63rd St. Flyover

November Straw Ballot to Include 63rd Street Flyover
By Paula Pellegrino
NBT Contributing Writer

In an Aug. 30 special City of Miami Beach Commission meeting, Commission members voted 4-3 to allow Vice-Mayor Richard Steinberg’s question (RNC2) regarding the 63rd Street flyover to stand in its original wording on a straw ballot for the upcoming November election.

Before discussion on the issue began, Mayor David Dermer cautioned Commission members and attending citizens that the debate was centered around a very narrow issue; certainly not involving the repair project itself but simply whether or not it was necessary to offer voters the option of voicing an opinion on the subject. The results will have no real effect upon the flyover’s fate other than revealing public sentiment.

The question, as it is written, makes no mention of the fact that the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) has already made a decision to include reconstruction of the flyover within the bigger bridge repair project regardless of any voting results. It was the withholding of this fact in the question that drew the most reaction from the citizens and Commission members alike.

Barry Klein, Miami Beach resident who spoke at the meeting, stated that he has been “bombarded with misinformation” throughout the entire duration of the ongoing discussion on this topic. From hearing things like the repair will lead to the blocking of Allison Island Road to discrepancies about the dimensions of the left-hand turn,
Klein says he is having a problem trusting any new reports that he hears. Bottom line, as Klein expresses, is that we “have beaten this horse beyond death.” To him, the vote is silly, since FDOT is calling it a safety issue and will follow plans it made some time ago to deconstruct the flyover.

Safety is certainly a concern when it comes to the 63rd Street flyover, and even more so, the entire bridge. Records report 52 accidents in the span of two years. That’s one every other week. Of those, however, as Steinberg noted, only eight of the collisions actually involved the flyover itself. But most others, around 30, did involve people changing lanes trying to get onto it. Six involved signals being run and 20 were rear-end collisions, although none of those were in queuing for the flyover. One car hit a wall and a truck struck a pedestrian at the signal. FDOT has the intersection there on its “most dangerous” list.

Not all the firefighters present at the meeting agreed with this, however, citing that slower speeds actually decreased the number of accidents over the stretch. Some, including Steinberg who first wrote the question, did momentarily wonder whether it was really worth inconveniencing voters for such a low number of actual flyover accidents.

At the drawbridge itself, though, one worker who has been at the site for more than five years, noted that it is not uncommon for him to see all types of trucks getting stuck at the flyover’s underpass, which cannot accommodate any vehicle that stands taller than 11’8.” One crash he witnessed on the top of the flyover knocked off the red flashing warning signal and another took out part of the guardrail.

Commissioner Luis Garcia, Jr., who seconded Steinberg’s original motion, disputed the “small safety issue” data as laid out by Vice-Mayor Steinberg at the August 30 meeting. He believes that the potential for accidents is great. He argued to put the question on the ballot even if the FDOT has already decided what to do with the flyover and reminded his fellow Commission members that fire and rescue vehicles are not permitted to use the flyover in its current state.

Commission Matti Herrera-Bower, who voted against the motion to include the question on November’ ballot, attended an FDOT project meeting one week prior to the special Commission session. She relayed that, as it was explained to her there, construction on the entire bridge project will take one and a half years to complete.

“I want people to understand from the get-go that there will be construction.” She stated that it might actually be worse if the flyover is not taken down because it would complicate the traffic route FDOT is planning to implement on the bridge during the repair. The mechanics of the drawbridge are being fixed. It is that procedure, she stressed, which is expected to last almost a year and a half. The flyover portion of the project would be included in the given time span and its omission from the FDOT’s “to do” list would do little to lessen the impending congestion.

Since the question, as it is written, mentions nothing about this fact, Commissioner Bower was quite concerned that voters who are not aware of FDOT’s overall bridge plan will reject the flyover question thinking that it would mean no traffic interruption at all. Her anxiety over this exclusion was echoed by some citizens, namely Robert Warren, who attended the meeting. While speaking, he cautioned Commission members not to confuse voters. He stated that most others he talks to just don’t want to deal with construction. He can imagine what they will say after they vote against the flyover repair and still get fifteen months of construction. “We are fooling the people. FDOT will come in and there will be construction.”

Commissioner Simon Cruz felt that the question, if extended to the public on the straw ballot, would be nothing more than a “good feel measure” unless someone there could be persuasive enough to change the stance of the FDOT. He voted to oppose its appearance on the November ballot.

In his own unequivocal style, Commissioner Saul Gross, before he himself opposed the motion, declared that since the project is totally in FDOT jurisdiction, it would be dishonest to put the question to voters because it gives them the idea that there is a chance that the bridge could actually stay up. In an attempt to “make lemonade out of lemons,” Gross suggested that a citizen advisory commission should be established to monitor the situation. Also, he suggested that perhaps some city money could be spent on a traffic study to figure out ways to improve traffic in the area. This study could focus on devising a more streamlined set-up than the lane system that is currently in place.

The idea that “we have no say” is an erroneous one according to Commissioner Jose Smith. He stated that FDOT could indeed add another lane to the north/south portion of the flyover but chooses not to because of the extra expense. Smith asserted that there were indeed other options. “We can go to FDOT and tell them to give us another alternative, but it’s not ‘this flyover or nothing.’” He goes on to suggest that the new lane configuration proposed by FDOT might actually increase the number of accidents and in five to 10 years, there will be more gridlock again.

So, to him, the proposed FDOT plan is not a long-term solution. The public, Smith says, should be allowed to “weigh options” and he cast his vote to retain the question.

In a final comment before the Commission passed the motion, Commissioner Luis Garcia Jr. reminded members, for whatever it was worth, that the FDOT wasn’t totally blameless for the condition the flyover and bridge are in right now. To him, the fact that Harding Avenue has been kept open as a three lane street heading south has turned it into an absolute thoroughfare for residents of Broward County and points north as they make their way onto the Beach. This overuse has greatly contributed to the amount of traffic and wear and tear on Beach streets, particularly the 63rd Street drawbridge and flyover, which were never designed to service such a great number of motorists.

In a telephone interview after Steinberg’s motion passed, he stated that ultimately, he was “happy voters will get to voice their opinion on the question of whether the 63rd Street flyover will be preserved.”

Send us feedback at [e-mail].



 
September 2004