Battle for Dade's last frontier at hand

The Miami Herald

Posted on Mon, Nov. 14, 2005

By Matthew Haggman

mhaggman@herald.com

Developers say the math is easy: The only way to construct homes at a more reasonable price in Miami-Dade County's soaring real estate market is to build on cheaper land. And large swaths of cheap land now sit vacant outside the county's Urban Development Boundary.

But a study released today by a group from the Center for Urban Policy Research at Rutgers University and the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. reaches the opposite conclusion: Homeowners' costs go up, not down when such far-flung communities are built. New roads, water and sewer hookups, schools, fire and police departments strain existing infrastructure, the study concludes, and ultimately are more expensive than building within developed areas.

The study, detailed in the book Sprawl Costs, predicts Miami-Dade County would save billions if future growth was shifted inward toward more developed tracts.

The dueling views will take center stage -- first at an advisory board meeting today and then when elected officials tackle the monumental issue at the Miami-Dade County Commission meeting in one week on Nov. 21.

The debate will center on whether to turn more than 4,000 acres of undeveloped land -- some pristine, some not -- along the county's western and southern fringes into subdivisions, offices, shops, warehouses and industrial parks, or whether to keep the boundary where it is and focus on redeveloping cities and towns throughout the county.

In a push not seen in years, developers have filed a dozen applications with Miami-Dade government seeking to build major developments on stretches of land long protected behind Miami-Dade's Urban Development Boundary. Established in 1975, the UDB forbids large-scale development -- limiting building to one dwelling per five acres.

But now, after months of anticipation, the Miami-Dade County Commission is set to cast its first vote on nine of the 12 applications. A no vote will kill a proposed project. A yes vote will send it to the state's Department of Community Affairs where it will be reviewed and then returned to the county commission for a final vote next year, likely in April.

''It is one of the most important decisions county leaders will ever make, because it's irrevocable,'' said developer Matt Greer, chief operating officer with the Carlisle Development Group, one of the biggest builders of affordable housing in Florida. Greer opposes moving the UDB.

''There is no recall or repeal,'' he said. ``There is nothing but regret if the county commission makes the wrong decision.''

The county's Planning Advisory Board is scheduled to review the nine pending proposals today and make recommendations to the county commission, which will decide a week from now whether each will be defeated or live on.

Votes on the three other projects -- labeled so-called Developments of Regional Impact because they are especially large and require more extensive regulatory review -- haven't been scheduled. Those proposed DRI's include the controversial Florida City Commons development proposed by Miami home builder Lennar Corp., another proposed Lennar project dubbed Parkland, and developer D.R. Horton's project, Providence.

While the Nov. 21 vote may not be the final word on the matter and doesn't include the three largest projects, most agree that the commission vote could prove prescient.

''It will show the direction they want to head in,'' said Neisen O. Kasdin, an attorney and lobbyist hired by the Latin Builders Association and the Builders Association of South Florida to advocate moving the line. ``You are dealing with very different projects, but how the commission votes on this will be very instructive on which way they will go with all of the applications.''

The UDB once seemed a nearly immovable line that provided a buffer between large-scale development in Miami-Dade County and the Everglades. It has been 12 years since the county moved the UDB for a residential development and only after a bruising fight was the line moved in 2002 for two separate industrial projects -- one by developer Armando Codina called Beacon Lakes and another by a development group that included state Rep. Carlos Lopez-Cantera.

But earlier this year it became evident developers were snapping up large parcels outside the line and hiring lawyers and lobbyists in preparation for a campaign to move the line for new development.

CRUCIAL MOMENT

''This is it; this is the moment of truth,'' said Michael Pizzi, a lawyer and Miami Lakes councilman who opposes any movement of the UDB. ``If this goes through, it means unbridled expansion all the way to the Everglades.''

Builders contend the county's growing population and soaring home prices require new development outside the line. They say Miami-Dade is largely built-out and many municipalities are restricting new development to the point that there is nowhere else to build housing for the thousands of people moving to the county.

But opponents of moving the line, such as the grassroots group Hold The Line, reject that notion.

They assert the rampant, sprawling development already has crowded schools and stretched county services and infrastructure rail thin. Roads, they say, are already choked with traffic.

In the Brookings and Rutgers study co-author Robert Burchell asserts that such costs are passed on to businesses and residents through higher taxes, fees and cutbacks in public service. ''And in most cases, sprawling developments do not generate enough property taxes to cover these added costs,'' said Burchell.

ADDED ISSUES

In Miami-Dade there are issues even beyond that: Hold the Line advocates contend continued westward and southern development threatens Everglades restoration, the county's water supply and, in some cases, imperils environmentally sensitive lands.

And they note that populations have actually declined in some places -- for instance, parts of downtown Miami. The idea that Miami-Dade is fully built-out they dismiss as absurd.

