Thrust Areas Ecosystem Water Institute Classification Level
Water, Land Use and Ecosystems Water and Climate Water and Society Water Resources Sustainability Springs Wetlands Watersheds Aquifers Lakes Coastal Zone  Water Institute Classification 1  Water Institute Classification 2  Water Institute Classification 3  Water Institute Classification 4
     

Implementation of the Model Land Development Code for Florida Springs Protection
Goals and Objectives
 
The objective of this project was to review state statutes for issues related to springs protection and local versus state authority.

Florida’s growth management framework consists of a State Comprehensive Plan, eleven regional planning councils, and local comprehensive plans. The state has greatest authority in dealing with Developments of Regional Impact (DRIs) and Areas of Critical State Concern (ACSC). Outside of these areas, however, the bulk of responsibility for growth management resides with local governments.

Community Affairs (DCA) gives assistance to local governments with their comprehensive plan, DCA must consider, among other things, groundwater recharge.

Local governments must evaluate and update their comprehensive plans every seven years. This evaluation includes consideration of water management district regional water supply plans and major groundwater issues.

In addition to comprehensive planning, the Florida Legislature has adopted laws permitting the designation of certain areas as "areas of critical state concern" in order to promote protection of and reverse deterioration of water resources in those areas.

State statutes expressly preempt local government authority to regulate in several areas. For example, agricultural activities do not fall within the scope of "development" for the purposes of comprehensive plans and thus are not regulated by comprehensive plans.

while agriculture poses serious threats to springs and springsheds in many areas of the state, counties and municipalities have limited authority to improve their regulation of agricultural practices.

One potential area of preemption relates to the establishment of local pollution control programs, which must be approved by DEP. DEP asserts that it need not approve local government regulations that may affect pollution if the regulation does not form part of a local pollution control program, the local government has not requested a delegation of authority from DEP, and DEP and the local government have no current delegation agreement Another area in which local governments cannot regulate due to preemption by the state is the consumptive use of water. That authority is vested exclusively in DEP and the water management districts. Consumptive use permits may only be granted if the proposed use does not interfere with existing legal uses of water, is a reasonable-beneficial use, and is consistent with the public interest. The water management districts also have authority to regulate buildings, roads, parking lots, ditches, and other activities affecting surface waters through the issuance of Environmental Resource Permits (ERP). A final preemption issue emerges with regard to septic tanks. The Department of Health has exclusive authority to approve and permit septic systems.
 
Planned Outputs
Final Report
 
Available Outputs
Title: Implementation of the Model Land Development Code for Florida Springs Protection
Authors: Hamann, R., and T. Ruppert
Project Lead
Hamann, Richard G
 
Project Participants
Hamann, Richard G
 
Additional Participants
Thomas Ankersen
Matthew Brewer
Matthew Clark
Laura Coates
Jason Evans
Christine Francescani
Lenny Kennedy
Thomas Ruppert
Barbara Sieger
Jeff Wade
 
EcoSystem:
Springs
 
WIClassLevel: 
Level 1: WI Affiliated Faculty Project
 
ThrustArea: 
Water and Society
Water, Land Use and Ecosystems
 
Sponsor
GAIL EASLEY COMPANY
 
Grant Award Dates
10/13/2006 to 2/1/2007