Hello, neighbors, as you jump into a new week in our “Oasis in the Heart of Miami.” I’m writing to make sure you’re aware of a critically important virtual resident workshop this Thursday, April 22, 6p. The outcome of this workshop will impact our village for generations, and this week is your LAST CHANCE to share your opinions. Engage now or forever hold your peace on this topic, because the door will be shut permanently in the coming weeks.
I’m talking about the proposed major development of 6th Ave. for the eight blocks where it passes through BP, from 121 St. southward to 113th St. (No other street is part of this project, so please don’t share opinions now about what you think should happen on Griffing Blvd., a county road, or our interior village-owned streets, none of which have anything to do with this topic.) The Florida Dept. of Transportation (FDOT) is proposing a major redesign of that stretch of 6thAve. using its own money, but not to include replacing the road itself or changing it in any way (to add lanes, new bike lanes, etc.). FDOT wants to install 6ft.-wide sidewalks down both sides that extend fully 10ft. from the edge of the road into the green spaces when accounting for 4ft. of grass between the road and sidewalk. That will require the removal of a significant amount of existing landscaping and adding about 20,000 square feet of concrete in our bird sanctuary. (That’s my rough calculation, as FDOT doesn’t provide that number.) No additional trees or landscaping are included, and no barrier is planned to protect pedestrians on that sidewalk, which will be adjacent to our busiest road with the highest speed limit before you consider our ongoing speeding issue.
Additionally, FDOT wants to add more drains on 6thAve., which we need, and also change out our current quaint street lights with commercial-grade lights like you see in other communities. If you aren’t clear what “regular” street lights look like, drive over the bridge towards Miami Shores and look at the street lights in front of the funeral home. That’s the light fixture (style, height, brightness) that FDOT is promising to install down the entire length of our 6thAve. in front of the 50 homes there—more of those lights, actually—unless BP coughs up $384,000 for a more attractive option. (I don’t make unilateral decisions about how we spend our money, but I can’t imagine the day that this village will be in the position to spend that kind of cash on lights with our roads and drains in their present condition and no plan to convert this village from septic to sewers.)
If you haven’t been following this topic for the past year, it pretty much snuck up and bit us on the butt.The prior administration and select elected officials had been working with FDOT without notifying the rest of the commission or the community, and FDOT had been actively working with them on the project without having been given official direction by the commission. In our form of government, the commission speaks as a group in writing on such matters, not through select commissioners and staff behind the backs of the rest of us. The commission in which I served last fall pressed “pause” on the project until we could fully understand the implications and include residents in the conversation. We conducted one public workshop several months ago to see the project for the first time, and since then our outside planners have been consulting with FDOT and staff about what’s best for the village. The “pause” has now ended, and that’s why this Thursday is so important.
This Thursday, April 22, at 6p, our planners will update the community on the project, and the commission will listen to resident input. This is YOUR workshop, not the commission’s. We will be in listen mode as you tell us what you think. Then, at an upcoming commission meeting (possibly as early as May 4), the commission will make its final decision and deliver it to FDOT. Based on what the commission decides, the project will move forward with a two-year completion window. At that point, there’s no turning back and any changes to our village will be permanent.
Clearly, this is big stuff. Hence, this post on Fred’s blog today and an email I sent last night on a Sunday evening.
To be clear, BP does have the option of declining the project altogether, but FDOT has previously reported that we can pick and choose elements of the project that suit us and we could also request that money for one element be diverted to others (for example: sidewalk money to lighting upgrades). This Thursday, our planners will tell us the final options from which the village must select and if FDOT’s offer has changed. (I suspect it has.) The commission needs to hear from you if you care about this project and how it will impact the village—good, bad or indifferent. If you don’t care, then you can ignore this message and the workshop. But given the implications, I hope to hear from many of you prior and to see you at the virtual meeting.
To be blunt, if you don’t speak out now, your opinions later won’t mean anything.
Feel free to reply to this email with your opinions, to share them with your other four elected commissioners, and to request that your email be read into public record if you can’t attend the virtual meeting this Thursday. Your best option of engaging is to attend, which is as simple as a click on your laptop, tablet or phone. I’ve included some important links below that make this all easy.
Thanks for hearing my plea that you engage in this critically important project. I want to hear all sides and all angles before I become one of the five people who will make choices that will impact our “oasis” for generations. I care enormously about this project, and I hope you do, too.
