Miami-Dade Legislative Item
File Number: 070724
Printable PDF Format Download Adobe Reader  Clerk's Official Copy   

File Number: 070724 File Type: Ordinance Status: In Committee
Version: 0 Reference: 07-84 Control: County Commission
File Name: ZONING REGULATION OF SIGNS Introduced: 3/7/2007
Requester: NONE Cost: Final Action: 6/26/2007
Agenda Date: 6/26/2007 Agenda Item Number: 7A
Notes: 6-wk p.h./4-wk muni notification Title: ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO ZONING REGULATION OF SIGNS; AUTHORIZING MUNICIPALITIES TO OPT OUT OF REGULATIONS RESTRICTING SIGN PLACEMENT IN PROXIMITY TO EXPRESSWAYS; AMENDING SECTION 33-121.11 OF THE CODE OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE [SEE ORIGINAL ITEM UNDER FILE NO. 070554]
Indexes: SIGNS
  ZONING
Sponsors: Jose "Pepe" Diaz, Prime Sponsor
  Dorrin D. Rolle, Co-Sponsor
Sunset Provision: No Effective Date: Expiration Date:
Registered Lobbyist: None Listed


Legislative History

Acting Body Date Agenda Item Action Sent To Due Date Returned Pass/Fail

Board of County Commissioners 6/26/2007 7A Adopted P
REPORT: Assistant County Attorney Cuevas read the foregoing proposed ordinance into the record. It was moved by Commissioner Diaz that this proposed ordinance be adopted. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Seijas, and upon being put to a vote, passed 9-2 (Commissioner Heyman and Chairman Barreiro voted “no,” Commissioners Moss and Sorenson were absent). In response to Commissioner Jordan’s inquiry regarding whether or not this ordinance would allow additional proliferation of signs by municipalities opting out, Assistant County Attorney Coffey advised a municipality that opted out could have more or less billboards than allowed by the County’s standard. She clarified that municipalities that opted out would be exempted from the County’s standard and would have to comply with the State’s standard. Commissioner Diaz noted that most cities would probably not want any signs, except cities that were largely industrial; and that the State law would provide protection against a proliferation of signs. Responding to Commissioner Jordan’s question concerning the strictness of the County’s sign standard, Assistant County Attorney Coffey noted it was stricter than the State’s standard with regard to the distance from the expressway; and that cities that opted out would have the choice to have more signs than what the County currently allowed. It was moved by Commissioner Jordan that this ordinance be reconsidered. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Sorenson, and upon being put to a vote, passed 11-2 (Commissioners Seijas and Diaz voted “no”). It was moved by Commissioner Diaz that the foregoing proposed ordinance be adopted. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Rolle. Commissioner Sorenson noted that the City of North Miami made an agreement with a sign company in April 2006, to install six (6) billboards along Interstate 95 for $6 million. She pointed out that County Manager Burgess devoted all of page 4 in his October 11, 2006 Memorandum regarding sign violations to the City of North Miami; that he identified Media Net as the main company; and that he put the City of North Miami on written notice not to violate the expressway billboard ban. She asked who the four (4) members of the corporate entities were that broke the County’s laws. Assistant County Manager Roger Carlton said he could not remember all four members, but two were Mr. Ron Book and Mr. Arthur Hertz. Commissioner Sorenson pointed out that Mr. Hertz’s rent payments for the Miami Seaquarium’s land made him one of the County’s biggest tenants in the Parks system. She pointed out that Mr. Book was the County’s lead lobbyist. In response to Commissioner Sorenson’s question regarding direct communication with a member of the North Miami City Council or Administration, Assistant County Manager Carlton noted the County Administration sent a series of letters to the City Manager with the message to “cease and desist” with the six billboards. He said he spoke directly with Mr. Hertz and asked him not to put up the billboards. Mr. Book said Assistant County Manager Carlton did not speak to him before the billboards were posted. He maintainted Assistant County Manager Carlton never spoke to him regarding the billboards until they were up, and Mr. Carlton did not provide him a copy of any letter(s) sent to the City of North Miami. Assistant County Manager Carlton explained that staff and the County Attorney’s Office made very substantial efforts to stop the billboards in North Miami from being posted. He noted he did not think he had spoken to Mr. Hertz or Mr. Book after the billboards were posted. Commissioner Sorenson expressed concern regarding the violation of the County’s sign ordinance and the clause in this proposed ordinance that would allow municipalities to opt out. She said she felt this proposed ordinance would lead to additional violations of the law. Following Commissioner Diaz’s explanation regarding the intent of this proposed ordinance, Commissioner Jordan noted she felt the County needed to establish countywide standards for signs and not allow the municipalities to opt out and establish their own standards. Commissioner Moss suggested that the municipalities that opted out of this proposed ordinance be required to present a plan similar to the plan done for the City of Miami on this issue. He expressed concern regarding the possibility of this proposed ordinance resulting in a proliferation of signs. Discussion ensued between Commissioner Moss and Assistant County Attorney Coffey regarding the laws that would apply to signs in municipalities that opted out of this proposed ordinance. Mr. Kevin Burns, Mayor, City of North Miami, explained the billboard company wanted to put up 40 billboards and sued North Miami. He said the Court ruled that the City of North Miami’s sign ordinance was unconstitutional and that a federal judge urged North Miami to settle with the company. Mr. Burns noted North Miami did not want billboards. He pointed out the County ordinance was designed to prevent billboards. He clarified that North Miami did not want billboards on Biscayne Boulevard, or more on NW 7th Avenue and Interstate 95; and that North Miami should have the ability to regulate the billboards the community desired. He noted that municipalities could opt out of this proposed ordinance to make stricter sign requirements. Following Commissioner Gimenez’s questions to Mr. Burns regarding the City of North Miami’s intent for allowing the billboards, Commissioner Seijas noted she supported community control of the signs; that the municipalities had responsible people who knew what to do; and that the County should respect the municipalities and allow them to control their communities. Discussion ensued regarding why the City of North Miami did not involve the County in the billboard litigation since the County had an ordinance that superceded municipal law. Hearing no other questions or comments, the Commission proceeded to vote.

