Father and son waited at least 4 minutes to cross this street today.

As soon as father and son darted across the intersection, the light turned green for this car.

I was optimistic that the problem was going to be fixed today.  At 8:10am the electrical contractors were already on the scene as you can see below.

8:15am

At around 12:30pm I headed home for lunch and for my daily 15 minute siesta. I was surprised to see that the pedestrian signals were still not working, but I had high hopes that the problem would be fixed today.  The electrical contractors were still busy at work as you can see below.

12:30pm

I left work this afternoon around 5:30pm feeling pretty good that the crosswalks signals would be working, but to my chagrin they were not.

5:30pm

My thinking was that there was  some secret that the highway planners knew that could enlighten us transit advocates as to why transit consistently fails in our region, but I was wrong. There is no secret, just institutional malaise, lack of vision, and as one member of the audience described it, a ‘bubble’ mentality.

I was disappointed in myself on my way home because I came armed with a series of tough questions about why we don’t have transit, and how the panelists (as the responsible parties) could do something to change the status quot. But I didn’t ask my questions – I was too busy listening to the spin. Don’t get me wrong, I learned an awful lot about how things work, but it wasn’t because of anything that the panelists said. Their insulated and distant positions on the need and demand for transit was more revealing than any of their answers were. It was as if their opinions of what ‘works’ in Miami, after so many years of experience, had been calcified into facts. ‘This is the way it is in Miami-Dade County’ was the idea touted by some , with Commissioner Gimenez sharing with me in conversation that his apparent cynicism came from years of dealing with inept transit management (an understandable feeling considering his efforts to address the management of the PTP).

I abandoned my questions early on because of the enthusiastic and vocal audience of transit professionals, planners and interested citizens who came up with their own questions for the panel. I was happy to see such an interest in the subject, and thought it was a signal to the members of the panel that they need to get moving on providing creative transit solutions.

Funding dominated the conversation (as it will when discussing transit issues), and I was happy that Javier Betancourt (Miami DDA’s Manager for Urban Planning and Transportation) asked the panel why transit doesn’t get the same funding that highways do. No one could give a simple, straight answer, but I think the answer to this question is the key to solving our mobility problems (and no, I don’t think our highways are the solution).

Ysela Llort, Assistant County Manager in charge of transportation was in the audience, and she answered the question by describing the competitive  and difficult Federal New Starts process for building transit infrastructure. Commissioner Gimenez described the problem as involving the operations and maintenance side of transit once the infrastructure is up and running. (Ysela also made this point.)

In conversation before and after both Commissioner Gimenez and Javier Rodriguez made interesting points about the funding conundrum. Why do roads and highways get funded over transit? Because government doesn’t have to get involved in the operations and maintenance side of the equation-  that is largely the responsibility of the citizenry (you are responsible for maintaining and fueling your car).

Lack of density was also mentioned, but what was not mentioned was lack of demand. I said several times over the evening that we need to get people out of their cars by making driving less convenient, to which the Commissioner and Alice Bravo grimaced. What an un-American thing to force people out of their cars. I disagree. The point of my comment was not that we should make people abandon their cars, but to provide more alternatives. How can we justify spending hundreds of millions of dollars improving flow on the Palmetto – which is within the fiefdom of FDOT – while not providing a convenient alternative to people who don’t want to sit in traffic. We wouldn’t have to improve flow if we gave people an easier choice to make.

I heard many promising things as well, most notably from Javier Rodriguez, who really gets the bigger picture. I’ll write more about him and his thoughts tomorrow. All being said, I came away with the hope that we have things to look forward too.

PS. Harpal is awesome. If anyone wants a free EASY Metro card, send me your email.

But some cycling advocates don’t think that is enough. The MacArthur is dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists, they say.

‘I think it’s really an accident waiting to happen” said Felipe Azenha, who used to ride his bike over the Venetian daily to work. Azenha pointed to recent causeway calamities. In March, NFL wide receiver Donte Stallworth ran over a pedestrian on the MacArthur, killing him. In August, a cab driver plowed into almost a dozen cyclists out on a leisurely ride on a Sunday morning. None of the bicyclists died.

‘They have to put safety barriers out on the MacArthur and make it more clear that there will be bicycles and pedestrians,’ said Azenha, who also suggested a lower speed limit on the MacArthur during the month of May.

