I won't dwell here, as my stance is clearly evident from previous posts. New article today, same gist as County Commissioners now coming from City of Miami commissioners. At least some progress is being made, but the vagueness of the plan and lack of site analysis/success-failure evidence is setting this whole process up to perhaps be a failure.
And, to just get ya scratching your head a little more, we have Miami City Manager Pete Hernandez saying last week, concerning the City's attempts to respond to/fund Orange Bowl renovations needed to keep UM Hurricane football in the OB:
''There's a big gap,'' Hernandez said. ``We're looking at the revenue streams to see what we can do. I'm optimistic. There are ways it can be done. Within 45 to 60 days, we'll have an idea of the viability of this.'',
and now saying about the baseball stadium:
''The downtown site looked good. However, I think that other sites in Miami, including the Orange Bowl, could be very good sites ..."
Those are two 100% contradicting statements from the same City Manager in a span of less than 7 days.
Confusion. Which way is he going? Which way is Miami going? I try to avoid being a conspiracy theorist, but is someone/something/$$$ pushing this decision one way or another, in a direction that in my opinion is not beneficial to Miami.
Thursday, March 8, 2007
Wednesday, March 7, 2007
Stadium Arcadium
And so it continues. Miami's stadium development is like a game of hopskotch, jumping from one idea to another.
Miami Herald reports on the continual great flip flopping going on with the new Marlins stadium.
In the grand scheme of things are the issues of where the stadiums go a HUGE deal? NO. But ... a) it is important that we move forward on these stadium projects and get something done, and b) in the grand scheme of things it isn't the biggest deal, but some enormous benefits can come from certain decisions.
So Miami-Dade commissioners are continually flip-flopping on their support of different sites for the Marlins' stadium, and they now seem happy that UM is considering football reallocation to Dolphins stadium because they are eager to rekindle the Orange Bowl siting of the Marlins' stadium. So here's the play by play:
- Loosing the UM football to Dolphins Stadium is a horrible idea for the City of Miami, in my opinion, and not something for our commissioners to be happy and supportive of.
- The location of 2 stadiums, if UM doesn't move, in the medium-density residential neighborhood of the Orange Bowl is a dangerous decision that would need a lot of planning analysis to even begin to get my support.
- Miami-Dade Commissioners declare the following as issues with the downtown plan they had espoused in the past month:
- The 9-acre site is too small (County Commissioners should not be making these decisions/statements without proper analysis and cited evidence from qualified planners and architects, of which none is offered in the press at least)
- The new downtown stadium site will not reenergize the area (A. I can't offer a professional opinion on this, but the past 15 years I've been observing urban spaces, I'm pretty sure I've noticed urban stadiums have a lot more round-the-clock life to them than further removed stadiums. B. County Commissioners should not be making theses decisions/statement without proper analysis and cited evidence from qualified planners and economists, of which none is offered in the press)
- The new downtown stadium will rely on community development money that should be spent elsewhere (Fair point that I agree with, but whose to say the same issue will not apply to the Orange Bowl sited baseball stadium)
- The Commissioners are proposing to move forward with funding plans that are non-site specific. I think this is a good idea, but I can't say whether this makes the whole proposal too weak/vague to get County or State funding and tax breaks.
Pheww, I need to take a breather, as this can get quite frustrating. Ok, ...
- "The commissioner [Martinez] even doubted if the Marlins would be able to sell beer because of the site's proximity to a charter school." (Please, I implore our County Commissioners to do more research before their public hearings, so that a comment/concern such as this does not come up randomly. I'm pretty sure this wouldn't be an issue.)
- For those that don't understand, the Marlins are a client, a tenant, we are trying to attract/keep. We got the Marlins/MLB interested and in support of the downtown site, and when they go to a public hearing to show their huge support, our county commissioners 180 and tell them that the site that the Commissioners proposed no longer has the Commissioners' support. This is not how you keep a client interested.
