With empty land available to build stores and homes in Miami-Dade County's designated urban area and with thousands of vacant homes waiting to be bought in this recession why would commissioners push for development out in the western fringes?

And why would Gov. Charlie Crist and the Florida Cabinet back such a lame-brain idea?

They will have a chance to stand up for county taxpayers and stop the sprawl next week when they consider two irresponsible amendments to the county's Comprehensive Development Plan that would expand the Urban Development Boundary. On Tuesday, the National Parks Conservation Association and 1,000 Friends of Florida will ask the governor and Cabinet to declare those two amendments in violation of the state's Growth Management Act.

The two environmental groups won a partial victory in a state administrative hearing in May. Administrative law Judge Bram D.E. Canter ruled that the Miami-Dade County Commission wrongly expanded the UDB to allow a Lowe's Superstore but was within the law in approving another amendment for a commercial development at the western end of Kendall Drive.

Leave out politics

The governor and Cabinet have final say over whether cities' and counties' changes to their growth plans violate the law. In these two cases, Mr. Crist and the Cabinet should find both amendments noncompliant. Given that two Cabinet members -- Attorney General Bill McCollum and Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink -- are running for governor and Mr. Crist is running for the U.S. Senate, their decision could be fraught with politics.

It shouldn't be. Mr. McCollum, Ms. Sink and Agriculture Commissioner Charles Bronson can rise above the urge to pander to development interests and support smart planning and the environment, specifically Everglades National Park, as well as Miami-Dade's agricultural interests.

This would also be a chance for Mr. Crist to redeem himself, somewhat, after signing into law SB 360, which would gut the state's growth management laws. Using the recession as an excuse, the Legislature approved SB 360 to ``jump-start'' growth by removing state oversight of Developments of Regional Impact and making cities and counties, rather than builders, liable for the costs of new infrastructure. Several cities are suing to get the law overturned.

Rejecting the two amendments also would vindicate Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Alvarez and the county's planning staff. The planners vigorously opposed the two amendments, using convincing numbers to show the county had plenty of in-fill development room inside the UDB. Mr. Alvarez twice vetoed the amendments, only to see the commission's pro-development bloc override him both times.

`No need for store'

Judge Canter said of the Lowe's amendment: There is ``no need for more commercial land, and no need for a home improvement store, in the area of the Lowe's site.''

As to the other amendment, known as the Brown tract, Judge Canter said that while the application to build on 40 acres of farmland did comply with state law it was so unique that it set no precedent for future developers wishing to move the UDB's current line. He described the site as relatively small, odd shaped and squeezed between a big residential development and an arterial roadway. For these reasons the judge said the tract had little agricultural value.

All that may be true, but if the Cabinet and governor approve the Brown amendment it will be seen as a precedent by the County Commission, whose majority is ever willing to oblige developers and pave over more farmland. Of particular concern is Parkland, a proposed suburb of 19,000 residents with homes, shops and offices on 961 acres outside the UDB.

The county already has a backlog of $6 billion in needed roads, sewer systems and other infrastructure. Police and fire departments also are stretched. Yet a majority of commissioners think sprawl is sound public policy.

Given the glut of vacant office space and homes for sale in Miami-Dade in this recession, the time to move the UDB to accommodate new development has become even more distant than it was when the commission approved these amendments last year.

This is the right moment for Mr. Crist and the Cabinet to send a strong message to Miami-Dade commissioners and developers: Moving the Urban Development Boundary is off-limits for the foreseeable future. Stop the sprawl.

Join the discussion

The Miami Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. In order to post comments, you must be a registered user of MiamiHerald.com. Your username will show along with the comments you post. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

     Showing: Oldest first Newest first Most-recommended first Least-recommended first

@Nyx.AuthorDisplayName@ wrote on @Nyx.PostedAtTime@:

@Nyx.repliedToText@

@Nyx.replyAnswerText@

Reply to this Comment @Nyx.Recommender@ @Nyx.AbuseReporter@