[{"_1":2,"_84":-5,"_85":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6699548,"mediaKeyId","5080582-8b4e3846d30b5b4d7365cd792ef479f3","parentId",5080582,"title","Votes at a glance: Miami‑Dade CDMP and zoning items — several small‑scale amendments, one appeal, and one deferral","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",1393000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5080582-8b4e3846d30b5b4d7365cd792ef479f3&start=1393&end=1393","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5080582-8b4e3846d30b5b4d7365cd792ef479f3/thumbnail_1393000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6699548/Miami-Dade-County/Florida/Votes-at-a-glance-MiamiDade-CDMP-and-zoning-items-several-smallscale-amendments-one-appeal-and-one-deferral","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6699548-8de7c642d17fea0d5b81307abac01ab5/orig.mp4?Expires=1770447120&Signature=nF1wDkWR3MwK1P9obTCAOa5EAUoUnMzhmE2M-hFMtYdCEHsMyKORTDbsHCLcV59AS6bn7dI5aggPbruslgJ2enD6lhaODMW7WSI5GRtFQBB6sfdLg1-l~ylpSuNJdfD1Q754uGeQvDfGvFHNA8q0zdop~~zddkxkMxUDU4xiBKcowk85wXIaEQNX7kQXxumTxoV6Axb9mdeQ~RWc2pAxjWuSofDvUgSCaaOxQY4RZtBss~IltLnZDTqcGbnPxcnwZeIm9UOZk3Sf8yWuBhH6T8L4jtD165yslESawGY4Ziik4iyrYXt16y4sYO1YVs8qoRjNIhUn9Tez7h~i05TPqw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Miami-Dade County","date","2025-06-26T00:00:00Z","article","Miami‑Dade County commissioners took votes on a series of Comprehensive Development Master Plan (CDMP) and companion zoning applications, passing most items unanimously or by clear majorities, and deferring one item to the next CDMP and zoning meeting.

Key outcomes

- Items 3A (CDMP amendment for a site at SW 197 Ave and theoretical SW 328 St) and its companion zoning item 8C1 (Lenoir Gaynor, Z2024000023) were adopted and the companion zoning item passed unanimously. The board accepted the applicant’s declaration of restrictions.

- Items 3B (CDMP amendment filed by Blue Nest Development LLC) and companion zoning 8C2 (KTC Properties, Z2024000128) were adopted; both passed unanimously with the administration’s recommended declarations of restrictions accepted.

- Item 8A1 (appeal: Garcia Curillo, Z2022000118) — the board approved the appeal subject to two changes staff read into the record: delete condition 5 and modify condition 2 to remove the requirement to dedicate the road. The board approved the rezone (EU1 to EUM) and the nonuse variance as presented, accepted the proffered declaration of restrictions and the applicant’s title opinion; the vote was unanimous.

- Application 8C3 (Sylvia G. George / New Life Chapel, Z2024000131) was approved after one resident testified in favor; the item passed unanimously.

- Application 882 (Fourteenth Street, Miami Investments, Z2024000125) was deferred to the next CDMP and zoning meeting (July 17) after the district commissioner was not present. Staff reported the applicant had submitted a revised covenant increasing the prior proffer from $150,000 to $300,000 for transit and $300,000 for affordable housing, for a total of $600,000; the board agreed to defer to allow the district commissioner to participate.

What the votes mean

Several of the CDMP items were described by staff as small‑scale amendments previously heard on first reading; the board took final action and accepted proffered declarations of restrictions where provided. The appeal at 8A1 required a supermajority because it was an appeal of a committee action; staff and the applicant indicated neighbors and the applicant had reached agreement and the board approved the application as modified on the record.

Procedural notes

Most zoning applications recorded no protests and no waves of support in the staff presentations included in the public record. Where public speakers were present, they generally either supported the applicants (8A1) or, in the case of other items, no public speakers were registered. The board’s clerk and county attorney provided roll‑call tallies and clarified vote thresholds when needed.