In conclusion, I think Miami will continue to be a mess if comments such as this characterize our Commission: ''Let's hope and pray the Hurricanes do move . . . and let's put the Marlins where they belong, at the Orange Bowl,'' Martinez said.
Wow, yes, let's loose our historied excellent college football team, and push for a stadium site that has failed in the past. Please, someone with influence get behind these commissioners, and lets pull together meetings where more players (UM, City of Miami, MLB, Children's Courthouse, non-governmental professional planners and architects) are at the table, coordinating and compromising, to work for a better solution for both of these stadiums.
Miami Herald reports on the continual great flip flopping going on with the new Marlins stadium.
In the grand scheme of things are the issues of where the stadiums go a HUGE deal? NO. But ... a) it is important that we move forward on these stadium projects and get something done, and b) in the grand scheme of things it isn't the biggest deal, but some enormous benefits can come from certain decisions.
So Miami-Dade commissioners are continually flip-flopping on their support of different sites for the Marlins' stadium, and they now seem happy that UM is considering football reallocation to Dolphins stadium because they are eager to rekindle the Orange Bowl siting of the Marlins' stadium. So here's the play by play:
- Loosing the UM football to Dolphins Stadium is a horrible idea for the City of Miami, in my opinion, and not something for our commissioners to be happy and supportive of.
- The location of 2 stadiums, if UM doesn't move, in the medium-density residential neighborhood of the Orange Bowl is a dangerous decision that would need a lot of planning analysis to even begin to get my support.
- Miami-Dade Commissioners declare the following as issues with the downtown plan they had espoused in the past month:
- The 9-acre site is too small (County Commissioners should not be making these decisions/statements without proper analysis and cited evidence from qualified planners and architects, of which none is offered in the press at least)
- The new downtown stadium site will not reenergize the area (A. I can't offer a professional opinion on this, but the past 15 years I've been observing urban spaces, I'm pretty sure I've noticed urban stadiums have a lot more round-the-clock life to them than further removed stadiums. B. County Commissioners should not be making theses decisions/statement without proper analysis and cited evidence from qualified planners and economists, of which none is offered in the press)
- The new downtown stadium will rely on community development money that should be spent elsewhere (Fair point that I agree with, but whose to say the same issue will not apply to the Orange Bowl sited baseball stadium)
- The Commissioners are proposing to move forward with funding plans that are non-site specific. I think this is a good idea, but I can't say whether this makes the whole proposal too weak/vague to get County or State funding and tax breaks.
Pheww, I need to take a breather, as this can get quite frustrating. Ok, ...
- "The commissioner [Martinez] even doubted if the Marlins would be able to sell beer because of the site's proximity to a charter school." (Please, I implore our County Commissioners to do more research before their public hearings, so that a comment/concern such as this does not come up randomly. I'm pretty sure this wouldn't be an issue.)
- For those that don't understand, the Marlins are a client, a tenant, we are trying to attract/keep. We got the Marlins/MLB interested and in support of the downtown site, and when they go to a public hearing to show their huge support, our county commissioners 180 and tell them that the site that the Commissioners proposed no longer has the Commissioners' support. This is not how you keep a client interested.
In conclusion, I think Miami will continue to be a mess if comments such as this characterize our Commission: ''Let's hope and pray the Hurricanes do move . . . and let's put the Marlins where they belong, at the Orange Bowl,'' Martinez said.
Wow, yes, let's loose our historied excellent college football team, and push for a stadium site that has failed in the past. Please, someone with influence get behind these commissioners, and lets pull together meetings where more players (UM, City of Miami, MLB, Children's Courthouse, non-governmental professional planners and architects) are at the table, coordinating and compromising, to work for a better solution for both of these stadiums.
Monday, March 5, 2007
Attempt #2
At an F-stop blue.
