Botched Land Deal Leaves Doral Paying Nearly Double After Legal Battle
How a Failed Land Purchase Became a $21 Million Settlement
In a striking example of how municipal planning can go awry, the city of Doral has agreed to pay nearly double the original purchase price for a vacant property it once intended to transform into a public park. The Doral City Council recently approved a $21 million settlement with property owner Doral 10, managed by Lizbeth Arencibia, ending a contentious legal battle that began in 2019.
The settlement comes six years after the city allegedly used and contaminated the 9.6-acre parcel without completing its planned $10.7 million purchase. This resolution highlights the significant financial consequences that can result from procedural missteps in municipal land acquisitions.
The Unauthorized Use That Sparked Litigation
According to court records, between January and May 2019, Doral and three contracted firms—JVA Engineering Contractor, EE&G Environmental Services, and BBC Engineering—used the vacant land between Northwest 102nd and 104th Avenues just north of 68th Street as a staging area for a roadway project. The critical issue: they allegedly did so without obtaining consent from Doral 10.
The property owner's lawsuit claimed city officials misrepresented their authority to both the contractors and Miami-Dade County's environmental permitting department, falsely indicating they had secured permission to use the site. What followed was a series of actions that reportedly left the property contaminated and significantly less valuable.
JVA Engineering was accused of extracting clean fill from the site to process contaminated soil from the roadway project, then depositing a mixture of contaminated soil and clean fill back onto the property. Four months after beginning to use the land, city officials informed Doral 10 that environmental remediation would cost at least $2.8 million, prompting them to abandon the original purchase agreement.
The Legal Journey and Settlement Decision
The path to settlement wasn't straightforward. After Doral 10 filed its complaint seeking $30 million in damages in Miami-Dade Circuit Court, the case was transferred to federal court. Initially, Doral secured a dismissal in 2020, but this victory was short-lived as the ruling was overturned on appeal in 2023.
Raul Gastesi, the private attorney representing Doral, painted a bleak picture for council members regarding the city's prospects at trial. "We were not doing well in court," Gastesi explained during the settlement approval meeting. "[Doral 10] has not been able to develop the land or do anything on the land due to contamination that they allege we caused."
The city's legal team concluded that purchasing the property was preferable to paying damages that could potentially exceed the settlement amount. "The court is likely to find against Doral," Gastesi warned the council before they approved the agreement.
The Settlement Breakdown and Real Estate Context
The $21 million settlement includes $17 million for the actual purchase of the 9.6-acre site, with the remaining $4 million covering Doral 10's losses from being unable to use or develop the property, plus attorney fees. This represents a significant premium over the original $10.7 million purchase price agreed upon six years ago.
Gastesi noted that market conditions had "changed dramatically" since the lawsuit was filed, contributing to the increased valuation. The property is strategically located in a rapidly developing area of northwest Miami-Dade County, where the Dunn family—relatives of property owner Lizbeth Arencibia—are among the largest landowners. Arencibia is the daughter of late developer Lowell Dunn, whose family has significant real estate holdings in the region.
Implications for Municipal Governance and Planning
This costly settlement serves as a cautionary tale for municipalities engaged in land acquisition projects. The case highlights several critical considerations for local governments:
- The importance of securing proper permissions before utilizing private property
- The potential financial consequences of environmental contamination
- The legal risks associated with improper contractor oversight
- The impact of market fluctuations on delayed property acquisitions
For Doral taxpayers, the settlement represents a significant premium paid due to procedural failures and alleged environmental damage. What was once envisioned as a $10.7 million park project has now become a $21 million expenditure—without any improvements to show for the added cost.
Insights About Municipal Land Acquisitions
What responsibilities do cities have when temporarily using private property?
Cities must obtain explicit written permission from property owners before utilizing private land, even temporarily. Failure to secure proper authorization can result in trespass claims, property damage liability, and significant financial penalties, as demonstrated in Doral's case.
How can municipalities protect themselves from similar situations?
Municipalities should implement rigorous protocols for land acquisitions, including comprehensive documentation of permissions, environmental assessments before and after temporary use, strict contractor oversight, and contingency planning for potential remediation needs.
Why did the settlement amount nearly double the original purchase price?
The settlement reflected several factors: compensation for alleged environmental contamination, the property owner's inability to use or develop the land for six years, legal costs incurred during the dispute, and appreciation of land values in northwest Miami-Dade County during the litigation period.
Could this situation have been prevented?
Yes, with proper protocols. The city could have either completed the purchase before using the property as a staging area or secured formal written agreements for temporary use with specific terms regarding site condition maintenance and restoration.
What lessons should other local governments take from this case?
This case underscores the importance of following proper procedures in land acquisitions, maintaining transparent communication with property owners, conducting thorough environmental due diligence, and recognizing that cutting corners in the short term can lead to substantially higher costs in the long run.
