In short
Florida does not have a single state zoning law for AI data centers. Local governments control where a data center can go through their comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance. A new state law, Senate Bill 484, took effect July 1, 2026, and added rules for large projects that use 50 megawatts or more of electricity at a single site. Those rules give local governments express authority to plan for the big loads, require water management districts to screen an AI data center project against local zoning before issuing a water permit, ban government agencies from signing nondisclosure agreements about an AI data center development, and direct the Public Service Commission to set electric rates that prevent cost shifting to other customers. The law does not preempt local zoning. It layers new requirements on top of a system that already makes the local comprehensive plan the highest land use control in the state. Fla. Stat. ch. 163, pt. II, SB 484 enrolled text
How land use regulation works in Florida
Florida regulates all development through a bottom up system. The state sets a broad framework. Counties and cities adopt the binding rules. Every piece of land must be consistent with the local comprehensive plan, which is a long range policy document that maps where different uses can go. After the plan is adopted, all development orders must be consistent with it. Fla. Stat. § 163.3194
This means the comprehensive plan is the single most important document for a developer trying to site an AI data center. The zoning code implements the plan, but the plan controls. If the future land use map shows a site as agricultural or low density residential, an AI data center cannot be built there unless the plan is amended first. Plan amendments require public hearings, a recommendation from the local planning agency, and a vote by the governing body. The state land planning agency also reviews larger amendments for compliance with state policy. Small scale amendments involving 50 acres or fewer may be adopted under an expedited process requiring only one public hearing, bypassing the standard state coordinated review process, subject to the additional conditions in Fla. Stat. 163.3187(1). Fla. Stat. 163.3187
Local planning agencies must hold public meetings, maintain public records, and make recommendations to the elected body. Fla. Stat. § 163.3174 At least once every seven years, each local government must evaluate its plan and decide whether to update it. Fla. Stat. § 163.3191
Where AI data centers fit in local zoning districts
No Florida statute says an AI data center is a permitted use everywhere. Each county and city decides. Some have explicit data center definitions in their zoning code. Others treat an AI data center as a general industrial use, a light manufacturing use, or a telecommunications facility.
Miami-Dade County offers the clearest example. Its zoning code classifies a data center as a telecommunications hub and permits it by right in industrial zoning districts. That means a developer does not need a rezoning, a special exception, or a public hearing. Because data centers are classified as telecommunications hubs and permitted by right in industrial zones no rezoning is required and the classification allowed the Iron Mountain project to bypass public hearings entirely, with notice for the developer’s variance requests mailed only to properties within 500 feet. Miami-Dade County Code of Ordinances, ch. 33, § 33-259(77), Florida Data Centers, Miami-Dade County Code of Ordinances, ch. 33, § 33-310, WLRN, Miami-Dade County Code, ch. 33, § 33-259(77), Florida Data Centers, WLRN In the IU-1 and IU-2 industrial districts, a telecommunications hub is a permitted use that requires at least 85 percent of gross floor area for equipment or machinery and no more than 15 percent for employees and support personnel Miami-Dade County Code Sec. 33-259, Miami-Dade County Code Sec. 33-262
This industrial by right treatment is what let the Iron Mountain MIA-1 project in Westview (unincorporated Miami-Dade) move forward without a public hearing. The 150,000 square foot facility on 3.4 acres broke ground in February 2025 after more than a year of planning. WLRN, Miami-Dade Beacon Council The Metrobloks Miami data center at 500 NW 137th Avenue, near the Everglades, also sits in an unincorporated area with industrial zoning. Metrobloks, Miami-Dade County, Iron Mountain, Metrobloks, Ch. 2026-65, Laws of Fla., Iron Mountain, Metrobloks
In counties that do not define a data center as a permitted use, the developer must seek a rezoning or a comprehensive plan amendment. That is the path taken in Polk County for the Fort Meade data center campus, in Palm Beach County for Project Tango, and in St. Lucie County for the Sentinel Grove project. Those applications involve public hearings and often significant community opposition, as described in the examples below. Florida Data Centers, Florida Data Centers, Florida Data Centers, WUSF, TCPalm
The new state layer, Senate Bill 484
SB 484 was signed by Governor DeSantis on May 7, 2026, and became effective July 1, 2026. It passed the Senate 31-6 and the House 92-16. The law does not preempt local zoning. Instead, it adds several tools that water managers and utility regulators must use and confirms local government zoning authority when a project reaches a certain scale. DCD, SB 484 bill analysis The law was a compromise. Two related House bills that would have set stricter siting restrictions did not pass. HB 1007 defined a hyperscale data center as one requiring at least 25 megawatts of energy resources and HB 1517 required environmental impact disclosures including an environmental impact study. HB 1007 Bill Page, HB 1517 Bill Page
Who is covered? The large load customer definition
The new rules hinge on the term large load customer. A large load customer is a customer whose anticipated monthly peak load of 50 megawatts or more at a single location, calculated as the highest average load over a 15 minute interval. Load from multiple locations owned by the same customer does not add together. Colocated tenants at a single location count toward the threshold. Fla. Stat. § 366.043(2)(d)
This is a different number from the 100 MW critical IT load threshold in the sales tax exemption statute under § 212.08(5)(r). The two thresholds are in separate chapters and serve separate purposes. A data center can be above 50 MW for the planning and ratepayer rules but below 100 MW for the tax break, or it can be below 50 MW and trigger none of the SB 484 requirements at all.