I wouldn't have ever tried writing this blog if millions of people before me hadn't already started blogging, so it is with great appreciation and respect that I thank all those who have come before me and paved the path. However, at the same time, I hope others are ok with one of the purposes of my blog being to create dialogue over the postings from other blogs I read about the local Miami area and its planning scene. And for now this is what I got:
Over on the Coconut Grove Grapevine, (CGG) whose author I don't know but completely respect for their dedicated care and concern for their neighborhood, there seems to be some disagreement with the way the planning process is going for SW 27th Avenue, and subsequently throughout Miami.
For anyone that doesn't know, SW 27th Avenue is one of the most important roads leading into Coconut Grove and is in horrible condition. CGG agrees with this, but seems to want to simply see some road modification work and greening done, and that's about it. In the same posting he refers to the waterfront planning process going on for Coconut Grove, and overall CGG seems to be displeased with the way these planning opportunities lead to further development and not just beautification. I think CGG is scared that when a planning process becomes fully exploratory, and brings up many different solutions and development scenarios, that the development powers that be will jump at the opportunity to cram the Grove with some whole lota shotty development.
And this is where we differ in opinion.
To put it bluntly, I believe we have little control over our area's population growth, and thus to avoid development, thinking that it is the reason we are growing, is wrong. The people are coming, we can't stop it, and we must plan, redevelop, and build to make sure Miami can harmoniously support its growing population.
I am pointing all this out to highlight the riff that exists in Miami between those that want to see Miami fixed up through halting development and beautifying what we already have, and those that want to see it fixed up with more development (some understand that it needs to be planned development). But we all agree that where Miami is today is a result of horrible planning over the past 20 years, and basically patch work development and problem fixing.
When something like the "fixing-up", aka its redevelopment, of SW 27th Ave. and of Coconut Grove's waterfront takes place, this is the opportunity we missed in the past to instate a planning process that can pave the way for positive growth. CGG expresses:
"Every time the City or County has some project in mind it ends up being a major issue. Can't some trees be added to 27th Avenue -- lots of trees -- and maybe clean up some sidewalks and plant some flowers? Isn't this good enough? Is it necessary to destroy businesses?"
Now, I don't know the full details of what proposals have been made for that project, but what CGG is hoping for is a sort of patchwork solution of just beautifying the road instead of engaging in a full planning process that looks at the surroundings too. No, we can't do it that way. We must engage in a full fledged process, and unfortunately, if it sometimes leads to change that some don't like, such as the increase in density or loss of some businesses, than that is what must be done for the greater good. The caveat here is that the planning process must be run well, with full public participation, and its end product should be a solution that most of the public agrees with.
CGG: "The same goes for the waterfront plan. Does the whole area need to be demolished? Can't the convention center be knocked down -- green space added and that be it?"
To simply demolish the convention center and green it over would be a waste of city funds (demolition is not cheap), and a wasted opportunity to invigorate the waterfront with some commercial activity that will help pay for its maintenance. With the removal of the convention center there is the opening up of so much opportunity to improve traffic flow, increase cultural space for the city, increase environmental preservation and education opportunities, etc. We owe it to the land we live on to look at problems in a macro-sense, spend some time planning for how to fix them.
I wouldn't have ever tried writing this blog if millions of people before me hadn't already started blogging, so it is with great appreciation and respect that I thank all those who have come before me and paved the path. However, at the same time, I hope others are ok with one of the purposes of my blog being to create dialogue over the postings from other blogs I read about the local Miami area and its planning scene. And for now this is what I got:
Over on the Coconut Grove Grapevine, (CGG) whose author I don't know but completely respect for their dedicated care and concern for their neighborhood, there seems to be some disagreement with the way the planning process is going for SW 27th Avenue, and subsequently throughout Miami.
