Urban Development Boundary: The Next Battle Line

BY MATTHEW HAGGMAN

mhaggman@herald.com

Standing between a row of cabbages on a wide expanse of farmland in western Miami-Dade County, Douglas Wilson stared at suburban homes and a strip mall looming on the eastern horizon.

Despite the encroaching urban sprawl, the farm land leased by Wilson and his brother, Daryll, has been protected from large-scale development for decades. The reason: It sits west of the county's Urban Development Boundary, the line providing a green buffer between densely populated areas and the Everglades.

But now home builder D.R. Horton wants to put roads, homes and shops on the land Wilson farms -- and is asking the county to move the UDB to do it.

''I guess it's inevitable,'' sighed Wilson, 53, who previously farmed the south Miami-Dade land that was turned into the residential subdivision Country Walk. ``We're going to have to look for new land.''

With a dwindling supply of developable land in Miami-Dade County and Broward County nearly built-out, a host of powerful developers are now targeting land previously off-limits for large-scale development.

The activity, sure to prompt a fierce and lengthy battle, represents the biggest push in years to move the UDB, which has been altered just once in the last decade and has not been moved for a residential development since 1993.

OPPOSING POINTS OF VIEW

On one side of the issue are the developers who argue the county's growing population and surging home prices have created a crisis in affordable single-family homes in Miami-Dade. The only land left to build reasonably-priced homes on, they contend, is the broad expanse beyond the UDB.

On the other are environmentalists, citizens associations and civil rights groups who say development outside the current line will choke already clogged roads, threaten Everglades restoration and open the door to incursions into rural and environmentally sensitive lands.

Developers, anticipating it's only a matter of time before the boundary is moved, have begun buying up land beyond the UDB. Home-building giant Lennar Corp. has an option to buy nearly 2,500 acres near Florida City. It hopes to build homes on 981 acres there and expects to file an application by April to amend the UDB, said Anthony Seijas, president of Lennar's Miami-Dade division.

The Miami-based home builder has also bought an 823-acre parcel in western Miami-Dade outside the UDB.

D.R. Horton, a Fort Worth, Tex.-based builder, has a pending application to amend the UDB for a development with more than 5,000 residential units along Krome Avenue near Kendall Drive. The 854-acre parcel includes the land where Douglas Wilson farms.

Meanwhile, Edward W. Easton of The Easton Group, Neighborhood Planning Company's Armando J. Guerra and Agustin Herran, and home builder United Homes all have snapped up property outside the UDB.

DIFFERENT RULES

Unlike Broward, which permits development to the Everglades' doorstep, Miami-Dade established the UDB in 1975. Running generally north-south, it limits any building outside the boundary to one dwelling per five acres.

Through the years, several amendments pushed the UDB further west, but the line has hardly moved at all during the past decade.

Now as developers eye the wide open spaces beyond the boundary, opponents are girding to save the current configuration at all costs.

''Moving it is totally dangerous to the Everglades,'' said Nancy Liebman, president of the Urban Environment League. ``And totally dangerous to people who like to have a quality lifestyle and don't want to be trapped in endless traffic gridlock.''

Developers say they are ready for what will likely be a bruising contest over the line's fate.

''Am I fearful of engaging and being a participant in sometimes contentious discussions about growth and how it should occur? No,'' said Stuart Miller, CEO of Miami-based Lennar. ``The population is crying out for development, and I think we will represent the population well.''

If more land is not made available, developers argue, then families will continue to be priced out of South Florida's surging real estate market.

But a 2003 report by Miami-Dade's Department of Planning and Zoning determined there is enough developable land to last until 2020. It also concluded the UDB should not be moved.

In recent years, faced with dwindling open space in the suburbs, local developers have focused more on urban in-fill projects, neighborhood redevelopment and high-rise condominium projects near town centers and the coastline.

NEEDS NOT MET

But Lennar and D.R. Horton argue the county's population growth and increasing housing needs cannot be met by in-fill projects alone. And, they say, many of the high-rise condominiums are way too expensive for most buyers.

''Not everyone wants to live in high-rise condominiums, especially families,'' said Easton, chairman of The Easton Group. ``There is a need for single-family homes.''

That housing shortage and lack of available land is feeding the upward spiral in prices, said lobbyist Miguel De Grandy, who represents D.R. Horton. ``That is creating a situation where you are seeing redevelopment in older neighborhoods with prices skyrocketing so folks living in those neighborhoods can no longer buy product there.''

Critics of moving the line say simply opening up new land won't automatically temper soaring housing prices. ''It will take more than moving the line out,'' said Rod Jude, Sierra Club Miami chairman. ``Prices will still be high.''

SAFETY ISSUES

There are also other concerns about pushing out the boundary line. Monroe County officials, for example, express worry that development outside the UDB in south Miami-Dade could impede evacuation efforts from the Florida Keys.

And some critics just don't buy the notion that Miami-Dade is out of developable land. ''They are trying to create this specter of people living in boxes if their development is not approved,'' said Richard Grosso, executive director of the Environmental and Land Use Law Center in Fort Lauderdale. ``That is not true.''

Grosso cites the county's own conclusions in its 2003 Evaluation and Appraisal Report of Miami-Dade's comprehensive master plan.

''The area within the UDB provides enough countywide capacity of residential land to accommodate projected development until 2020,'' the report concluded.

UPWARD REVISIONS

The date when the county's inventory of residential land is expected to run out has since been revised upward to 2021, according to Mark R. Woerner of Miami-Dade's Department of Planning and Zoning.

But Easton responded that every single-family home builder he has spoken with in Miami-Dade County says the biggest problem now is finding developable lots.

''That is my barometer,'' Easton said.

The last time a small portion of the line was pushed westward was in 2002 to make way for the 436-acre Beacon Lakes industrial park west of Miami International Airport. That effort, led by developer Armando Codina, received so much attention that the Harvard Business School did a case study last year on the long-running battle.

Amendments to the UDB are considered in April of every odd year.

THE PROCESS

Here's how it works: A developer submits a detailed plan to the county and South Florida Regional Planning Council. The plan goes through a comment and revision process, in which state agencies critique the project. That process can run for a year or more.

Ultimately, the plan goes before the Miami-Dade County Commission. A super-majority -- two-thirds of the county commissioners -- is required for approval.

The push to move the line comes as the county commission prepares to launch a new study on the UDB. Another study that could have implications for the UDB, the South Miami-Dade Watershed Study, is due to be completed later this year.

Some suggest the county should defer action until each study is submitted.

Miami-Dade Commissioner Dennis C. Moss, who proposed the UDB study, said Friday he will not support any UDB changes until the study is completed.

''I am hoping that within the next six to eight months the study will be done,'' said Moss, who added that constituents in his south Miami-Dade district are increasingly getting priced out of the market. The pricey condos being built in Miami, he said, aren't a solution for them.

''I want there to continue to be a greenbelt,'' Moss said. ``But I am also not one who thinks the sky will fall if we expand the UDB.''

FORMING A DEFENSE

In the face of developers' efforts, opposition groups are scrambling to organize and mount a defense. Last month, Liebman said, a group was formed called the Coalition for Livable Communities. It includes the Urban Environment League, Sierra Club and Tropical Audubon Society, among others.

Late last month, in what it called ''an opening salvo,'' the UEL commissioned a poll of registered voters' feelings about traffic in Kendall, Hialeah and South Miami. Some 55 percent said they were spending more time in traffic than a year ago and 77 percent deemed traffic a ''lot worse'' than when they first moved to the area.

Grosso said the Environmental and Land Use Law Center is putting together a white paper on the subject.

But developers are assembling formidable, high-priced teams, too.

D.R. Horton has hired De Grandy, real estate analyst Andy Dolkart and lawyer Joseph Goldstein -- the same attorney who got the Beacon Lakes boundary amendment passed for Codina.

According to Lennar's Seijas, Lennar has retained Goldstein and lobbyists Luis E. Rojas and Miguel Diaz de la Portilla, the defeated Miami-Dade mayoral candidate and former county commissioner.

ARGUMENT QUESTIONED

Meanwhile, some question developers' affordable homes argument.

''When it is painted as a battle between those who need affordable housing and hard-core environmentalists, it really does an injustice to the issue,'' said Daniella Levine, executive director of the Human Services Coalition.

DeGrandy shrugs off such comments, noting that the UDB was set up with an eye toward moving it to accommodate growth.

''The UDB was never meant to be a line in stone,'' said DeGrandy. ``The UDB is there to be a buffer for additional development until such time it is necessary to move the UDB.

``The question for the commissioners is, is this the right time?''

I don't think a developer, especially DR Horton, is qualified to speak on the housing crunch of Miami especially when all they want to do is build over the Everglades. I hope the city eventually started requiring developers of highrises to set aside a certain number of affordable units in each project, this would help to elevate the problem.

They should be thinking about drawing the line nearer, not farther.

its better for us skyscraper lovers to keep that line where its at or maybe move it in more.

less suburban more urban

theyres millions of places to build affordable mid rise houseing all across the county, just cause these huge companies wanna keep building 800 acre subdivisions cause its easier, doesnt mean we should just give in, the city is changing, and these developers need to change too

There is an area south of the UDB that Florida City wants to annex. This is sort-of related to the developers' fight to push the UDB southward, along the southern edge of the county. Here's a map, courtesy of Miami-Dade County's Office of Strategic Business Management, Incorporation and Annexation Division:

http://img230.exs.cx/img230/7505/flacityannex12jy.jpg (http://www.miamidade.gov/INC/annex/anx_flcity.pdf)

http://img230.exs.cx/img230/7331/flacityannex22ou.jpg

It would be a big mistake to extend this boundary.

Also, as the article pointed out, look at the western edge of the green area. That's Card Sound Road, one of only two roads that are used to evacuate the Keys.

Miami-Dade County would be wise to not copy what Broward did by allowing developers full reign of their county, because now they are almost completely at buildout and facing their own problems.

there is enough land left within the UDB to satisfy developers through 2020.
I don't understand why they want to build past Krome Avenue.

Guys I was on the Miami dade web page and there is a long list of annexations and towns incorporations going on in the county. There are 11 areas looking to incorportate, including Redlands which might fall completely outside the UDB. Also 10 cities are looking to annex areas around them. Now I wonder why there is so much activity to grab up land. Do you think something will happen to the county form of government? I dont think the county would want to give up all that area and population. Also I wrote the mayor of Miami last year asking why Miami doesnt annex areas to the west and make itself easily the largest city in the state and in the top ten in the nation (could easily double or triple its population) he wrote back and told me to keep my eyes open in the fall or spring. As of yet I have seen nothing about Miami annexing anything. If they wait much longer there wont be anything left to annex. Just wondering what he was talking about.

^^^hmm...interesting peice of info!!

One thing that is very unique about our "metro" form of government in Miami-Dade County is that the County (not the State) sets the rules and procedures for annexing land, forming new cities, or dissolving (dis-incorporating) existing cities.

Part of what you saw on the website are Municipal Advisory Committees... They study whether or not an area is worth incorporating. Then the MAC gives a recommendation to the County Commission, and they decide whether or not to put it to referendum.

If the area that's incorporating is an affluent area and a "donor community" (i.e., it pays more in taxes that it receives in services), the County will not allow the area to incorporate without negotiating a mitigation fee that must be paid to the County each year (to keep from having to raise taxes on unincorporated areas). Plus any new city has to contract with the Miami-Dade Police Department for the first 3 years of its incorporation, it has to remain within the Miami-Dade Fire Rescue District, the Miami-Dade Public Library System, and continue to use Miami-Dade Water and Sewer and Miami-Dade Solid Waste Management.

Sometimes the County will require that it retain zoning control over a specific area within a city limits. Doral and Miami Gardens both fall into this category.

Many of those MACs (Fontainebleau, Goulds, North Central) represent areas that don't have a strong enough tax base to support a city and would actually get less services (i.e., "recipient community"), without raising taxes. The County has considered creating a "township" style limited government like those used in the Northeast and Midwest as an alternative to areas that want more control over their zoning and stuff but can't afford or don't want to be a full-fledged city. Florida doesn't have townships, so this would be a unique thing to Miami-Dade County.

The City of Miami has limited areas to annex that are worth annexing... It's landlocked by several other cities, and the areas that are directly adjacent to its northwest are extremely poor. Any area it would want to annex could potentially have mitigation fees. Annexing the poorer areas northwest of Miami would put a strain on services. Miami-Dade County is much larger and much better equipped to handle that. City of Miami would do best by concentrating on infill, making itself denser, etc. At more than 10,000 per square mile, it is doing quite well so far.

Thanks for explaining that Tivo. Yes we have townships here in the midwest, and they do somewhat rule themselves and do things like care for roads and have volunteer fire departments. Miami (the city) is very limited in how it can grow that is for sure.

thanks for that info tivo...I think Miami should be left in its current siz and work on further densification, as you said!!

i wouldnt be unhappy if city of miami and dade county merged as jacksonville did... that would easily make miami one of the largest cities in the nation... and make government much easier and efficient

Nimby thats what I was thinking too. The merger would make miami in the top five in the US. Right now miami is being passed up in population by suburbs around the nation, not just central cities.

San Francisco, is small....but it's still one of the greatest cities in the country...and it's greatly respected..we don't have to be another houston, dallas, or phoenix!

This is perhaps the best news to date in the battle against moving the urban development boundary.
--------
Posted on Sat, Feb. 19, 2005

MIAMI-DADE MAYOR | STATE OF THE COUNTY
Alvarez sets new priorities for county

Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Alvarez highlighted new priorities and took a more conciliatory approach to the County Commission in his State of the County speech. His themes included protection of the urban boundary from sprawling development.

BY NOAKI SCHWARTZ AND TERE FIGUERAS NEGRETE
nschwartz@herald.com

In his first State of the County speech, Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Alvarez on Friday broadened his agenda beyond his message of government reform to include environmental, health and juvenile delinquency issues -- and took a more conciliatory approach toward commissioners who oppose his effort to reduce their powers.

Alvarez highlighted one theme welcomed by environmentalists: protecting the Urban Development Boundary established to shield agricultural and environmental resources from sprawling development.

The mayor said he would not favor changing it until a local, regional and state study with recommendations on how to balance growth and environmental concerns is completed this fall.

''This watershed area plays a vital role in the health of Biscayne Bay and the Everglades,'' said Alvarez, who noted he has taken his children fishing and airboat riding in Everglades. ``The longer I live in South Florida, the more I come to appreciate these natural wonders.''

Environmentalists cheered the statement.

''I am overjoyed that this is my mayor,'' said Jamie L. Furgang, an Everglades Policy Associate with Audubon of Florida. ``I'm telling you, I think the mayor is the champion of Biscayne Bay that we need.''

In the past, Alvarez has rarely strayed from his stump speech that calls for stripping county commissioners of the power to award lucrative contracts and the county manager of his authority over department directors.

On Friday, however, the mayor showed he has more goals in mind.

''With 100 days in office comes 100 days of wisdom,'' said Mario J. Artecona, executive director of the Miami Business Forum.

Alvarez talked generally about launching an initiative to foster healthy lifestyles among the elderly by educating them on nutrition and exercise. He expects to create a task force to study alternatives to jailing the mentally ill, put together a plan to fight juvenile delinquency, and reiterated his support for a salary increase for commissioners, who currently earn $6,000 a year.

CAMPAIGN PROMISE

Alvarez also discussed his campaign promise to make county government more efficient by streamlining the permitting process.

He has asked County Manager George Burgess to outline an action plan bringing together construction industry experts to make recommendations.

Overall, the speech was received well by the large audience of business people, university graduates and county employees, who applauded longest when Alvarez spoke about his push to change county government.

``On these issues, some Miami-Dade commissioners and I have an ideological disagreement between conscientious and well-meaning elected officials, he said, adding that he will submit his recommendations on these changes to the commission within weeks.

While commissioners did not join in that round of clapping, most agreed the speech was more conciliatory than Alvarez's frank inaugural address, which rankled commissioners with its lack of political niceties.

However, Commissioner Barbara Carey-Shuler did not give the mayor high marks, complaining that his speech lacked details.

She said she also was irritated that when the mayor spoke about future Metrorail priorities, he singled out the East-West corridor that would connect Florida International University -- the site of his speech -- to a transportation hub at Miami International Airport, but did not mention the North corridor.

ESCALATING RIFT

This issue has been the source of an escalating rift along ethnic and racial lines on the commission, with Carey-Shuler and other black commissioners pushing for the North line.

Alvarez has said he favors the East-West expansion.

Alvarez's appearance ended with an unexpected on-stage handshake with Commission Chairman Joe Martinez, who has been highly critical of the mayor's plan to strip the commission of large contract awards.

But this public display of friendliness does not mean the commission's opposition to Alvarez's push to broaden mayoral powers will lessen.

''We have a main philosophical difference, but it's not personal,'' Martinez said. ``We have a lot of things in common. Who's not going to be against crime and traffic?''

Link to article (http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/10939802.htm)

very encouraging article....hopefully Alvarez stands his ground!:)

Posted on Tue, Mar. 01, 2005

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY
Activists' rallying cry: Hold the line on growth
Mayor Carlos Alvarez joined environmentalists as they kicked off an effort to ensure that Miami-Dade's urban development boundary stays put.

BY CURTIS MORGAN
cmorgan@herald.com

Environmentalists launched a campaign Monday against a tide of red-tiled roofs rapidly rising toward the Everglades.

The turnout at Bayfront Park in downtown Miami was sparse, as it typically is for media events, but nonetheless notable because of who showed up.

Carlos Alvarez, just past his 100th day as county mayor, delivered a concise but clear message echoing the campaign's slogan to ''Hold the Line'' -- meaning resist pressure from developers to extend what's known as the Miami-Dade urban development boundary to permit thousands of new homes on the fringes of the county.

''I do not believe moving the UDB and expanding development is the answer to our population growth,'' he said.

For environmentalists, the mayor's stance, echoed by County Commissioner Katy Sorenson, was a major boost in what promises to be a bruising battle with politically powerful developers over where and how the county should grow.

Outside the UDB, residential building is limited to one house per acre -- not enough to fuel what Nancy Liebman, president of the Urban Environment League of Greater Miami, called the ''overzealous, outrageous development'' envisioned for south and western Miami-Dade.

Activists warn that the growth poses problems not only for the fragile Everglades, but for farmers and suburbanites in the form of overcrowded schools, flooded property, gridlocked streets and bigger tax bills.

''Hold the line or taxpayers will be holding the bag,'' Sorenson said.

At least two major projects have been proposed outside the UDB and more are likely to be in the pipeline soon.

One large landowner, Atlantic Civil, floated preliminary plans for 6,000 homes, a multiplex movie theater, a hotel and 300,000 square feet of retail space on 2,500 acres outside the UDB near Florida City. In September, developer Lennar Corp. signed an option to buy the land.

D.R. Horton, a Texas builder, has a pending application to amend the UDB for a development with more than 5,000 residential units along Krome Avenue near Kendall Drive.

Attorneys for the developers did not return calls.

County planners say there is room to accommodate growth inside the UDB for at least a decade, but developers have argued that they need to move the line to fill demand for affordable housing.

Alvarez said he wants the county to complete ongoing growth studies before making any decisions. One, the South Dade Watershed Study, is due later this year.

The first skirmish on the issue comes when commissioners decide whether to allow Florida City to annex the Atlantic Civil parcel, a step activists think would make it easier to develop property that environmentalists say should be used to help restore water flows to Biscayne Bay. That project, still years away, is part of the $8.4 billion Everglades restoration plan. The Atlantic Civil issue comes up for commission discussion today.

Link to article (http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/local/11017843.htm)

YESS...The mayor always has our back!

HOLD THAT LINE BOYS! next rally im there! we gotta fight this... pushing the line back is one of the worst possible things they can do

Affordable housing has no place in the everglades, think about it: if it is affordable housing shouldn't it be close to mass transpotation options so that these needy people can get to and from work easily since they will most likely be unable to afford to pay for a car and insurance...In the west there are no such transit options and thus make this "affordable" a huge mask for a developer to make a huge profit...

This sucks, we must fight this, otherwise Naples will soon become suburban Miami...

Here's a tidbit of info from the constitutional side of the spectrum in Florida. The Legislature has the power to make General and Special laws (General laws apply uniformly throughout the state, whereas Special laws apply to specific places and have over and under population figures (eg., counties between 500,000 and 2 million people)).

Miami-Dade is the exception in Florida-- No special laws for Miami-Dade County. It kind of goes to what Tivo was saying about which entity has what power. I guess years ago, they made a "Miami" exception so that Tallahassee wouldn't have that much power over how Miami-Dade governed itself.

Miami-Dade County was the first county in Florida to receive home rule, and it's also the most autonomous of all the counties. It received its home rule powers when the Constitution was amended in 1956, and it formally adopted its charter (the county's constitution) in 1957.

The enacting clauses of the Dade County Home Rule Charter are part of the Florida Constitution (Article VIII, Section 11). The Charter gives the people of Dade County the power to govern themselves in local affairs without state interference and it gives the County the power to operate a centralized metropolitan government (its former name was Metropolitan Dade County, or Metro-Dade). Cities are subordinate to the County in this structure. As you said, the Legislature can pass laws that affect the entire state, but only the County Commission has the authority to pass legislation that would specifically pertain to Dade County. (A law that is unique to Dade County: pitbull dogs are illegal here.)

The Legislature also has no power to alter the government of Dade County, its departments, nor can it alter any of its cities or their charters. The County is set up like a city government, where all the departments report through a County Manager and ultimately to the Mayor and County Commissioners. All counties except Dade elect a Sheriff, Property Appraiser, Tax Collector, and Supervisor of Elections. In Dade they are county departments and the directors are appointed. The Dade County Sheriff's Office was abolished in the 1960s by referendum, and it was replaced by what is known today as the Miami-Dade Police Department.

Dade is the only county in Florida with the power to unilaterally change its own name without a special act of the Legislature. It did so by referendum in 1997 when it became Miami-Dade.

Article VIII, Section 6, Florida Constitution
f) DADE COUNTY; POWERS CONFERRED UPON MUNICIPALITIES. To the extent not inconsistent with the powers of existing municipalities or general law, the Metropolitan Government of Dade County may exercise all the powers conferred now or hereafter by general law upon municipalities.
Florida law recognizes Miami-Dade County as a city, so whenver a law makes a reference to a "city" or "municipality," it applies to Dade. Therefore, Dade and Duval are the only two counties that can tax both as a county and as a city. Dade charges unincorporated residents a municipal services tax ("city" tax) of 2.447 mills and it taxes everyone in the entire county a countywide operating tax of 5.935 mills.

Only Dade has "true" home rule.

Holy dam, Tivo, what are you, a Constitutional Law professor at Um? You're a freakin genius. That's incredible info. So I guess the Legis. can say "this law applies to 'all municipalities' or to 'municipalities of over 2 million people" and they can back-door a law that applies to Miami-Dade anyway-- right?

ya gotta give love for Tivo:)

Thanks guys :bowtie:... I'm not a lawyer, however I'm pretty well versed in local and state politics and bureaucracy, plus I've read a lot of books on home rule and Dade County's charter, etc. etc.