Molins said he could not address the concerns because the causeway is a state road controlled by the Florida Department of Transportation.

Of course, we all know that FDOT has said the County can do something by working with the statewide agency to ensure safe passage between the two cities for bicyclists and pedestrians.  Well, May 1 has come and nearly gone.  There is no telling if action will be taken.  Regardless, life goes on for the intrepid, as I saw four other bicyclists and two runners out on the MacArthur at 8:30 this morning. If the County and FDOT were wise, they would work together to figure out a solution before someone gets hurt.

If you do decide to head out there, please take extreme caution.

If you build it – Traffic will consume the neighborhood, taxpayers will fund 73% of 2000 temporary construction jobs, Jeffery Loria will cash out in a few years, the Little Havana neighborhood will be revitalized disenfranchised, The Marlins will stay in Miami (for 35 years, guaranteed), etc…

This Friday, the Miami-Dade Commission will meet to determine the fate (maybe – they will likely postpone the vote) of the Marlins’ Ballpark at the Orange Bowl.  As we noted earlier, from a strictly urban policy perspective – the current site plan (and funding scheme) is a calamity.

In addition to bilking taxpayers for 73% of stadium costs, we will also find ourselves footing the bills for at least $100 million dollars worth of parking.  Then, in the not too distant future, we’ll realize we built the stadium too far away from existing transit, and we’ll need to fund a reasonable solution (like a streetcar west from downtown to the MIC) or our elected officials will think up of a $180 million scheme to create a people-mover extension from the Culmer station.  By this point, I’m sure most rational people would then agree that it would have been better to save the hundreds of millions in parking and transit costs and just build the damned thing in downtown, near existing parking and transit to begin with…  But hey, this is Miami, right?  We can’t do anything right…

To reiterate – the current site plan will have deleterious effects on the surrounding community.  In its current state, the site will act as a vacuum – sucking in traffic while providing few benefits to little Havana.

Central to the Marlins’ and public officials’ pitch to taxpayers was a promise that, in exchange for $450 million in public subsidies, the $609 million stadium project would propel redevelopment in the surrounding area, luring commerce, jobs, amenities and foot traffic to an area that sorely lacks them.

But the stadium site plan released this month suggests that the city of Miami’s approach might best be summed up as “build it and hope.”

Contrary to Andres Viglucci’s thoughts, to me, the current site plan evoke more of a “build it and to hell with the surroundings.”

In reading the article last weekend, I was curious if anyone caught onto the glaring contradiction posed by the political proponents of the stadium plan and the city planners.

On one hand, political proponents claim the park will serve as a catalyst, bringing commercial and retail activity to the community at least 80 days a year.  This activity is confined to the “mixed-use” garages (FYI – parking/retail mix does not constitute mixed use) that provide scarce retail space along the base of the garages.  This space, of course, is supposed to be sufficient to create a vibrant district around the stadium, regardless of the season.

Then the truth comes out we have the city planner’s take on the garages surrounding the stadium:

City planners say the size and shape of the garages were dictated largely by the Marlins’ need for 6,000 spaces and quick exit times.

My question remains, if we were planning a vibrant district around the stadium, wouldn’t we want to complicate the exit procedure so that people would linger around the stadium longer?  It appears that is what the Seminole Hard Rock Casino did (rather well, I might add) in Hollywood (from what I’m told: just try leaving there in a timely manor on a Saturday night after a concert…) From a planning perspective, I would agree that this idea is convoluted, but it illustrates that the entire site plan is being designed so that drivers can come and leave as efficiently as possible on game day – not as it should be – a structure built to compliment a community.

As our own Tony Garcia aptly noted, ”Why are people going to come to this area?  What’s going to make it a destination, and not just for baseball games?…You need a better mix of uses here, not just parking garages.”

Below are a few images of some other successful baseball parks around the country.  These stadiums, particularly San Diego’s Petco Park, exemplify what a Baseball stadium should look like, how it should fit in with the surroundings, and how people interact with these spaces not just during baseball season, but 365 days a year. Compare these parks to the rendering above.

