Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board advises against proposed ordinance requiring upfront buffers and bonds for stalled sites
Summary
Planning staff proposed an ordinance to require perimeter buffers, bonding and site stabilization on development orders; developers and board members warned the draft’s two‑week inactivity threshold and two‑year expiration could be impractical, and the board voted to give a negative recommendation to council.
Village planning staff presented a draft legislative ordinance intended to address partially cleared or stalled developments by requiring perimeter buffers, irrigation/maintenance and a bond to ensure site stabilization when construction stops. The draft also included reductions to some development‑order expiration timelines.
Eric Wishart of the Department of Community Development said the ordinance aims to prevent long‑term unfinished sites from becoming eyesores and from causing erosion, dust or stormwater problems. He said the measure would apply prospectively to new development orders, not retroactively to existing approvals.
Developers and industry representatives who testified argued the proposed timelines and obligations were impractical. Mark Geschwindt of Miramar Development and other builders described complex financing, permitting and consumptive‑use constraints (South Florida Water Management District, Army Corps processes) that can stall projects for legitimate reasons and said the ordinance could saddle projects with significant up‑front landscaping, irrigation and maintenance costs that might be impossible to meet. One speaker said the draft’s two‑week inactivity standard and two‑year automatic expiration of development orders would not reflect construction realities such as materials delays, financing pauses or permit coordination.
Board members echoed those concerns, noting the village could be left with minimally planted, poorly maintained buffers or burdensome bonding requirements that do not accomplish the intended outcome. Several members said the ordinance’s goals were reasonable but the proposed approach risked unintended consequences.
After discussion the board voted to provide a negative recommendation to the village council on the ordinance as drafted and to forward suggestions that the council consider alternatives that balance community appearance with market and permitting realities. The recommendation will be included in the planning board’s comments when the ordinance goes to council.