Link to Thursday’s workshop agenda, which includes instructions to attend by Zoom and to speak during public comment:
Link to the FDOT video of the first workshop, which includes the presentation (jump to the start at 5:00):
Link to the static FDOT presentation without having to watch the video:
Link to email addresses for all five elected officials of BP: NEVER CROSS-COMMUNICATE BETWEEN ELECTED OFFICIALS, PLEASE.
https://www.biscayneparkfl.gov/index.asp?SEC=4516B002-1F29-4888-ADCE-C9AF6D27752C&Type=B_LIST
Stay positive. Test negative. Cheers to BP2021!
Mac
MacDonald Kennedy
Commissioner, Village of Biscayne Park
Cell 305.213.5139
Mac,
ReplyDeleteThanks.
It is unclear why then Commissioner Harvey Bilt, who was acting more or less alone (as alone as you can act when Tracy Truppman is running the Commission), but sort of also in partnership with then manager Krishan Manners, approached the state about 6th Avenue. But whatever motivated him, it also turns out that 1) our biggest speeding problem is and has always been on 6th Avenue, and 2) a collection of Village residents, most of whom live on 6th Avenue, consider it unsafe. For our immediate purposes, and here, we won't go back into why someone buys a house on a busy street, then complains that they live on a busy street.
In any event, I hope to be present by Zoom on 4/22. Whether I am or I'm not, here's what I think: I completely agree that 6th Avenue is our main speeding problem. Speeding can cause complications, including accidents, and if anyone said they had confirmed that there have been more accidents on 6th Avenue than on any of our other streets, I would accept that.
However, the state has already been asked, and already said no, if we could lower the speed limit from the 30 MPH that it is now, and always was, and as all our other streets were, to 25 MPH, which all of our other streets are now. They've offered us some other choices, which you correctly recapitulated, and which include the big three: sidewalks, lighting, and drainage. Most or all of that does not address what I'm imagining might have been Harvey Bilt's reason for approaching the state to begin with, and the reason some of us agree they would like a change in 6th Avenue.
As for sidewalks, I do a reasonable amount of walking in the Village. I never walk along 6th Avenue. And it's not because there are no sidewalks. It is essentially unimaginable to me that anyone would walk along 6th Avenue. It's a walking course that doesn't make sense for anyone, or for any purpose. Bright lighting is debatable, and we should consult someone who knows a lot about birds, and whether or not brighter lighting will disorient or otherwise disturb our bird population. Unless the people who want a change on 6th Avenue don't care about that, and are only interested in anything that will decrease accidents. I do agree with you about the advantage and advisability of improved draininge.
If it turns out to be documentable that there are more accidents on 6th Avenue than elsewhere, and if we can't dramatically reduce that with better enforcement (or even if we can), I would favor two things. (I would not favor, nor do I believe the state will, reducing the number of lanes of 6th Avenue for those eight blocks out of 5.6 miles.) I would favor having the foot or foot and a half of the right sides of the right lanes grooved, so anyone who slides over toward the edge of the right lane will get a disturbing reminder/wake-up that they are about to slip off the road. And I would favor about a one foot to one and a half foot tall barrier (even breakaway metal is good) off the road, leaving space, of course, for enough of a shoulder for someone whose car has broken down, or gotten a flat tire.
Sixth Avenue is what it is for a reason. The whole 5.6 miles of 6th Avenue is that, except where the speed limit is 40, which it is up in CNMB. It was that when we all moved here, and when some of us decided we didn't want to live on a busy street, and others of us decided we did. If there is a documentable problem, we should try to solve that problem while simultaneously respecting the character of 6th Avenue, and what it was always intended to accomplish.
Fred
I believe Harvey’s initial request was for crosswalks across 6th Avenue connecting east and west sides of the village. We quickly found out that crosswalks must connect to sidewalks, which is how sidewalks became part of the equation. Now, FDOT’s plan includes sidewalks but no crosswalks. Is that because FDOT doesn’t deem them necessary based on our foot traffic? So there aren’t enough pedestrians to merit crosswalks but apparently there are enough to merit sidewalks? This project, which doesn’t cost the village a dime, is rather fuzzy around the edges. The other peculiarity is that FDOT says we only need more drains if we add sidewalks because of the amount of concrete that will be added to the village, decreasing natural drainage. So they’re saying that we don’t have flooding problems now without sidewalks? Clearly we do, so we need more and better drains, but they will not provide them on their own street if we don’t allow them to install sidewalks. Where’s the logic?
ReplyDeleteOh, "logic." That's a different conversation.
Delete