Miami-Dade Legislative Item
File Number: 120558
Printable PDF Format Download Adobe Reader  

File Number: 120558 File Type: Resolution Status: Removed from Agenda
Version: 0 Reference: Control: Board of County Commissioners
File Name: UDB WORKING RESOLUTION Introduced: 3/21/2012
Requester: NONE Cost: Final Action:
Agenda Date: 5/1/2012 Agenda Item Number: 11A3
Sponsors: Jose "Pepe" Diaz, Prime Sponsor
  Bruno A. Barreiro, Co-Sponsor
  Esteban L. Bovo, Jr., 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 5/1/2012 11A3 Motion resulted in tie vote
REPORT: Commissioner Sosa noted the County spent $3.2 million on the Watershed Study, which had 85 recommendations. She indicated that the Board members did not have time to review this study, and although she could support some of the recommendations in the future, currently the commissioners’ attention was best focused on the downturn in the economy. She also expressed the belief that the composition of the UDB Working Group should be more balanced, as the views of both the developers and the environmentalists were essential. Therefore, she stated that at this time, she could not support this item. Commissioner Bell noted at this point a UDB Working Group was not needed. She expressed disappointment that the agricultural community was not represented as this item affected this community directly. Chairman Martinez noted, contrary to its original intent, the Watershed Study developed into a study that opposed the Urban Development Boundary (UDB). He said that commissioners reviewed the study, but discounted the recommendations because they were completely biased. He indicated that he would support creating a new, more balanced Working Group. Commissioner Moss noted the UDB was a very contentious issue in this community with advocates on both sides. He stressed the importance for Board members to have substantive discussions on the UDB before they put in place a Working Group. In addition, it was not clear whether the environmentalists would even participate in this process, Commissioner Moss noted. For this reason, he could not support the proposed resolution. Commissioner Diaz noted he concurred with Chairman Martinez that the results of the Watershed Study were not balanced. He referred to a resolution that was passed by the Board in April 2008 adopting the findings of a study conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on the same issue; however, the Administration withheld the study’s findings in 2010. Commissioner Diaz read from the final page of the EPA Study as follows: “The team’s assessment was that the UDB has been and remains an effective tool for promoting the County’s development and goals in the region. However, because of the lack of agreement over the core purpose of the UDB and the contested process for considering changes to the UDB, the time is ripe for a detailed review and assessment of this central tool of the CDMP.” He noted he concurred with Commissioner Bell that the agricultural community should be involved in this process. Commissioner Diaz stated that the Working Group could discuss both the Watershed and the EPA studies. He said that through its study, the federal government was advising the County to move forward and discuss this issue. Commissioner Diaz indicated that the County Attorney’s office had amended some of the language in the resolution, and asked the Attorneys to read the amendments, for the record. Assistant County Attorney Dennis Kerbel noted he would summarize the changes to the resolution, which were distributed to the Board members. He advised that the new language eliminated references to a permanent UDB and overly restrictive procedures, tied the Working Group to the recommendations of the EPA Study, and added a member to the Working Group. Assistant County Attorney Kerbel advised that another change, which was not distributed to the commissioners, was to be found in the last sentence as follows: “The Working Group is encouraged to consult with the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Agricultural Groups, and any other entities or individuals the group deems necessary to its deliberations.” The Board by motion duly made, seconded and carried adopted the foregoing proposed resolution as presented.

Board of County Commissioners 4/3/2012 11A3 Deferred 5/1/2012 P

County Mayor 4/2/2012 Deferrals 4/3/2012
REPORT: The Prime Sponsor has requested deferral to the May 1st, 2012 Board of County Commissioners Meeting.

