Southwest Ranches drops Sunrise-only rule for US 27 business zone; council adopts text amendment

The Town of Southwest Ranches unanimously adopted a text amendment to its comprehensive plan on Aug. 8 that removes a Sunrise-only potable water and sanitary sewer requirement for properties designated US Highway 27 Business, while preserving a provision related to roof structures.

Town planner Jeff (staff) told the Local Planning Agency and council the change is prospective and would apply only if property is rezoned and a site plan is approved. “What it does is it removes the restriction that all property designated US Highway 27 Business has to be connected to Sunrise Water and Sewer,” he said, adding the policy still requires connection to a municipal water and sewer system and that connections be made before a building permit is issued.

The amendment followed months of discussion and public comment. Mayor (presiding) said the Sunrise-only clause had become a practical barrier to development on the town’s west side, because running Sunrise infrastructure there would be much more expensive and could delay projects or encourage annexation by neighboring cities. “If Pines has some sort of a leak, they’re going to have to dig down through a Sunrise pipe? They’re not going to do it,” the mayor said in arguing the restriction made development economically infeasible.

Bergeron family representatives and nearby property owners urged the council to approve the change. Andrea Kaiser, speaking for Bergeron US 27, said the Sunrise-only provision “attempted to create a monopoly in favor of Sunrise” and had produced unintended consequences that undercut the town’s development goals. Lonnie Bergeron, who testified that sewer surrounding three sides of the parcel and a 12-inch water line are nearby, said allowing alternate municipal connections would make projects feasible without imposing unnecessary cost on property owners.

At the same time, a letter read into the record by Steven Waldman on behalf of Ali Bergeron alleged an email from the town attorney relayed nine conditions that might have been tied to a council member’s favorable vote; the letter called those conditions unrelated to the merits of the text amendment and urged a vote on the amendment itself. The claim was presented as an allegation; the council proceeded with debate and amendment rather than taking separate ethics action during the meeting.

Before the council vote, members agreed to restore the earlier text so that the phrase referencing "roof structure" remained in the code language. The council then voted 5-0 to adopt the amendment after the Local Planning Agency recommended approval earlier in the evening.

The adopted ordinance includes transmittal to state review agencies and “provides for an effective date,” as the text read into the record stated. The LPA had recommended the change before the council action. The town clerk’s roll call recorded affirmative votes from Albritton, Hartman, Jablonski, Vice Mayor Kosinski and the mayor.

The amendment is intended to let property owners use the nearest feasible municipal provider rather than being constrained to a Sunrise-only option; council members said staff will follow up on implementation as property owners pursue rezoning or site plan approvals.