The Development Around Petco Park (Image Via: docsplatter)

New Development Around Petco Park (Image Via: Oh Snap)

Development Around AT&T Park (Image Via: Gedawei)

Wrigley Field as Seen From the EL (Image Via: straightedge217)

Fenway Park's Entrance (Image Via: Ally85)

Tony says:

The type of development that this site deserves is too big for the city of Miami and Miami-Dade County — they are not in the business of developing land. Elected officials must be better stewards of public coffers. If they cannot do what is responsible now, then they need to wait until the time is right. As for the Marlins, if they want to leave, call their bluff. If they don’t want to stay, then we don’t want them.

Call me cynical, but what Miami-Dade needs is a proactive approach to engineering and designing our streets for safety so that incidents like this, and the many like it, are  avoided in the first place–not a communication strategy quickly detailing how another Miami-Dade resident has been maimed  by a speeding motorist, along an over-sized four-lane road, where there isn’t adequate lighting.

Although I missed the official rally–Critical Mass had a late start–I heard enthusiasm for the politicians on hand–especially Commissioner Sanchez– and of course from attendees about the event. Let’s keep pushing them to make Miami-Dade more bicycle and pedestrian friendly.

Thanks to our friend Rydel over at  Bike Miami Scene for providing us with yet another great video.

Ride the Rickenbacker – Miami, FL. from rydel high on Vimeo.

As for the new bicycle lanes–the reason Ride The ‘Rick occurred–they certainly improve the safety and visibility of bicyclists riding the Causeway. Of particular note is the new toll booth lane supposedly dedicated to bicyclists only, except during periods of intense traffic.  That unexpected improvement will make the transition form mainland to causeway a whole lot smoother and safer for bicyclists and pedestrians, who currently use a sidewalk to narrow for sharing.

However, I do think the County missed a key opportunity with the actual bridge portions of the causeway. Known as the most exhilarating, but dangerous part of the ride, one has to wonder why each bridge is without signage or on-pavement markings. Unless there is some asinine  traffic law or some reasoning that I am missing, it seems the bridges would have been perfect for not only the aforementioned signage, but a real signature bicycle infrastructure solution. Colored lanes to improve visibility as well as bollards or curbing to physically protect cyclists on the bridge immediately come to mind.

In addition, where the parallel shared use pass crosses the bicycle lanes and four lanes of traffic, it may have been wise to add a blinking yellow light to complement the “Pedestrians Crossing” sign.  We all know motorists move at speeds upwards of 65mph along the causeway, so any and all precaution at grade crossings should have been taken–especially for those pedestrians and bicyclists traveling at night.

Otherwise, the lanes seem to be well-signed, marked and detailed at all intersection crossings. I certainly liked the “Wrong Way” signs on the back of the “Bicycle Lane” signs, alerting bicyclists to their wrongdoing if traveling in the wrong bicycle lane direction.

More pictures to come…Let’s hope the momentum continues…

You are invited to attend a Public Meeting to review and comment on the draft Needs Alternative of the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). The LRTP is being developed to guide federal, state, and local transportation funding allocations through the Year 2035 and the Needs Alternative is a list of needed improvements to the County’s transportation system that will form the basis for the LRTP.  This comprehensive plan will consist of highway, transit, bicycle, pedestrian, and other types of improvements for maximizing local and regional mobility of people and goods. Solutions will include new, creative, and innovative approaches to current transportation challenges.  The final draft of the LRTP will be presented for approval to the MPO Governing Board in late 2009.

Who:Miami-Dade MPO

What: 2035 LRTP Public Meetings

When and Where: The following meetings will be held from 6:30 PM to 8:30 PM:

· January 29 – Miami Beach Regional Library, 227 22nd Street, Miami Beach, FL  33139

· January 29 – West Kendall Regional Library, 10201 Hammocks Blvd. Miami, FL 33196

· February 3 – Homestead Branch Library, 700 N Homestead Blvd. Homestead, FL 33030

· February 3 – Coral Gables Library, 3443 Segovia St. Coral Gables, FL 33134

· February 5 – Gwen Margolis Center, 1590 NE 123rd St. North Miami, FL 33161

· February 5 – Miami-Dade College West Campus, 3800 NW 115th Ave. Room 1121 Doral, FL 33178

Why: To encourage citizens to become familiar and get involved with the transportation planning            process.

For more info: www.miamidade2035transportationplan.com.