To "back-door" something, I suppose the Legislature could pass a general law that applies criteria in the way you mentioned, like citing population ranges, certain levels of pollution, etc. Or they could group a list of counties together as long as it applied to more than one. But that's not a special act. A general law is a "blanket" that cuts across statewide, involving something like acts deemed to be felonies or misdemeanors (acts committed against the state), torts, education standards, what sources of revenue can the city/county/state/school district/special district use and how much can they collect, regulating motor vehicles, regulating utilities, etc.

A special law is created whenever a county or city doesn't have the legal power to pass a law on its own. Under home rule, Miami-Dade was able to create its own public hospital authority without asking the state to do it for them (the Public Health Trust that runs Jackson Memorial Hospital). Contrast that with Broward, for example: the state created the North Broward Hospital District and the South Broward Hospital District, in the days before Broward had its own charter. By the same token, for a community wanting to form a city, the local state delegation (the legislators that represent your county) pushes through a special legislative act to incorporate your city.

Dade's Home Rule amendment also happens to say that it can't pass legislation that's inconsistent with general law, so that does maintain a check and balance.

Here's something interesting: the Legislature kinda screwed up a couple of years ago when they overhauled the rules on elevator inspections, when they started turning over inspections to private contractors. For as long as I can remember, Miami-Dade County regulated elevators countywide with its own staff (enforcing state and federal regulations) except in Miami and Miami Beach, who also have their own staff. The wording of the law was so bad that it effectively voided the County's ability to regulate, and it took almost two years to get that restored. To my surprise, not too long after this new law went into effect, in buildings I frequent I started noticing a bunch of elevators with expired inspection certificates or temporary certificates, some of which took months to get back up to date. :)

Posted on Mon, Mar. 14, 2005

URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Diverse groups unite against sprawl

As developers push to extend the Urban Development Boundary, environmental and community activists have broadened support for a surprisingly effective opposition campaign.

BY CURTIS MORGAN
cmorgan@herald.com

Both live miles from where developers want to build thousands of new homes, but Hattie Willis and Millie Herrera still fear they will feel the impact in their own backyards.

That's why Willis, a Little Haiti activist, and Herrera, an East Kendall community council member, have joined the fight against expanding the Urban Development Boundary, which would open Miami-Dade County's western and southern fringes to a wave of growth.

Willis believes her blighted neighborhood ought to get basic necessities before tax dollars go to sparkling new communities.

''We have streets over here that don't have pavement,'' she said. ``We have streets that don't have curbs and sidewalks. We have people over here who don't have lights.''

For Herrera, the prospect of more cars streaming onto Kendall's choked roads looms as a nightmare.

''Anywhere you go in this town, it's gridlock,'' she said. ``This needs to be looked at as an environmental issue, but more importantly, for quality of life and economic impact.''

The two are among the newest recruits in a campaign that has added diversity to the usual list of suspects opposing suburban sprawl. Along with the Sierra Clubs and Audubons are the Haitian Women of Miami and the Venetian Causeway Neighborhood Alliance.

BROADENING RANKS

Nancy Liebman, president of the Urban Environment League, which is paying for and helped organize the Hold the Line campaign, said the environmental and community activists who typically lead such fights recognized they needed to broaden ranks.

''This couldn't be just another environmentalists versus developers argument,'' she said. ``It had to show the power of all the people opposed to it.''

While the fight is only beginning and likely to last for years, a campaign formally launched only two weeks ago already has proved effective, bolstered by support from two formidable political voices. Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Alvarez and Gov. Jeb Bush have both questioned moving the line.

The development industry, which wields significant political clout of its own in Miami-Dade, is paying close attention and planning strategies to counter what some acknowledge has been a surprisingly sophisticated offensive.

''They're out in front,'' said Jeff Bercow, a veteran land-use attorney with clients hoping to develop property currently outside the UDB. ``I don't agree with their position, but they have gotten their stories out effectively so far.''

Because only one house can be built on five acres outside the UDB, which snakes along the county's western and southern fringe, the line has long acted as a buffer between suburbs on the east and farm fields and the Everglades on the west. While largely intact since the late 1980s, it was moved in 2002 for developer Armando Codina's Beacon Lakes warehouse project west of Dolphin Mall.

At least two other developers are pursuing large projects beyond the line.

Near Florida City, Atlantic Civil wants to build 6,000 homes, movie theaters and shops. Lennar, a major developer, has an option on the land.

In West Miami-Dade, Texas builder D.R. Horton hopes to build 5,000 homes and condos along Krome Avenue near Kendall Drive. Other proposals are expected.

Environmental groups began strategizing more than a year ago -- before either project had made much progress through agencies.

''I think we thought of this as the new Homestead Air Force Base,'' said Cynthia Guerra, executive director of the Tropical Audubon Society.

Working with the Urban Environment League, they modeled the UDB campaign on the effort that finally killed plans to turn the air base into a commercial jetport.

With a modest budget -- Liebman said the campaign has cost about $10,000 to date -- they hired a young but experienced grass-roots organizer. Gilberto Osario, 23, fresh off the John Kerry presidential campaign, began cold-calling community groups.

They commissioned a survey showing that residents were fed up with traffic and spiraling taxes. They set up a website. They put on PowerPoint presentations detailing ripple effects on everything from traffic to drinking water and -- oh, yeah -- efforts to restore Biscayne Bay and the Everglades.

'It was funny, somebody came up after a meeting and said, `You didn't even mention the environment,' '' Guerra laughed.

JOINING THE CAMPAIGN

So far, 29 groups have signed on, from homeowner associations, affordable housing advocates and garden clubs to city groups such as Willis' Communities United. Less than 10 are groups whose agendas typically include environmental issues.

Developers say the campaign is trading on distortions and fear-mongering.

Miami-Dade planners have said there is enough room inside the UDB to accommodate projected population growth for at least a decade. But developers argue there is a pressing need for more homes, particularly ''affordable'' ones, as prices soar and open land within the UDB disappears.

Ed Swakon, a consulting engineering for Atlantic Civil, believes critics have exaggerated the environmental value of land and outside impacts.

Such large ''developments of regional impact'' face tougher standards than hodgepodge projects, Swakon said. ``They have to do a much better job of planning for traffic, for schools and for commercial projects internally.''

Swakon said he recently registered a website with the aim of countering the environmentalists' position. Both Bercow and Swakon agreed the development community needed to do a better job of making the case to the public.

Miguel DeGrandy, a lawyer and lobbyist for Horton Homes, said critics were politicizing a decision that should be based on data. The UDB, he argued, has never been intended as a ''line in the sand,'' but as something to be adjusted as the county grows.

`RELIGIOUS FERVOR'

''They make it an issue of religious fervor,'' DeGrandy said. ``What I have seen so far of Hold the Line is it's following that pattern of creating the appearance of good guys and bad guys. They tell you that anyone that seeks to disagree is necessarily trying to harm the environment.''

Herrera, not a member of any environmental group, begs to differ.

For her, it's about learning from and fixing past mistakes that have eroded daily life, such as inadequate roads that have doubled driving time to clients, robbed time from family and multiplied stress. She knows she is not alone.

''It's a growing and thriving community, but we need to take care of these issues and not just grow because we want to grow,'' she said.

Link to article (http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/11128455.htm)

It looks like the citizens views didn't matter much on this one. The commission overrode Mayor Alvarez's veto (and conviently held the vote when one of their opponents, my commissioner Carlos Gimenez, would not be there to vote) and allowed Florida City to annex 1700 acres of land outside the UDB which Lennar wants to build a 6000 home subdivision on at the edge of the Everglades on land pegged for Everglades restoration.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/11952081.htm

FLORIDA CITY


Vote allows big gain for small town

Miami-Dade commissioners overrode the mayor's veto that had blocked a controversial annexation by Florida City.

BY TERE FIGUERAS NEGRETE

tfigueras@herald.com


Florida City, which has waged a long-running and controversial battle to annex a swath of South Dade land, will get its wish.

County commissioners voted Tuesday to override a veto from Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Alvarez that sought to block the tiny city's acquisition of 1,700 acres outside the Urban Development Boundary line, which separates undeveloped land from sprawl.

Florida City's mayor, Otis Wallace, has argued that his city needed the added land to boost its tax base with low-density, high-priced homes.

Critics of the annexation, including Alvarez, said the annexation would lay the groundwork for rolling back the urban boundary line in order to allow for denser development -- specifically a massive mega-development that has already been floated on that land.

''I hope people remember how individual commissioners voted today,'' Alvarez said. ``They said this was an issue of simple annexation. I disagree.''

Wallace, as well as several commissioners who supported his cause, have complained that Florida City's wish to annex had been muddied by the swelling opposition to moving the Urban Development Boundary.

''This is about the future of Florida City,'' said Commissioner Dennis Moss, noting that the city had excised large chunks of sensitive wetlands from the annexation area after protest. ``If we were here to move the UDB in order to incorporate this land, my vote would be no.''

Annexation opponents, including a loose coalition of environmentalists and neighborhood activists called Hold the Line, have questioned such arguments.

They note the annexed land encompasses the proposed Atlantic Civil project, a housing development that could bring retail space, 6,000 homes and up to 18,000 new residents to the mouth of the Keys. Monroe County has come out heavily against the plan, citing concerns over hurricane evacuation and water quality.

Home builder Lennar has contracted to purchase the land, but any project would have several hurdles to clear before coming back to the commission for a vote. The Atlantic Civil project has submitted preliminary paperwork to the South Florida Regional Planning Council, which reviews large-scale projects. The project's developers are expected to submit a finalized application next month.

Alvarez said Wallace's insistence that Florida City would be content with the five-acre ''ranchette'' homes allowed outside the urban boundary was disingenuous at best.

Wallace has said he hoped to lure homeowners willing to pay up to $1 million for a home on the outskirts of Florida City, but conceded at a previous commission meeting he knew of no developer who had shown any interest in that kind of project.

''What kind of market are they talking about?'' said Alvarez. ``Who's going to be willing to pay a million dollars in a place that has no infrastructure and is flood-prone?''

The annexation issue has also brought Wallace criticism that cuts closer to home. One of his sisters is Commissioner Barbara Jordan, who voted for the annexation and against the veto. Another sister is Sandy Walker, a registered lobbyist for Atlantic Civil and Lennar.

County ethics rules do not consider siblings immediate family, and did not require Jordan to recuse herself from the vote or disclose the relationship. But the relationship has sparked consternation among annexation opponents, who say it represents a too-cozy relationship between Florida City, the developers and a voting commissioner.

Jordan alluded to a Herald article outlining the family ties, saying her brother had called her after the article appeared to offer an apology for putting her in an awkward position.

''I told you then and I tell you now, publicly,'' she said, addressing Wallace from the podium, ``You don't owe me an apology.''

Had all 13 commissioners been present Tuesday, Alvarez's veto would likely have stood.

The votes of two-thirds of the present members are required to pass an override. With Commissioner Carlos Gimenez in France on a long-planned trip with the Beacon Council, that meant eight commissioners were required to cancel the veto.

Seven had already voted in favor of annexation; Commissioner Javier Souto had missed the June 7 vote.

Souto was present Tuesday, though, providing the crucial eighth vote against the veto.

''This is about a little city with great plans,'' Souto said.

Gimenez, reached in France last week, said he would have voted to uphold the veto.

Alvarez said he was expecting a defeat.

''I'm not surprised by the vote, but I am disappointed,'' he said.

This Sucks...

this sux fat ones...! I can't believe Miami and its inconsistency amongst leadership. They should do a medieval style wall and contain ALL metro development within it til its nice and dense! :jk:

but seriously wtf w/this type of development it has to stop, i mean imagine a proposal for 6,000 suburban(esque) lo/mid-density homes at downtown dadeland or city of south miami?!?!

imagine how this could of been SO much better considered by the gov. and developers. pretty soon i bet the keys us1 expansion will get approved and then the upper keys become homestead south. :nono:

This one suprised me. Turnberry Assoc. known for waterfront highrises (Aventura, MB, Sunny Isles) has joined the list of developers trying to get the UDB pushed further west. They bought land west of the Turnpike at NW 41st ST and plan to build a mall (they built Aventura Mall).

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/12887491.htm

Some quotes from the article:

Builders think outside boundary

South Florida's Turnberry Associates -- known for condos, hotels and malls -- joined the growing ranks of developers buying land outside the Urban Development Boundary.

BY MATTHEW HAGGMAN

mhaggman@herald.com


The Urban Development Boundary once seemed a nearly impregnable line that blocked large-scale development beyond its western and southern edges.

But emboldened developers are now flocking in increasing numbers to the far reaches of Miami-Dade with new confidence that they can persuade county leaders to allow development outside the boundary, or UDB, despite a host of environmental and other concerns about the march of sprawl.

Turnberry Associates -- among South Florida's best-known developers -- has quietly joined the list of developers buying land outside the line. The Aventura-based developer paid $20 million for 64 acres west of the boundary at the southwest corner of Northwest 41st Street and Florida's Turnpike.

The land purchase comes as developers are making the biggest push in years to move the county's development boundary.

Turnberry executives haven't disclosed any plans for the property, although a consultant who said he has done work on the property said Turnberry is contemplating a retail development on the site. The parcel is located immediately west of the growing city of Doral and is on a turnpike exit.

Turnberry's projects have included high-rise condominiums in South Florida and Las Vegas, and the Aventura Mall, and it is currently overhauling the iconic Fontainebleau Hotel in Miami Beach. But it hasn't previously gambled on buying land outside the UDB.

''For developers in Dade County, they believe the brakes are off the train,'' said Alan Farago, an organizer in the Hold the Line campaign, which seeks to stop any amendment to the development boundary. ``Now it's get what you can as fast as you can.''

After a lengthy review, a two-thirds vote of the Miami-Dade County Commission is required to adjust the line.

The projects range from massive new residential communities to an industrial park to a new Lowe's Home Center, according to county filings. Developers seeking to build such projects include Lennar Corp., Shoma Homes and D.R. Horton.

''You are seeing it because there is a strong belief that the line will be moved in the next 24 months,'' said developer Edward W. Easton, chairman of The Easton Group in Miami who has partnered with Lennar on one of the projects seeking to move the line.

``It is an opportunity to have developable land at a reasonable price -- and there is such a shortage of developable land inside the boundary.''

The Miami-Dade Department of Planning & Zoning has concluded, however, that there is enough developable land within the boundary to last until at least 2018. It has also reviewed nine of the UDB amendment applications, recommending that seven be rejected.

VOTE IN NOVEMBER

The County Commission is set to vote on nine of the applications on Nov. 21. Approved applications go to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review. Applications then return to the County Commission for a final vote in the spring.

Andrew Dolkart of Miami Economic Associates represents several developers seeking to move the boundary and says he did work for Turnberry on its West Miami-Dade parcel. He said the developer is contemplating ``some form of mall.''

Attempts to develop the property will likely face particularly fierce resistance, because it is near a well field that supplies much of Miami-Dade's drinking water.

Now it goes to the full County Commission.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/local/13181468.htm

Hold the line on the urban boundary, board advises

A week before the Miami-Dade Commission votes on nine applications to move the much-debated Urban Development Boundary, the Planning Advisory Board recommended a majority of applications be rejected.

BY MATTHEW HAGGMAN

mhaggman@herald.com


The Miami-Dade Planning Advisory Board is recommending that the County Commission reject five of nine applications filed by developers to move the Urban Development Boundary.

The 10-person board also recommended commissioners approve three applications and decided to take no position on another.

The Planning Advisory Board, composed of private citizens appointed by commissioners, is the final panel to make recommendations on the proposals before the Miami-Dade Commission votes Monday. Commissioners will decide whether to scratch the proposals or send them on to Florida's Department of Community Affairs for further scrutiny.

After review by state regulators, the applications go back to the County Commission for a final vote in April.

The PAB made its recommendations after a full day of hearings Monday that lasted late into the night.

The projects the PAB recommended be rejected include a proposed 305-acre development at Southwest 184th Street and 157th Avenue and a 193-acre residential project at Southwest 88th Street and 167th Avenue.

The UDB is a boundary that forbids large-scale development along the western and southern fringe of the county.

Developers are making the biggest push in years to move the UDB to make way for new residential subdivisions, offices, stores and industrial parks. Not since 1993 has the UDB been moved to make way for a residential development.

They argue the line should be moved to accommodate growth -- particularly the need for more housing. Opponents counter there is plenty of land to develop inside the boundary and contend the county should focus on other infrastructure needs, such as public transit expansion and new schools, before allowing development farther west.

The Department of Planning & Zoning has stated there is enough land inside the boundary to satisfy residential needs until 2018.

Opponents to moving the line, who have organized under the banner Hold The Line, aim to persuade commissioners to reject as many applications as they can next week rather than wait for a final vote in April.

Developers, meanwhile, hope to see their proposals through to the next step in the review process.

They expressed dismay that the PAB recommended sending three projects to Tallahassee for state review even though board members thought the projects should be rejected. ''It was not a very strong showing by the PAB,'' said Cynthia Guerra, executive director of the Tropical Audubon Society.

''A transmittal keeps an application alive,'' she said. Then, she said, ``There is more time for consultants and lobbyists to recruit support.''

''We voted to kill the really bad ones,'' said PAB Chairman Wayne Rinehart.

``But the really questionable ones we made a vote to deny but still sent through the system by voting to transmit.''

we gotta go to that meeting! chuck! we need u and ur sign!

Looks like the developers are trying a new tactic, trying to get a law pushed through that would maintain the current ratio of condos to single family homes. With the current rate of condo construction, that would require HUGE amounts of land to build that many single family homes, which would by law force open all lands east of the everglades to development.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/13197691.htm

Boundary battle heats up

Developers have proposed changing the standard for county housing needs, which critics say will help efforts to extend the Urban Development Boundary in years to come.

BY MATTHEW HAGGMAN AND NOAKI SCHWARTZ

mhaggman@herald.com


As developers make the biggest push in years to extend Miami-Dade's Urban Development Boundary, they also are proposing a measure that would likely make it much easier to move the hotly debated line again and again in the future.

On Monday the Miami-Dade County Commission will vote on nine applications by developers to move the UDB, the line that limits large-scale building along the western and southern county border. But two powerful builder groups are also asking the commission to change the standard used to assess the county's housing needs, which could require more developable land.

The proposal is under fire from groups opposed to moving the UDB because it would likely clear the way for developers to win future battles over building large-scale projects on what is now protected land. County planners also consider the language of the proposal confusing. Adding to critics' outrage, the builders submitted a last-minute revision that planners had no time to review.

''It's troublesome that the very people we rely on to comprehend and evaluate are concerned about the language for its clearness,'' said Commissioner Sally Heyman. ``Where does that leave someone like me who relies on them?''

The proposal, pushed by the Latin Builders Association and Builders Association of South Florida, would require the county to maintain a 15-year supply of developable land just for single-family homes, rather than all types of housing. Singlefamily homes require more space than condominiums or town homes.

''If you have to maintain a 15-year supply of single-family homes, you are almost always going to guarantee that you have to amend the boundary,'' said Mark Woerner, chief for Metropolitan Planning at the county's Department of Planning & Zoning.

Current county policy calls for a 15-year supply of developable land for new housing of any type within the UDB. County planners say that yardstick is being met and there is currently no need to move the line.

If the proposal is rejected, as county planners recommend, it dies. If it is approved, it goes to the state for review and is then subject to a final county vote in April.

Developers contend the county's population has grown to the point that Miami-Dade's housing needs simply cannot be met within the confines of the current boundary. But opponents argue that the area within the boundary is not yet built out, and that open space must be preserved for environmental and agricultural reasons.

Opponents are now furious about the builders' attempt to get the commission to also consider a revised proposal, only presented publicly this week.

The revision still calls for a 15-year supply of homes, but requires that the current ratio of single-family-to-condos be maintained in any assessment of future housing needs. Opponents say this runs counter to calls from some public officials to make future development more compact and near transit lines, rather than allowing so many land-gobbling single-family homes.

Guillermo Olmedillo, a former county planner now representing the LBA and BASF, said the revision was necessary because the builders' initial proposal was unrealistic. It was poorly crafted because of ''too many cooks in the kitchen,'' he said.

But opponents called the move an end-run around the review process. Cynthia Guerra and Alan Farago, both leaders with the Hold The Line campaign -- an umbrella group opposing any movement of the UDB, said they have not even seen the new language which the commission may consider on Monday.

Farago, executive director of the Everglades Defense Council, called the builders' move ''underhanded,'' adding: ``They should get in line like everyone else. If they want to make major changes they should go back into the cycle and come back in two years.''

The county considers changes to its development plan every other year.

But Olmedillo insists the county can do whatever it wishes, including accepting the last-minute revision. The Miami-Dade County Attorneys Office agrees.

''It is really up to the commission at this point,'' said Joni Armstrong Coffey, assistant county attorney.

Today's the big day:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/columnists/carl_hiaasen/13204793.htm

Moving UDB would promote urban sprawl

By CARL HIAASEN


The usual suspects will be on hand Monday when the Miami-Dade County Commission considers taking the first step toward trashing the Urban Development Boundary and obliterating the vital green barrier between urban development and the Everglades.

Most of the 40-plus lobbyists hired by developers and building groups will show up to see if all their hard work has paid off. They've been slithering backstage for months, locking up votes from obliging commissioners and leaning on the reluctant ones.

Nine of 12 applications are on the table, and this week's decisions will signal what commissioners intend for the three remaining projects, the largest and most ruinous.

The meeting holds the promise for either drama or vaudeville, and if you're a Miami-Dade taxpayer, you ought to show up.

If you don't, they'll stick it to you. They might, anyway

Sprawl is a huge and escalating burden upon South Floridians, the expense of new roads, sewers, schools, police and fire services falling largely on the public.

Taxes don't go down with overcrowding; they go up. A recent study by the Center for Urban Policy Research says that building westward in Miami-Dade is far more costly to government than building in developed areas

Still, the developers who've been snapping up land west of the UDB insist it's the only place left for affordable homes in the county. In other words, they're not being greedy -- they're just performing a noble public service.

Nobody seriously believes the comic claim that Miami-Dade is desperately short of space for housing. The Department of Planning & Zoning reports that there's enough available land for new construction until 2018.

Other builders will tell you there are plenty of opportunities remaining east of the UDB -- including neighborhoods that can be profitably redeveloped.

But the really big money is in buying up raw land and slamming up instant sardine-can subdivisions of the sort you now see all along the Turnpike extension in South Miami-Dade.

The blight merchants are running out of green spaces to pave, and that's the sole reason that the county's development boundary is in jeopardy. Once the UDB is moved, not an acre of farmland or wetland will be safe.

A pushover

Commissioners can kill any project with a No vote. That would be decisive, and require an actual backbone.

The more cowardly (though safer) choice is voting Yes, which would send the development plan to the state Department of Community Affairs for review. The DCA would then ship it back to Miami-Dade for action some time next year.

If you're a commissioner who's sold out one way or another, the DCA option is appealing. You can explain your vote by saying you simply want the state's opinion, knowing full well that the DCA these days is a pushover.

