After half-hearted discussions about checking Shelby County sprawl in 2000 and 2004 -- with 6,000 of the 16,000 lots approved meantime in unincorporated areas around Memphis, and with infrastructure-extension debt at $1.7 billion -- the County Commission finally imposed a six-month moratorium on new residential projects outside municipal limits, to let the Office of Planning and Development determine where growth should or shouldn't go, depending on local services, schools and environment.

A day before the commission's vote, Memphis Commercial Appeal writer Amos Maki quoted County Mayor A C Wharton as saying, ''Anything that evidences that we are breaking away from the ways of the past, where anything goes without regard to cost and sustainability, is welcomed.''

After the 11-0 vote, with two abstentions, the mayor said in a statement the moratorium will ''give us 'breathing room' necessary to develop effective mechanisms that will encourage growth of durable neighborhoods that pay for themselves.''

Moratorium sponsor Commissioner Deidre Malone also pointed out that officials need the map ''so when a new development goes before us we will know if it makes sense.''

With enough projects in the pipeline to keep developers busy for some time, the Memphis Area Home Builders Association took a ''neutral'' stance, though its president, Mack Andrews, expressed concern about lot shortages if the moratorium ''were to go past six months.''

Some developers criticized the commission, but those who favor smart growth voiced their support, including Looney Ricks Kiss architectural firm principals Carson Looney and Frank Ricks, Boyle Investment Co. senior vice president Rusty Bloodworth, Welch Realty Co. owner Jackie Welch, and Community Development Council executive director Emily Trenholm. Commercial Appeal writer Michael Erskine quotes her as saying ''this is watershed in terms of finally starting to move in the right direction'' and encouraging investment and redevelopment in urban areas.

As to the map of areas suited and unsuited for growth, the daily says in an editorial: ''If there are parts of the county where it would be in the public interest to prohibit new construction, planners shouldn't be intimidated by the prospect of upsetting a few developers.'' -- Commercial Appeal  11/13/2005

Click here to view the source article or here to view the source publication.