Miami Dade County Community Forum

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Florida Cabinet denies Lowe's move of Urban Development Boundary

According to the Miami Herald, the State Cabinet voted 3 to 1, siding with an administrative law judge, to reject the County Commission's move of the Urban Development Boundary for a Lowe's store.  The County Attorney signaled that it was over for the County. Lowe's might appeal. 

The Urban Environment League was a founding member and driving force in the  Hold the Line movement which was a broad coalition of people, government entities and groups in favor of holding the line on development in areas not served by infrastructure. The UEL agrees with the ruling, we don't think it is the time to move the UDB line.

The Miami Herald says:

Environmentalists and urban planners hailed the decision, saying it sets a precedent for dealing with counties that attempt to bend state growth management laws and allow sprawl. They hope the ruling will halt attempts by politically powerful developers who are seeking to move development boundaries in other counties, including the creation of a new suburb on the Everglades' doorstep in Miami-Dade called Parkland.


  1. AnonymousJuly 29, 2009

    Thank you for helping to educate county residents about the Urban Development Boundary. Too bad the other application was approved.

  2. AnonymousJuly 29, 2009

    Hey, UEL! I'm confused. I read in the South Florida Business Journal that the Governor and Cabinet gave Miami-Dade County permission to move the UDB for an office retail project at the same time they rejected Lowes. Are we OK with that? Are we experiencing some shortage of office retail? The story also said that the whole Cabinet, with the exception of Charles Bronson, voted to approve the project. Alex Sink, say it isn't so!

  3. The SFBJ elected to look at this with the glass 1/2 empty. We prefer a 1/2 full view. What you said is true, but it was never expected that the Brown application would be denied because of its unique location surrounded by development and a road and it is an odd shaped parcel. We are happy that the Lowe's was denied. The way the vote was taken -- we believe that the decision was, do you upheld the ALJ findings or not. We preferred that they did, so in our opinion Sink was on the right side of the vote. To NOT uphold his opinion would have opened the door to BOTH being approved. Bronson: No hero.