The agency recently laughed off objections from both the South Florida Regional Planning Council and Monroe County, and said Homestead could add another 2,616 houses with no regard for the impact on hurricane evacuation.

Hurricane horrors

Gurgling with stupidity, a DCA official actually stated that Homestead isn't required to consider hurricane egress ramifications because it isn't located directly on the ocean.

The name ''Andrew'' apparently didn't ring a bell.

It's obvious why developers hoping to dislodge the development boundary would be thrilled if Miami-Dade commissioners punted the ball first to the DCA.

Ironically, the man responsible for that agency's empty-headed leadership is Jeb Bush, who certainly knows a thing or two about hurricane horrors.

The governor also has a stake in the battle over the UDB, having made Everglades restoration the centerpiece of his environmental agenda. For him to twiddle his thumbs while the county surrenders the last protective buffer would be politically problematic, to put it mildly.

Bush is said to have phoned some Miami-Dade commissioners to ask them to hang tough, but it's wishful thinking to believe he holds more sway than the lobbyists who helped get them elected.

Go to the meeting

They'll all be in the peanut gallery Monday, watching to make sure that promises are kept. If the smaller developments get approved, lobbyists for the Lennar Corp. -- which has a monstrous project planned for Florida City -- will be popping the champagne, too.

The vote has been inconveniently scheduled during the short holiday week, in the hopes of discouraging public attendance. The more citizens who show up, the more squirmingly uncomfortable it will make the sell-out commissioners.

That's why you should go to the meeting and speak up -- not just because you care about the Everglades, or because you don't want more traffic, more overcrowded schools and more dangerous chaos during hurricane season.

The best reason to be at the meeting is because the lobbyists and the politicians they own don't want you there. They don't want anybody spoiling their party.

Another article about today's big event:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/opinion/13221509.htm

Contain costly sprawl in Miami-Dade

OUR OPINION: REJECT THE ASSAULT ON THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY


Today Miami-Dade County Commissioners come face-to-face with an unprecedented attack on the Urban Development Boundary. No less than nine proposals seek to expand the UDB for building projects, and another measure would make it far easier to move the line in the future. How commissioners vote will be critical to Miami-Dade's future.

Will we march ever closer to the Everglades, raising the costs of infrastructure and services for all taxpayers? Or will we sensibly build out vacant parcels and other locations ripe for redevelopment within the existing UDB?

The answer is clear: Commissioners should say No to all nine proposals for residential development and other projects outside the existing UDB. They should reject the proposed change in the standard used by the county planners to assess housing needs.

Protecting water supply

There is good reason for the UDB to restrict large-scale development on the county's western and southern fringes. Lands outside the UDB buffer the Everglades. They protect the water supply consumed by South Floridians and are vital to the health of Biscayne Bay and other environmentally sensitive areas. Developers eager go outside the UDB say that it is the only place with land affordable enough to build reasonably priced homes. But the county's Department of Planning and Zoning says there is enough land to continue building homes within the UDB until 2018.

More important, adding to Miami-Dade's sprawl will increase costs for all taxpayers. The reasons are well documented in studies and books. Providing roads, schools, water and sewer hookups, police and fire stations cost prohibitively more in new developments far from the urban core. Unleashing a building boom outside the UDB would make traffic worse on already-jammed roads. It would make mass-transit options less feasible and exacerbate crowding and neglect issues in schools.

Commissioners face tremendous pressure from more than 40 lobbyists hired by developers to extend the UDB. They should remember that their duty is to vote for what is best for all residents, not just the interested few with an agenda and a financial reward. Commissioners should vote against sprawl and for residents' future.

so what happened? howd they vote?

The result was that after a full day of debate, they were deferred until Novemver 30th.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/13229858.htm

A clash, no vote on boundary

The Miami-Dade County Commission did not cast a formal vote on any of nine applications to amend the Urban Development Boundary. Opponents complained they were not allowed to address each application.

BY MATTHEW HAGGMAN, TERE FIGUERAS NEGRETE AND NOAKI SCHWARTZ

mhaggman@herald.com


A daylong hearing Monday on whether to open up more than 1,000 acres of vacant Miami-Dade land to build shops, subdivisions, offices and warehouses ended in acrimony even though no action was taken on any of nine proposals to expand the development boundary.

Dozens of speakers were angered when Miami-Dade Commission Chairman Joe Martinez restricted their ability to voice objections.

Many audience members thought they would be allowed the standard two minutes to respond to each application as it came before the commission. Instead, Martinez told them they could speak once -- for a maximum of two minutes.

No commissioners objected to the chairman's rule change.

''A cynical mind could say that this was a way to cut down public comment,'' said Cynthia Guerra, executive director of the Tropical Audubon Society.

Neisen O. Kasdin, former Miami Beach mayor and now a lobbyist for the Latin Builders Association and the Builders Association of South Florida, responded that Martinez ``was trying to avoid the same people coming up, voicing general objections again and again.''

What followed was a several-hour procession of speakers objecting not only to expanding development rights but to the rules imposed by Martinez.

In the end, the County Commission postponed until Nov. 30 formal votes on the nine applications by developers to move the Urban Development Boundary, the line that limits large-scale development on the western and southern fringe of Miami-Dade County.

There will be no public comments on the nine applications at that time, Martinez said.

Combined, the projects are the biggest push in years to move the boundary.

Established in 1975, the UDB limits any development outside the line to one dwelling per five acres. Many consider the boundary a vital check against increased sprawl and an important green buffer between highly developed areas and the Everglades.

Proponents of moving the boundary counter that the county is largely built out, and that the line must move to accommodate the region's swelling population.

The line has rarely been moved in recent years. Not since 1993 has the line been moved for residential development. Only after a bruising fight was the line moved in 2002 for two industrial projects, Beacon Lakes by developer Armando Codina and another development led by a group including state. Rep. Carlos Lopez-Cantera.

DUELING T-SHIRTS

Mayors, city councilmen, environmentalists, neighborhood activists, lobbyists, lawyers and school board members packed the commission chambers Monday. Many opponents, hoping to fend off developers' applications, were clad in green ''Hold the Line'' T-shirts.

Supporters of moving the UDB wore white T-shirts emblazoned with the words: ``Say Yes To The American Dream.''

Opponents were quickly dismayed when Martinez, in the midst of debate on the first application, stopped the proceedings midstream.

The rule change came during public discussion of an application by the City of Hialeah, the only UDB application introduced Monday. The city's mayor, Raul Martinez, had already outlined benefits of converting a landfill outside the UDB into a commercial development.

Several opponents were called up to speak -- including Miami Beach Mayor David Dermer, Miami-Dade School Board member Evelyn Greer and Miami Lakes Councilman Michael Pizzi.

Their comments mainly touched on the perils of moving the UDB in general, prompting Raul Martinez to raise his hands in a helpless gesture. ''I'm being beat up for all the other applications,'' he said.

CHANGE ELICITS GROANS

That's when Chairman Martinez, who is not related to the Hialeah mayor, announced the change -- prompting groans from the audience.

One man stood up, shouted angrily at Martinez, and stormed out just as the chairman summoned a sergeant at arms to escort him from the chambers.

Greer also protested, asking Martinez to ``allow me to speak on the issue of each application.''

Martinez's response: ``I wouldn't stand in front of your board and argue with your procedures.''

Minutes later, the chairman left the dais for more than an hour -- missing at least half a dozen speakers, including a representative of the National Park Service.

Guerra said opponents, already outgunned by legions of lobbyists working for the building industry, were at an even greater disadvantage as a result of the procedural change. The reason: Attorneys for the developers and landowners seeking the other eight changes will get the final say -- without rebuttal from opponents -- on Nov. 30.

''Not only will they get the last word, they'll be able to discount everything we've said,'' said Guerra. She said she had to severely curtail her comments on the nine items to fit into the allotted time.

The commission chairman defended his decision, saying that he wanted to include all public comment at Monday's meeting. That way advocates for either side would not have to return.

ENDED EARLY EVENING

Most people assumed the meeting would stretch well into the night.

But the commission ended the Monday proceedings shortly after 7 p.m. The reason: Commissioners Katy Sorenson and Sally Heyman, considered sympathetic to the Hold The Line campaign, were scheduled to perform in a charity production of the Vagina Monologues. Pat Wade, a member of Hold The Line, a grass-roots organization seeking to stop all of the applications, predicted that there won't be as many opponents showing up on Nov. 30 because it is a ''tremendous burden'' to carve out time to spend the entire day at the commission.

Speakers Monday ranged from a septuagenarian fruit grower from the Redland to a soft-spoken high school student whose voice broke with emotion as she pleaded with the commission to vote against moving the UDB.

Others argued that moving development further out would overwhelm already strained roads, sewers and schools. They noted the Miami-Dade Department of Planning & Zoning has concluded there is enough land inside the boundary for development until 2018.

Gihan Perera, a member of the Miami Workers Center, challenged the building industry's claim that an expanded UDB would provide more affordable housing in South Florida's high-priced market and stimulate the economy.

Perera said the county should concentrate on improving housing inside the urban core. ``People want to live in their neighborhoods with their families. They don't want to be shipped out to the Everglades.'

Kasdin, who spoke on behalf of builders, has long maintained that urban infill isn't enough by itself to meet the county's housing needs.

FOR BOUNDARY CHANGE

A handful of residents spoke in favor of moving the line, including Kendall resident Lily Romero, who said new homes were needed out west. They also argued that new construction will bring new jobs.

Eric Stephens, a Keys landowner, added: ``People should be able to do what they want with their property.''

Chimed in Commissioner Nathacha Seijas: ``I like him.''

A vote by commissioners to deny any individual application on Nov. 30 will end the bid. But a vote to transmit the application will send it to the state's Department of Community Affairs for further review before coming back to the county commission for an ultimate vote, likely in April.

Opponents hope to knock off several applications now rather than giving developers, lobbyists and consultants more time to press their case in coming months.

In addition to the nine applications, two builder groups, the Latin Builders Association and Builders Association of South Florida, are also seeking a change the county standards that guide government planners when assessing future county housing needs. Critics allege the requested changes would make it easier to move the UDB in years to come.

I can't see moving the UDB when there are tons of acres available south of Cutler Ridge & east of US1...doesn't make any sense whatsoever. I hope the commission rejects all of the applications and leaves the UDB intact.

amen

I can't see moving the UDB when there are tons of acres available south of Cutler Ridge & east of US1...doesn't make any sense whatsoever. I hope the commission rejects all of the applications and leaves the UDB intact.

Why do you think they are avoiding developing that area? Is the land really spendy? Im sure it would be outside the UDB once they open it up as well.

They aren't avoiding.....

The vast majority of the housing starts are in South Dade and the Homestead area because that is the only land available.

The real thing is economics and making a quick buck. Land outside the UDB is dirt cheap and if the companies can get the UDB extended and the zoning changed that is tens of millions and with the bigger projects hundreds of millions of dollars added to the bottom line.

Why do you think they have hired practically every politico in Dade County for sale to be lobbyists?

There is BIG BIG money in moving the line.

Today is Round 2.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/opinion/13288510.htm

URBAN DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY


County's future at crossroads

BY MICHAEL PUTNEY

mputney@local10.com


Second chances are common in art, rare in real life. The Miami-Dade Commission gets one today when commissioners hold a second public hearing on what is, arguably, the most critical issue facing our community: Whether or not to move the Urban Development Boundary.

The first public hearing on Nov. 21 on nine applications to move the UDB was something like the Philly or Boston tryout of a Broadway-bound show -- the first time it plays before a live audience all its faults suddenly are glaringly apparent. A good producer gets them fixed before the show gets to New York and bombs.

The UDB show bombed at its first Miami tryout 10 days ago. The fault lies principally with the producer of the so-called public hearing on the UDB, Commission Chairman Joe Martinez. Today, the curtain goes up again at 9:30 a.m. at County Hall. Let's hope that Martinez, with help from his colleagues, has fixed the problems that were so obvious last week.

First problem: Martinez abruptly and arbitrarily changed the amount of time that people normally are allowed to speak at a public hearing -- two minutes. The great majority of speakers who had signed up were opposed to moving the UDB and expected to say so on each of the nine applications. But Martinez, sounding like the tough cop he used to be, summarily ruled that all those antis would be just too darned repetitious, so each would get no more than two minutes to speak on all nine applications. Shamefully, none of the other 12 commissioners on the dais objected.

News flash to the chairman and commission: Participatory democracy, especially public hearings, are often repetitious. Lengthy, too. And, yes, frequently boring. But capriciously changing the rules on speaking at public hearings so that citizens are limited in expressing their opinions is anti-democratic and reinforces the suspicion that the fix is in at County Hall. That's doubly reinforced, of course, by the gaggle of move-the-line lobbyists in their $1,000 suits circling the commission antechamber like sharks looking for prey.

The lobbyist contingent on the UDB includes such notables as former County Manager Sergio Pereira, former Miami Beach Mayor Neisen Kasdin, former U.S. Ambassador Simon Ferro, former Miami-Dade Commissioner Miguel Díaz de la Portilla, etc. Lots of prominent formers, plus a legion of current lobbyists and assorted bottom-feeders holding IOUs from commissioners for whom they've raised substantial sums of money for campaigns.

Thus it's no surprise that ordinary citizens wonder whether the 13 commissioners will vote their conscience on the UDB applications or the way their lobbyist/lawyer friends and contributors tell them to. Since commissioners didn't vote at the first, mismanaged public hearing, we'll see what they do today. The result will have an enormous impact on how and where Miami-Dade grows in the coming decades, even though today's applications first must be reviewed by the state Department of Community Affairs and then come back for a final vote next April.

Still, today's vote will set the tone and direction: either to follow the current county urban-infill policy, favored by county experts and most urban planners, or allow construction west and south of the UDB.

The most compelling argument for moving the UDB is that it could result in affordable workforce housing. That is, homes for folks with a household income of, say, $50,000 to $80,000 who are priced out of buying an existing home in the current overheated market. With the median home price doubling in the last three years to $366,300 in Miami-Dade, builders can get some traction with the affordable-housing argument. Of course, what's ''affordable'' to big builders like Lennar and D.R. Horton may mean $300,000 for a 4/2 on the edge of the Everglades as opposed to $400,000 or more somewhere inside the UDB. Which leaves that working family out of luck in either case.

There are all kinds of arguments to be made against moving the UDB, but I thought that the most compelling one at the first UDB public hearing was made by Miami-Dade School Board member Evelyn Greer, a former mayor of Pinecrest. Brandishing a copy of the school district's five-year school construction and renovation plan, Greer told commissioners they could ''flush this plan'' if they moved the UDB.

Let's see how our commissioners perform this time. If they let only builders and their lobbyists speak and not the public on each application it will only deepen the suspicion, anger and resentment so many people feel, justifiably or not, toward Miami-Dade government. A few weeks ago, as commissioners tried to override a mayoral veto of their unconscionable attempt to give themselves yet another perk (post-retirement health insurance), one commissioner complained loudly that it wasn't about money, it was about respect. Of course, anytime a politician says it's not about the money that's precisely what it's about. As for the respect, they can earn some today by holding a fair public hearing and fully explaining their votes.

I can't say I am the least bit surprised. If you are a county commissioner, how do you say no to the people who bankroll your elections?

Posted on Thu, Dec. 01, 2005

DEVELOPMENT

Dade keeps growth plans alive

Commissioners sent proposals to change Miami-Dade's urban development boundary to Tallahassee for review, delaying a final decision until next year.

BY MATTHEW HAGGMAN, NOAKI SCHWARTZ AND TERE FIGUERAS NEGRETE

tfigueras@herald.com

To the dismay of environmentalists, Miami-Dade County commissioners bypassed another opportunity to torpedo any in a slew of proposals to allow warehouses, homes and offices on more than 1,000 acres of land currently off-limits to development on Miami-Dade's western and southern fringes.

Instead, commissioners on Wednesday sent the controversial building proposals, which would expand the Urban Development Boundary, to the state for further review -- a move that effectively keeps the projects alive well into the New Year.

Opponents fear the commission sent a disconcertingly mixed message about the future of the boundary, created decades ago to protect the county's agricultural land and natural resources from urban sprawl.

''This was an opportunity to send a clear signal,'' said Alan Farago, one of the leaders of the Hold the Line campaign, a loose coalition of neighborhood groups and activists fighting the expansion. ``It seems very transparent that the County Commission has avoided the hard discussion.''

The clear signal sought by preservationists: Have the commission vote outright to reject the projects, which it could have done Wednesday. But the commission essentially postponed a yea-or-nay decision on any of the proposals.

Gus Gil, president of the Latin Builders Association, said the commission was wise in waiting for input from the state.

''I don't see anything wrong with what happened today. Everything got transmitted,'' said Gil, whose influential group has not taken a stand on individual applications but is asking for changes in how the county calculates its housing needs. That application was also sent on to the state, with a recommendation of denial.

''Everything deserves a fair review,'' Gil said.

Despite the setback to preservationists and antidevelopment groups, Wednesday's meeting wasn't as cantankerous as a meeting last week on the boundary proposals in which citizens angrily protested limits on their chance to object to the projects.

TIME TO STUDY

Sending the applications to Tallahassee, reasoned some commissioners, allows time to study them more while still affording the commission a chance to reject developments in a final vote, expected in April.

Commissioners are not required to tag on recommendations before transmitting the applications to the state. But the commission ''recommended'' that four of the nine applications be denied, including the 300-acre Eureka Palms development in Southwest Miami-Dade. The commission took no position on the remainder.

That tactic of pegging recommendations rather than taking decisive action prompted criticism from the dais. Commissioner Natacha Seijas -- who has generally been sympathetic to efforts to expand the boundary -- said colleagues were picking the least contentious option.

''To deny and transmit is cowardly,'' she said. ``It is a way to make everyone happy.''

The proposed changes to the boundary include plans to build the 300-acre housing development on the western tip of Eureka Drive in Southwest Miami-Dade, a hoped-for Lowe's Home Center at the edge of Kendall and commercial development on a landfill site annexed by the city of Hialeah.

The total acreage represents the biggest push to expand the amount of Miami-Dade's buildable land in more than a decade.

Established in 1975, the Urban Development Boundary restricts any development outside the line to one dwelling per five acres.

The line -- which runs mainly along the southern and western edges of the county -- is considered by many to be a crucial defense against urban sprawl, congested streets and crowded schools. It also was intended to serve as a buffer for the Everglades and the county's agricultural communities, such as the Redland.

Opponents have urged county officials to embrace so-called infill development, which would direct development to areas closer to the county's urban core rather than westward.

Those who favor moving the line counter that the county's population is bursting at the seams and boundary shifts are needed to accommodate those numbers.

''You can't have it both ways,'' said attorney Stanley Price, who represents developer Shoma Homes in a bid to build on 80 acres of agricultural land off Killian Drive and Southwest 167th Avenue. ``Urban infill is a wonderful concept except if it's in your individual neighborhood.''

Changes in the boundary have been rare in recent years, and the line has not been shifted for residential development since 1993.

The most recent change came only after a bitter fight in 2002 that allowed two industrial projects: Beacon Lakes by developer Armando Codina and another development led by a group including state Rep. Carlos Lopez-Cantera.

The latest applications have spawned a political fight that has proven to be exponentially more bruising.

LOBBYISTS HIRED

Developers have hired legions of lobbyists to plead their cases. Municipalities across the county, as well as neighboring Monroe County, have taken an antidevelopment stance when it comes to urban boundary issues. Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Alvarez, who has veto power over the commission votes, has also championed opposition to moving the line. Gov. Jeb Bush said earlier this year he had serious reservations about the expansion.

A hearing last week was clouded by acrimony after opponents complained they were restricted from voicing their concerns on each of the applications. Commission Chairman Joe Martinez said speakers would get only two minutes before the commission -- total -- and that no opportunity for comment would be allowed at Wednesday's hearing.

Martinez opened the podium to limited public comment Wednesday.

Martinez urged both sides of the debate not to jump to conclusions based on what transpired at Wednesday's meeting.

''Anyone who does investigations wants more information,'' he said.

It's not that difficult to say no, especially if you are not up for reelection. Interest groups opposed to moving the UDB contribute also.
I understand the cynicism, but really, there are reasons pro and con to move and not to move...it isn't all about money.
A few things that I know are facts:
More and more people are moving to South Florida everyday, whether or not the line moves.
Individuals are building houses on the west side of the Urban development Boundry as I type this.
The houses that are being built are single family homes on 5 acre plots (perfectly legal with the line as it is).
These houses that are being built are not paying much in the way of impact fees to address road widening or anything.
I am a proponent of smart growth.
I think that there should be more self sustaining communities...you know, the kind where the developer pays for the roads, schools, sewer, fire station, underground powerlines, and there is a town center with parks and gathering places, etc.
I am not saying this because I get any money...in fact, I'd financially benefit a bit more if everyone had to live within 3 miles of me...I hate driving.

Yeah, I see the other side of moving the line.

The big problem is that it is hard-wired into the heads of most people (not necessarily us) that the American Dream is a suburban style single-family house with a yard.

It is also hard-wired that mass transit is for poor people and a low-class and even dangerous thing to do, so if given a choice people will rather stay in their cars and listen to radio, read their newspapers, talk on their cell phones, receive fellatio....I've seen just about everything imaginable in my years driving up and down 95 stuck in traffic!

When people start to have families with kids, they aspire for that kind of life since that is what the media has been telling them is "ideal" for their entire lives. A condo, a townhouse, isn't "ideal" to them.

And if those single-family housing options become limited, I think it may impact the population growth of South Florida because why should a young family that wants a single-family house stay in Miami or move to Miami when they can move to Central Florida in Tampa or Orlando, get paid basically the same salaries in their jobs, enjoy all the benefits of Florida, and yet have significantly reduced housing costs?

That's one of the main arguments of moving the UDB.

But what will be affordable housing beyond the UDB be for a single-family house? $300k or $350k instead of $400k? Is that really affordable?

The big problem is that it is hard-wired into the heads of most people (not necessarily us) that the American Dream is a suburban style single-family house with a yard.
Have u seen the land size of the some of the houses out here? (152 ave and 8 st area). The shoma homes development out is a joke. Selling homes for over $250,000 that are on 0 lots.... or executive, whatever u call a house that only has one side entrance to your backyard, and your side wall is used as a border for your property line. And another thing, the backyards are rediculous. 6 feet from the sliding glass door to the fence. some backyard.

My girlfreinds brother lives out there and to mow his lawn he has to mow the front lawn, taker the mower THROUGH the house then mow the back yard because there is no room between the houses. Also the area (Coral Way and 152nd) has no stop lights, only stop signs for clogged 4 lane roads which suddenly change to 2 lane roads then back to 4 lane or 6 lane roads depending on the developer. Basically its chaos out there.

You really need to load up google earth and look at aerials of Kendall and South Dade. Mile after mile after mile of shit like this.

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/6325/uglysprawl3gm.jpg

I'm not sure if it got passed or not but by far the worst aspect of the builders push was the ordinance they were trying to get placed in the code that would require keeping the current single family house to condo ratio we have now forever. Imagine that with all the condos that are being built. For every condo unit that got built you would have to find land for two single family homes. Amazingly bad legislation. Since there's no way they could find enough land, wouldn't the government's only option then be to stop condo construction?

