Florida Senate Bills 1730 and 180 are solid housing reforms

In May 2025, the Florida State Legislature passed Senate Bills 1730 and 180, two reforms to state housing law. SB 1730 amends the Live Local Act, a bill which vastly expanded where residential development can be built when it was signed into law in 2023. SB 180 aims to ensure rebuilding in the aftermath of a weather emergency is not impeded by local government.

Live Local Act background

The Live Local Act, Senate Bill 102, was passed in 2023 and a revised version, Senate Bill 328, passed in 2024. SB 102 preempted local zoning restrictions, allowing residential development on land zoned as industrial, commercial, or mixed use (if at least 65% of square footage in mixed use development is used for residential purposes). These developments are allowed as long as at least 40% of the units built are “affordable” for 30 years. Affordable in this context means those earning up to 120% of Area Median Income (AMI) do not have to spend more than 30% of their income on housing to live in these units. Developments under the Live Local Act can reach the maximum height and density permitted in the proposed area.

Further, the Live Local Act allows substantial property tax exemptions if stated affordability criteria are met. The development qualifies for a 75% tax exemption if units are affordable to those making between 80 and 120% of AMI. This provision is known as the “missing middle” property tax exemption. A full exemption is granted if units are affordable to those making less than 80% AMI. To qualify for either of these exemptions, at least 10 affordable units must be built. Additionally, SB 102 set aside funding for Florida’s State Housing Initiatives Partnership and State Apartment Incentive Loan programs and enacted a formal ban on rent controls statewide. While most original provisions have been maintained, some have been amended. SB 102’s substantial property tax exemptions prompted pushback from counties worried about diminishing their tax base and incentivizing unnecessary residential development. Pasco County was one such protestor. In response to growing concerns, the Florida Legislature passed SB 328 in 2024, the first revised version of the Live Local Act. House Bill 7073, a 2024 Florida tax bill, further revised some of the Live Local Act’s provisions.

These two 2024 bills revised the original Live Local Act to include a restriction on development near single-family homes and an avenue for counties to opt-out of the property tax exemption. Under SB 328, if a development proposed under the Live Local Act is adjacent to a single-family parcel that is part of a broader single-family neighborhood (specifically, 25 contiguous single-family homes), the county may restrict the height of the proposed development to 150% of the surrounding structures, or three stories, whichever is taller.

Additionally, HB 7073 allows counties to opt out of the missing middle property tax exemption if there is already a surplus of units in a county according to the most recent edition of the Shimberg Center for Housing Studies Annual Report. According to the 2024 Shimberg Annual Report, 34 of Florida’s 67 counties are currently eligible to opt-out of this tax exemption (see Table 1).

Source: Shimberg Center for Housing Studies 2024 Annual Report Appendix 4

SB 1730: What’s new?

Alongside other minor revisions to the Live Local Act, SB 1730 introduces two important new additions: A provision for religious institutions to add affordable housing and a clarification of parking minimums.

SB 1730 states that a board of county commissioners may approve residential development on parcels owned by religious institutions as long as at least 10% are considered affordable. Florida’s SB 1730 is the most recent bill in a growing movement known as Yes-In-God’s-Backyard (YIGBY), which seeks to expand housing supply through work with faith-based organizations. Whereas the original Live Local Act did not particularize developments on religious institution-owned property. Because religious institutions typically build low-income housing, they could play an important role in expanding supply for this income group. SB1730 opens an avenue for faith-based institutions to cooperate with local governments to make this potential supply expansion a reality.

The original Live Local Act also required localities to consider reducing the parking requirement on developments within a quarter-mile radius of a transit stop. Developments could receive at least a 20% reduction in their parking requirement if the proposed location was within half a mile of a major transportation hub easily accessible by pedestrian-friendly means and had available parking within 600 feet. Now, under SB 1730, instead of only requiring consideration, local governments must grant a 15% reduction in the parking minimum upon request of the applicant if the development is located within a quarter mile of a transit stop. Further, only one of the two aforementioned criteria must be satisfied for developments to qualify for the 20% reduction.

To date, there are 105 projects proposed under the Live Local Act, with the majority concentrated in the Miami area. These projects amount to over 31,000 additional units for the state of Florida. This bill has been a monumental step toward alleviating Florida’s shortage-driven sky-high home prices. The Live Local Act, in all its variations, has been successful in spurring development, but this legislation is still far from ideal; several problems remain.