County Attorney 3/21/2012 Assigned Dennis A. Kerbel 3/22/2012

Infrastructure and Land Use Committee 3/14/2012 2A AMENDED Forwarded to BCC with a favorable recommendation with committee amendment(s) P
REPORT: Note: Earlier in the meeting, Commissioner Sosa advised that she needed to leave early due to a prior commitment, and asked Deputy Mayor Jack Osterholt to provide Commissioners, particularly the newly elected Commissioners with a copy of the Watershed Study and the cost of that study before moving forward. She also asked the County Administration to ensure that anything approved by the work group was balanced, e.g., if three developers were selected on one side, then three environmentalists should be selected on the other side. Assistant County Attorney Geri Bonzon-Keenan read the foregoing proposed resolution into the record. Commissioner Diaz explained the intent of this ordinance, noting the Commission had dealt with the issues of the Urban Development Boundary (UDB) for some time. He also noted the UDB was never meant to be permanent, but created to protect sections of the community, slow down massive growth and ensure proper procedures were put in place. It was just a process. He asked if it was correct that only six of the forty applications filed were approved. Mr. Mark Woerner, Chief of Metropolitan Planning in the Sustainability, Planning, and Economic Enhancement Department (SPEED), noted from 1989 to present, 38 applications had been filed, and of those, only nine were approved, five of them in the last ten years. Commissioner Diaz noted the idea was to have a discussion between staff and all parties involved about the studies already conducted. He expressed disappointment that two organizations withdrew from the Work Group in order to impede the process, but noted other organizations were willing to take their place and had valid opinions. He noted many applications had been filed that he thought had merit, but they failed due to a strong oppositional campaign. He asked Assistant County Attorney Coller to read the amendments into the record. Assistant County Attorney Craig Coller noted the language “after input from owners of property outside the Urban Development Boundary” should be inserted in the third line of the second paragraph on typed page 2, after the word “board;” and ‘Chair of the Agriculture Practices Advisory Board or its designee’ should be added to the Working Group as an additional member. Commissioner Diaz said he was willing to work with staff to establish a balanced work group; and invited his colleagues to add other groups. Commissioner Diaz expressed appreciation to Commissioner Barreiro for co-sponsoring this resolution. Commissioner Monestime noted he disliked this proposal for the same reason he disliked the previous one Commissioner Suarez sponsored. He pointed out the Board approved only a small percentage of UDB applications that came before it. He also noted he was unsure whether the proposed discussion would provide the well-intended results that Commissioner Diaz desired, and did not believe 90 days was sufficient time for the work group to provide a good report. Commissioner Monestime expressed disbelief that the County’s demand for land would not be met beyond 2016, noting developers redeveloped or built on existing land during the condominium boom, not on new land. He suggested the workgroup include representation from other organizations more interested in developing within the UDB, such as the MDEAT and CRAs. He further noted he understood it was cheaper to develop outside the UDB than inside it, and believed the cost factors were the real issue. He also noted he believed a serious discussion that focused on policies and practices that drive investment and development into the urban communities within the UDB was needed. He noted for these reasons he stated, he could not support this resolution. Commissioner Barreiro spoke in support of this resolution, noting it would provide a positive process for looking at areas in terms of conservation. He also noted this resolution proposed a second, permanent UDB line that would serve as a buffer between the urban core and the Everglades National Park for years to come. He said he believed it would result in better planning of the CDMP, since currently, applications were approved piecemeal, without the broader picture being considered. Commissioner Jordan expressed concern regarding the terms ‘permanent’ and ‘unanimous vote.” She said she could accept an extraordinary vote instead, noting even nine votes were hard to obtain for a UDB item. She said she usually considered each application independently, and voted inconsistently on UDB items. She noted requiring a unanimous vote could prevent a good project from moving forward. Commissioner Diaz noted the point made by Commissioner Jordan was valid and why he wanted the working group to be balanced in representation. He noted the reason the Beacon Council and Greater Chamber of Commerce were chosen as members was because they were neutral entities with many members and represented tourism. He noted the County’s largest industry was tourism and the Everglades National Park attracted a lot of tourists. He suggested school representatives should be included as well. Commissioner Diaz pointed out that the Green Belt was supposed to be a permanent buffer, created as a wide park; and that nearly all of Broward County built out to the edge of the UDB, which he did not want Miami-Dade County to do. Jobs needed to be created in the community and a limited supply of developable land needed to be addressed as well, he noted. In addition, this was a work in progress and the working group would be required to bring back recommendations for the County Commission to consider. There being no further discussion, the foregoing proposed ordinance was forwarded to the County Commission with a favorable recommendation, with Committee amendment(s) to insert the following language after the word ‘Board’ in the third line, second paragraph on typed page 2 (handwritten page 4): “after input from owners of property outside the Urban Development Boundary”; and to include the Chair of the Agricultural Practices Advisory Board or its designee as a member of the Working Group.

Legislative Text



WHEREAS, as set forth in Miami-Dade County’s Comprehensive Development Master Plan (CDMP), Miami-Dade County values excellence in urban planning and the preservation of the County’s agricultural lands and natural resources; and
WHEREAS, one of the most essential components of the CDMP is the Urban Development Boundary, which separates the areas where urban development should occur from areas where it should not occur, provides for the orderly and efficient construction of infrastructure, encourages urban infill and redevelopment, discourages urban sprawl, and helps to conserve agricultural and environmentally-sensitive lands; and
WHEREAS, the Miami-Dade County Code currently provides for amendments to expand the UDB to be filed every two years; and
WHEREAS, since 1991, amendments to the UDB have generally been considered in a piecemeal fashion based on individual private applications, often resulting in numerous contentious public hearings; and
WHEREAS, this Board wishes to undertake a comprehensive review of the UDB and to consider establishing a permanent UDB that can only be amended in very restrictive circumstances, to provide greater certainty in the County’s comprehensive plan and its vision to balance the County’s urban development with its preservation efforts; and
WHEREAS, a small working group of stakeholders from the environmental and development communities could make recommendations to the Board as to how to best create a permanent Urban Development Boundary with restrictive procedures should future UDB amendments become necessary,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the County Mayor or designee is directed to create a Working Group to make recommendations to the Board >>, after input from owners of property outside of the UDB,<<1 relating to (1) the establishment of a permanent Urban Development Boundary and (2) the establishment of very restrictive procedures for future amendments to the UDB, including a requirement that further UDB expansions shall require the unanimous approval of this Board. The Working Group shall consist of the following nine members: the Director of the Environmental & Land Use Law Clinic at the Nova Southeastern Shepard Broad Law Center or designee; the Executive Director of the Tropical Audobon Society or designee; the President of the Urban Environment League of Greater Miami or designee; the President of the Latin Builders Association or designee; the President of the South Florida Builders Association or designee; the President of the Florida East Coast Chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc., or designee; the President of the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce or designee; the President of the Beacon Council or designee; >>the Chair of the Agricultural Practices Advisory Board or designee;<< and the Miami-Dade County Deputy Mayor with responsibility over the Department of Sustainability, Planning and Economic Enhancement or designee. Miami-Dade County staff, including the Chief of Metropolitan Planning of the Department of Sustainability, Planning and Economic Enhancement, shall provide support to the Working Group. Within 90 days of the effective date of this resolution, the working group shall prepare a report and recommendation for the Board. Under no circumstances shall this task force exist for one year or more after the effective date of this Resolution.

1 Committee amendments are indicated as follows: Words stricken through and/or [[double bracketed]] are deleted, words underscored and/or >>double arrowed<< are added.

Home  |   Agendas  |   Minutes  |   Legislative Search  |   Lobbyist Registration  |   Legislative Reports
2016 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 © 2016 Miami-Dade County.
All rights reserved.