Miami’s Battle Between Environmental Preservation and Urban Expansion
The city of Miami has immense importance to the South Florida region. As a hub of commerce, tourism and culture, it is the premier metropolitan region of Miami-Dade County and South Florida in general. However, as the city progresses into the next few decades it has a plethora of challenges to deal with. Miami’s current population was roughly 500,000 in 2017 and that figure is projected to rise to 700,000 by 2030. To accommodate this projected increase in population, Miami will be forced to re-develop current neighborhoods and sprawl outwards. However, Miami’s ability to sprawl outward is inhibited by the presence of the Everglades National Park, located south and west of the city, and the Atlantic Ocean, situated east of the metropolitan area. The metropolitan region’s ability to accommodate growth is extremely limited by the surrounding natural barriers.
Population growth and limited space are not the only problems facing Miami. Miami is tasked with protecting itself from the repercussions of rising sea levels that stem from climate change. The National Wildlife Foundation recently published a report stating that Miami is set to lose 3.5 trillion dollars to coastal flooding, the most out of any city in the world. The Everglades, which are an invaluable component of the Florida ecosystem, are also experiencing their fair share of environmental problems, including the destruction of the ecosystem by urban development. All these factors place Miami in a difficult situation. The city needs to expand to accommodate growth, but any proposed expansion has to take into account all the potentially detrimental environmental impacts. In an effort to balance the need for expansion with environmental concerns, Miami established an Urban Development Boundary.
Miami’s unique Urban Development Boundary (UDB) functions as a dynamic growth boundary. This line that separates development from the Everglades consistently moves to make sure the National Park is protected and urban development can move in a different direction. Since the UDB was created in 1975, the area of Miami that can be developed has increased roughly 15% from 366 square miles to 420 square miles. Comparatively, there is over 1,500 square miles of land permanently preserved in Miami-Dade County beyond the UDB, mostly comprised of the Everglades, which shows just how constrained the city of Miami is. Currently, Miami has developed 94% of the land inside the Urban Development Boundary, leaving only a miniscule percentage of city land that can be used for future growth. The UDB is a key policy within Miami’s Comprehensive Urban Development Master Plan, a blueprint that structures growth for the entire region. Every seven years the Master Plan is reviewed and the UDB can be moved closer or farther away from the downtown center based on environmental or urban development concerns. The latest review of the UDB has sparked massive debates about sprawl and the environment.
Miami’s current sprawl conundrum is unique among other cities in the United States. By establishing the UDB as a dynamic border for the city, the UDB can cater to both the city’s need for expansion by moving outward or move inward to address environmental concerns. While this seems to be a fantastic solution to address both needs, the ambiguity of a fluid city border is the crux of the problems Miami faces. Since the border can be debated and moved every seven years, those who are tasked with moving the UDB can potentially overlook either environmental or developmental concerns. For example, if the housing market crashes and Miami-Dade County decides to add affordable housing outside the UDB, does that justify neglecting the health of the flora and fauna in the Everglades? Overall, difficult decisions need to be reached when debating the UDB because the best interests of environmentalism and urban development do not always align.
When weighing the merits of environmental concern and need for additional acreage to accommodate increasing population, Miami finds itself at crossroads. The EPA’s primary suggestion, to hold the UDB in its current position and focus urban development on revitalization, is an ideal solution that can best solve the current sprawl conundrum. Miami can potentially solve its housing problem by redeveloping run-down neighborhoods with affordable housing without moving any closer to the Everglades. This will preserve the health of the ecosystem while allowing Miami to accommodate the needs of its growing population. While no solution is perfect, revitalizing communities instead of moving the city boundary closer to the Everglades is the best way to ensure the future success of both the city and its surrounding natural resources.
The UDB exemplifies the conflicting interests of environmentalism and urban development. Sprawl is a key component to growing a city, but uncontrolled sprawl can have detrimental effects on local ecosystems. The UDB was implemented to balance the needs of both Miami ‘s expansion and the environment, but it has not always produced optimal results. However, if Miami commits to enacting revitalization projects and holds the UDB in its current position, the city will be able to expand sustainably and protect its valuable natural resources for the future.