For anyone that doesn't know, SW 27th Avenue is one of the most important roads leading into Coconut Grove and is in horrible condition. CGG agrees with this, but seems to want to simply see some road modification work and greening done, and that's about it. In the same posting he refers to the waterfront planning process going on for Coconut Grove, and overall CGG seems to be displeased with the way these planning opportunities lead to further development and not just beautification. I think CGG is scared that when a planning process becomes fully exploratory, and brings up many different solutions and development scenarios, that the development powers that be will jump at the opportunity to cram the Grove with some whole lota shotty development.
And this is where we differ in opinion.
To put it bluntly, I believe we have little control over our area's population growth, and thus to avoid development, thinking that it is the reason we are growing, is wrong. The people are coming, we can't stop it, and we must plan, redevelop, and build to make sure Miami can harmoniously support its growing population.
I am pointing all this out to highlight the riff that exists in Miami between those that want to see Miami fixed up through halting development and beautifying what we already have, and those that want to see it fixed up with more development (some understand that it needs to be planned development). But we all agree that where Miami is today is a result of horrible planning over the past 20 years, and basically patch work development and problem fixing.
When something like the "fixing-up", aka its redevelopment, of SW 27th Ave. and of Coconut Grove's waterfront takes place, this is the opportunity we missed in the past to instate a planning process that can pave the way for positive growth. CGG expresses:
"Every time the City or County has some project in mind it ends up being a major issue. Can't some trees be added to 27th Avenue -- lots of trees -- and maybe clean up some sidewalks and plant some flowers? Isn't this good enough? Is it necessary to destroy businesses?"
Now, I don't know the full details of what proposals have been made for that project, but what CGG is hoping for is a sort of patchwork solution of just beautifying the road instead of engaging in a full planning process that looks at the surroundings too. No, we can't do it that way. We must engage in a full fledged process, and unfortunately, if it sometimes leads to change that some don't like, such as the increase in density or loss of some businesses, than that is what must be done for the greater good. The caveat here is that the planning process must be run well, with full public participation, and its end product should be a solution that most of the public agrees with.
CGG: "The same goes for the waterfront plan. Does the whole area need to be demolished? Can't the convention center be knocked down -- green space added and that be it?"
To simply demolish the convention center and green it over would be a waste of city funds (demolition is not cheap), and a wasted opportunity to invigorate the waterfront with some commercial activity that will help pay for its maintenance. With the removal of the convention center there is the opening up of so much opportunity to improve traffic flow, increase cultural space for the city, increase environmental preservation and education opportunities, etc. We owe it to the land we live on to look at problems in a macro-sense, spend some time planning for how to fix them.
Miami's Stadiumanigans
So this is what goes through my rational head as I relax on Saturday evening, reading the Herald, somewhere in the cockles of my mind a subconscious sense of relaxation and satisfaction knowing Miami might be getting closer to pulling off a baseball stadium deal that could begin to help our city liken itself to other successful urban cities, and I come upon this other stadium article. At this point, I slam down the paper and crumble the wad of toilet paper that was in my hand. Are you kidding me!!!
And pause. This is my first posting of substance, so I am trying to set the flavor for what I want to express in this bloggy blog. I want to express my raw emotions and candid thoughts, but will make sure to check them with the rational understanding I have so far acquired through my planning profession, and at the same time leave it open to critique from anyone.
And unpause. So these are my thoughts in a nutshell:
- The Orange Bowl, its identity, and UM's football history there are probably one of Miami's top-20 most identifiable positive traits. Now, for anyone that hasn't noticed, Miami is in the business of killing its own history, but this one right here is too big to kill.
- Wow, how much would it suck for Miami to gain one stadium and loose the other. A true success story! For, if UM leaves the Orange Bowl, I fear the survival of the actual stadium itself, and smell demolition acoming. Oh, and wouldn't this little twist be great ... the Canes move to Dolphins Stadium and the baseball stadium deal falls through or gets delayed ... and we're back to 1980s downtown Miami ... WITH NOTHING IN IT.