You really need to load up google earth and look at aerials of Kendall and South Dade. Mile after mile after mile of shit like this.

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/6325/uglysprawl3gm.jpg
At SW 160th st and 137th ave I think there is a prison (just off the top-right corner of your aerial). That will break up the pattern of suburbia. Anyways, have any of you ever tried to drive around these neighborhoods? It is really difficult, there are lots of dead ends.

have any of you ever tried to drive around these neighborhoods? It is really difficult, there are lots of dead ends.
Drivers Ed., sophmore year in highschool, I remember our teacher explaining to us the reason traffic is soo bad in west kendall is because, b4... communities east of the turnpike wouldn't be closed off. There are tons of alternate streets you can take other than the main ones, IE Bird Road or Coral Way or 8th street. My dad works on 92 ave and coral way, and to get home to the 157 ave and bird area, my dad would cut time by taking 32 street, between coral way and bird. off course, 32 street ends on 117th ave.
Now you come to the area west of the turnpike. Ane everything out here is enclosed communities, resulting in dead ends, and forcing people to take the main roads.

lol Clusterfuck.

Drivers Ed., sophmore year in highschool, I remember our teacher explaining to us the reason traffic is soo bad in west kendall is because, b4... communities east of the turnpike wouldn't be closed off. There are tons of alternate streets you can take other than the main ones, IE Bird Road or Coral Way or 8th street. My dad works on 92 ave and coral way, and to get home to the 157 ave and bird area, my dad would cut time by taking 32 street, between coral way and bird. off course, 32 street ends on 117th ave.
Now you come to the area west of the turnpike. Ane everything out here is enclosed communities, resulting in dead ends, and forcing people to take the main roads.

lol Clusterfuck.

Not to mention the only streets that cross the turnpike are bird, miller, sunset, kendall and killian. Every single minor road dead ends there which of course causes traffic since everyone who lives west of the turnpike tries to get east of the turnpike in the morning.

borninthegrove, ur in the bird 157 area?

i live ther 2, lakes of the meadow, everything that was said is true :runaway:

borninthegrove, ur in the bird 157 area?

i live ther 2, lakes of the meadow, everything that was said is true :runaway:
Yup, i live right behind Lakes of the Meadow, in a development called Park Lakes; One of the few good communites without an association and reasonable land size.

And then Snapper Creek Expressway cuts off 97th and 77th avenue from going north of Kendall Drive. Theyre talking about expanding 97th and making it go through. I'm against it. Keep the 'clusterfuck' of traffic away from me. Although it would probably ease traffic on 87th and 107th ave.

Now let's see if the commission will over rule the veto.

Posted on Sat, Dec. 03, 2005

DEVELOPMENT

Alvarez veto holds urban line

Miami-Dade County Mayor Carlos Alvarez vetoed a push to expand development near the Everglades.

BY NOAKI SCHWARTZ AND TERE FIGUERAS NEGRETE

nschwartz@herald.com

In a sweeping bid to stop development from edging closer to the Everglades, Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Alvarez on Friday vetoed applications to expand the county's Urban Development Boundary.

Alvarez vetoed a package of building proposals affecting the UDB that the County Commission sent to the state this week for further review. But the commission can override Alvarez's veto when it meets on Tuesday.

If the veto stands, the proposals are dead, although they can be resubmitted in two years.

The move endeared Alvarez to those fighting changes to the urban development line. They said the mayor showed political mettle in standing up to Miami-Dade's influential development industry.

But critics -- including several commissioners -- said the veto was a hollow gesture that threatens even noncontroversial, well-planned projects. That's because the package sent to the state includes not only the residential and commercial proposals to expand the UDB but also applications to change the use of areas well inside the line. Those include projects held up as examples of good urban planning, supported by even the staunchest anti-development commissioner. Among those:21 acres of residential and commercial projects on Biscayne Boulevard near Northeast 112th Street and a 1,300-unit development in South Dade's Perrine neighborhood.

''He has taken a blunt instrument to this,'' said attorney Jeffrey Bercow, who has three clients applying for zoning changes within the boundary. He also represents Eureka Palms, which seeks to bring 300 acres of land inside the urban boundary line in order to build single-family homes.

''It's pure politics, and I don't think it's good policy,'' Commissioner Carlos Gimenez said of the veto.

Alvarez said the commission could have separated projects inside the boundary from those outside it. He also said they could have made a final decision on the projects.

''They could have put an end to the endless lobbying of officials. They didn't,'' Alvarez said. 'Instead of dealing with the issue, commissioners chose to wash their hands of this political `hot potato.' ''

The Urban Development Boundary, which runs mainly along the southern and western edges of the county, was established in 1975. It restricts any development outside the line to one dwelling per five acres.

Preservationists say the line is needed to deter urban encroachment on the Everglades, preserve water resources and protect the county's remaining farmlands. Developers and their allies say population growth will require that the line be extended.

At a news conference, Alvarez said developing outside the present line will increase traffic, strain police and fire rescue services and require the construction and staffing of new schools without adequate funding.

Alvarez also said he was concerned about the board's decision to send many of the applications to Tallahassee for review without indicating where local officials stand on them. He reasoned that between staff, the planning advisory board and community groups, commissioners have enough information to make decisions about the building projects.

''This veto is more than just ``Holding the Line,'' he said, alluding to an opponents' group. ``It's about holding elected officials to a higher standard and forcing them to make tough decisions when our quality of life is at stake.''

Commission Chairman Joe Martinez shot back in a written statement that commissioners want to make informed decisions with state input.

He also chastised the mayor for failing to engage commissioners before they voted on Wednesday, saying that the mayor has been welcome to speak at their public meetings ``but the podium has always been noticeably empty.''

Martinez and the other 12 commission members will have the chance to override the mayor's veto on Tuesday with a two-thirds vote.

Proposed changes to the boundary include plans for a 300-acre housing development at the western end of Eureka Drive in Southwest Miami-Dade, a commercial development on a landfill site by the city of Hialeah and possibly a Lowe's Home Center at the edge of Kendall.

Commissioner Katy Sorenson will support the veto. She said the threat of expansion outweighs potential benefits of the other applications. She plans to ask county attorneys to look into separating the applications -- but notes that that could prove tricky.

''We're in uncharted territory,'' she said.

Friday's veto is another chapter in the fractious battle over moving the urban boundary line -- a battle which exploded this year following an unprecedented number of applications seeking to expand the amount of developable land in the county.

Miami Lakes Councilman Michael Pizzi, whose municipality is one of several that publicly came out against UDB expansion, applauded the mayor's veto.

Alvarez conceded the commission could override his veto, but said he felt compelled to get his objections on record now.

``I'm just trying to do what's right and quite frankly -- this is a no-brainer.''

Yup, i live right behind Lakes of the Meadow, in a development called Park Lakes; One of the few good communites without an association and reasonable land size.Not sure if you cats consider this close to you or not, but my girlfriend lives at SW 65th and 127th Ave. Nice house, but if I sleep over and try to get back to South Beach in the morning, it will take an hour and 45 minutos on a good day. Driving there from here at night.....18 minutes. Getting from her house to the Turnpike...5 miles maybe....takes about 45 minutes at 8am.

Not sure if you cats consider this close to you or not, but my girlfriend lives at SW 65th and 127th Ave. Nice house, but if I sleep over and try to get back to South Beach in the morning, it will take an hour and 45 minutos on a good day. Driving there from here at night.....18 minutes. Getting from her house to the Turnpike...5 miles maybe....takes about 45 minutes at 8am.
now that you mention the turnpike, you think it would be a good idea if the state created on-ramps and off=ramps for miller and sunset roads... to help alleviate traffic for morning and afternoon rush hours?

now that you mention the turnpike, you think it would be a good idea if the state created on-ramps and off=ramps for miller and sunset roads... to help alleviate traffic for morning and afternoon rush hours?You are probably right...that is not my area of expertise, but the little experience that I've had tells me that situation/commute is no bueno! It is seriously straining my relationship!!!!!!

i can not believe that roark, master of all things urban, lord of south beach, cars are the devil, he walks everywhere... his girlfriend lives out there... i have lost all faith in the world, i have no idea what to believe anymore

lol, well you could always convert her to the urban side roark. Ask her to move in with you at your south beach pad! Unless she has to live all the way out in Kendall for her job or something, I would think she would find south beach more interesting.

:ohno: I know...it's a bit sad. She works on Brickell, and lived on Brickell (2 block "commute" to work), but she wanted a house. You know...woman these days just don't listen! :)

^wow, works in brickell, what young person would wanna house these days, condos are the new trend lol

They voted 12 to 1 to overturn the veto.

Posted on Tue, Dec. 06, 2005

Miami Dade commissioners override veto on urban development vote

By Noaki Schwartz

nschwartz@herald.com

Without comment, Miami-Dade Commissioners voted overwhelmingly today to override Mayor Carlos Alvarez's veto that tried to kill applications to move the county's development boundary.

''I think everyone has said what they really have to say,'' said Commission Chairman Joe Martinez, referring to earlier discussions on the applications.

Commissioners voted 12 to 1 in favor of overriding the mayor's veto, with only Commissioner Katy Sorenson voting to uphold the veto. In doing so, commissioners sent nine projects that could allow development closer to the Everglades to the state for review. Last week, some commissioners complained that the mayor's veto was politicially motivated. The package of applications on its way to Tallahassee includes residential and commercial proposals to expand the UDB, as well as applications to change the use of areas well inside the line. Some of these proposals have been held up as examples of good urban development.

The final commission vote on the projects, which collectively affect 1,000 acres outside the current line, will be held in April.

Minutes after the commission's vote, Alvarez, who did not attend the meeting, issued a press release.

''The decision about whether to move the UDB is a local one,'' he wrote. ``By choosing not to sustain my veto, county commissioners have failed to explore all options available to them and abdicated their responsibility to the state.

The response was too much for at least one commissioner, who after reading the memo said that this morning's vote was not about moving the boundary.

god damn... 12 to 1... doesnt inspire much faith for the line's future does it?

I love how they are sending it to the state because they say they just want all the information they can get. I guess thats not much of a vote of confidence for their own planning and zoning department (which recommended killing the proposals). Aparently they feel the State would know how a project would effect Miami-Dade more than Miami-Dade's government does. Or they want to approve them but they want to be able to say it was based on the State's recommendations since the County recommended against it. Of course I don't know what kind of luck they will have with the State since Bush has already come out against moving the line.

I think the veto vote was more about Alvarez than it was the line. The commission really hates him right now.

I'm from North Carolina.....but that lines need to stay where it is, build more denser housing in homestead, florida city. EVERglades is to important to just go and have a sprawl orgy all over it. Hell....build New York style brownstones like their doing in Houston. Bring that Metromover to Homestead and Florida City. HOLD THAT LINE........Developers will come up with anything to coax people to do what they want......which is as 5O Cent says SINGULARLY and APATHETICALLY "Get rich or die trying"

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/14218806.htm

Developers retreat from UDB

Developer Lucky Start pulled the plug on its application to move the Urban Development Boundary, becoming the third builder to retreat.

BY MATTHEW HAGGMAN AND TERE FIGUERAS NEGRETE
mhaggman@MiamiHerald.com

Residential developers proclaimed last year the time had come to move Miami-Dade's Urban Development Boundary to build new homes on hundreds of acres of land. But now the same developers are in headlong retreat.

On Wednesday, developer Lucky Start became the third home builder in recent weeks to announce it is yanking its bid to alter the line that limits large-scale development along the county's western and southern border.

Simon Ferro, Lucky Start's attorney, said the Miami developer ''determined the support would not be there and decided to withdraw.'' Ferro declined further comment and Jorge Fernandez, head of Lucky Start, did not return calls.

The residential projects in particular have been a lightning rod for debate. They have drawn impassioned opposition because of fears of crowded schools, congested roadways and further strains on the county's infrastructure. However, developers have countered that new residential building outside the line would create much-need affordable houses.

The three biggest residential projects are now out of the bidding. Lucky Start's 193-acre Newest Kendall project was the latest, Shoma Homes withdrew in February and Adrian Development Group withdrew last week.

Nine projects remain for building warehouses, offices and stores. Two could include relatively small-scale plans for new homes. The planning advisory board will review the applications today and the county commission is set to vote on them in mid-April.

REMAINING PROJECTS

Cynthia Guerra, executive director of Tropical Audubon, said the remaining, mostly commercial projects are no better than the recently withdrawn residential ones.

''The only thing that falls out of the mix is the impact of schools,'' Guerra said. ``But all the other issues still exist -- the other applications still consume water, still add to traffic, still impact the environment.''

Established in 1975, the UDB limits building to one dwelling per five acres outside the line. The boundary has not been moved for residential development in more than a decade. After a bruising fight, it was altered for two industrial projects in 2002.

Last year, a dozen developers filed applications to move it, but faced growing opposition.

''Now we need to focus our energies on planning for the future,'' said Lani Kahn Drody, president of the Builders Association of South Florida. ``We can't have the 5-acre ranchette hobby farmers continuing to gobble up our precious resource of land when we have issues of housing affordability to face.''

The fight over the UDB has been a David-and-Goliath face-off: A cadre of well-funded developers, backed by legions of lobbyists and attorneys, versus a grass-roots movement that ranged from homeowners associations to environmental groups.

But opponents to moving the line have been joined by powerful regulatory, political and business interests. Earlier this year the county came under blunt criticism from state regulators, who warned that future development would be cut off unless the county revamped its long-range water usage plans.

Last month, the Florida Department of Community Affairs strongly recommended that Miami-Dade commissioners deny all the applications -- even those within the urban boundary -- citing such concerns as water, traffic and schools.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Miami-Dade Department of Planning & Zoning recently recommended that all but one application -- a 14.7 acre office project -- be denied. And Gov. Jeb Bush, along with powerful home builders like Sergio Pino, have said now is not the time to move the line.

Developers continued to tweak their applications in hopes of appealing to the county commission. For instance, Lucky Start recently offered a covenant that would prevent them from breaking ground until 2009.

But Commission Chair Joe Martinez, who represents the congested West Kendall area and who himself endures an hours-long commute, told residential applicants in November he wouldn't support them unless they could come up with a traffic plan.

Martinez said Wednesday such a plan has not been formulated and said he would have voted against Lucky Start.

WRONG TIMING

''It's a beautiful project, but the timing is not right,'' said Martinez, who met with Lucky Start's Fernandez this week. ``Let them apply next cycle. I'm not going to support any residentials until the traffic is improved.''

But the fight isn't over. Three proposals seeking to build massive residential projects outside the line are working their way through the South Florida Regional Planning Council -- a process that takes many months but eventually results in the applications going before the county.

''It's good to celebrate our victories,'' said Jamie Furgang, a leader in the Hold The Line campaign. ``But we also know the goalposts are always moving.''

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/14255841.htm

DEVELOPMENT
Board adds twist to UDB debate
The stage is set for the Miami-Dade County Commission to vote in two weeks on proposals to move the Urban Development Boundary after the final review board gave its recommendations.

By MATTHEW HAGGMAN AND TERE FIGUERES NEGRETE
mhaggman@MiamiHerald.com

After developers for three big residential projects abandoned their bids to move the Urban Development Boundary, opponents were feeling optimistic.

Then the Planning Advisory Board weighed in. The nine-member board has recommended the Miami-Dade County Commission approve four of the six applications by developers seeking to move the line, which limits large-scale building along the county's western and southern borders.

The PAB recommendation came as a last-minute twist, after state regulators and county planners had taken a dim view of the developers' proposals. Until now, momentum seemed to be gathering against approval of the majority of applications. But it's still unclear if the PAB view significantly matters, or if it's one more voice in the throng.

''It's hard to say how much or less weight this carries with the County Commission than other entities,'' said Neisen Kasdin, an attorney representing the Latin Builders Association and Builders Association of South Florida.

The PAB is the final review board to evaluate the proposals before the county commission casts its deciding vote in two weeks.

PAB members are appointed by the commission.

Opponents to moving the line were chagrined. The PAB findings were in sharp contrast to Florida's Department of Community Affairs, which recommended that all applications be denied. And Miami-Dade's Department of Planning & Zoning said all but one should be rejected.

''I am really disappointed by the PAB,'' said Cynthia Guerra, Tropical Audubon Society executive director, who cited a Bendixen & Associates poll last month finding that more than 70 percent of Miami-Dade voters oppose moving the line. ``We need to remind the commission that this is not what the public at large thinks is best for us.''

PAB chairman Al Maloof responded that if any projects did not address all infrastructure issues, such as traffic or water, the board wouldn't have recommended approval. He said several developers have made changes since the state Department of Community Affairs made its review.

''Some of the applicants met the burden,'' Maloof said.

The development boundary is considered by some to provide a vital buffer between urban land and the Everglades, and has rarely been moved in recent years. Many call it a line in the sand that must hold at all costs to protect the environment and control growth.

There are also concerns about traffic and the county's water supply.

But developers say environmental and infrastructure risks can be eliminated, and that the county cannot support its growing population without building out. Builders hope to move the line for everything from a Lowe's Home Center to a large industrial park.

Meanwhile, three other proposals for large residential projects outside the development boundary are winding through the approval process, but they won't go before the commission for many months.

Doh! Why can't they just make a long term decision about the line already? Set it and forget it...

lolololol @ set it and forget it

Looks like the commission wont have to decide on any giant residential projects outside of the UDB as the last one has been withdrawn. Only a few commercial proposals remain.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/14365124.htm

URBAN DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY

Last residential developer pulls out before UDB vote
On the day before Miami-Dade county commissioners begin deciding whether to open more land for development, another in a series of proposals was withdrawn.

BY TERE FIGUERAS NEGRETE AND MATTHEW HAGGMAN
tfigueras@MiamiHerald.com

Another developer has pulled out of the fight to open hundreds of acres of land to intensive development -- less than 24 hours before the Miami-Dade County Commission begins its final hearings on the proposed expansion today.

Backers of a plan to build on more than 70 acres of farmland near Homestead -- including commercial and business spaces and up to 270 homes -- withdrew their application Monday afternoon, according to Chairman Joe Martinez's office.

The application, filed under the name Barry Brant Land Trusts, and represented by attorney and former county commissioner Miguel Diaz de la Portilla, is the fourth of the controversial proposals to pull out in recent weeks.

Those opposed to moving the Urban Development Boundary, which was created to shield agricultural and environmental land from sprawl, hailed the latest surrender.

But they remain concerned about the remaining five applications, which could bring a big-box home store, offices, warehouses and retail shops to hundreds of acres near the Everglades.

The commission is expected to vote on the issue over a three-day hearing that begins today.

''Every day that passes, we hope another one will pull out,'' said Cynthia Guerra, an environmental activist and a member of the loosely knit Hold the Line campaign.

Diaz de la Portilla did not return calls for comment Monday evening.

His client was the only one of the remaining applications seeking residential development.

Andrew Dolkart, a consultant to several developers seeking to move the development boundary, said the latest withdrawal is understandable.

''The residential applicants just don't have the votes,'' Dolkart said. ``It is simply a political equation.''

Major home builders Shoma, Adrian and Lucky Start, whose bids to build homes on the far west and south fringes of the county were much larger than the Brant application, all cited a lack of support on the commission dais for their abrupt pullouts.

The developers also cited Martinez's request that residential builders come up with plans to ease traffic -- a major concern in Martinez's congested West Kendall district.

TAKEN CRITICISM

Martinez himself has taken pointed criticism during the contentious debate over the development boundary. Monday was no exception.

Opponents say the three-day process for voting on the development proposals that Martinez has outlined is unfair to their side, and will force volunteers to wait for hours -- or even days -- before the controversial items are open for public debate.

''There are reams of people who have signed up to speak, but can't wait around all day. They have jobs to get back to, or families to care for,'' Guerra said.

Martinez, who also drew heated criticism for his handling of a November round of the UDB hearings, said through a spokesman that he ``was trying to be as inclusive as possible.''

''This way, more people can come after work,'' said Gilbert Cabrera, spokesman for the commissioner. ``Because it will be later in the day, more people can participate.''

Cabrera also said that Martinez has no plans to recuse himself from any of the votes this week, despite a report in The Miami Herald that he has a job with a security firm whose clients include prominent builders, and whose owner is a vice president of the Builders Association of South Florida.

The county's ethics commission has ruled the relationship did not pose a conflict.

LAST APPLICATIONS

The most recent battle over the Urban Development Boundary began last year with an unprecedented push by the building industry -- which filed a flurry of applications seeking to expand the line.

The remaining applications are:

• The city of Hialeah's plan to build industrial and office space on a site that includes a former landfill; roughly 790 acres between Northwest 97th Avenue and the Turnpike.

• Doral West Commerce Park, 2.5 acres west of the Turnpike and east of Northwest 122nd Avenue near Northwest 22nd Street.

• A Lowe's Home Centers store on 51.7 acres near theoretical Southwest 138th Avenue and north of the Tamiami Canal Area.

• An office and business project on 42 acres south of Kendall Drive, west of Southwest 167th Avenue. Applicants are David Brown, Steven Brown and Victor Brown.

• Businesses and offices on 14.7 acres southeast of Southwest 142nd Avenue and 312th Street. Applicants are Pedro Talamas, Juan J. Valdes and Nadia A. Valdes.

Proponents maintain Miami-Dade's supply of undeveloped land is dwindling -- and that the county must open more space to accommodate a growing population. They also point to some municipalities that look unfavorably on added growth, meaning that the county has to look at the far reaches of unincorporated Miami-Dade to provide affordable housing.

Opponents insist there is plenty of land within the boundary for responsible growth, and say the county should focus on existing problems such as traffic, overcrowded schools and concerns over the county's water supply -- all of which have prompted sharp criticism from the Tallahassee.

Earlier this year, the state's Department of Community Affairs -- which reviews major land-use decisions such as these -- recommended all of the applications be denied.

Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Alvarez appealed to the commissioners to listen to the state's recommendations.

''Your ultimate decisions,'' wrote the mayor in a Monday memo to Martinez, ``will reflect a distinction between sprawling development and managed growth.''

That's good, I wouldn't trust these commissioners with walking my dog...

i really would like to see the Loews home center thing approved and built on the nw corner of 137th and 8th st... nearest one, that i know of, is by the palmetto, like red road or something. i like home depot, but i like choices, also... and options.

so watd they rule? i looked around all day today and couldnt find anything...

Opposed the Lowes by a slim majority and opposed an industrial park complex...

Good news so far! lets HOLD THE LINE!

ahh.. o well

One of the proposals was approved, the rest were denied. The one that was approved was basically harmless as it is surrounded by development already and only opposed based on the principal that the line should not move since it sets a bad precedent. Also the approved land might be used for a Marlins Stadium.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/local/14383123.htm

URBAN DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY
Hialeah wins, others fail in bid to move development line

Only the city of Hialeah was successful in getting the Miami-Dade Commission to move the boundary line for new development in the county. Four other projects were rejected.

BY TERE FIGUERAS NEGRETE AND MATTHEW HAGGMAN
tfigueras@MiamiHerald.com

How they voted

Months of contentious debate over the largest set of land-use decisions to come before the Miami-Dade County Commission in many years ended Wednesday as commissioners opened the door for new development -- but just a crack.