Local planning authority over large loads
SB 484 added § 163.326 to the Florida Statutes. The Legislature found that data centers and other large load customers can raise unique planning, infrastructure, and compatibility issues. Local governments may address those issues through their comprehensive plans and land development regulations. The statute expressly confirms that local governments keep full authority to exercise their planning and zoning powers over large load customers. A large load customer may not be considered an electric substation for the purposes of s. 163.3208. Fla. Stat. § 163.326
This is not a mandate to adopt new rules. It is a clear statement from the Legislature that local governments may regulate large load customers like data centers, and they have the tools to do it through the comprehensive plan. A county can add data center specific policies to its future land use element, infrastructure element, or capital improvements element during its next evaluation cycle or through an amendment. It can adopt special setback, noise, water, or landscaping standards for data centers in its land development code. The statute confirms that these uses fall within the local government’s authority.
Water supply, the new consumptive use permit rules for large data centers
A data center that needs water for cooling, even water from a municipal system, may be required by a water management district or the Department of Environmental Protection to obtain a consumptive use permit. Fla. Stat. § 373.219 SB 484 amended § 373.203 to define data center and large-scale data center. The precise definition of large-scale data center under chapter 373 could not be fully confirmed from the bill extracts, but the accompanying analysis indicates it is separate from the 50 MW threshold. For any large-scale data center, the water management district or DEP may not issue a consumptive use permit if the proposed water use is harmful to the water resources of the area or is prohibited by the applicable local government zoning regulations and comprehensive plan. Fla. Stat. § 373.262(2)
That gives local zoning a direct role in water permit decisions. The water permit process now must check local zoning consistency. If the local comprehensive plan does not support a data center at the site, or the zoning is inconsistent, the water permit cannot issue. The developer must also show the use is a reasonable beneficial use, will not interfere with existing legal uses, and is consistent with the public interest (the three-prong test under § 373.223). Fla. Stat. § 373.223(1) The governing board of a water management district or the department shall require a large-scale data center applicant to use reclaimed water in lieu of all or a portion of a proposed use of surface water or groundwater when a suitable reclaimed water supply source is available and permitted, reclaimed water distribution or supply lines are available at the property boundary in sufficient capacity and quality, the applicant can access the source, the use is environmentally, economically, and technically feasible, and the use would not conflict with the applicant’s surface water discharge permit. Fla. Stat. § 373.262(3)
For consumptive use applications by a large-scale data center requesting at least 100,000 gallons per day, the applicant must submit a detailed listing of all water sources, amounts, and losses for cooling, industrial processes, employee needs, and landscape irrigation, plus a water conservation plan. Fla. Stat. § 373.262(4)(a) A modification to an existing consumptive use permit for a large-scale data center is treated as a new initial application, not an amendment, so the full process applies again. Ch. 2026-65, § 6, Laws of Fla. (amending Fla. Stat. § 373.239, effective July 1, 2026)
The Southwest Florida Water Management District already adopted new rules in December 2025 that affected the Fort Meade project. The district told the City of Fort Meade it cannot use its existing water infrastructure to serve the data center under the new rules and must apply for a new permit with board approval at a public meeting. WUSF These district-specific rules add to the new statutory requirements in SB 484.
Nondisclosure agreements are banned for data center developments
SB 484 added § 112.231, which prohibits any state or local agency from entering into a nondisclosure agreement that restricts the agency from disclosing information about a potential AI data center development to the public. Any agreement that violates the prohibition is void and unenforceable. An agency that enters a prohibited NDA faces a civil fine up to $1,000. Fla. Stat. § 112.231
SB 484 limits AI data centers to a single 12-month confidentiality period under the same 2017 statute (Fla. Stat. 288.075) that allowed Project Tango in Palm Beach County to shield its end user identity. The bill was weakened during the House process, but the agency NDA ban survived in the final law and now sits alongside this narrower 12-month public records exemption for the developer’s proprietary business information. Fla. SB 484, Florida Phoenix The law does not repeal the existing confidentiality framework under § 288.075 for economic development projects. Instead, it sits alongside it. Under the amended § 288.075, an economic development agency must disclose that a project involves an AI data center, and the confidentiality period for AI data center projects is limited to 12 months, without the option for an additional 12 month extension that other projects can receive. Fla. Stat. § 288.075 How the flat NDA ban interacts with the 12 month confidentiality period has not been litigated or clarified by agency guidance.
