A Tale of Two Bridges

A Tale of Two Bridges
Miami-Dade Commissioner Xavier Suarez
Miami-Dade Commissioner Xavier Suarez

There has been much talk in recent days about a “signature” bridge to be designed and built in the general area of Overtown, where the existing highway’s massive, supporting columns divide historic neighborhoods.

Its price tag, at $800 million, guarantees that there will be accusations of cronyism and backroom dealing in a bidding process that started out with 17 proposers and has ended up with two ranked very close to each other.

Lost in the discussion is the fact that this is the classic “bridge to nowhere.” It doesn’t span any body of water or deep ravine. It is simply an elevated highway (technically referred to as a “viaduct”). Its horizontal and vertical mass ruins the view corridors from the Arsht Center; this fact alone prompted Miami’s powers-that-be to suggest a new design that would at least raise the level of the highway in the hope that its mass is less of a visual obstruction.

Thus was the stage set for the three-part drama that ensued.

ACT I

Ignoring the calls of many past city mayors (myself included) to make this “bridge” into a “tunnel” and thus restore the visual and pedestrian flow from Overtown to the bay, the state began a selection process for the design of the new “bridge.” About the only solid criterion going forward was that the new highway be elevated to a height in the range of 30 to 40 feet.

ACT II

Miami Mayor Tomas Regalado and Commissioner Marc Sarnoff instituted a lawsuit against the state in which they argued that the new “bridge” ought to take into account the community’s preference as to aesthetics. The suit might not have had legal merit, but it sure made sense to the affected communities (including Overtown, Downtown and the so-called Omni area). The lawsuit was settled with the creation of a committee of stakeholders (county, city, DDA, Arsht Center) that the court agreed should have a voice, if not a vote, on the design of the “signature bridge.”

ACT III

Applying the byzantine rules of a “negotiated bid process,” the Florida Department of Transportation whittled the design-and-build proposals to two, and ranked the winning bidder slightly higher than the second one. The rankings by the state conflicted with the ones by the community-based “signature bridge” committee, which ranked the two top bids in reverse order.
Adding to the bizarre character of the selection process is a “cone of silence” requirement which, though meant to avoid lobbying of the selection process by the bidders, has been used by the state to shroud from the public the actual design proposals.

DENOUEMENT

Art, of course, is in the eye of the beholder. But for once the overwhelming preference of the elites, the public officials and the people at large agreed: The second bidder’s design (“aerial dancers”) is far superior to the one recommended by FDOT (“tarantula”).

The reader can judge for himself/herself. Many of us, who are fiscal conservatives or supporters of public transportation (or both), would just as soon scrap the “signature bridge” and use the money to fund the SMART plan. But we must also face the political reality, which dictates that the bridge be built much like the pharaohs dictated that the pyramids be built. If we must have a pyramid, where a tunnel would work much better, at least make it a beautiful one.

 

Miami-Dade County Commissioner Xavier L. Suarez can be reached at 305-669-4003 or via email at district7@miamidade.gov.

District 7 Homepage

Xavier’s Facebook

Xavier’s Twitter


Connect To Your Customers & Grow Your Business

Click Here