The commission rejected four of five applications to move Miami-Dade's Urban Development Boundary, or UDB, the line designed to limit large-scale development along the county's western and southern borders.

The votes, which came after four other developers withdrew applications to build hundreds of acres, meant that eight of the original nine bids to move the development boundary were turned away in the biggest fight over moving the development boundary in many years.

The one applicant to prevail: the city of Hialeah.

Hialeah leaders, including former Mayor Raul Martinez, persuaded 12 of the 13 commissioners to open some 1,100 acres for industrial parks and offices. Developer Armando Codina, who owns a significant portion of that land, sat in the commission chambers as the county approved Hialeah's application.

The vote marked a second UDB victory for Codina, who successfully got the development boundary moved in 2002 for his Beacon Lakes industrial park project west of Doral.

Those opposed to moving the line -- a hodgepodge of environmentalists and activists that eventually garnered support from Gov. Jeb Bush and state regulators -- hailed Wednesday's votes, which capped off more than a year of fighting a well-funded and politically powerful building industry.

''I think we're all kind of feeling like we're in a dream,'' said activist Jamie Furgang of Audubon of Florida. She said that while the activists and community groups loosely assembled under the Hold the Line campaign had also fought the Hialeah application, she considered it ``one of the less egregious ones.''

LONE HOLDOUT

Only one commissioner -- Katy Sorenson -- voted against Hialeah's application for land east of Florida's Turnpike that includes the Peerless landfill.

Other commissioners were swayed by a variety of factors in the proposal's favor -- including a pledge to build a new water treatment plant aimed at easing water supply fears. Proponents also cited its potential for economic growth and environmental remediation.

''This is not about moving the line. It's about jobs and cleaning up a landfill,'' said current Hialeah Mayor Julio Robaina. He added after the meeting that the vote might help the city in negotiations with the Florida Marlins, who are considering a move.

Robaina, who has been discussing a possible stadium inside his city, said the commission's vote ``gives us one more thing to bring to the Marlins. You can't have a stadium without being inside the UDB.''

Codina said he is not in discussions with the Marlins, and his current plans for the property do not include a sale to the baseball team or a donation to the city. ''I love the Marlins, and I wish they would stay,'' he said after the meeting. ``But I will let the mayor take the lead on that.''

Martinez, the former Hialeah mayor who was a principal architect of the plan to annex the land and expand the development boundary to include it, bashed the media and political rivals of the commissioners in an impassioned monologue.

Furgang of Hold the Line gave high praise to the five commissioners who rejected the other four applications as a decisive voting bloc: Sorenson, Carlos Gimenez, Sally Heyman, Rebeca Sosa and Dennis Moss. Nine of the 13 commissioners' votes are required for a UDB change to pass.

''I am very surprised and pleased with the leadership they showed,'' she said.

CLOSE VOTE

In a razor-thin decision, the five commissioners voted against moving the line to allow a Lowe's Home Center on 51.7 acres near Southwest Eighth Street and 137th Avenue.

The Lowe's bid failed despite appeals by the retailer's representatives, who promised a new roadway and bridge to the property. Also, attorney Juan Mayol said a portion of the property would be sold to the Miami-Dade School Board for a much-needed high school -- or perhaps a charter school or a private school if the School Board declined. He also offered land for a park.

Lowe's had collected several hundred signatures from residents in the area and rallied more than two dozen people to appear in the chambers in support of the store -- which neighbors said would allow for greater access to emergency supplies in hurricane season, among other benefits.

Commission Chairman Joe Martinez said he supported the project based on the add-ons by the developer.

''You're missing a good opportunity,'' he told his fellow commissioners.

OFFICE PARK

A 2.5-acre industrial and office park called Doral West Commerce was shot down an a 13-0 vote.

''This is the right project at the right place,'' argued lawyer Felix Lasarte, who said the office park was on a site surrounded by land inside the urban boundary -- most notably Codina's Beacon Lakes project. The site is west of the Turnpike and east of Northwest 122nd Avenue at about Northwest 22nd Street.

Commissioners also turned away an office and business project proposed for 42 acres south of Kendall Drive and west of Southwest 167th Avenue and rejected offices proposed for 14.7 acres southeast of Southwest 142nd Avenue and 312th Street. The applicants were Pedro Talamas, Juan J. Valdes and Nadia A. Valdes.

They're back:
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/miami_dade/story/323347.html

COMMISSIONS VOTE
Contentious Lowe's development a step closer

Miami-Dade County commissioners gave developers a major victory in the ongoing tussle over plans outside the county's Urban Development Boundary by voting to support the development of a Lowe's.

BY CHARLES RABIN
crabin@MiamiHerald.com

A big-box home improvement store at the center of Miami-Dade County's contentious westward growth battle is closer to being built after a tight commission vote Tuesday.

The commission's 8-5 decision to tell the state it supports construction of a Lowe's center outside the Urban Development Boundary followed a heated debate pitting development interests against opponents to urban sprawl.

Voting in favor: Miami-Dade Commissioners Jose ''Pepe'' Diaz, Audrey Edmonson, Joe Martinez, Dorrin Rolle, Natacha Seijas, Barbara Jordan, Bruno Barreiro and Javier Souto.

Against: Carlos Gimenez, Sally Heyman, Dennis Moss, Katy Sorenson and Rebeca Sosa.

Fitting for the yearslong fight over development in Florida's most populous county, the vote triggered immediate reaction: Environmental activists said they would file a suit to stop the project if Mayor Carlos Alvarez refuses to veto it first.

''. . . It is urged that you exercise your authority and promptly veto the approval of the Lowe's application and any other UDB expansion attempts that come before the County Commission,'' Miami Lakes Councilman and attorney Michael Pizzi wrote.

CASE-BY-CASE

Pizzi said he faxed the letter to Alvarez's office shortly after the vote. An Alvarez spokeswoman said she could not immediately comment on the mayor's position. In the past, Alvarez has said he opposes building outside the UDB but will look at items on a case-by-case basis.

In a half-full chamber with many in attendance wearing yellow Hold The Line stickers, commissioners spent Tuesday pondering 17 change requests to the county's development master plan.

The four development issues proposed for outside the county's UDB drew the most attention.

Commissioners rebuked the county staff recommendation and supported the Lowe's and one other project -- a 600,000-square-foot office and commercial center at Southwest 167th Avenue and Kendall Drive.

With the votes, both projects will be forwarded to the state's Department of Community Affairs, which will make recommendations before returning the items to commissioners for a final vote in April.

They also forwarded to the state without approval a residential complex planned for Southwest 167th Avenue, between 104th and 112th streets. The move could mean the death of that project, as commissioners said they hoped the state will reject it.

While commissioners approved major commercial projects, they were less inclined to support the building of homes outside the development line.

Besides the Lowe's vote, the day's other contentious battle was over plans to build the massive commercial structure on the western end of Kendall Drive.

It passed with a positive recommendation from the commission. Sorenson, Gimenez and Moss voted against.

Martinez fought for the plan -- arguing that developer David Brown promised to build a long-sought road connecting Kendall Drive to a nearby residential complex. It was a job, Martinez said, that the county couldn't complete.

Sorenson took exception: ``Should we make policy decisions based on what developers are going to do for us? Seems to me we ought to be making the policy.''

Not everyone in the crowd -- mostly composed of an umbrella group of environmental organizations calling themselves Hold The Line -- sided with Sorenson.

CountryWalk's Ory Dawes questioned why county planners who allowed people to move to the county's western reaches now are unwilling to allow infrastructure to be built. ''What about those of us already to the west?'' she asked.

THIRD TIME LUCKY

The Lowe's vote commanded the most attention. Twice since 2003 representatives of the home improvement giant have tried to convince commissioners to let them build outside the UDB; both times they were denied.

Tuesday they cracked through -- even as dozens of people lined up to speak against the plan to build on 52 acres at Southwest Eighth Street and 137th Avenue.

Said Julie Hill: ``Further sprawl will exacerbate climate change in South Florida.''

Added John Wade: ``We should have a water recycling program working before there's any attempt to move the UDB.''

But Humberto Sanchez, who lives about 25 blocks from the proposed Lowe's site, told the story of a recent shopping venture to buy light bulbs. ``It took me an incredible amount of time to buy light bulbs at Home Depot.''

Commissioners also shot down a plan to build office space in a small square area in Doral adjacent to Beacon Lakes, just outside the UDB.

Alvarez vetoes growth plan in West Miami-Dade

Miami-Dade County commissioners aren't likely to override a veto by the mayor to halt

development outside the county's Urban Development Boundary.

Posted on Thu, Dec. 06, 2007

BY CHARLES RABIN AND MATTHEW I. PINZUR

Miami-Dade County Mayor Carlos Alvarez vetoed a series of projects planned for the county's western reaches Wednesday, effectively killing the deals in a vital test of where the county would draw the development line.

The veto represents a major victory for opponents of further growth in Florida's most populous county.

And, significantly, the veto is likely to hold. The county commissioners supporting development outside the invisible boundary typically off-limits to new projects don't appear to have enough votes to override Alvarez.

The mayor's message was direct: Expanding the so-called Urban Development Boundary would mean longer drives to work and trouble for police, fire and services.

''If Miami-Dade moves outside the UDB, it will affect our delivery of services and strain already taxed resources,'' Alvarez wrote. ``Police and fire rescue services would be spread over a greater area, resulting in longer response times due to greater distances and road congestion.''

The veto was a stinging setback for developers looking to build new homes -- and the shops and offices that come with them -- in suburbs near the Everglades.

''His veto overlooks the pleas of thousands of area residents,'' said Juan Mayol, an attorney for Lowe's, the home-improvement giant that sought to build a store outside the UDB.

``We are hopeful that the county commissioners will continue to recognize that these hard-working families are tired of overcrowded schools and long drives to buy such simple things as plywood or a garden hose.''

Hold The Line, an umbrella group of environmental organizations, said Alvarez's veto ''was the right thing to do,'' said group member and Miami Lakes Councilman Michael Pizzi.

''Expanding the UDB would have a devastating effect on the environment, and a devastating effect on the quality of life for Dade County residents,'' Pizzi said.

Commissioner Joe Martinez, who pushed for an office park outside the UDB and in his district, said Alvarez ``has stopped a lot of good applications for no reason.''

It would take nine of the 13 commissioners to override the veto. The five commissioners who voted against extending the UDB westward said they plan on sticking by their vote at the next commission meeting Dec. 18.

PERMANENT LOSSES

Commissioners Carlos Gimenez, Sally Heyman, Dennis Moss, Katy Sorenson and Rebeca Sosa were on the losing side of an 8-5 vote last week. Only Heyman left wiggle room on her position, saying she was ''not looking to change her vote'' but was ``not unequivocally saying no.''

Sorenson, often the most vocal anti-sprawl voice on the dais, said it's important to continue to hold the line.

''I assume that all these victories are temporary, but the losses [on UDB issues] are permanent,'' she said.

Wednesday, Alvarez vetoed all 12 applications to change the county's development master plan -- including three outside the UDB.

Without an override, projects outside the UDB won't be heard again -- if at all -- until 2009 when the county's Comprehensive Development Master Plan reappears before commissioners.

Alvarez asked the commission to work on a comprehensive plan for ``inevitable future expansion.''

His veto comes a week after commissioners spent several contentious hours debating the legitimacy of moving the boundary. Over the objections of county staff, a divided commission ultimately forwarded three projects outside the UDB -- two of them with positive recommendations -- to the state Department of Community Affairs.

If the veto holds, the DCA won't see the applications.

The most heated debate involved Lowe's request to build on Southwest Eighth Street at 137th Avenue. The company offered land to build a school and to build a bridge to a side road.

Twice since 2003, representatives of the home improvement giant have sought permission to build outside the UDB; they failed both times.

This time the Lowe's issue drew a half-full commission chamber of supporters and opponents. One man in favor of Lowe's told a story of having to drive a long way to buy four light bulbs; opponents spoke of stretching resources like water and police and fire services.

Two other projects proposed for Southwest 167th Avenue in West Kendall were debated.

Almost immediately after commissioners voted to send the applications to the state Capitol, members of Hold The Line said they would file a lawsuit against the county if the mayor failed to veto them.

LITTLE CHOICE

Alvarez's veto also halted nine changes planned for inside the development boundary. Some of them -- like one that would have tweaked land-use maps at Miami International Airport and three smaller airfields -- were approved and even written by county staff.

But the mayor had little choice because Commission Chairman Bruno Barreiro chose to package all 12 applications in one basket instead of separating them.

Barreiro said he's considering calling for a vote to override the mayor at the Dec. 18 hearing.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/miami_dade/story/333866.html





Damn, its like the County Mayor makes perfect sense or something. Why don't they do some infill, make some multistory big box retailers out there to prevent people from having to drive long distances to get items.

Good for Alvarez.

Good for Alvarez.

Ditto. Time for our fat metro area to slim down for a change... and by slim down, I mean build vertically! :)

Wow, I'm proud of Mayor Alvarez, taking Miami in the right direction.

Some of these commisioners are real nutcases. I congratulate Mayor Alvarez.

That's good.

Here's a PDF with maps. Those everglade boundaries are great.

has anyone asked the developers what their plans are once they have built on all free land? are they going to stop building at that point?

i doubt it. s florida can only grow up now, and the sooner everyone comes to accept that the better off everyone will be. and maybe we can make some of these new constructions affordable!

:bash::shocked:

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/miami_dade/west_kendall/story/416986.html

WEST KENDALL
Massive West Kendall development under review

After years of discussion, the 6,900-home project planned for 960 acres on the county's western edge is now under an extensive monthslong review by the county.

BY YUDY PINEIRO
ypineiro@MiamiHerald.com

Parkland 2012, a Lennar development that could bring thousands of homes, condos and offices, plus a high school, police and fire station to 960 acres just west of Country Walk and outside the urban development boundary, is now being reviewed by the county.

The project is a ''development of regional impact,'' so sweeping in scope that it requires a separate, more in-depth review than the urban growth requests that appeared before commissioners a few months ago and are due back for a final vote in April.

Because of the lengthy process, it could be months before hearings take place.

But developers have already begun to reach out to the community, hoping to quell fears about the project's size and request to move the UDB -- a line limiting urban sprawl that many West Kendall residents feel should stay put because resources are already stretched.

''We understand the UDB is a hot button for everyone, but the fact is it was never intended to be a line in the sand,'' said Jose Cancela, a spokesman for Parkland developer Lennar, who is partnering with Ed Easton on the project. ``It was intended for planning purposes.''

Cancela reiterated a popular developer stance -- that the limit on the available land is fast approaching and the lengthy application and permitting process won't allow homes to be built for years anyhow. In Parkland's case, Lennar doesn't anticipate any home to be up before 2012 -- hence the project name, Parkland 2012.

''Parkland 2012 is about the future. We need to be ready for the future,'' Cancela said. ``South Florida is a hot market and it's going to continue to be.''

According to the completed plans filed with the county on Jan. 18, the developer is proposing 1,257 single-family homes, 2,436 townhomes, 3,248 condos, and about 200,000 square feet of retail space off Southwest 152nd Street and Southwest 162nd Avenue.

Plans also include: a hospital with 200 beds, two K-8 schools and a high school with capacity of up to 1,600 students, 100,000 square feet of medical office space, and 550,000 square feet of warehouse and office space.

Space has been set aside for the county to use for amenities such as a library, police and fire stations and parks.

The project requires approval from the South Florida Regional Planning Council, a separate process developers started months back.

County agencies just recently started reviewing the plans. They are expected to comment by next week and submit it to county planners, who will finalize their recommendation and request the recommendations of the West Kendall Community Council and the Planning Advisory Board.

The Miami-Dade County Commission then makes a recommendation to the state's Department of Community Affairs, which further reviews the project.

That's just planning. The applicant must seek separate zoning approvals.

Rosa Davis, a county planner, doesn't expect any hearings to take place anytime soon. ''We're in start mode,'' Davis said. ``Nothing is going to happen until April.''

Sometime next week, Davis said the application should be up on the county website http://www.

miamidade.gov/planzone/

CDMP_special_apps.asp

Why can't they just stop building out west?! No more suburbs!

The project requires approval from the South Florida Regional Planning Council, a separate process developers started months back.

Is there any precedent for such submissions for projects west of the Boundary Line?

:ohno:

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/miami_dade/story/508919.html

URBAN DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY
Dade developers get OK to cross development line
With hundreds packing the chambers, commissioners approved the first development in three years outside Miami-Dade's imaginary growth line.

BY CHARLES RABIN AND MATTHEW I. PINZUR
crabin@MiamiHerald.com

Miami-Dade County commissioners ignored the pleas of their mayor, their planning and zoning board, the state and multiple speakers Thursday -- voting to let developers build a home improvement center and an office complex outside the Urban Development Boundary.

The twin 9-4 decisions, following a full day of vigorous public debate, mean developers are as close as ever to breaking the UDB barrier for only the second time in more than a decade.

Holding up a copy of the county's master plan, Commissioner José ''Pepe'' Diaz pointed out that nowhere in it does it say, ``Hold the line. What it does say is we need a compelling purpose.''

The vote drew an immediate rebuke from County Mayor Carlos Alvarez -- who promised earlier in the week to veto any application that passes.

''The mayor's position on the UDB has been clear and consistent and has not changed,'' Alvarez spokeswoman Victoria Mallette said in a statement.

The mayor's threat to veto, however, may be no more than a symbolic gesture, because the nine votes for the change are enough to override Alvarez.

In the end, commissioners Diaz, Joe Martinez, Natacha Seijas, Audrey Edmonson, Rebeca Sosa, Dorrin Rolle, Bruno Barreiro, Barbara Jordan and Javier Souto voted for the applications.

Commissioners Carlos Gimenez, Katy Sorenson, Sally Heyman and Dennis Moss voted against.

''You think one line doesn't matter, one inch doesn't matter? There will be another battle in another two years,'' Sorenson said, warning that the decision may open the development floodgates.

If the mayor's vote is overridden, ''We will go to court,'' threatened Miami Lakes Town Councilman Michael Pizzi, leader of Hold the Line -- an umbrella group of more than 100 organizations that oppose extending the boundary. State regulators could potentially determine the change violates growth-management laws and take legal action.

But for now, commissioners have given the go-ahead to build a Lowe's store at Southwest Eighth Street and 137th Avenue, and for developer David Brown to build a commercial and office complex at Kendall Drive and Southwest 167th Avenue.

A third application by developer Ferro Investment Group II was withdrawn before the meeting.

SIX-HOUR DEBATE

The two votes came almost six hours after heated debate on the dais, and after several dozen spoke from a crowd of hundreds that stood for hours outside the chamber in a line that snaked around a corner and past an escalator.

Most were wearing similar green stickers, but with opposing messages.

''Pretty soon you're going to have airboat rides looking at home improvement centers,'' Karen Esty of The Redland told commissioners.

Yet backers said the projects could help spur improvements, like new schools. ''We need a school. Braddock High School is busting at the seams,'' said Mireya Diaz. ``All the people that spoke against this don't live in the area.''

Some commissioners were swayed by promises from the developers, saying the projects would be an economic boost and noting that Lowe's would build a school and Brown a bridge to ease traffic.

As the sun set and the meeting entered its 11th hour, kids who missed going to school on Thursday sat on carpeting outside the chamber with parents and teachers, playing games and eating candy.

They received a lesson in civics that wasn't always cordial.

NASTY EXCHANGES

The intensity of the debate could be seen during an exchange between Pizzi and Commissioner Seijas.

''I'm here today to ask you to stop the insanity,'' said Pizzi, a longtime advocate of keeping development from entering the UDB.

Retorted Seijas, noting how Pizzi has long made the same argument: ''I believe in the description of insanity -- in this one,'' she said, alluding to Pizzi.

Thursday's vote is the closest developers have come in their yearslong fight to get the go-ahead to build outside the imaginary line on the western edges of Dade that runs mostly along Krome Avenue. Two years ago, both developers were denied attempts to build.

Then, commissioners killed a host of UDB applications after heeding concerns from the state and environmental advocates over traffic congestion, environmental issues, a limited water supply and the impact new development would have on existing schools and neighborhoods.

The only application that was approved by commissioners then was to developer Armando Codina, who received the go-ahead to build just west of Hialeah.

Thursday's arguments were similar, running from worries over water supplies to traffic congestion. The county planner said construction outside the UDB isn't necessary because there is enough space available inside the boundary for several decades.

Sorenson stopped her colleagues before the final vote, warning of a long fight in the courts if the state finds the county didn't comply with growth management law. Addressing Assistant County Attorney Joni Armstrong Coffey, Sorenson asked what would happen if the county was not in compliance with state growth laws.

''We will be in litigation,'' Coffey said.

Ridiculous. As if we needed another Lowe's in west Dade.

Armstrong-Coffey used to teach at th FIU College of Law when I first started there. I don't know much about her, but hopefully she can turn this battle around.

Ridiculous. As if we needed another Lowe's in west Dade.

Armstrong-Coffey used to teach at th FIU College of Law when I first started there. I don't know much about her, but hopefully she can turn this battle around.


I live two miles south east of were that Loews is going and I am all for it. At the moment, directly behind were they will build the store and commercial center you have abandoned farms, homes, a school bus depot and Rinker Cement Plant. There is plenty of "stuff" already there. If you cross Eigth street from where they are going to build there is already homes and commercial business' for at least a good 2 or more miles. If they are going to build something that will keep people from having to travel south or east of it for work, school or other commercial establishments it will definitely alleviate the traffic congestion in that area.

I live two miles south east of were that Loews is going and I am all for it. At the moment, directly behind were they will build the store and commercial center you have abandoned farms, homes, a school bus depot and Rinker Cement Plant. There is plenty of "stuff" already there. If you cross Eigth street from where they are going to build there is already homes and commercial business' for at least a good 2 or more miles. If they are going to build something that will keep people from having to travel south or east of it for work, school or other commercial establishments it will definitely alleviate the traffic congestion in that area.
bump

Thank you, building for the sake of building and profit alone is wrong, but so is the opposing of development for the sake of the cause is also wrong. Some advances will come at a price, the razing of burnt Malaluca to keep the neighborhood striving is a cost that we have to deal with, unfortunately.

Why can't they just stop building out west?! No more suburbs!

Don't be ignorant, there are too many people in Miami that want a house instead of an apartment. Not everyone wants to raise their kids in the Downtown area, I know I wouldn't...

but the bright side is that miami could engulf all of south florida(not metropolitan of miami ,the state). and could become a megacity!

Don't be ignorant, there are too many people in Miami that want a house instead of an apartment. Not everyone wants to raise their kids in the Downtown area, I know I wouldn't...

Why you call him an ignorant for?

Of course there are going to be people wanting a house, but you know why? Because there are houses available. If there were no houses, then there was nothing to choose from.

Don't be ignorant, there are too many people in Miami that want a house instead of an apartment. Not everyone wants to raise their kids in the Downtown area, I know I wouldn't...

You don't be ignorant. I'm not the person who falsely believes living in a single family home in BFE Miami have to drive everywhere in traffic, having my life dependent on a piece of metal on wheels is going to improve my quality of life.

