(continuedfrompage 1)
Even with the investment of billions of public dollars in the state's highway system, traffic congestion continues to get worse. The average Floridian spends the equivalent of 8.1 dayseachyear commutingtoandfromwork, upfrom 7.3 daysper yearjustadecadeago. Thevastmajorityof those trips aremade byautomobile. Local andstatego,vemments-and,byextension, taxpayers - find themselves saddled with billions of dollars of costs to repair and expand roads, as well as to provide sewer andwaterservice,policeandfireprotection, and schools to newly developed areas on themetropolitanfringe.Meanwhile,manyof thestate'solderurbanareasfindthemselves caughtinacycleofpovertyanddespairtheirtax dollarssiphonedofftopayfor the constructionofnewserviceselsewhereand theirschools,publictransportationsystems andinfrastructurelefttodecay.
For many Floridians, sprawl has imposed emotional costs as well. For some, it's the sadnessthatcomesfromwatchingblightdescendonanoldneighborhoodorbulldozers tear through a favorite fann or forest. For others,itisafeelingofalienationfromone's neighbors and one's environment. For still others,itisanunfulfilledlongingforspecial characterintheir surroundings.
It can and has been argued
thatsuchwrenchingtransformationsaretheinevitableresult of Florida's astonishing rate of population growth. Yet it has become clearthat
the impact of that growth has been magnified by poor deci ions oYer the allocation ofpublic resources, thedesign of communities, and theprO\isionof public services- all of which have contributed to the phenomenon known as"sprawl."
Whatis "sprawl"?
Sprawlispoorlyplanneddevelopmentcharacterizedbytheconversionofnaturaloragriculturallandtolow-densityresidentialenclaves,commercialcenters, and business parks, all separated fromone anotherbyroadsand parking lots. Sprawl means long distances between homes and work or shopping, heavy relianceonfreewaysandautomobiles, andthedestructionoftheveryfeature thathasinducedmanytomovetoFlorida-thenaturallandscape.
SprawlhascometodominatetheAmericanlandscapeintheyear�sinceW?rld War II, producing many of the icons that have come to symbolize Amencan life to the rest of the world: the automobile, the suburban ranch house, the fast-foodrestaurant,thedrive-in.
But sprawl has had a uniquely negative impact here in Florida. The stat�'s fragile natural environment- its wetlands, bays, rivers and coral reefs; its endangeredanimals,plantsandmarinelife-hasreactedpredictabl todevelopment that intenupts natural water flows, increases runoffinto \Yate��ys, andfragmentsnaturalhabitats.AndFlorida'speninsulargeograph baslimited thespaceavailableforgrowth,increasingconflictsbeteennaturalvaluesand humandevelopment.
Itislittlesurprise, then, thatFloridianswereamong thefirst inthecountryto recognizetheneedtobringsensibilityandsensitivitytofuturede elopment.
Anhistoriccrossroads
Beginninginthe1970sandculminatingwiththe198 Gro\Yth_ !anagementAct, thestategovernment creatednewprocessestoplanforandmanage growth to protectnaturalresources,enhancecommunity alue andimproveFloridians' qualityoflife.Whiletheseprocessesstoppedman oftheoutrageousdevelopmentmistakesofthe1950sand1960s, thetrendtoward prawlhascontmued almostunabatedtothepresentday.
(cominuedonpage 18)
4 April/May 2002 • Florida r Planning
(continuedfrompage 4)
Florida'sgrowthmanagementlawsallowstateandlocalgovernmentstotake ahardlineagainstsprawl.Butpolitical leaders - often under heavy influence from developers, home builders, highway contractors and other special interests-have generally lacked the willtoimplementtoughgrowthmanagementpolicies.
At the turn of the 21st Century, then, Floridafindsitselfatanhistoriccrossroads. Sprawlhasproven tobeapoor modelofdevelopmentforthestate,and current growth management policies haveproveninsufficienttostopit.
Therearetwogeneralschoolsofthought onwheretogofrom here. One would haveFloridaacceptsprawlasagiven, returnfullcontroloverdevelopmentdecisionstolocal governments thathave
••proven unwilling to manage growth inthepast, anddothebestwecanto build enough highways, schools and otherpublicfacilities toget by. There are many within this group who recognizethenegativeimpactsofsprawl, andwhowouldencouragemeasuresto protectecologicallysensitiveareasand reducetheburdenofnewdevelopment on taxpayers. But they worry that, by goingtoofartolimit sprawl,thestate risksitseconomicfuture.
Thealternativeistotakeaggressiveactiontorevisethepublicpoliciesthathave encouragedsprawlinggrowth overthe last50years.Publicinvestmentwould nolonger"chase"sprawl,butwouldinstead beredirectedtosupportexisting communities.Newdevelopmentwould be encouraged in urban areas and existingsuburbs,butnotonagriculturalor naturallands.Thestate'stransportation policywouldberewrittentoencourage alternatives to the automobile: highspeedrailservice,busesandlight-rail systems, bicycles and sidewalks. This school of thoughtargues that the real economicdangerisnotfromthedismantlingofspraw1,butfromitscontinuation -thataneconomicandsocialsystem
18 April/May 2002 • Florida r Planning
thatisbuiltoncheapland,cheapwater and cheap oil cannot long survive. It acknowledgesthatdiminishingkeypillars of the state economy-tourism, fishing, agriculture- would cause severe long-term damage to the state anditspeople.
