| 4.20.06 |
|
‘This Is Not Fantasy Land’
By Rebecca Wakefield County Commissioner Joe Martinez is a funny guy. Not Joe Arriola funny, but still. On Tuesday afternoon, after hours of testimony about the potential impact of several proposed developments on county resources such as roads, schools, water and farmland, the commissioner looked up from his doodle pad to respond to the comments of a Redland area orchid grower. “Ms. Motes, I’ve been figuring it out and I agree with you,” he said. “There’s no way you can milk a goat and drink a glass of wine, unless you have three hands.” Mary Motes’ larger point had been about how hard the small family farmers in South Dade work and how the quiet open spaces they preserve add more to the regional quality of life than mere acreage would suggest. Fortunately, Martinez stopped short of speculating whether goat goes best with red or white. Further down the dais, Commissioner Javier Souto was more rhetorical, if less coherent. “To be or not to be,” he began, casting Miami-Dade’s destiny in the great Urban Development Boundary debate as a stark choice between self-annihilation and prosperity. “You want people to come and bring the money, or you want to starve alone?” Souto went on to explain that actually, the decision to allow more intense development in rural parts of the county isn’t a choice between black-hat developers and white-hat environmental types. It is a matter of balance, something he hoped all the citizens whose bottoms had been molding to the chamber audience seats since the early morning would understand. “If they don’t like Florida the way it is, well you know, then maybe they’re living in a fantasy world,” he rambled. “Maybe they should go to Disney World and live in fantasy land. Yeah, it’s pretty in Disney World and Epcot and all that. But this is something else. We’re destined to be one of the greatest places in the world.… We need to manage our growth intelligently. If we fight we’re not going to get there.” Huh? is often the correct response to a Souto soliloquy, but the man was on to something. “Anybody else want to philosophize?” Martinez segued. “Commissioner Socrates, I mean, Jordan?” Barbara Jordan took the mike like an old school MC, calling out the critics of moving the boundary line for the inconsistency she saw between protesting rural development yet not also pushing for higher building densities in the urban core. Then Jordan went on to explain that it's hopeless anyway. Urban infill is not going to solve the problems of water shortages, traffic congestion and school overcrowding, she argued. “Urban infill is not going to make them [the problems] go away, it’s just going to be transferred from one place to another,” she said. “I interpret it as another form of NIMBYism.” Jordan then contrasted the county’s affordable housing crisis (re-marketed as a workforce housing crisis) with the entire notion of smart growth. She complained that some municipalities are pushing their affordable housing problems off on the county. “Development is going on, but is it smart?” she asked. “I don’t know. At some point we are going to have to bite the bullet.” Urban Environment League of Greater Miami President Nancy Liebman had a counter to that complaint, which more than one commissioner made. “Pardon our confusion,” Liebman quipped. “The warfare was over housing. The last five remaining applications have nothing to do with any housing. Are we trying to do economic development in the Everglades?” All the residential developers had withdrawn their applications to build outside the boundary after a number of political setbacks, not least the state’s ballsy and long-overdue threat to prevent future development if the county doesn’t first deal with the critical water supply shortage guaranteed to occur if significant planning and capital improvements are not done. The South Florida Regional Planning Council and the county’s own Planning Department also had advised against approving most of the developments. When even a pro-development governor like Jeb Bush, and developers like Sergio Pino and Jorge Perez question the value of breaking the UDB, it’s worth listening. Another activist, Albert Alvarez, made the further point that extending development decreases the value of land in urban areas. He praised the commission for asking for more concessions. “As a schoolteacher, [I can say] you’re training them quite well,” he said. “You’ve got them sitting up straight with hands folded. So why do you want to let them slouch now?” Commissioner Dennis Moss continued to express disdain for the idea of stopping development in the south and west. “You just can’t say ‘No, no, no,’” he said. “You have to come up with alternatives.” Earlier in the day he questioned the politics behind the state’s unusually aggressive stance. “The DCA and DEP [Department of Community Affairs and Department of Environmental Protection] came down in their little way of doing things – shock and awe,” he spat. It was difficult to tell from a distance whether Commissioner Natacha Seijas had a point, what with the snarling behind her fangs, but Jordan seemed to agree with Moss. “Who pays attention to the state anyway?” she asked. “They are kind of off the mark on this one.” Katy Sorenson, who gamely attempted to at least get a few points across about not giving up more to developers than is gained in overall community benefit, said that if the commission makes a stand on the UDB, developer expectations will adjust. Just as children learn to color within the lines, Sorenson admonished, “They’ll stop applying if we stop approving.” My deadline came before the commission made its decision on the five contentious UDB projects, but it seemed clear where it’s headed. It is also clear that the commission is nearing the end of the era in which it can afford to ignore long-term pressures to advance short-term gains. Comments? E-mail wakefield@miamisunpost.com. |