Why you call him an ignorant for?

Of course there are going to be people wanting a house, but you know why? Because there are houses available. If there were no houses, then there was nothing to choose from.

Exactly. Most of the world lives in urban areas, and most of those urban areas are far denser than downtown Miami. Even those places we deem to be the most livable cities in the world - Vancouver, Vienna, Melbourne, Pittsburgh - are quite a bit denser than downtown Miami. That being said, people here may want to live in a single family home in the suburbs, but it's a false assumption that a single family home in the suburbs provides a higher standard of living than dense condo development or is better for raising a family.

That being the case, South Florida, moreso than many other areas, needs to be very careful about its planning. Poor planning is the reason we currently have water shortages every summer, and developing further west is only going to facilitate that problem because even less water will be able to drain down into the aquifer. I'm all for getting rid of those melaleucas though. They're not native; they're ugly; and there are too many of them as it is.

Slightly west of were they will be building the Loews this is what you see. It is not only a thin row, it is acres and acres of burnt Melaleuca trees that do not even have branches or leaves anymore. They are simple thin, white tree trunks. It looks cool but serves no ecological purpose. Melaleuca trees are predatory and as mentioned before not native to South Florida. They were only brought here to drain and dry up the Everglades to build out western Dade County.

http://sofia.usgs.gov/virtual_tour/images/photos/controlling/2780_rimtrees.jpg

thats beautiful

who would want to build over that... JUST KILL THE EVERGLADES WITH MORE SUBURBAN CRAP

Reasons I despise suburbs:

1)Everything is to spread out and far.
2) Kills nature taking a lot of land.
3)People have to depend of a vehicle, making it more expensive for one to live. (Gas?)
4) The metro area becomes a boring monotone place.
5) Alligators in the kitchen, bathubs, and under the beds are a common case.
6) It is impossible to fill every street and avenue with a beautiful pedestrian friendly urban art.
7) NO urban spaces
The list goes and goes.

Reasons I despise suburbs:

1)Everything is to spread out and far.
2) Kills nature taking a lot of land.
3)People have to depend of a vehicle, making it more expensive for one to live. (Gas?)
4) The metro area becomes a boring monotone place.
5) Alligators in the kitchen, bathubs, and under the beds are a common case.
6) It is impossible to fill every street and avenue with a beautiful pedestrian friendly urban art.
7) NO urban spaces
The list goes and goes.

Not to mention a thriving population of Burmese pythons from so many people releasing their pet snakes into the wild.

Agreed. I dislike suburbs intensely. One way to help restore the biosphere and reduce human impact on the natural world is to build up, not out. Dense areas like downtown Miami are not only more pleasant places to live but do not harm the environment like building sprawling suburbs do. Suburbs also encourage the use of cars for transportation, unlike urban areas, which further hurts the environment.

They should stop all development out in western Dade ASAP and encourage more in downtown as we need to continue building up, not out. The last 10 years have been good for that, but it needs to keep happening, and we need to reduce the amount of suburban construction in areas around Miami.

You don't be ignorant. I'm not the person who falsely believes living in a single family home in BFE Miami have to drive everywhere in traffic, having my life dependent on a piece of metal on wheels is going to improve my quality of life.

Thats your way of thinking, but as for the majority, people like to have their nice shiny cars, and million dollar houses.

Thats your way of thinking, but as for the majority, people like to have their nice shiny cars, and million dollar houses.

So be it, but don't call me ignorant for having an opinion.

I agree with you 100% kevin. I can't stand going to places like Weston or Homestead where all you see is never-ending quarter-acre lots with brand new single family homes, all with a hummer or SUV parked in front of them. That is what's destroying the environment right there. They need to put an end to suburban sprawl! Urban density is definitely the answer, but I don't see why anyone would want to live in a place like that anyways. Most of that stuff isn't cheap, my uncle has a house in Weston that he paid $700,000 for and it isn't even that nice. The area has no character. The older suburbs closer to downtown (Grove, Gables, etc) are much nicer than the new sprawling stuff in the western part of Dade and Broward. And to get ANYWHERE, you have to drive. Nothing is within walking distance, everything is spread out, there is no public transportation or metrorail, I just don't get it! I guess some people like that lifestyle.....

If I had a million dollars I don't see why you wouldn't put that money into a downtown condo rather than a sprawling 5,000 sq.ft house in the middle of nowhere in Weston......remember it's all about location in real estate.


I think part of it may be that some people still think downtown is a bad neighborhood because of what they remember from the 80s, and when Brickell wasn't really even on the map. I know some people who live in South Florida who don't even know what's going on with downtown, they haven't been there in years, they don't think there are any new skyscrapers, they don't know what kind of neighborhood it is nowadays, especially Brickell....if only they knew about the lifestyle.....many of them were raised in suburbs so they probably don't know what it's like to live in an urban environment....

A lot of people won't put their million dollars in a downtown condo because instead of paying a normal 400 dollars on maintenance, you will be paying about 1,000, which is ridiculous.

You'd save that extra $600 on gas money and other expenses associated with suburban living over time.

Also you got the cost of Homeowners Insurance as well as the cost of maintaining or fixing the many things that can go wrong in a home.

When you live in a suburb:

You waste money on:

Car
Car insurance
House maintaninance
house facade
Gardens
Gas


In cases of flood you can loose:

Furniture, tv, and what not
your car

^^ This has much more to do with the "American dream". From as young as I can remember , teachers have told me about the "American dream" which is to live in a home out in the suburbs with a garden,backyard,tree, a room for everyone. This is talked about in the news even movies. This is part of the American culture. Which I see no end too.

The only way this will end is:
1) American culture for some reason takes a major change in what it see must be the American dream.

Or

2)Something happens that makes living out in the suburbs very very bad/hard/difficult. Like say very high cost for resources such as gas.

Gas would have to get massively high for this, look at the cost of gas now, it is having just a dent on this, and even in Europe with ~$8.00 gas they still drive!!!!!!
Don't forget just how rich we are. Just how much is $3.50 a gallon really; compared to the total net worth of the average person?

Other than that which I do not see happening anytime soon, this will not change anytime in the near future.

^^ This has much more to do with the "American dream". From as young as I can remember , teachers have told me about the "American dream" which is to live in a home out in the suburbs with a garden,backyard,tree, a room for everyone. This is talked about in the news even movies. This is part of the American culture. Which I see no end too.

The only way this will end is:
1) American culture for some reason takes a major change in what it see must be the American dream.

Or

2)Something happens that makes living out in the suburbs very very bad/hard/difficult. Like say very high cost for resources such as gas.

Gas would have to get massively high for this, look at the cost of gas now, it is having just a dent on this, and even in Europe with ~$8.00 gas they still drive!!!!!!
Don't forget just how rich we are. Just how much is $3.50 a gallon really; compared to the total net worth of the average person?

Other than that which I do not see happening anytime soon, this will not change anytime in the near future.


We need to take a lesson from the Europeans and Asians and make our lives more urban-oriented and less suburban. American culture is flawed in so many ways compared with others, and this suburban lifestyle being the "American Dream" is part of it. Personally my dream would be to either live in a dense city (urban) or in the mountains far away from civilization (rural). I could not stand living in the suburbs.

i remember when the skyscraper was purely american...

you want to stop suburbs, have the city refuse to pay for road service, plumbing, and all the other expensive resources they have to pick up the tab on because suburbs arent self sustaining...


(if we didnt build HIGHWAYS and expand thier roads, they would be gridlocked and no one would BUY in the suburbs)
its the city or the state always having to pick up the tab on all these things

SMARTER= having a concentrated area of living where less resources (street paving, trash collection, additional waste management plants) (police, fire, city govt officials) are used...

i remember when the skyscraper was purely american...

you want to stop suburbs, have the city refuse to pay for road service, plumbing, and all the other expensive resources they have to pick up the tab on because suburbs arent self sustaining...


(if we didnt build HIGHWAYS and expand thier roads, they would be gridlocked and no one would BUY in the suburbs)
its the city or the state always having to pick up the tab on all these things

SMARTER= having a concentrated area of living where less resources (street paving, trash collection, additional waste management plants) (police, fire, city govt officials) are used...

Totally agreed. We (as America) need to concentrate people in cities and densely populated areas instead of spreading out in sprawling suburbs.

People may want a house but a house is a luxury and as time goes on fewer and fewer people will have that option so living in a house is not a god given right just ask people who live in Hong Kong. The ignorant thing was totally unnecessary by the way.

Don't be ignorant, there are too many people in Miami that want a house instead of an apartment. Not everyone wants to raise their kids in the Downtown area, I know I wouldn't...

People may want a house but a house is a luxury and as time goes on fewer and fewer people will have that option so living in a house is not a god given right just ask people who live in Hong Kong. The ignorant thing was totally unnecessary by the way.

And that is why Miami has options, unlike Hong Kong and New York. That is the luxury of living here in Florida, not just Miami. The best thing about it is that you have choices in living in Downtown or in a house further west. You go on the expressway, whether it be the Turnpike, Palmetto, I-95/75...and the further north or south you go, you see more and more houses and townhouses. That is why Miami is great, you have the luxury of having options...

(Sorry for the ignorant thing... I just think you have to have suburbs.)

at what cost?

It's not just Miami, it's really every city in America. Even in New York, you have the option of living in an urban area or in the suburbs. Miami is no different.

Ana Menendez chimes in in, in my opinion, this poorly written article. (My last sentence just contained the word "in" three times in a row. I didn't think that was possible.)


http://www.miamiherald.com/news/columnists/ana_menendez/story/514847.html
IN MY OPINION
Drive west shows insanity of UDB vote
By ANA MENENDEZ
amenendez@MiamiHerald.com
Monday at 5:01 p.m., I did what 1.7 million people in South Florida do every weekday: I got in my car downtown and drove to the suburbs.

I used to make the commute years ago. The idea this time was to see how long it would take to get to Southwest 137th Avenue and Eighth Street, where county commissioners last week voted to expand the Urban Development Boundary to make way for a Lowe's store.

No one would join me on my trip, not even my loyal sister: ''That's totally insane.'' She might have been slightly more horrified had I told her I was going to Baghdad.

To the modern phobias, add fear of traffic: that throat-clenching despair that comes over you when you realize it's rush hour and you have to make it across town.

CREEPING

But the human being can adapt to anything, even I-95. By 5:06 I was merging onto 836, my speed steady at 10 miles an hour. By 5:14 I'd made it past the Orange Bowl. Then it was a stultifying ride to the 826, where traffic picked up as I approached the new Sunpass-only extension to Southwest 137th Avenue.

I finally arrived at the site of the proposed Lowe's at 5:52. Almost one hour of my day to behold a wide bleak expanse of charred trees on one side and a wide bleak expanse of strip malls on the other.

Someone who's never been west of I-95 might imagine the UDB as a magic line that separates the concrete world from the Garden of Eden. In reality, the UDB is a haphazard frontier. There is already much development south and west of where the Lowe's would go up.

The store is not just the advance guard of pro-development forces. It's the expression of an economic reality: Lowe's wants to build a home store there because the site is already surrounded by hundreds of homes and their improvement-minded owners.

SUBURBAN McMANSIONS

Drive a few miles west to Southwest 152nd Avenue, take a left, and you'll find yourself in a McMansion canyon. At the corner of 152nd and Southwest 15th sits a typical one for sale: a six-bedroom, three-bath, two story mini-palace whose online listing boasts a heated pool, an elegant winding staircase, stainless steel appliances and, in one of the baths, a sumptuous Roman tub.

The suburban dream has come to this: It's now possible to live like Nero for only $599,999.

And there's the rub. The pleasures of a 3,154-square-foot home are disconnected from its true costs -- not just to the home's owners, who bear the brunt of over-development, but to everyone in the county forced to share the drains on time, schools and the environment.

They seem like good deals, these houses that go for less than $200 a square foot. But they're actually wildly expensive. Unfortunately, instead of discouraging sprawl by taxing its real costs, our leaders encourage it.

REWARDING COMMUTERS

And it's not just the wacky commission. Monday, less than a week after the UDB vote, there were Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and the Diaz-Balarts at a Doral gas station talking up a proposal that would reward people who commute to work by allowing them to write off the cost of filling the tank.

It's almost as insane as spending an hour in traffic to get home. But every day, more and more people are willing to make the sacrifice. And more and more politicians are willing to indulge them.

The vote to expand the UDB was a travesty. But even if reversed, it's probably too late to save the environment. As I drove back east against the great tide, I wondered, is it too late to save us?

Unfortunately, instead of discouraging sprawl by taxing its real costs, our leaders encourage it.

Mayor Alvarez vetoed the whole thing but looks like the commissioners will override the veto.

The commission overoed the veto this morning.
Commissioner Barreiro who represents South Beach, downtown and part of Brickell and Little Havana voted on the pro-sprawl side.
Com. Gimenez who represents the rest of Brickell (south of 8th street), the Grove, Coral Gables & South Miami voted against the UDB applications.
Com. Heyman who represents the Biscayne Corridor up to Aventura and the rest of the beach outside of south beach also voted against moving the UDB.

The commission overoed the veto this morning.
Commissioner Barreiro who represents South Beach, downtown and part of Brickell and Little Havana voted on the pro-sprawl side.
Com. Gimenez who represents the rest of Brickell (south of 8th street), the Grove, Coral Gables & South Miami voted against the UDB applications.
Com. Heyman who represents the Biscayne Corridor up to Aventura and the rest of the beach outside of south beach also voted against moving the UDB.

So what does that mean to the UDB? Is it getting moved or not? Are they going to built the stupid Lowe's or not?

So what does that mean to the UDB? Is it getting moved or not? Are they going to built the stupid Lowe's or not?

It is not even a matter of moving the line or not. There already is many things built in that area.

I'm sure there will be a few lawsuits before construction begins.

So what does that mean to the UDB? Is it getting moved or not? Are they going to built the stupid Lowe's or not?

It was approved... Its in the Herald today.

^^ the problem is not that these two projects get build. It is absolutely almost no problem if just these two projects get build.

However, the real problem is that after these two projects get build then another developer would say " why not let me build my store right next to the new Lowe's. And some time later another store developer says the same thing.

This will continue until finally it is a whole new city getting built out in the everglades.

I would not have a problem building out along the 8 St canal... All of that land catches fire every year... If any of you have taken a drive to the Miccosukkees, you would see how ugly the scenery is.

Ecosystem

I would not have a problem building out along the 8 St canal... All of that land catches fire every year... If any of you have taken a drive to the Miccosukkees, you would see how ugly the scenery is.

Ecosystem

Ecosystem? You mean a non-native, man made ecosystem with the predatory Malaeluca trees that are not even good enough for making toilet paper.

I truly do despise environmentalists...

You shouldn't despise anyone, it takes away from the pure joy of life. :cheers:

Great news! Looks like construction on the projects approved to be built outside the UDB will be on halt until it is seen by Florida government. Also, the protection of the marine industry along the Miami River. Here's the article:

State to fight change to Dade development line, Miami riverfront
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking-news/story/609734.html#recent_comm

State regulators will fight local plans to build two controversial projects in West Dade and invite more residential development along the Miami River, the Florida Department of Community Affairs announced Friday.

Regulators said the Miami-Dade commission violated its own growth policies, approving a business park and a Lowe's home improvement store that the county's own analysis said were not needed. It would build unnecessarily on wetlands, the state said, and violate numerous Florida guidelines about protected lands and urban growth.

They similarly rejected the City of Miami's vote to gut protections for waterfront businesses such as marinas and shipping lines.

Unless the state and local governments can settle, the case will be heard by an administrative law judge. Such a hearing would not take place for months, possibly not until early next year. In the interim, permits cannot be issued for the new projects.

Ha, nice......

Really good (for once) that politicians down here can't make these ludicrous decisions with out the insight of the state.

That's great to hear. You know, when I mentioned possible benefits to slower population growth in the region the other day this is one of the issues that may come into play. With a lessening demand for expansion outwards perhaps it will force politicians to rethink how and where they want future development to happen---with emphasis on the urban core. We can hope so, anyway.

I'm happy to see the State take positive steps to protect the long term intrests of ALL South Florida residents. We will always have a good water supply if we protect it.

Protect it, and fix it. I really have my fingers crossed for the Everglades restoration project.

Miami-Dade board backs plan for Everglades suburb

Miami-Dade County's Planning Advisory Board voted 7-3 to recommend that commissioners move the Urban Development Boundary in western Miami-Dade for a new 19,000-person suburb called Parkland.

The 961-acre project has drawn opposition from those worried about its proposed location about 2.5 miles from Everglades National Park and whether the project will add more suburban sprawl to traffic-clogged West Kendall. The developers, led by home builder Lennar, say it's a well-planned and environmentally sensitive community that will avoid the mistakes of the past.
:eek2: WHY?! :uh:

WHAT THE FUCK?! Are they serious?! Why are they SO stupid?! Ahds823nia,kd9

GODDAMN THESE PEOPLE ARE FUCKING STUPID. Why don't they learn that it is time to stop building out in the middle of fucking no where and on the everglades. Stupid stupid stupid. they should be shot and fed to alligators while their children watch and their wives get mangroves shoved into every... well you get the idea. :bash::bash::bash::bash::bash::bash::bash:

Hahhahahah LOL.

Well, I don't care anymore. :(

Why are you people making such a huge deal out of something that has absolutely no effect on you. Why is it such a horrible thing for people wanting to have a suburban lifestyle. I think if someone wants to live in a house with kids, fine. If someone wants to live in a glass skyscraper, thats what downtown, brickell, and south beach is for. Its good that there is something for everybody. Plus, it is obvious what the demand is, and thats why they need more land to build in Kendall.

Why are you people making such a huge deal out of something that has absolutely no effect on you. Why is it such a horrible thing for people wanting to have a suburban lifestyle. I think if someone wants to live in a house with kids, fine. If someone wants to live in a glass skyscraper, thats what downtown, brickell, and south beach is for. Its good that there is something for everybody. Plus, it is obvious what the demand is, and thats why they need more land to build in Kendall.

I disagree. It is a bad idea for several reasons. Firstly, the area that they are building on is a natural environment and Miami should try and protect what is left of the Everglades and its surrounding areas.

Secondly, there is nothing wrong with wanting a suburban lifestyle. However, let's concentrate on developing in the pre-existing built environment. Miami is already suffering from too much sprawl and further suburban development is not what the city needs. Miami is making a concious effort to revive its urban core. Building these massive sprawling bedroom communities goes against every proper planning principle in the book. When there is no space to build out, you build up. If there is no more space for suburbs, go elsewhere. Cities need to learn to limit their growth to a managable level.

I'd rather see the city making a concious effort to improve a residential area like Overtown so that maybe one day future families will view this once thriving neighborhood as a great place to raise their kids. We owe it the existing environment to not build more suburbs. We should be more invested in our community.

Lastly from an economic standpoint, even if you disagree with everything I have just said, building homes in South Florida makes no sense right now. Home values are plumetting dramatically and I need not explain the extent of the housing crisis that is already plaguing are cities. If people want to live in miami suburbs, they can, there are plenty of homes already available. let's not further mess up the housing market.

I disagree. It is a bad idea for several reasons. Firstly, the area that they are building on is a natural environment and Miami should try and protect what is left of the Everglades and its surrounding areas.

Secondly, there is nothing wrong with wanting a suburban lifestyle. However, let's concentrate on developing in the pre-existing built environment. Miami is already suffering from too much sprawl and further suburban development is not what the city needs. Miami is making a concious effort to revive its urban core. Building these massive sprawling bedroom communities goes against every proper planning principle in the book. When there is no space to build out, you build up. If there is no more space for suburbs, go elsewhere. Cities need to learn to limit their growth to a managable level.

I'd rather see the city making a concious effort to improve a residential area like Overtown so that maybe one day future families will view this once thriving neighborhood as a great place to raise their kids. We owe it the existing environment to not build more suburbs. We should be more invested in our community.

Lastly from an economic standpoint, even if you disagree with everything I have just said, building homes in South Florida makes no sense right now. Home values are plumetting dramatically and I need not explain the extent of the housing crisis that is already plaguing are cities. If people want to live in miami suburbs, they can, there are plenty of homes already available. let's not further mess up the housing market.

Agreed!

Not to mention that we would all have to pay for the infrastructure, the further taxed police and fire departments having to cover a larger area, and the increased traffic for everyone that putting an entire city further out west who will all be getting in their cars and heading east every morning rush hour clogging every road all the way to downtown even more than they already are.

Not to mention that we would all have to pay for the infrastructure, the further taxed police and fire departments having to cover a larger area, and the increased traffic for everyone that putting an entire city further out west who will all be getting in their cars and heading east every morning rush hour clogging every road all the way to downtown even more than they already are.

In addition to alligators, there are giant Burmese pythons out there. A high-rise condo in downtown Miami is the way to go to avoid gators and pythons.

+1.

Why are you people making such a huge deal out of something that has absolutely no effect on you. Why is it such a horrible thing for people wanting to have a suburban lifestyle. I think if someone wants to live in a house with kids, fine. If someone wants to live in a glass skyscraper, thats what downtown, brickell, and south beach is for. Its good that there is something for everybody. Plus, it is obvious what the demand is, and thats why they need more land to build in Kendall.

People that want the suburban lifestyle are not really out of options, so why the heck would you build a whole new town that far west? It an ecological, urban, and insane problem! So no, not making a big deal out of nothing, you should probaly care about your community a little more.

Watch and see they will keep stretching the boundary lines whereby Naples will eventually become a suburb of Miami.

^^ Well thankfully it can't get that bad. That is since the Everglades National park is in the way and the government is not allowed to build there. However, what is scary is we will take up every single square inch of the swamps which is not park of the Everglades national park and turn it into suburbs. Correct me if I am wrong but that is a potentially huge amount?

People that want the suburban lifestyle are not really out of options, so why the heck would you build a whole new town that far west? It an ecological, urban, and insane problem! So no, not making a big deal out of nothing, you should probaly care about your community a little more.

I do care about my community. That is why I am for the construction to go ahead in the land on the corner of 8 St and 137 Ave. All of that burnt land that catches fire every year is an eyesore, and it will benefit my community by bringing stores closer that area and not having to go all the way south.
I believe in supply and demand. There is a reason why every single home built in the suburbs is occupied. There is a reason why there are thousands and thousands of homes being built everywhere in Miami, from South Kendall all the way to Doral. The majority, whether it be 51% or 80%, prefer to have their houses and lawns and driveways. About the the development going there, they will be green, they will be environmentally friendly.
So no, I do not see the problem with extending the Urban Development Boundary.

