Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Doral council approves Midtown MDA change, developer to pay $500,000 instead of conveying parkland
Summary
The council approved a modification to the Midtown Doral master development agreement replacing a planned parkland conveyance with a one‑time $500,000 payment, $400,000 in in‑kind park contributions and a 110% performance bond. Staff and the applicant said conservation easement and federal permits restrict public access to the 50‑acre preserve.
The Doral City Council voted Oct. 8 to approve linked amendments to the Midtown Doral master development agreement and related settlement documents that replace a previously proposed parkland conveyance with a combination of cash, in‑kind contributions and bond guarantees.
City planning staff told the council the developer will make a one‑time monetary contribution of $500,000 to the city and an in‑kind contribution valued at $400,000 for architectural, engineering or construction work identified by city staff within 180 days. Staff also said the developer must post a payment and performance bond equal to 110% of the estimated value of required work, and the city may draw on that bond if the developer fails to commence or complete the work within agreed timeframes.
The changes apply to a roughly 50‑acre area frequently called the preserve and are tied to modifications in the master development agreement and the recorded declaration of restrictions. City planning staff said the preserve is encumbered by a perpetual conservation easement issued by the South Florida Water Management District and by permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that include conditions forbidding public access and certain improvements.
"Encumbering the property is a conservation easement in perpetuity that's been issued by the South Florida Water Management District," staff said, and added the Army Corps permits "specifically prohibit public access in perpetuity." Staff told council that if the city were to accept the property it would face annual maintenance costs without the ability to open the site to the public.
Applicant counsel was present and offered to answer questions but did not give a prolonged presentation. Council members who spoke said they had reviewed the record and previous hearings and moved to approve the resolutions and ordinance on second reading with the conditions described by staff.
The council’s approval carries the stated requirements: the $500,000 payment, $400,000 in‑kind contributions to specific park projects identified by staff within 180 days, and the 110% performance bond to secure completion of the required work. The city clerk recorded the roll‑call approval on the record at second reading.