Electric utility tariffs, cost of service and foreign entity ban
The law directs the Public Service Commission to develop minimum tariff and service requirements for large load customers. The rates must ensure that the large load customer bears its full cost of service, so costs are not shifted to the general body of ratepayers. The statute also prohibits a public utility from knowingly providing electric service to a large load customer that is a foreign entity. Fla. Stat. § 366.043 The PSC must adopt rules, and utilities must then file compliant tariffs. Florida has four investor owned utilities subject to PSC jurisdiction, namely Florida Power & Light, Duke Energy Florida, Tampa Electric Company, and Florida Public Utilities Corporation. Municipal utilities and rural electric cooperatives are not fully regulated by the PSC, so the statute’s reach with respect to those utilities may be limited. SB 484 bill analysis
Real projects show how the rules bite
The following projects illustrate the range of local land use paths for Florida data centers, from by right industrial placement to contentious comprehensive plan amendments that stalled or died.
Fort Meade Data Center Campus, Polk County
The Stonebridge development proposes 4.4 million square feet on 1,300 acres, a $2.6 billion investment, and 1.2 gigawatts of power demand. The Fort Meade City Commission voted unanimously on April 15, 2026, to approve the development agreement, rezoning, and a 10 year tax break worth up to $150 million, despite 40 of 41 public comments opposing the project. Groundbreaking was targeted for the end of 2026. The project still needs a water use permit from the Southwest Florida Water Management District, and the district has already signaled that a new board approved permit at a public meeting is required. Florida Data Centers, WUSF
This case shows that a project can clear local zoning and a development agreement but still face a separate water permit review, now with a zoning consistency check under SB 484.
Project Tango (Central Park Commerce Center), Palm Beach County
On 202 acres near FPL’s West County Energy Center, the developer proposes 11 AI data center buildings up to 75 feet tall, totaling 3.7 million square feet. The applicant has postponed the final vote three times, most recently to July 15, 2026. The operator’s identity remains shielded under an existing statute. Over 7,000 people signed a Change.org petition opposing the project. Florida Phoenix
Sentinel Grove Technology Park (Project Jarvis), St. Lucie County
The largest proposal to date, 1,218 acres, up to 15 million square feet, a $13.5 billion investment, and 1 GW of capacity. The St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-2 against recommending the comprehensive plan amendment in late 2025. The developer withdrew the land use application on February 26, 2026, citing advancing state legislation, and the site remains agricultural. Florida Data Centers
Yeehaw Junction, Osceola County
A 434 acre site is proposed for nine buildings totaling over 7 million square feet. A pre application meeting was held in October 2024 to discuss rezoning from agricultural to industrial. The site sits near the 27,000 acre DeLuca Preserve, and the development would be served by FPL, Toho Water Authority, and multiple fiber providers. The pre-application meeting was held, but the AI data center project was abandoned and the land was sold to an auto magnate for a distribution site. GrowthSpotter
Miami-Dade County projects, the by right path
Two projects show how industrial by right zoning can streamline development. Iron Mountain MIA-1 (16 MW, 150,000 square feet) broke ground in early 2025 without a public hearing because the code classifies a data center as a telecommunications hub and permits it in industrial districts. Metrobloks Miami (15 MW) also sits in an unincorporated industrial zone. Both are below the 50 MW SB 484 threshold. Miami Herald
How the tax landscape connects
Florida’s data center sales tax exemption has its own size threshold. Since August 1, 2025, only a data center with critical IT load of 100 megawatts or higher qualifies for the exemption on equipment, building materials, infrastructure, and electricity. The project must also spend $150 million in cumulative capital investment within five years. Fla. Stat. § 212.08(5)(r) There is no grandfather clause. Existing sub 100 MW AI data centers lost the exemption. Tax alert The exemption also applies to electricity used exclusively at the data center, so the loss hits operating costs. Florida state sales tax is 6 percent, and local option surtax typically adds 1 percent to 1.5 percent. Tax alert The state also repealed its 2 percent sales tax on commercial leases effective October 1, 2025, which can partly offset the impact for tenants. EY
For a developer, the three key numbers to track are now 50 MW (SB 484 large load customer rules), 100 MW (sales tax exemption), and $150 million (capital investment). A 75 MW project triggers the planning, water, and ratepayer rules but does not get the sales tax break.