Board of County Commissioners 6/5/2007 7A Deferred 6/26/2007 P

County Manager 6/4/2007 Deferrals 6/5/2007
REPORT: Requesting deferral of this item to the next Board of County Commissioners’ meeting scheduled for June 26, 2007.

Governmental Operations and Environment Committee 5/15/2007 3B SUBSTITUTE Forwarded to BCC with a favorable recommendation P
REPORT: The foregoing proposed ordinance was read into the record by Assistant County Attorney Joni Armstrong-Coffey. Chairwoman Seijas opened the public hearing and the following person(s) appeared in connection with the foregoing proposed ordinance: 1. Mr. Ron Book, 2999 NE 191 Street, expressed support of the foregoing ordinance on behalf of the City of Miami and the City of North Miami. Hearing no one else in connection with this matter, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rolle asked if this ordinance would apply to billboards placed in North Miami. Assistant County Attorney Craig Coller noted if this ordinance was adopted and the City of North Miami adopted its own ordinance authorizing it, than those billboards would be affected. Hearing no further comments or discussion, the Committee proceeded to vote on the foregoing proposed ordinance, as presented.

Board of County Commissioners 3/19/2007 Municipalities notified of public hearing Governmental Operations and Environment Committee 5/15/2007 3/6/2007

Board of County Commissioners 3/7/2007 Requires Municipal Notification Governmental Operations and Environment Committee 5/15/2007

County Attorney 3/7/2007 Referred Governmental Operations and Environment Committee 5/15/2007

County Attorney 3/7/2007 Assigned Craig H. Coller 3/7/2007

Board of County Commissioners 3/6/2007 4D AMENDED Adopted on first reading as amended 5/15/2007 P
REPORT: County Attorney Greenberg read the foregoing proposed ordinance into the record. He noted that a scrivener’s error existed. It was moved by Commissioner Gimenez that the Board adopt the foregoing ordinance as amended to underline the following language: "that has not opted out of this division" in Section 33-121.11. This motion was second by Commissioner Heyman. Hearing no other questions or comments, the Commission proceeded to vote. The foregoing proposed ordinance was adopted on first reading and scheduled for public hearing before the Governmental Operations and Environment Committee on May 15, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.

Legislative Text


TITLE
ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO ZONING REGULATION OF SIGNS; AUTHORIZING MUNICIPALITIES TO OPT OUT OF REGULATIONS RESTRICTING SIGN PLACEMENT IN PROXIMITY TO EXPRESSWAYS; AMENDING SECTION 33-121.11 OF THE CODE OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE

BODY
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Section 33-121.11 of the Code of Miami-Dade County, Florida is hereby amended to read as follows: 1
Sec. 33-121.11. Applicability

This division shall apply to both the incorporated and unincorporated area >>, except that, notwithstanding section 33-82 of this code, this division shall not apply in those municipalities that by ordinance have opted out of this division and have established their own regulations of signs in proximity to expressways. A copy of each municipal ordinance establishing regulations differing from this division shall be filed with the Director within 15 days after adoption by the municipality. It is further provided that<< [[A]] >>a<>that has not opted out of this division<< may establish and enforce more restrictive regulations as such municipality may deem necessary.

Section 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or provision of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall not be affected by such invalidity.
Section 3. It is the intention of the Board of County Commissioners, and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance, including any sunset provision, shall become and be made part of the Code of Miami-Dade County, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such intention, and the word “ordinance” may be changed to “section,” “article,” or other appropriate word.
Section 4. This ordinance shall become effective ten (10) days after the date of enactment unless vetoed by the Mayor, and if vetoed, shall become effective only upon an override by this Board.
1 Words stricken through and/or [[double bracketed]] shall be deleted. Words underscored and/or >>double arrowed<< constitute the amendment proposed. Remaining provisions are now in effect and remain unchanged.



Home  |   Agendas  |   Minutes  |   Legislative Search  |   Lobbyist Registration  |   Legislative Reports
2014 BCC Meeting Calendar  |   Miami-Dade County Code of Ordinances   |   ADA Notice  |  

Home  |  Using Our Site  |  About Phone Directory  |  Privacy  |  Disclaimer

E-mail your comments, questions and suggestions to Webmaster  

Web Site © 2014 Miami-Dade County.
All rights reserved.