First, while the Live Local Act dramatically expands the areas in which residential units can be built, it does little to address density expansion in places that are zoned as residential but only allow single-family detached homes. The 2024 version of the bill even explicitly restricted projects in the vicinity of single-family neighborhoods. In addition to expanding residential development areas not already zoned as such, addressing density restrictions in residential areas would complement the Live Local Act. Such reform can be made through allowing Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) statewide or expanding options for missing middle housing in residential areas as other states have done. Freeing housing markets via state-level preemption should not be limited to commercial centers but also should expand options in existing residential areas.

Second, SB 1730 does not go far enough in its YIGBY reform. Currently, it only encourages localities to consider allowing religious centers to build affordable housing, but takes no explicit steps to prevent localities from preventing religious organizations from building housing. California’s Senate Bill 4 is an example of a state making affordable housing development on land owned by religious organizations legal by right. Without a similar provision, it is unclear whether SB 1730 will be able to realize its full potential given the ease of avoidance.

Finally, by including an affordability requirement for units, the Live Local Act has inherited problems associated with inclusionary zoning since its inception. Specifically, enacting these policies distort markets, often materializing smaller additions to supply than could be seen under blanket zoning reform. Instead, expanding the areas in which residential development can happen without affordability requirements, while simultaneously providing assistance in the form of housing vouchers, may better expand supply and help alleviate Florida’s ongoing affordable housing crisis.

SB 180: Emergency provisions for impact fees

In addition to continuing zoning reform through SB 1730, in 2025 the Florida Legislature also amended the permitting process for rebuilding in wake of a natural disaster. SB 180 clarifies the impact fees that can be charged on rebuilding structures and establishes a statewide standard for post-storm permitting and rebuilding regulations enacted by local governments.

Impact fees are one-time fees charged to developers to make up for the additional strain on public facilities created by their projects. Impact fees fund local roads, schools, and emergency services among other public goods. Generally, impact fees are necessary to ensure that development pays for itself rather than adding the burden of new infrastructure onto existing residents via property taxes. Well-designed impact fees are proportional to the impact of the development for which they are charged. SB 180 takes steps to ensure that Florida’s impact fees are proportional in the wake of a disaster.

Specifically, SB 180 forbids localities from charging impact fees on the reconstruction of destroyed structures if the replacement does not increase the impact on public facilities. If it does, then any impact fee charged must be proportional to the increased strain on public facilities. This law prevents developments from being charged twice by the local government for the same public facilities and is key for maintaining the proportionality of these fees.

Additionally, SB 180 prevents localities from increasing barriers to construction after an emergency in two ways. First, it bars them from increasing their permitting and inspection fees for 180 days after a state of emergency is declared for a hurricane or tropical storm. Second, it prevents them from enacting a moratorium on development or making more restrictive amendments to land development regulations for one year after a hurricane makes landfall. This bill is a step in the right direction, but may be too broad to account for every area’s needs. After a disaster, it is vital that communities can be rebuilt without additional financial or regulatory strain from their governments. However, the general language of SB 180 has led this bill to receive some early pushback, namely from the American Planning Association’s Florida chapter and the New Smyrna Beach city commissioners.

These entities primarily oppose the state’s preemption of local authority over comprehensive planning in the aftermath of emergencies. In New Smyrna Beach, for example, the enactment of SB 180 into law would nullify their recent stormwater regulations. While these provisions may be broad, it is unclear whether stringent comprehensive plan requirements are the answer. Florida building codes already account for the state’s susceptibility to hurricanes and tropical storms. Construction experts in weather emergency-prone areas have been innovating and employing storm-resistant building technologies to grapple with their specific challenges. SB 180 ensures that builders all over the state can build back their communities without undue interference from local government.

Both SB 1730 and SB 180 are awaiting signatures from Governor Ron Desantis to become law. Both bills, while having room for improvement, are promising steps toward a better housing policy landscape in the state of Florida.

The post Florida Senate Bills 1730 and 180 are solid housing reforms appeared first on Reason Foundation.

Source: https://reason.org/commentary/florida-senate-bills-1730-and-180-are-solid-housing-reforms/