Commissioner Regalado asked the Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioners to defer a rezoning application affecting a neighborhood and the board voted to postpone the item to May 22.

The deferral followed an extended presentation by Commissioner Regalado and county staff explaining options available to the property owner and warnings that the developer could build under an administrative “as-of-right” process if residents do not engage. An attorney speaking for the developer explained that the rezoning request would permit, with a workforce bonus, “up to 17 single family units,” while, without rezoning, the property owner had submitted an administrative application that would allow “8 lots and 2 units on each lot for a total of 16 units.”

Why it matters: Commissioners and staff said the neighborhood has options to influence the outcome only by meeting with the developer and by pursuing private agreements or covenants if they want roads kept closed or other restrictions enforced. Commissioner Regalado told residents, “you have a legal right to enter into an agreement with the developers,” and staff explained a covenant tied to zoning would require a return to the county to lift it.

County staff described the technical difference between the tracks: the administrative approval on file would allow 16 duplex units if the developer meets code requirements, while the rezoning under consideration would change the zoning category and, with the workforce bonus, allow a different unit mix. Staff also noted there are outstanding deficiency comments on the administrative submission that would need to be addressed for that route to proceed.

After the discussion, Commissioner Regalado moved to defer the item; the motion was seconded and carried. The board set the hearing date for May 22 and asked staff to help coordinate meetings between residents and the developer. The chair warned that members of the public who spoke at today’s hearing would not be allowed to speak again on this item at the May 22 hearing if the public comment period were kept open now.

The record: County staff advised that if the applicant follows the administrative approval process and meets code requirements the property could be developed as submitted administratively; staff also described an alternative nonuse variance process to keep a roadway closed and noted that private covenants or a county covenant would be options to ensure the road remained closed.

Next steps: The matter is scheduled for public hearing on May 22. County staff offered to help residents coordinate a neutral meeting site to confer with the developer and urged the neighborhood to meet with counsel and the applicant to clarify options before the next hearing.