
s. 373.036, F.S. Water Quality Stds.
s. 18.021(4Ch17-3 F.A.C.
I | s. 186.021(4), F.S.


* Translational Plans
** Section 373.039, F.S. states that the Florida Water Plan will consist of the State Water Use Plan, the Water Quality Standards and
Classifications; Chapter 17-40.510, F.A.C., states that the Florida Water Plan will consist of the State Water Use Plan, State Water Quality
Standards, State Water Classification, and appropriate sections of the District Water Management Plans.
Note: All References to Chapter 17-40, F.A.C., are to the Proposed December 1, 1993 version.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs