The Miami Herald

MIAMI-DADE DEVELOPMENT

Posted on, Feb. 22, 2006

State: Reject new projects

A critical review from state planners is likely to become a powerful political tool in the debate over whether Miami-Dade should move a development boundary.

BY CURTIS MORGAN, MATTHEW HAGGMAN AND NOAKI SCHWARTZ
cmorgan@MiamiHerald.com

State growth managers may have slammed the brakes on a developer-fueled drive to open the fringes of Miami-Dade County to more suburbs and strip malls.

In a blunt review released Tuesday, the Florida Department of Community Affairs recommended that Miami-Dade commissioners reject all 17 projects up for consideration -- both inside and outside the county's urban development boundary, everything from homes and offices in West Kendall to a Lowe's home store in far West Miami-Dade.

The agency, which reviews land-use changes statewide, said the county had not shown it has enough drinking water to support the flood of people or that it needed to open new areas to more intensive development. It also found some projects could glut roads and schools.

The report thrilled activists who have campaigned against moving the boundary line and disappointed developers pushing for cheaper virgin land. It undoubtedly will become a powerful political weapon in the heated debate over where and how Miami-Dade should grow.

'There is no clearer way the state can say, `Stop everything,' '' said Cynthia Guerra, executive director of Tropical Audubon and a member of the Hold the Line coalition of environmental and civic groups. ``We just can't continue sprawling and sprawling.''

Neisen Kasdin, an attorney representing the Builders Association of South Florida and Latin Builders Association, said the state didn't distinguish at all among the individual developments. Only nine of the 17, for instance, were proposed outside the line.

`BROAD BRUSH'

''It seems as though [DCA] painted with a very broad brush,'' he said.

While the DCA can't outright order a county to reject or downsize projects, the agency can and has challenged county land-use decisions in administrative court, and its recommendations typically carry considerable weight with local politicians.

Environmentalists said they hope that's the case when the commission reconsiders the proposals, possibly in April.

After all, they argued, commissioners dodged a politically touchy yes-or-no vote on the proposals in late November with the justification that they wanted the state's opinion -- a decision made over the recommendations of the county planning staff, the objection of Commissioner Katy Sorenson and a veto, later overridden, from Mayor Carlos Alvarez.

''The County Commission asked for a clear message and they got it,'' said Jamie Furgang, Everglades policy associate for Audubon of Florida.

Commissioner Rebeca Sosa, who had not yet read the state report, said she would consider the feedback carefully and ``vote accordingly.''

''I've said it since the beginning that I always analyze one step at a time, but that I would not approve any movement if the infrastructure was not created,'' she said.

Mayor Alvarez said commissioners should have rejected projects outside the line on its own last year -- based on the county's own analysis indicating enough existing land inside the line to feed development for 15 years.

''I'm very happy that now we have a third party saying what our professional staff has said, what I have said and what people wanting to hold the line have said,'' Alvarez said.

The UDB, which runs along the southern and western edges of the county and restricts development outside the line to one house on five acres, was created in 1975 to help manage growth.

BATTLE LINE

In the past, and especially last year, it's become a battle line.

Preservationists argue that continuing sprawl is choking schools and roads and encroaching deeper into an already shrunken Everglades. Developers and their allies argue the booming population and demand for affordable housing requires the line to be moved.

The DCA report came down squarely on activists' side, though in dry technical language, and clearly added to mounting state pressure against the county's expansion push.

The report echoed warnings last month from state water managers and environmental regulators that Miami-Dade's plans to slurp up more cheap underground water threatened the Everglades, a concern that applied to projects wherever they were proposed.

But water -- elevated by a key change last year in growth management laws -- was only one of the issues, said Marlene Conaway, chief of comprehensive planning for the DCA. Some projects posed traffic and school problems or needed more support data, such as a long-awaited and nearly completed watershed study of South Miami-Dade.

Conaway stressed that the DCA comments were intended only as recommendations and the agency would work with the county to resolve any issues.

But she acknowledged that some represented ``large hurdles.''

The agency also was sharply critical of a developer-crafted proposal to rewrite UDB policy, one that critics have said would only make it easier to move the line in the future.

The DCA report largely echoed that concern, saying instead of strengthening the policy it would ``diminish it.''

CONFUSION

Latin Builders Association President Gus Gil acknowledged the proposal's wording was confusing and said he plans to meet with Miami-Dade's Department of Planning & Zoning to clear up any confusion.

''I understand the concern in the report,'' he said. ``The wording in the proposal is somewhat difficult to understand.''

But developers still reject the county analysis that there's enough land for future housing within current boundaries as incorrect and dated.

''The county is counting capacity that does not exist,'' said Simon Ferro, an attorney representing developer Lucky Start in its bid to move the UDB for a 192-acre West Kendall development. ``I don't agree we have enough capacity for future growth. I respectfully disagree with their recommendation.''

Richard Grosso, an activists' attorney with the Environmental & Land Use Law Center in Fort Lauderdale, called the review the strongest he'd seen in 20 years. Combined with tougher growth management laws linking water supply to growth, he said, it posed wide potential ripple effects, including for a second and much larger set of developments proposed outside the UDB the commission has yet to review.

''It's a question whether the county will be able to approve big new developments within the UDB, let alone outside,'' Grosso said.