| Threshold | Statute | What it triggers |
|---|---|---|
| 50 MW monthly peak load | § 366.043 (SB 484) | Local planning authority, PSC tariff, water permit zoning check, disclosure rules |
| 100 MW critical IT load | § 212.08(5)(r) (HB 7031) | Sales and use tax exemption on property and electricity |
| $150 million capital investment | § 212.08(5)(r) | Required to claim the sales tax exemption |
| 100,000 gallons per day | § 373.262(4)(a) | Additional CUP application detail and conservation plan |
Key takeaways
- The comprehensive plan is the highest land use control. Any AI data center that needs a plan amendment or rezoning faces public hearings, staff review, and possible state agency review. A developer should budget the time and political cost.
- Local governments have clear authority, and now express legislative encouragement, to address AI data centers in their comprehensive plans and land development codes. They can adopt specific standards for setbacks, noise, water, landscaping, and infrastructure.
- A project that draws 50 MW or more at a single location becomes a large load customer under SB 484. The water management district cannot issue a consumptive use permit for a large-scale data center if the use conflicts with local zoning or the comprehensive plan. This makes the local planning framework an early and hard gate.
- Nondisclosure agreements between government agencies and data center developers are now void and can trigger civil fines. The confidentiality period under the economic development statute is limited to 12 months for data center projects, and the agency must disclose that the project is a data center.
- The PSC must set tariffs that prevent ratepayer cost shifting, and a utility cannot serve a large load customer controlled by a foreign country of concern.
- The 100 MW sales tax exemption threshold is separate from the 50 MW SB 484 threshold. A 75 MW project gets the SB 484 rules but loses the tax break.
- By right industrial zoning in some counties, such as Miami-Dade, allows AI data centers to be built without a public hearing, which changes the political dynamics and the timeline.
Frequently asked questions
Q:Does SB 484 ban AI data centers in Florida?
A:No. The law does not prohibit or preempt data centers. It gives local governments express authority to regulate them, adds water permitting conditions, bans NDAs, and requires fair electricity rates. Local zoning remains the primary gatekeeper.
Q:What is a large load customer under SB 484?
A:A customer whose anticipated monthly peak demand is 50 megawatts or more at a single location, including colocated tenants, measured over a 15 minute interval. Load from separate locations owned by the same customer is not combined. Fla. Stat. § 366.043(2)(d)
Q:How does the water management district check local zoning?
A:SB 484 created § 373.262 so that a water management district or DEP may not issue a consumptive use permit to a large-scale data center if the proposed water use is prohibited by the applicable local government zoning regulations and comprehensive plan. The water permit is now gated by local land use consistency. Fla. Stat. § 373.262(2)
Q:Can a city or county enter an NDA with an AI data center developer?
A:No. As of July 1, 2026, any NDA that restricts an agency from disclosing information about a potential data center development is void and unenforceable. An agency that signs one faces a civil fine up to $1,000. Fla. Stat. § 112.231
Q:Is there a grandfather clause for AI data centers that already had a sales tax exemption before the threshold rose to 100 MW?
A:No. The 100 MW threshold under HB 7031 applies to all data centers on and after August 1, 2025. Sub 100 MW AI data centers lost the exemption regardless of when they were built or certified. Greenberg Traurig
Q:Do municipal utilities fall under the PSC tariff rules in SB 484?
A:Not fully. The Florida Public Service Commission does not fully regulate municipal electric utilities or rural electric cooperatives. SB 484 bill analysis The extent to which the tariff requirements in § 366.043 apply to those utilities is an open question.
Q:How long does a comprehensive plan amendment take for a large AI data center?
A:It depends on the scale and the political environment. A small scale amendment for 10 acres or less skips state review. A larger amendment goes through the State Coordinated Review or Expedited State Review process, which can take many months, and must be approved by the local governing body after public hearings and a planning agency recommendation. The seven year evaluation cycle may offer a faster way to add data center policies to the plan.
Subscribe to The Compute Law Brief
The Compute Law Brief is a free weekday newsletter on the law of AI infrastructure across tax, real estate, construction, power, and deals. The big US build markets and federal law. Three minutes a morning. No paywall, and no email gate to read the blog. Subscribe if you want it in your inbox.
Junde Liu, JD, LL.M. (Taxation) candidate at UF Law. Originally published on Compute Law Blog. This article is general information and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney client relationship. The reader should not act on the basis of any content here without first consulting a licensed attorney in the relevant state. Last reviewed for accuracy May 23, 2026.