- But, alas, I feel bad for the City of Miami. These are two big cash investments that I don't know if the city is prepared to plan for. From my understanding, what the City is proposing to invest in the baseball stadium is our tax money, which is OK with me, and I guess doesn't require upfront funds from the budget. But it seems the Orange Bowl renovations, which the City has openly begun planning for, has an increasing cost that would require some cash from the City. Can't really give a good analysis here, I just know it doesn't sound too good.
- Finally, to UM I must ask, is this the best decision they could make? I understand their want to increase their athletic profit (although $4 million, when you're in the big league that UM is in, isn't that huge an amount of money). Let us for now put aside the question of what would happen to student attendance numbers (up or down?) if it was moved to the Dolphins Stadium. UM has made it openly aware that they actively want to raise their ranking, which for those that don't know involves about 50 factors which include academics, facilities growth, alumni giving, etc. In my opinion, one thing UM misses out on that could really help raise its prestige, is that it has sub par interaction with the area that houses it, be it Coral Gables or Miami. And now, to ponder removing one of its strongest ties to the Miami area, and taking it up north to Dolphins Stadium is a mistake in my opinion. UM has a responsibility to the community that houses it to help us figure out a way - a solution - for how to keep UM football in the Orange Bowl and eventually fix the stadium up.
There are hundreds of other reasons why this seems a bad idea. The intimacy of the stadium for the more action packed college football is appropriate versus Dolphins Stadium's more impersonal feel. Furthermore, what makes the best universities in the country the best - TRADITION!! tradition! Tradition!!
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Welcome
Hello all. I don't know if this is cliche to say, but I am not typically prone to be a blogger. I have never been successful at upkeeping something of this sort, whether it be a journal or webpage. However, I am challenging myself through this page because I feel I have unfulfilled potential in my life, and I'm not sure what outlet I'm supposed to fulfill it through, but I thought I would give this a shot as a beginning.
I am a 24 year old urban planner with lots of thoughts and ideas that I want to express and have others comment on. I read quite a few blogs about my local area, Miami, and I find myself frustrated many times with the postings and comments I see. So rather than just aimlessly and constantly comment on people's pages, I decided to start posting my own original thoughts.
The main theme of my thoughts goes something like this: I love urban spaces, have and always will. I love Miami. I love other big cities in the world. I am idealistic. But I am training myself to become more realistic, and mold my ideas into tools that can actually accomplish something in our realistic unfair world. I attended a great university where I was surrounded with so many different disciplines of thought and perspectives, I have worked within the office of one of Miami's City Commissioners, I have worked for a private transportation engineering firm and an architecture firm, and am now working for a private planning firm that works with both private developers and government clients. My point being that I think I have seen a good amount of planning perspectives, and am starting to understand how difficult urban planning is (both from the private and public side). There is no one right or wrong way, and too many critics act like there is. So I am here to try and spill some thoughts on ways to find the compromise between all these forces.
Wish me luck.
I am a 24 year old urban planner with lots of thoughts and ideas that I want to express and have others comment on. I read quite a few blogs about my local area, Miami, and I find myself frustrated many times with the postings and comments I see. So rather than just aimlessly and constantly comment on people's pages, I decided to start posting my own original thoughts.
The main theme of my thoughts goes something like this: I love urban spaces, have and always will. I love Miami. I love other big cities in the world. I am idealistic. But I am training myself to become more realistic, and mold my ideas into tools that can actually accomplish something in our realistic unfair world. I attended a great university where I was surrounded with so many different disciplines of thought and perspectives, I have worked within the office of one of Miami's City Commissioners, I have worked for a private transportation engineering firm and an architecture firm, and am now working for a private planning firm that works with both private developers and government clients. My point being that I think I have seen a good amount of planning perspectives, and am starting to understand how difficult urban planning is (both from the private and public side). There is no one right or wrong way, and too many critics act like there is. So I am here to try and spill some thoughts on ways to find the compromise between all these forces.
Wish me luck.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