Next steps

The deferred item (882) will return at the July 17 CDMP and zoning meeting. For adopted items, staff will incorporate the board’s action into the record for each application and proceed per usual county processes.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Miami-Dade County - Miami-Dade BCC - Comprehensive Development Master Plan & Zoning - Jun 26, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Board of County Commissioners took final action on multiple CDMP and companion zoning items, adopting several small‑scale CDMP amendments with proffered declarations, approving an appeal with modified conditions, and deferring an application after an increased developer proffer.","taxTitle","Miami-Dade County, Florida","taxId",2864,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":42,"_43":77,"_45":77,"_46":78,"_48":79,"_50":80,"_52":81,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":82,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":83,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6699553,"Miami-Dade commissioners keep 1‑to‑1 jobs‑to‑housing ratio after public debate",484000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5080582-8b4e3846d30b5b4d7365cd792ef479f3&start=484&end=484","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5080582-8b4e3846d30b5b4d7365cd792ef479f3/thumbnail_484000.jpg","/articles/6699553/Miami-Dade-County/Florida/Miami-Dade-commissioners-keep-1to1-jobstohousing-ratio-after-public-debate","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6699553-749fdc8f8a2adfd7f1f4f505a0ee1f1d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770447120&Signature=Zv4HMMzjUXGqrAv-1hokaP6X5WBoNI48P9l85UggWW3xgfRTbkZH5368Zx~uMsHEAyFF187DTZFRXi8GzZ1pplPOM~corMk4k5j1rPVaIFn-jOSePxhOBQEUIQp0L3HKodiitOqLCuTCoymGuIDjMgj-MeKxo3KDGSGleDI9u6ulyPEKkXSjhe4bgh8kPCdsj56w~g7YxbAzI5ZyK5Jpm7Ib8QdJv6cTnLmSoSrm1rsuW~Bxeri1fg~nwX6ZcEHkD7gMLgCxEB2KOZ5-SKMq-G7IbDFG33-xskhMe4kUcQxy2oc2ghz4T0ieCH3GPCBU7XDA8OT3HBARiAtSf--oig__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Miami‑Dade County commissioners voted 7‑3 to reject staff-recommended changes to a Comprehensive Development Master Plan amendment and adopt the board’s original language keeping a 1‑to‑1 jobs‑to‑housing ratio for the item the board considered as item 7A.

The vote followed public comment from neighborhood and industry groups and an initial roll call that briefly left the motion short of the supermajority needed before a motion to reconsider and a second recorded vote produced the final 7‑3 outcome.

Why it matters: The county’s jobs‑to‑housing ratio is used when evaluating certain rezonings and land‑use amendments outside the urban development boundary (UDB). Supporters of the staff recommendation argued it would preserve closer job access to new housing; proponents of the 1‑to‑1 standard said a higher ratio would reduce housing supply and worsen affordability.

At a public hearing, Scott Palowitz of the Hold the Line Coalition urged the commission to “please follow the staff recommendations on item 7A,” saying the existing 1.5‑to‑1 jobs‑to‑housing ratio helps ensure jobs are located within about five miles of new developments. Palowitz said replacing that standard with a 1‑to‑1 ratio “means that at least one‑third of residents will have to drive far outside their communities to find work,” adding that he believed the change would worsen traffic and affordability.

Representatives of the Builders Association of South Florida pressed the opposite view. Jose Gonzalez, the association’s chairman, said the board’s originally transmitted language — a 1‑to‑1 ratio — should be adopted. Jose Gonzalez said state reviewers made no changes to the board’s transmitted language and recommended the commission move forward. Other builders’ representatives, including Jeff Burkhall and Graham Penn, argued that land supply for single‑family housing in Miami‑Dade is nearly exhausted and that a higher jobs‑to‑housing ratio would require developers to set aside nonresidential land even where demand does not exist.

Commissioner debate and procedure: Chairman Javier Rodriguez moved to reject staff recommendations and adopt the item as originally filed (the 1‑to‑1 ratio); Commissioner Oliver Gilbert seconded. The first roll call returned a 6‑4 vote and the motion was announced as failed. Commissioners then pursued a motion to reconsider. After a motion to reconsider was made and seconded, a second roll call was held: Commissioners Milian‑Orbis, Regalado, Bastien, Bermudez, Gilbert, Vice Chairman McGee and Chairman Rodriguez voted Yes; Commissioners Steinberg, Cohen Higgins and Senator Garcia voted No. The final tally on the remade motion was 7‑3, and the item passed.

The county attorney later recapped the sequence on the record, noting the board’s action to reject staff changes and adopt the originally filed CDMP language with the 1‑to‑1 ratio.

What was not decided here: The vote applied to the CDMP amendment before the board at item 7A; it did not itself change land uses on specific parcels beyond that amendment nor did it alter other staff policies not on the agenda. The transcript and staff materials do not specify implementation steps or timing beyond the board’s approval.

Public comment and positions: Scott Palowitz (Hold the Line Coalition) argued for the staff standard; the Builders Association delegates (Jose Gonzalez and others) advocated for the 1‑to‑1 ratio. Several commissioners asked procedural questions about vote thresholds and the effect of the motion; the county attorney and clerk provided clarifications on the record.

The board concluded the item after the final vote and returned to the afternoon agenda.","The Board of County Commissioners rejected staff changes to the county Comprehensive Development Master Plan and voted 7‑3 to retain a 1‑to‑1 jobs‑to‑housing ratio for the item before them, after public comment from housing and development groups and procedural votes that included a motion to reconsider.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Miami‑Dade CDMP and zoning items — several small‑scale amendments, one appeal, and one deferral

Miami-Dade commissioners keep 1‑to‑1 jobs‑to‑housing ratio after public debate