''Anyone who looks at San Francisco or New York or London would laugh to say that Miami is fully densified,'' said developer Greer. ``An argument that we are out of land is not a rational argument when you look at other world-class cities that Miami aspires to be.''

Building several thousand new homes will hardly put the brakes on a housing market that has seen median existing home prices double in the last three years to $371,200 (October), say opponents of opening Miami-Dade's last frontier, and do little to address the affordable housing crisis.

But proponents of moving the line don't buy that thinking. ''It is physically impossible to accommodate anticipated growth within the UDB,'' said Kasdin. ``Anyone who says otherwise is not honestly analyzing the facts.''

Developers argue a fresh supply of new homes will temper skyrocketing prices and do much to provide reasonably priced homes in a region where homeownership is slipping beyond the reach of a large segment of people.

And they assert development is already occurring outside the line in the form of single-family ranchette homes on five-acre lots. They say a more efficient use of land is to allow many more people to live on subdivided parcels.

Furthermore, they argue such development poses no ecological threat.

''None of the projects proposing to relocate the UDB will impact wetlands, encroach on Everglades National Park or jeopardize water supplies or Everglades restoration,'' Latin Builders Association president Gus Gil wrote in an editorial in The Herald earlier this year.

Opponents also argue that Miami-Dade has hundreds of unfunded mandates -- from mass transit obligations to build 80 miles of expanded Metrorail to dozens of new schools -- that should be addressed first before large-scale development is allowed to sweep up even more open land in the county.

LESSON FROM HISTORY

Some say history provides a lesson on the impact of moving the boundary -- namely, that a series of county commission decisions in the 1980s to move the UDB steered development away from urban infill and instead sparked the current sprawl that robbed mass transit initiatives like Metrorail of ridership.

Those decisions, wrote former county Commissioner Harvey Ruvin earlier this year, created the ''two-hour traffic commutes, overcrowded schools and the dysfunctional urban systems'' the county has today.

'The seductive `affordable housing' arguments were similar to those heard now,'' said Ruvin, now Miami-Dade County Clerk. He added: ``We have the benefit of hindsight this time. Don't we?''

To date, two important entities in the county -- Miami-Dade's Department of Planning & Zoning and the Community Councils -- have taken a dim view of most applications to move the line.

In its Aug. 25 report outlining its initial recommendations, the Department of Planning & Zoning concluded there is enough land to build new homes inside the UDB until 2018. It recommended that the county commission reject seven of the nine applications.

Similarly, the Community Councils, which are citizen boards that review land use proposals, voted to recommend that six applications be denied and two adopted. It declined to make a recommendation on one.

Meanwhile, the Monroe County Commission and cities ranging from Coral Gables and Pinecrest to Miami Lakes and North Bay Village have voiced opposition to moving the line.

Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Alvarez opposes any movement of the UDB. In a March interview Gov. Jeb Bush expressed ''grave concerns'' about developers' efforts to alter the UDB, saying movement should be allowed only if there is a ``major compelling need.''

LOTS OF LOBBYISTS

In the face of such opposition, developers such as Lennar Corp. and organizations such as the Latin Builders Association, have hired platoons of lobbyists -- more than 40 this year, according to county records, to sway the vote.

The lobbyist list includes former Miami-Dade Commissioner Miguel Diaz de la Portilla and Sandy Walker, the sister of Miami-Dade Commissioner Barbara Jordan.

It's unclear how county commissioners will respond in the face of such intense pressure. Miami-Dade Commission Vice Chair Dennis B. Moss, for instance, declared earlier this year that he will not vote to approve any changes to the line until a study -- which Moss proposed -- was completed on the UDB. With the first vote a week away, there is no indication the study will be done in time.

Moss didn't return repeated calls from The Herald. Others also wonder if commissioners will vote yes now under the logic they simply want to give a particular application more thought before making the ultimate decision next year.

Pizzi specifically warned against commissioners who ''say they are voting yes right now to get more information. That is intellectually dishonest,'' he said.

LITTLE WIGGLE ROOM

Raising the stakes is the fact some developers have closed on their properties -- rather than having them under contract -- meaning there is little wiggle room for development, other than moving the line.

If the county approves the current applications, some fear the floodgates will be opened for even more development.

Indeed, developers already appear to be banking on that notion by snapping up land outside the line for future development. In August, for instance, Aventura developer Turnberry Associates -- among the best-known developers in Florida -- paid $20 million for 64 acres west of the Florida Turnpike and Doral. The company is not alone.

''I hope citizens will come down and register their views with the county commission,'' said Miami-Dade Commissioner Katy Sorenson, who opposes moving the boundary line. ``This is a big one. This [begins] a series of critical votes.''