Why are you people making such a huge deal out of something that has absolutely no effect on you. Why is it such a horrible thing for people wanting to have a suburban lifestyle. I think if someone wants to live in a house with kids, fine. If someone wants to live in a glass skyscraper, thats what downtown, brickell, and south beach is for. Its good that there is something for everybody. Plus, it is obvious what the demand is, and thats why they need more land to build in Kendall.Great questions, and great point.
There are plenty of people that want to dictate where you should and shouldn't live. They say things like, "We should encourage....xyz" or "we should build a theater, but you can't build parking spaces on your private property", they try to deny that they aren't busy bodies or elitists. They probably are good people, but just really don't think about private property ownership in the way that the founding fathers of the United States have guided our great country.
Amazingly 305, they will even say to you that building what you want, "goes against every proper planning principle in the book". Yep...which book?
When you read these reactionary posts, you get the idea that the posters have only read ONE book, and that was the one that their Professor required.
Hitler has a book about "proper planning" is that worth following? I don't think so.
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” - William F. Buckley Jr.
Read these arguments carefully. Pretend that is was written 113 years ago...Miami wouldn't exist.
"Why not build up the existing land" in New York/Penn/Ohio/Mich/etc/etc/etc instead of encroaching on the "natural environment" of the Florida Penninsula." For instance.

In some people's minds, the grass and burnt up land are natural. Beavers that build dams and reroute rivers are natural. Homosapiens that reroute rivers are not natural.
Beaver skin coat? Oh, you better not!!!!
We've got to stop the homosapiens! Tax them, create Government regulations for them! But every other animal...they are cool...it's the humans that are bad, especially the humans with cars.

Be careful about making these "thinkers" accountable for the things they were told to think in the books that they were assigned in class. If you challenge their thinking, then suddenly you are patronizing them. And if you use their EXACT quotes, you are spinning their words.

305, just find comfort in the fact that most of the people that post that kind of "we should..." stuff say so in pure theory. The weshoulds aren't the kind of people that actually DO anything.

Forgive them 305, they really do not understand what they have been told to do.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz :sleepy:

Here is a map of the Everglades National Park. Click it and then zoom in. You can see which parts of Miami-Dade are part of the Everglades and which parts are built on. You can also see which parts are neither part of Everglades National Park and built on. And those parts seem to be mostly south of Homestead area.

So I guess that means that if new suburbs are to be built in Miami-Dade County they will pretty much all be South of Homestead all the way to the keys?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/31/Everglades_National_Park_map_2005.11.png

????

Amazingly 305, they will even say to you that building what you want, "goes against every proper planning principle in the book". Yep...which book?
When you read these reactionary posts, you get the idea that the posters have only read ONE book, and that was the one that their Professor required.
Hitler has a book about "proper planning" is that worth following? I don't think so.

If you challenge their thinking, then suddenly you are patronizing them. And if you use their EXACT quotes, you are spinning their words.


Ok, since these few select comments were clearly directed at me, I'll reply. Building does not go against every proper planning principle in the book, sprawl does. Furthermore, "in the book" is obviously a saying, it is implied that it does not mean only one book.

Please keep your accusing assumptions to yourself. I would never bother engaging in these forums had I only read one book. No one questions your background when you post, so don't do it to us.

Your comment about patronizing has absolutely nothing to do with this forum. It deals with a response from me your probably didn't like on the 1111 Lincoln Road Page. Grow up and keep your personal vendettas aside.

When you quote someone out of context, you are spinning their words and interpreting them wrongly.

You truly are relentless in bringing down someone who has a different idea than yours in these forums. If you can't learn common edict, do not bother to post on these forums please. Every time I make a comment, you feel the need to not only disagree but question my character and background. Please get over yourself

I believe in supply and demand. There is a reason why every single home built in the suburbs is occupied. There is a reason why there are thousands and thousands of homes being built everywhere in Miami,.

?!?!?!?!
Take a trip to the suburbs sometime. The newest subdivisions especialy. I would say they are less than 50% occupied. Entire neighborhoods in Homestead are basically ghost towns. Try to find a house in one of those neighborhoods off 8th street and 147th ave that is not for sale and or in forclosure.
If you are going to open up the UDB at least only do it when its necessary, not when tens of thousands of recently built homes stand vacant.

Never would have guessed we'd see Godwin invoked in a UDB thread. I guess when your life revolves around ideology instead of reality, that's what you get.

?!?!?!?!
Take a trip to the suburbs sometime. The newest subdivisions especialy. I would say they are less than 50% occupied. Entire neighborhoods in Homestead are basically ghost towns. Try to find a house in one of those neighborhoods off 8th street and 147th ave that is not for sale and or in forclosure.
If you are going to open up the UDB at least only do it when its necessary, not when tens of thousands of recently built homes stand vacant.

I do drive around the neighborhoods of 8 St, and that is why I said what I said. I live 20 blocks away, and I have multiple friends and family that live there. There is a car in every driveway. The foreclosure issue is another story.

Plain and simple, There is no need for a brand new town of nearly 20,000! Thats it.

OK, so where would you put the thousands of people that move here every year?

Near the core?

Not everyone wants to live in an apartment. Thats all I'm trying to say. I'm not bashing downtown/Brickell, nor am I promoting the construction on the everglades. I'm just saying that there is something for everybody. And, without a doubt, the majority want a single family home. And unfortunately the city of Doral has banned the construction of single family homes, only townhomes and apartment buildings. Kendall is still growing.

Well that's true. The great majority of people coming here are from cities over 8 million (New York, South America, etc..) I think they don't want to live that stressful life anymore.

^^ Ok two things, isn't Miami-Dade population stagnating? and isn't there a ton of vacant homes (apartments AND houses)?

And one more thing, haven't we been reading in Newspapers about South Florida's oncoming water shortage due to us building out in the Everglades and destroying our water supply?

Yes , yes and yes. But what can we do?

Tell me, I really want to know.

OK, so where would you put the thousands of people that move here every year?

In the thousands of single family houses we've already built. Who says they have a right to a brand new home?

OK, so where would you put the thousands of people that move here every year?

The population is not growing at such rates. There isn't any situation in which people moving down here can't find homes! :lol: Theres enough homes already all over Dade and Broward be it in Kendall, Hialeah, Miramar, Pompano, Little Havana, or Brickell, basically anywhere and everywhere. :okay:

The population is not growing by huge amounts any longer (it's possible there may be a decrease by the next census) and as such there's not an insatiable demand for more land. What this is truly all about is the desire to increase tax revenues, regardless of the impact on the urban core.

That desire is understandable---especially in dire economic times---but agreed that the focus should always be on density and reinvigorating the existing core whenever possible. With that said, though, we also need to recognize that we cannot transfer our desires onto others. Most folks---especially those with families---do not really share our enthusiasm for city life and prefer the suburban lifestyle.

With that said, though, we also need to recognize that we cannot transfer our desires onto others. Most folks---especially those with families---do not really share our enthusiasm for city life and prefer the suburban lifestyle.


Oh, I've tried, and needless to say, I'm still in the suburbs. My extended family is even worse. In my opinion however, this isn't about the dichotomy between suburbs and "city life". We already have suburbs and we already have city life. No one is forcing you to live one way or the other. If anything, the continued degradation of rural land is forcing those people to either move north or fall into this contrived choice. I can't count the number of small farms that were gobbled up in the suburban land rush through Homestead and Florida City.

There's no shortage of suburban homes in Dade county, new or otherwise. Now there's no shortage of urban condos. Perhaps someday, that will change, and the UDB will need to be moved. It's just that most of us don't feel that the time is right now. We can't afford the city we have now. How can we support more?

Homes Evacuated As Brush Fire Rages In Miami-Dade
Firefighters Battle 2 Brush Fires
http://www.justnews.com/2009/0406/19109303_480X270.jpg

MIAMI -- Miami-Dade firefighters evacuated homes as a brush fire burned in southwestern Miami-Dade County on Monday afternoon.
Slideshow
The fire, which broke out near Krome Avenue and Southwest Eighth Street, was reported at about 4 p.m.
Miami-Dade fire officials said they have asked residents of homes at the eastern edge of the blaze to evacuate because the fire is headed that way. The affected homes are located near Southwest 157th Avenue and Southwest Eighth Street, Local 10's Michael Putney reported.
The fire is spreading rapidly because of dry brush and strong winds in the area. Fire trucks were pouring water onto the roofs of homes and other buildings in the hope of preventing the spread of the flames.
Scott Peterich of the Florida Division of Forestry said the fire had consumed about 75 acres so far.
"We've got winds out there coming from the west at upwards of 25 mph, which is really pushing it," Peterich said. "The fire is in an area of grass and also stands of melaleuca. That's a concern, because the melaleucas are extremely flammable given the dry conditions."
Peterich said six fire units were battling the flames.
Miami-Dade fire officials said that as a precaution, they want residents to stay away from the area until they give an all-clear, Putney said.
Another brush fire started burning at about noon near Card Sound Road, just north of Mile Marker 122. Forestry officials said that fire has consumed 50 acres so far. Firefighters continue their work to put out the blaze.

That really sucks, but the smell of burning forest fires is really nice. I hope everyone's homes stay okay, even though they shouldn't have purchased a home so far out west. Jk, I'm done being cynical now lol.

Oh my.....:runaway:I hope all of you Miami resident skyscraper members will be safe and not near this site.Looks scary I saw the video with the smoke rolling through the whole city.Good luck.

I live 30 blocks away, and they closed off all the streets West of 142.

Hmm another fire sparked today behind a school in West Miami Dade. Do you think this is arson or caused by weather.

Do you think this is arson or caused by weather.

Yes.

That really sucks, but the smell of burning forest fires is really nice.

I agree! Everywhere you go it smells like you are right near a campfire.

Usually when it is "hazy" or "smoggy" it is when one of those fires are blazing.

I agree! Everywhere you go it smells like you are right near a campfire.

Usually when it is "hazy" or "smoggy" it is when one of those fires are blazing.

I'm guilty of liking that smell, too. Makes you want to grab the barbecue sauce!

Some folks really suffer from it, I know...but still...mmmmmm! :lol:

Do you think this is arson or caused by weather.Of course, and undeniably, it was caused by man made global warming. Mother Nature doesn't have anything to do with these things anymore.

Looks like the line will not be moved after all...

"Judge: Miami-Dade County Commission wrong to expand UDB for Lowe's"
http://www.miamiherald.com/486/story/1045337.html

In twin rulings marking the newest chapter in the long fight over sprawl in Miami-Dade County, an administrative law judge ruled that county commissioners wrongly expanded the western development boundary for a Lowe's Superstore but properly approved a separate request to move the line.

The ruling comes as a wealthy and politically powerful group of builders, including Lennar. and Century Homebuilders, is readying a proposal to move the development boundary for a new suburb on the Everglades' doorstep called Parkland.

Opponents to moving the line hailed the ruling Tuesday, saying it shows state regulators can enforce growth management laws even if Miami-Dade County commissioners vote to bend them.

The judge's decision to let one proposal stand was so filled with qualifiers and unique characteristics that it likely won't serve as precedent for other bids to expand the Urban Development Boundary, said attorney Richard Grosso, who represented the National Parks Conservation Association and 1000 Friends of Florida in the case.

''Except for some really unusual circumstances, this ruling means that the UDB should not be amended for many years in the future,'' said Grosso, a Nova Southeastern University law professor and general counsel of the Everglades Law Center.

Maureen Rich, a Lowe's spokeswoman, said the company is ``disappointed with the decision. We are continuing to evaluate the ruling before deciding our next step.''

The Urban Development Boundary, or UDB, is a demarcation running along the western and southern edges of the county that limits development to one dwelling per five acres outside its borders.

The UDB was moved only twice during the 1990s but has been under increasing pressure in the past decade from suburban builders seeking more land for industrial parks, malls, offices and homes.

In the past seven years, county commissioners have voted to move the line five times.

Opponents -- including urban planners, civic leaders and environmentalists -- have fought back, advocating for more infill and urban redevelopment while highlighting the costs of far-flung development, like traffic-clogged roadways.

Lowe's sought to expand the boundary to build a store at the intersection of Tamiami Trail and Northwest 137th Avenue on a 52-acre parcel. Separately, a group led by Brown wanted to expand the boundary on 42 acres at the western end of Kendall Drive to build shops and offices.

Miami-Dade's Department of Planning and Zoning urged denial of both applications last year, saying there was plenty of available space inside the UDB.

But in April last year county commissioners voted to approve both proposals, overriding a veto by Miami-Dade County Mayor Carlos Alvarez.

In July the state's Department of Community Affairs objected, agreeing with county planners that there is enough land to build inside the line.

That set the stage for a trial before administrative law Judge Bram D.E. Canter in Miami.

In his ruling, Canter said it is ''beyond fair debate'' that there is ''no need for more commercial land, and no need for a home improvement store, in the area of the Lowe's site.'' The judge cited the fact Miami-Dade planners said there is enough commercial land in the county to last through 2023.

Canter said the Brown application complies with state law -- but added that the site is relatively small, oddly shaped and wedged between a big residential development and an arterial roadway that limit the property's agricultural value.

''These factors . . . diminish the precedent that the re-designation of the Brown site would have for future applications to expand the UDB,'' the judge wrote.

DCA will now issue a final order, which can be appealed.

The focus now shifts to what the ruling will mean for the massive proposed project, Parkland, where builders want to construct a suburb of nearly 19,000 residents with homes, shops and offices on 961 acres outside the UDB.

Jose Cancela, spokesman for the Parkland developers, declined to comment on the Lowe's/Brown case but said the group is moving forward with its application and ``hope to have it before the commission this year.''

Critics say the amount of available land has increased in the last year amid record foreclosures.

''With stores and homes going vacant inside the UDB, why do we need to expand the line?'' asked Miami Lakes Mayor Michael Pizzi, who has long fought moving the boundary. ``This decision sends a message to Parkland that you may well get the votes at the Miami-Dade Commission but you will lose in court.''

I can't help myself... I am very upset with the whole Lowe's thing. As someone who lives 10 blocks away, I was looking forward to having a home improvement store right by my house instead of having to drive at least 10-15 min for the closest Home Depot/Lowe's. Hopefully Lowe's isn't discouraged and continues to look around in the area.

You have to love the fact that the commission was spending tax payer dollars to fight a case in court basically against its own planning and zoning departments.

How about this:

And the bucks keep flowing in
BY CARL HIAASEN
chiaasen@MiamiHerald.com

Unlike Sarah Palin, Charlie Crist has chosen not to quit his governorship early. Florida's own one-term wonder is using his remaining time to ingratiate himself with as many deep-pocket interest groups as possible.

The governor's unseemly burst of groveling is directly connected to his upcoming run for the U.S. Senate. Sucking up to the National Rifle Association and the Christian right, Crist last week declared his opposition to the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, whose confirmation is already a done deal.

Many of Crist's longtime supporters were surprised, but they shouldn't have been. Charlie has no problem with timely pandering.

Take Senate Bill 360, which he signed into law last month. Authored by lobbyists for developers, it's one of the worst pieces of legislation to come out of one of the country's most buyable legislatures.

The law emaciates Florida's Growth Management Act by removing state oversight of massive residential and commercial projects known as Developments of Regional Impact, which put enormous stress on neighboring communities.

More outrageously, the new law will stick taxpayers -- not developers -- with most of the high costs for roads and other infrastructure that housing subdivisions require.

It's a recipe for more reckless sprawl, which is the last thing Florida needs, and the last thing a self-baptized environmentalist like Crist should be endorsing.

Lobbyists for the building industry say SB 360 will jump-start many stalled construction projects, a dubious claim in a state with a pandemic housing glut and practically zero demand for new units. The real motive is to gut land-use regulations before the next boom.

Republican lawmakers who lovingly embraced the bill named it the ``Community Renewal Act,'' which is more digestible than the ``Developers' Relief Act.'' Here's all you really need to know: The Florida Chamber of Commerce and the Florida Association of Realtors love it.

Guess who doesn't: Cash-strapped cities and counties that will be saddled with the fiscal burden of supporting the new projects. They say the law wrongly restricts a local community's ability to plan and regulate its own development. One way or another, the tab for roads and sewers must be passed along to a public that's already fed up with how overbuilding has damaged the quality of life. Passed 25 years ago, the original Growth Management Act was porous and too easily subverted. The new bill is a toothless farce.

Crist was well aware how strongly local governments opposed it. Officials from Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach and several other counties urged the governor to use his veto. His own growth-management guru, Tom Pelham, thought the bill was lousy.

The governor signed his name anyway, saying, ``It's probably one of those bills where nobody's going to be overly happy on either side of the argument.''

Really, Charlie? The developers were beyond overly happy; they were turning cartwheels.

That wasn't the reaction in most city and county halls. So far, at least 16 municipalities have joined a lawsuit seeking to have SB 360 declared unconstitutional.

Lawyers for Homestead, Weston, Miami Gardens, Key Biscayne and other cities say the measure is an ``unfunded mandate'' that unlawfully heaps costs on local governments without providing necessary sources of revenue.

They also contend that the bill, which is cluttered with provisions unrelated to development, violates a constitutional requirement that statutes must deal with a single subject.

Like his stance against Sotomayor, Crist's unexpected support for the lax development law disappointed those still clinging to the notion that he's a different breed.

The same fellow who fancies himself a crusader for the Everglades has -- if SB 360 is allowed to stand -- essentially guaranteed that the remaining wetlands of western Miami-Dade will be paved, dooming any hope for reviving the Everglades.

Only as craven political strategy does Crist's latest cave-in makes sense. You can't win a U.S. Senate seat without a war chest, and developers, builders and banks are among Florida's most prolific campaign donors.

As of mid-July, the governor had already raised $4.3 million for his 2010 Senate race, a record-breaking sum. He seems in no hurry to reveal who gave what. He won't even identify his ``bundlers'' -- the major players who solicit and collect campaign checks on his behalf.

Late last week, the Federal Election Commission began posting Crist's donor information. Nobody will be shocked when big money starts rolling in from those who stand to benefit from the Developers' Relief Act.

Obviously Charlie would rather be a plump turkey than a lame duck.

XX

Miami Herald

Posted on Wed, Jun. 15, 2011
Mayor will have key role on holding line on development
By Matthew Haggman
mhaggman@miamiherald.com

When it comes to moving the Urban Development Boundary, the power of Miami-Dade County government, and its soon-to-be new mayor, has never been greater.
For more than three decades, the UDB — the line that keeps growth from encroaching west and south into fragile agricultural lands and wetlands — has been a critical curb on sprawling large-scale development from encroaching on the doorstep of the Everglades. But recent changes by the Republican-controlled Legislature that were signed into law by Gov. Rick Scott have severely limited state oversight of planning decisions by city and county governments — such as moving the UBD. State planners previously served as a check on such efforts and could stand in the way of decisions to move the line, but now can only provide non-binding comments in most cases.

“The legislation takes the power from Tallahassee and puts it more in the hands of local officials,” said T. Spencer Crowley III, a land use attorney at the law firm Akerman Senterfitt in Miami. “It doesn’t mean the UDB will automatically be moved, but it will be easier because of the state’s limited involvement in objecting to changes.”

The switch will place whoever becomes the new county mayor — former Hialeah mayor Julio Robaina and former county commissioner Carlos Gimenez will face off in a June 28 runoff — in an even more decisive role in the ongoing debate about if and when the UDB should be moved.

The state agency previously charged with reining in development will soon be smaller and housed within a new agency called the Office of Economic Opportunity. The name, critics say, illustrates the state’s shift in priorities when it comes to planning versus unrestrained development, and raises questions about what will happen at the local level. “Both mayoral candidates are talking about downsizing government. The question is what will be left standing,” said Laura Reynolds, executive director of Tropical Audubon Society. She, along with leaders of several other environmental groups, met last week with Gimenez and Robaina and pressed them not to gut Miami-Dade County’s growth management policies and environmental oversight.

Meanwhile, the changes and upcoming election comes as developers are again starting to rev up a bid — which has been on hold amid the downturn — to move the UDB in order to build a massive new suburb called Parkland on 961 acres in the southwestern fringe of the county.

The UDB, created by county leaders in 1975, has long been a core part of the fierce debate about how Greater Miami should grow. Outside the boundary, which runs along the western and southern edge of the county, building is limited to one dwelling per five acres.

On the campaign trail, both Robaina and Gimenez have broadly sketched out an aversion to altering the UDB, while adding that each decision must be made on a case-by-case basis. Both have said there is ample room to build inside the boundary in Greater Miami following the searing recession that triggered record-high foreclosures and sent property values plummeting county-wide for four straight years.

As a county commissioner, Gimenez was a consistent — though not absolute — skeptic to moving the UDB and has embraced proposals that would make it harder to change the boundary in the future. Robaina has a shorter record on the development boundary, and actually led the charge to successfully move the line five years ago. He has also stopped short of embracing rules making it harder to move the line, though hasn’t ruled it out.

Complicating the picture is the fact that Gimenez’s one vote to move the UDB, over the course of his nearly seven years on the commission, was in support of the Hialeah application pushed by Robaina. In April 2006 commissioners voted 12-1 — only commissioner Katy Sorenson opposed — in support of an application to move the UDB to put 1,100 acres of Hialeah land inside it for warehouses and offices.

But the builders behind Parkland are betting that Robaina, a real estate investor in his business life, will be more supportive of their effort.

A host of corporate entities listed as owning a stake in the project have all donated to Robaina’s campaign, according to records filed with the county’s Planning and Zoning Department and campaign disclosures. Parkland’s major investors include homebuilding giant Lennar Corp., real estate developer Edward W. Easton, Sedano’s principal Armando Guerra and builder Sergio Pino. The Parkland backers have contributed to Robaina through a host of corporate entities with names such as Krome Grove Investors, Corsica West II Land Trust, Granada Shopping Plaza and Private Lending Group LLC.

Together, the entities and professionals such as lawyers, architects and planners affiliated with the project have given more than $28,000 to Robaina’s campaign, according to campaign records.

Gimenez has received their support as well, though not at the same level. Edward W. Easton, for instance, wrote a $500 check to Gimenez. Several of the professionals, primarily attorneys, involved with Parkland contributed $3,500 to the Gimenez campaign, according to a review of contributions.
“Julio is seen as a more as pro-business and pro-development guy,” said Pino, who said he’s held fundraisers at his office that included Lennar executive Anthony Seijas and Guerra. “But supporting Julio does not mean he will support Parkland. This will take community support.”

Further, Pino said he’s reconsidering the merits of Parkland. “It has to make sense to me,” he said. “I’m not 100 percent sure today.”

If approved, Parkland is envisioned to sit on agricultural land west of Kendall-Tamiami Airport and be home to nearly 19,000 residents, along with shops, offices and schools. Supporters say it would be self-sustaining community, while opponents note its location far from existing major job centers and contend it would exacerbate sprawl.

Robaina told The Miami Herald he’s “never heard of” Parkland, “nor do I have any information regarding this project.”

Asked about his stance, Gimenez said: “With the economic situation we have and the housing stock we have, it doesn’t make much sense to me. If you have an abundance of housing, I don’t see how that would even be profitable, but I am not a developer.”

Critics to moving the line have argued that new development should be focused on redeveloping and filling in land within the existing boundary, and that there are plenty of areas to do that, including Miami’s urban core. Proponents of moving the UDB argue that despite the real estate downturn, the region is running out of land and must make room now for future expansion, particularly for single-family homes. “You can’t wait for the day the economy turns around to start planning and going through the approvals process,” said Lennar’s Seijas, who is overseeing Parkland and is currently chief operating officer with Rialto Capital Advisors, a Lennar subsidiary. “You obviously have to start the process prior to the point the demand is there.”