Whythisreport?
Thesevenexpertswhoseopinionsare presentedintheSprawlreportfall, by andlarge,intothissecondcamp.They argue,tovaryingdegrees,thatthesystemsthatregulategrowthinFloridaare brokenandneedtobefixed.
Their opinions as to the root causes of sprawl and the public policy steps that needto betaken to restrainitare as diverseas theirbackgrounds.They are current and former government officials, engineers, lawyers, planners andleadersofnonprofitorganizations. TheyareDemocrats,Republicans and Independents. Butwhilethereismuch on which they disagree, they share a longtime interest in and study of growthmanagementissues,aswellas adeeploveofFloridaandconcernfor itsfuture.
Theyalsosharedgeneralagreementon severalpoints:
Florida's 1985 GrowthManagement Act, while well intended, has been underminedbyalackofenforcement and conflict with otherstate policies, and has led to someunintendednegativeconsequences.
Lackofenforcementoftheanti-sprawl provisions of the act has reduced the effectivenessofthestate'skeygrowth managementtool. Itssuccesshas also been undermined by state fiscal and transportationpoliciesthatactaspublicsubsidiesforsprawlingdevelopment. Further,someprovisionsofthelawsuchastherequirementthatsufficient roadcapacityexisttoaccommodateany newdevelopment-havehadtheunintendedconsequenceoffurtherdispersing
development into agricultural and naturalareas.
While implementation of the act has been a problem, most of thoseinterviewed sawgreatvaluein thelawitself,notingthatithascurbed someoftheworstdevelopmentpractices ofthe1950sand1960s, givencitizens theopportunitytomakeanimpactonthe growthmanagementprocess,andprovideda framework withinwhichstate andlocalofficialscanfightsprawl.
The proposals made in 2001 by Gov. Bush's Growth Management Study Commission are unlikely to substantiallycurbsprawl,andsomeproposals maymaketheproblemworse.
Thoseinterviewedwereunanimousin theiroppositiontothecommission'srecommendationthatultimatepowerover mostgrowthmanagementdecisionsbe returnedtolocalgovernments.Allsaw valueintheguidanceandenforcement roleplayedbytheDepartmentofCommunityAffairs
Several other commission proposals were considered well-intentioned but unlikely to resolve theproblemsthey weredesignedtoaddress.
Creating an economic model to estimatethecostsofdevelopmentwould be a benefit to communities, but only if the model includes environmental andqualityoflifecostsleftoutofthe commission'sproposal.Similarly,those interviewedhadguardedpraiseforthe commission's plan to improve school planning,butnotedthatsuchaprovision willnoteasethecrowdingproblemsalreadyburdeningmanyFloridaschools.
Stateofficialswerealsourgedtobring greater balancetothestate' transportationpolicies.Ratherthanspendingbil-
(continuedonpage 19)
(continuedfrompage18)
lionsonhighwayexpansionprojectsthat exacerbate sprawl, state officials were urgedtosupportprojectstocreatemore transportationchoicesforFloridians.
encourage higher density, mixed-use development in suburbs, protect rural and natural areas, promote transportation choices, and eliminate taxpayer subsidiesforsprawl.
Ultimately, most agreed that at least some Floridians are ready to change theirlifestylesinordertoachieveanend tosprawl.Buttheysaidthefirststepisto provideFloridianswithchoicesinhousingandtransportationthatwouldallow those wishing to live more sustainable lifestylestodoso.
Numerous public policy initiatives AsanadvocateforthehealthofFlorida's have the potential to reduce sprawl environment andtheprotection ofconinFlorida. sumer rights, Florida PIRG Education
Whilethoseinterviewedhadavarietyof recommendationstoaddresssprawl,itis clear that a multifaceted approach will beneeded. Suchanapproachwouldincludeprogramstorevitalizeurbanareas,
Fundsharesthe concerns about growth managementissues expressedby those we interviewed. We believe dealing withsprawlanditseffectsisamongthe mostimportantpublicpolicyquestions facingthestateatthetumofthemillen-
nium. At the conclusion of this report, we offer our own recommendations for a public policy framework thatcan combatsprawlinFlorida. Noteveryone interviewed for this report agrees with or endorses these specific proposals. However,weearnestlyhopethatpublic officialsatalllevelsofgovernmentwill follow the advice of these experts and develop and implement effective policies to protect Florida's environment, its taxpayers, and the quality of life of itsresidents.
The Sprawl in Florida report was published in February, 2002. The seven individuals interviewed were Tom Pelham, AICP, Dr. Earl Starnes, Charles Pattison, Pegeen Hanrahan, Richard Grosso, Laurie MacDonald and Tom Reese. Tofind out more, check out the Sprawl in Florida report on the FPIRG Web site at http://floridapirg.org/ FL.asp?id2=5880&id3=FL&.