Seijas said they haven’t decided when they’ll try to move the line and get approvals for Parkland.

But when they do, it will be the biggest residential push west in Miami-Dade County in some two decades.

In the past 10 years the boundary has been moved four times, but always for commercial projects, ranging from warehouses to offices.

The county commission has turned back attempts to move the line. In 2006, the year the Hialeah application led by then-mayor Robaina was approved, four other applications were rejected by the commission. Each time, Gimenez voted against moving the line.

At the same time, four other applications to move the UDB were withdrawn because it was clear the votes weren’t there.

In 2008, when the commission approved two changes to the UDB, one for a Lowe’s superstore and another for an office project, Gimenez voted against moving the line both times. As it happened, state regulators took aim at the Lowe’s project and the UDB was not moved in that instance.

Separately, in 2008, Gimenez also voted in support of a charter amendment that would require a vote by three-fourths of the commission to approve a change, rather than the current two-thirds. A majority of the county commission, however, killed that proposal. “I look at things case by case, but I have consistently been against moving the UDB,” said Gimenez.

As to the question of maintaining a robust growth-planning staff at the county, he said: “We can’t cut that to the bone. I want a truly professional planning staff and one that can act quickly.”

Robaina said his commitment to proper planning procedures has “always been at the forefront of responsible growth.” The former mayor stopped short of embracing greater restrictions on moving the UDB, but said he would consult with interested parties to determine if changes needed to be made.

“Our policies and procedures will meet the needs for smart growth,” Robaina said.

To one observer, the weakening of the state’s role in land-use planning does not mean the county must do the same thing. But it does mean the decisions now largely rest in local hands.

“The Legislature has not required Dade County to change its growth management plans,” said Richard Grasso, law professor at Nova Southeastern University. “And Dade County still has a very strong UDB. That has not changed. The only that has changed is the county has a better chance of getting away with it if it does the wrong thing.”


© 2011 Miami Herald Media Company. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.miamiherald.com


Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/06/15/v-print/2268668/mayor-will-have-key-role-on-holding.html#ixzz1PTRQKvZu

Thanks for Posting this Quantum..not trying to get political, but what Rick Scott is doing to Florida Planning is disgusting and a slap in the face to all the state planners who have studied and investigated and worked to try and fix alot of the problems developers and land grabs did to the state in the formative years.

To basically close down the Dept of Community Affairs and reduce the legislation in place on Growth Management is going to effectively end planning in the state little by little get ready for subdivisions to go in every random place imaginable... I cant wait to graduate to leave the state because obviously no one cares here as long as they get to build another suburb.

I don't think the metropolitan area needs to sprawl any further. It's already not very dense at all and there's tons of room left, especially as you get near the edge in places like Hialeah and Northern Dade county.

When you look at a map of South Florida with it's strict boundary lines and you look at the population, you would think, "wow, that's got to be solid urbanity," but it's not.

Thanks for Posting this Quantum..not trying to get political, but what Rick Scott is doing to Florida Planning is disgusting and a slap in the face to all the state planners who have studied and investigated and worked to try and fix alot of the problems developers and land grabs did to the state in the formative years.

The Urban Development Boundary is political, so there's no way around it. I saw the article in this morning's paper before I was ready to get out of bed, and thought somebody else would have posted it by the time I logged on, but they hadn't yet, so I posted it. I try to give other members a chance to participate in the forum by not posting every article I see right away. Then, I post the article if I think nobody else has posted it yet.

Thanks for Posting this Quantum..not trying to get political, but what Rick Scott is doing to Florida Planning is disgusting and a slap in the face to all the state planners who have studied and investigated and worked to try and fix alot of the problems developers and land grabs did to the state in the formative years.

To basically close down the Dept of Community Affairs and reduce the legislation in place on Growth Management is going to effectively end planning in the state little by little get ready for subdivisions to go in every random place imaginable... I cant wait to graduate to leave the state because obviously no one cares here as long as they get to build another suburb.

+1

Amen!

Thanks for Posting this Quantum..not trying to get political, but what Rick Scott is doing to Florida Planning is disgusting and a slap in the face to all the state planners who have studied and investigated and worked to try and fix alot of the problems developers and land grabs did to the state in the formative years.

To basically close down the Dept of Community Affairs and reduce the legislation in place on Growth Management is going to effectively end planning in the state little by little get ready for subdivisions to go in every random place imaginable... I cant wait to graduate to leave the state because obviously no one cares here as long as they get to build another suburb.

This is exactly why we need people like you to stay and fight the good fight.

I really wish we could convince the older generation that sprawl doesn't work. Its like giving a drug addict another fix. Yeah it calms them right now, but does nothing to address the really problem that there and addict, a vice that will destroy them.

The boom has done wonders to help the overall city. Downtown is growing and thriving. And the Urban areas are doing better than the exurbs in recovering from the bust.

High housing cost aren't a real problem right now. Moving the boundary line to get a quick "fix" of cheap housing in the middle of nowhere seems like the last thing we need to be doing. Especially when there are so many places that can be reposition into great areas.

This is all very true. Even as the downtown housing market is recovering, single family housing units (a house) are still at all time high foreclosure levels.

And yet a decent mass transit system never seems to be proposed. It's sad. In the years to come, the population will explode, we will have new freeways all over the place and traffic and pollution will be horrendous.

It boggles my mind why our elected officials do now care more about establishing a solid and widespread mass transit system.

This is exactly why we need people like you to stay and fight the good fight.

.

UMDEV, I really wish I could stay and fight the good fight, but Planners and Architects are among the highest unemployed professions in the states, estimated at around 25%, its estimated that for every new planning job posted in the state over 300 Nationwide applicants apply, and the governor just got rid of the largest planning department in the state.

Even then our profession is spit at and regarded as extremist who try and stop capitalism and development, without actually understanding what planners do usually we are limited by the politicians to only being paper pushers and not revolutionaries! Planners need to have more control, not politicians.

Im going to start a blog with all of this, but i've just been busy.

And yet a decent mass transit system never seems to be proposed. It's sad. In the years to come, the population will explode, we will have new freeways all over the place and traffic and pollution will be horrendous.

It boggles my mind why our elected officials do now care more about establishing a solid and widespread mass transit system.

Who pays for it? State is broke, you talk to anyone about increasing taxes and riots will break out.

And the fact that we are going to see more suburban development is going to make building a good transit network will be near impossible...the more we spread out the more unlikely that we can build an effective system...its just to costly to develop a transit line in the burbs.

And yet a decent mass transit system never seems to be proposed. It's sad. In the years to come, the population will explode, we will have new freeways all over the place and traffic and pollution will be horrendous.

It boggles my mind why our elected officials do now care more about establishing a solid and widespread mass transit system.

Miami can start by focusing new development along the current metrorail system and provide other options like light rail to and from it.

For example there is large empty lots at the Coconut Grove station. We should be putting high density mixed use projects at locations like these. You should be able to live, work and shop pretty much at any metrorail stop. Then you can easily travel between these hubs.

Think about it, if you could live and work right at the Coconut Grove station then you could easily go one stop north on the metrorail and hang out in Brickell at night which is booming or go one stop south and hang out in Coral Gables.

Miami has a lot to build on but I feel the people here don't see a lot of the potential because they are stuck in their old mindset of Miami. People look at me like I was crazy when I take the metro from Brickell to UM but it is easier, faster and cost me less money than sitting in traffic on US-1. But that's because I moved here from the northeast and I'm used to the subway. But I know people who live near me and would take 10+ more minutes, pay more for gas, have to pay and deal with the hassle of parking on campus all because they just feel more comfortable knowing they have their car readily available. They also view public transportation as something lower class people use where I'm used to riding with professionals.

The city should give huge incentives for development, especially residential, near metrorail stops. Getting people using the current metrorail is the best path to expanding it.

Miami has a lot to build on but I feel the people here don't see a lot of the potential because they are stuck in their old mindset of Miami. People look at me like I was crazy when I take the metro from Brickell to UM but it is easier, faster and cost me less money than sitting in traffic on US-1. But that's because I moved here from the northeast and I'm used to the subway. But I know people who live near me and would take 10+ more minutes, pay more for gas, have to pay and deal with the hassle of parking on campus all because they just feel more comfortable knowing they have their car readily available. They also view public transportation as something lower class people use where I'm used to riding with professionals.

The city should give huge incentives for development, especially residential, near metrorail stops. Getting people using the current metrorail is the best path to expanding it.

Surprised that someone in the South Florida development industry is a supporter of urban Development, but its definitely good to see.

And your so right about alot of things, something that hasnt been studied enough is the gender gap in using alternative transportation, I hate to put down women but I believe that women are alot less likely to use public transportation for perceived safety reasons...so changing that mindset is very important.

Also another huge key is employment centers, companies moving to the suburbs because its cheaper, is a huge key because as employment centers move people are more likely to move to be closer to their place of employment...expect the Miami herald to do this soon, will probably move to some corporate park in Miramar or doral taking alot of employees with it

Also another huge key is employment centers, companies moving to the suburbs because its cheaper, is a huge key because as employment centers move people are more likely to move to be closer to their place of employment...expect the Miami herald to do this soon, will probably move to some corporate park in Miramar or doral taking alot of employees with it

This trend is starting to change. The Herald really needed the $$$ so they needed to sell the land. But demographics show that young professionals are by and large moving back to the city. People don't want to live near office parks in the middle of nowhere.

The better developed suburbs will develop into town centers to provide a quality lifestyle but the exurbs are going to be in for a tough ride.

Look at all the projects on the horizon. The new gables residential project near the Douglas metrorail stop is good example. We'll probably spend the next years building multifamily rental in urban locations.

^Yea thats been the recent trend,young professionals moving into the city
link> http://money.cnn.com/2006/06/15/real_estate/return_to_cities/index.htm

but the question becomes what happens when these young professionals once they get married and have kids? do they still live in the city bachelor pad or do they do as the parents did a live in suburbs?

As to the suburbs becoming town centers, yup slowly its happening but many dont think its sustainable because of the limited job potentials of these suburbs, but either way I believe they are referring to these town centers as peri-urban zones.

^Yea thats been the recent trend,young professionals moving into the city
link> http://money.cnn.com/2006/06/15/real_estate/return_to_cities/index.htm

but the question becomes what happens when these young professionals once they get married and have kids? do they still live in the city bachelor pad or do they do as the parents did a live in suburbs?

As to the suburbs becoming town centers, yup slowly its happening but many dont think its sustainable because of the limited job potentials of these suburbs, but either way I believe they are referring to these town centers as peri-urban zones.

It all depends. One of the biggest things is how people will get around. Miami needs to do a better job of developing transit lines from the outlying suburbs into the CBD and high employment centers in order to make it feasible for people to get around while living outside of the city. Transit oriented development will be a great thing should Miami and other cities and towns in the metro area develop such areas.

Look at cities like Boston and Chicago for example. There are highly populated towns and small cities right around the major one that have great transit links into the downtown areas and are very attractive to those young families that want a yard, or some more space without paying through the roof. These cities and towns are close enough to the city to attract professionals, all the while satisfying the need for more land and/or a house.

but the question becomes what happens when these young professionals once they get married and have kids? do they still live in the city bachelor pad or do they do as the parents did a live in suburbs?

The problem with this is that people are looking at this through the old paradigm. First off people are getting married older and having less kids and kids later in life.

If you don't get married until late twenty, early thirties and don't have kids until a few years later then by the time the kid is school age you're already pushing 40.

Another component is that the American family is changing. The whole mom, dad, two kids and dog is gone. You have a lot more couples with no kids, grandchild living with grandparent, gay and lesbian couples, Single mom with child, etc.

Then as your article points out many boomers are moving back to the city to be close to their family. If you live in the city with a kid and your parents move back into the city now you have even less a reason to move to the suburbs.

The suburbs were a failed experiment in sprawl. We've been living in cities for thousands of years and then we just abandoned that because of the invention of the car. It took of 50+ years but now were seeing the cities that rely on the tradition neighborhood structure are built to last over the long haul. Sure having a big house with a big back yard is nice, but it's a luxury that everyone cant have without serious sacrifices.

It made a lot of sense when the cities were dirty and crime infested from industrialization. But now we have much different business that are well suited to thrive in major cities.

It all depends. One of the biggest things is how people will get around. Miami needs to do a better job of developing transit lines from the outlying suburbs into the CBD and high employment centers in order to make it feasible for people to get around while living outside of the city. Transit oriented development will be a great thing should Miami and other cities and towns in the metro area develop such areas.

Look at cities like Boston and Chicago for example. There are highly populated towns and small cities right around the major one that have great transit links into the downtown areas and are very attractive to those young families that want a yard, or some more space without paying through the roof. These cities and towns are close enough to the city to attract professionals, all the while satisfying the need for more land and/or a house.

This is the old mentality of people wanting to have their cake and eat it to. Americans have this crazed obsession with yards and that somehow families cant exist without them. How on earth did families survive for thousands of years before America invented the suburbs?

If you work in the city, more than likely you should live in the city. Sure visit other areas occasionally but the trip that you take everyday, twice a day, should probably be a short one.

The older generation that was raised off of this myth of the suburbs probably wont get this. The boomer generation is probably one of the most selfish self absorbed generations ever. But luckily the Millennial generation is now starting to surpass them in population and our demographics will begin shaping the trends.

Miami needs to do a better job of developing transit lines from the outlying suburbs into the CBD and high employment centers in order to make it feasible for people to get around while living outside of the city. Transit oriented development will be a great thing should Miami and other cities and towns in the metro area develop such areas.

Look at cities like Boston and Chicago for example. There are highly populated towns and small cities right around the major one that have great transit links into the downtown areas and are very attractive to those young families that want a yard, or some more space without paying through the roof. These cities and towns are close enough to the city to attract professionals, all the while satisfying the need for more land and/or a house.

Once again who builds and pays for this? Recently Tallahassee I feel did a great thing by revising its entire bus system, only thing was once they restructured the bus route they noticed that all bus routes are going further and further out....if you make transportation more accessible to the suburbs all it will do is make people live further and further away...it has already happened with the American Streetcar...IMO transit lines should only serve areas with certain densities...yes its against the doctrine of accessibility but providing services further and further out is not a solution!

This is the old mentality of people wanting to have their cake and eat it to. Americans have this crazed obsession with yards and that somehow families cant exist without them. How on earth did families survive for thousands of years before America invented the suburbs?

If you work in the city, more than likely you should live in the city. Sure visit other areas occasionally but the trip that you take everyday, twice a day, should probably be a short one.

The older generation that was raised off of this myth of the suburbs probably wont get this. The boomer generation is probably one of the most selfish self absorbed generations ever. But luckily the Millennial generation is now starting to surpass them in population and our demographics will begin shaping the trends.
You can live in the city and still have a yard and garden!:lol:
http://christopherleekennedy.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/18_urbangarden.jpg

One a serious note, i really like urban gardens and green roofs and the like, its just that American Culture has become obsessed with the perfect green lawn and the large swimming pool and view it as a necessity . I find it kind of gross and just ridiculous.

http://www.gardenvisit.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/vancouver_convention_centre2.jpg

The thing that gets me is the misconceptions. Have most suburbanites tell it the suburbs are somehow more social places. Everybody in the back yard having a BBQ which usually only happens a couple times a year. They fail to realize how driving in their cars by themselves to their houses where they stay locked up watching movies is less social than living in the city.

Were in love with the ideal of the perfect "Leave it to Beaver" suburb, but reality is far from it. I'm in the suburbs right now and I see maybe 4 people walking down the street all day. I took the dog for a walk and didn't run into anyone. I asked if they take the dog to the dog park to socialize with other dogs and dog lovers and they say everyone once in a while because they have to drive to the nearest one. That's a weird dynamic when you have to drive to actually walk a dog.

Once again who builds and pays for this? Recently Tallahassee I feel did a great thing by revising its entire bus system, only thing was once they restructured the bus route they noticed that all bus routes are going further and further out....if you make transportation more accessible to the suburbs all it will do is make people live further and further away...it has already happened with the American Streetcar...IMO transit lines should only serve areas with certain densities...yes its against the doctrine of accessibility but providing services further and further out is not a solution!

Are you asking who pays for the transit? The city and state does. Miami is going to get into a land crunch down the line. We already have terrible traffic and it's only going to get worse. You can build all the new expressways you want and widen the one we have, but in the end the only solid way to help curb traffic and spur smart growth is a good mass transit system.

Building dense outlying cities and towns with a good transit connection is a way for smart growth.

This is the old mentality of people wanting to have their cake and eat it to. Americans have this crazed obsession with yards and that somehow families cant exist without them. How on earth did families survive for thousands of years before America invented the suburbs?

If you work in the city, more than likely you should live in the city. Sure visit other areas occasionally but the trip that you take everyday, twice a day, should probably be a short one.

The older generation that was raised off of this myth of the suburbs probably wont get this. The boomer generation is probably one of the most selfish self absorbed generations ever. But luckily the Millennial generation is now starting to surpass them in population and our demographics will begin shaping the trends.

It's all a matter of opinion. Some people like a little more space between themselves and their neighbors. Some people want to be able to sit outside and watch their kids play. Rather than walk to a park. Besides, Miami is not a city where one without a car can get around with ease like in other cities.

It's all a matter of opinion. Some people like a little more space between themselves and their neighbors. Some people want to be able to sit outside and watch their kids play. Rather than walk to a park. Besides, Miami is not a city where one without a car can get around with ease like in other cities.

I think most people would prefer more space if given the opportunity. I would prefer to have a backyard oasis large enough for a lagoon swimming pool. But its not just about what people want but what can be realistically provided.

In order to provide a large lot you have to go really far out where land is cheap and build at really low densities. This means that in order for developers to build enough houses to make a profit you end up with these pods of houses with no other uses close by. So now the person lives far from everything and has to sit in traffic forever to go anywhere and there upset.

Now that's not to say that everyone needs to live in the city as not all the jobs are located in the city. But saying you want to work downtown but live in the suburbs is like saying you want to drive a huge gas hogging truck but you want to decrease our dependency on gasoline. Sure a few people can do it but its not a model that can be sustained for a lot of people.

As Americans we don't really look at the pros and cons we just want all the benefits and think we can always invent some way to get around the negatives. We hate the traffic but don't want to get rid of our cars. We know that we cant build enough roads to handle the traffic because building more roads only encourages more use of those roads.

Even though were only about 5% of the population we usually use a much higher percentage of the resources and account for a higher percentage of pollution. We just don't think in terms of living within our means. We have to have huge houses to store all the materialistic stuff we never use and have a huge backyard to sit and watch our kids play even though the truth is today we never use the backyard but maybe twice a year and instead the kids grow up getting obese watching tv or playing video games.

Building dense outlying cities and towns with a good transit connection is a way for smart growth.

Suburbs usually aren't dense cities or towns. You shouldn't be building these cities or towns outside of the cities unless you can provide gainful employment for the people who live there. The connections should be for intercity exchange of goods and services not to work in an outlying city and live in another.

Also if these outlying cities are dense then why live in a different one from where you work if both the main city and the satellite city are both dense?

Are you asking who pays for the transit? The city and state does. Miami is going to get into a land crunch down the line. We already have terrible traffic and it's only going to get worse. You can build all the new expressways you want and widen the one we have, but in the end the only solid way to help curb traffic and spur smart growth is a good mass transit system.

Building dense outlying cities and towns with a good transit connection is a way for smart growth.


No, trust me I know very well who pays for transit...thing is idealist like you seem to be, dont understand the full dynamics of funding transit. No politician wants to increase taxes to build a transit line because it wont be completed during their term so it doesnt matter to the politicians it only matters to the planners and transit advocates like me and you.

Building dense outlying cities doesnt work! its been proven many times, and China is going down this road currently.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
further proof, adding transit to the suburbs is BAD IDEA.
>Instead, Transportation for America wants transit agencies to extend frequent bus or rail service to every remote suburb where there might be a few people over 65–not because those people want to ride transit but to give them “options.” In order to pay for service extensions to suburbs, many transit agencies have reduced transit service in the central cities most transit riders are actually located. As a result, since 1985 per capita transit ridership has plummeted in such major urban areas as Los Angeles, Chicago, and Atlanta.
Congress expects to pass legislation this year that will decide how to spend $40 billion in annual federal gas tax revenues over the next six years. In recent years, 20 percent of those gas taxes have been spent on transit. Transportation for America’s goal is to further increase that share. But after decades of huge transit subsidies, per capita transit ridership today is no greater than it was in 1970–mainly because the subsidies have focused on extending transit service to those who don’t need it rather than providing better service to those who do.The city dweller.

No, trust me I know very well who pays for transit...thing is idealist like you seem to be, dont understand the full dynamics of funding transit. No politician wants to increase taxes to build a transit line because it wont be completed during their term so it doesnt matter to the politicians it only matters to the planners and transit advocates like me and you.

Building dense outlying cities doesnt work! its been proven many times, and China is going down this road currently.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
further proof, adding transit to the suburbs is BAD IDEA.
>

Post of the year!

The vote was 7-5 in favor of transmitting the application to the Rick Scott ravaged state agencies.

Yes votes:
Barbara Jordan (how does a vote in favor help your Miami-Gardens, Opa-Locka district? Oh yeah, your brother is the Florida City mayor who wants to expand real estate holdings in deep south dade outside the UDB)
Bruno Barreiro (how does a vote in favor of sprawl help your district in South Beach and Downtown?)
Lynda Bell (South Dade tract home construction industry lackey)
Xavier Suarez (how does a vote in favor of sprawl help your district in Coral Gables, Coconut Grove and South Miami?)
Pepe Diaz
Esteban Bovo
Joe Martinez (got my disounted house from the Latin Builders Association, how can I say no?)

No Votes:
Audrey Edmunson
Jean Monestime
Sally Heyman
Dennis Moss
Javier Souto

Kind of sad that the seat that Katy Sorenson held for so long with such dignity was filled with an embarrassment like Bell. Current mayor Gimenez used to be the commissioner in Suarez' district and he was always and automatic no vote (when he wasn't in Europe buying Mercedes's on the tax payer's dime).

^^Sorensen is missed. I got to know her over the years and she was a genuinely dedicated (and intelligent) commissioner. Heyman is a good one, too. Very helpful in my recent dealings regarding a county lease (not that that's the only reason! :lol:).

There's some nitwits there, no question. At least the undisputed Queen of the Idiots is gone!

http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/assets_c/2010/05/Seijas-1-thumb-200x149.jpg

^^Sorensen is missed. I got to know her over the years and she was a genuinely dedicated (and intelligent) commissioner. Heyman is a good one, too. Very helpful in my recent dealings regarding a county lease (not that that's the only reason! :lol:).

There's some nitwits there, no question. At least the undisputed Queen of the Idiots is gone!

http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/assets_c/2010/05/Seijas-1-thumb-200x149.jpg

Seijas with her BFF Lynda Bell (courtesy of EyeOnMiami)
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-dpqW39KTdaU/TcS65EuBF5I/AAAAAAAAJps/A3mYbIp1dGk/s400/lynda%2Bbell%2Band%2Bnatacha%2Bseijas.jpg