Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM-86-06416 s CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission FROM: Cesar H. Odio City Manager, L-P41/ I DATE: J U L 1 e i9ee O"LE: SUBJECT: Bay Heights and hatoma Manor Traffic Improvements REFERENCES: ENCLOSURES: On Thursday, June 19th the Department of Public Works held an evening meeting with the Bay Heights and Natoma Manor property owners to discuss the various options for improving traffic conditions in their neighborhoods. The property owners were informed that the Department would mail them a list of the different viable traffic improvement methods, including a synopsis of the advantages and disadvantages of the various methods; and a ballot card to be returned to the Department to determine their preference. Enclosed is a copy of the information that was mailed to the 326 property owners in the Bay Heights and Natoma Grove areas. Also enclosed is a tabulation of the balloting to date. This item is scheduled for discussion at the July 24th Commission meeting. DCB:mw cc: Juan M. Portuondo, Technical Services Administrator E S6*wfi4l PLACE -A 1.2.3.4 AND 5 IN THE BOXES TO INDICATE YOUR PPEFEPENCES. ONE REPRESENTS YOUR FIRST PREFERENCE AND 5"YOUR LEAST DESIRED OPTION. OPTION 4 OPTION 6 OPTION 5 l OPTION 7 00 NOTHING, EXISTING SIGNS TO REMAIN GLACE "X' IN APPROPRIATE I WOULD LIKE TO PETITION DADE COUNTY TO WIDEN S. BAYSHORE DR. FROM 2 LANES YES NO TO 4 LANES. NAME (PLEASE PRINT) SIGNATURE (00 NOT PRINT) ADDRESS _ +`'. it +4. �» .. i- .. i �•. _ .a - � .J=Z •b. .. •r - CITY OF MIAMI DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS _ P.O. ._ 80FLORIDA33233-070B FLORIDA w ATTENTION: HIGHWAY SECTION 00 0 (4i#u of 'Miami DONALD W. CATHER, P.E. Diredtor Dear Property Owner: CESAR H. ODIO City Manager OPTIONS FOR REGULATING TRAFFIC IN THE BAY HEIGHTS AND NATOMA MANOR NEIGHBORHOODS At the June 12, 19860 City Commission meeting, the Commission requested the Department of Public Works to hold an evening meeting with the property owners in the Bay heights and Natoma Manor Neighborhoods to discuss solutions to the neighborhood traffic problems. This property owner meeting was held on June 19t 1986 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers at 3500 Pan American Drive. The most serious traffic problems in Bay Heights and Natoma Manor occur during the late afternoon rush hour traffic between 4:00, and 6:00 p.m. S. Miami Avenue and S. Bayshore Drive are heavily' traveled County arterial roadways that become congested with traffic during the late afternoon rush hours. Traffic congestion is especially bad on S. Miami Avenue at Alatka Street where traffic must merge from two southbound lanes to one lane. This "bottleneck" causes traffic to back up on S. Miami Avenue and motorists begin looking for' short cuts. Motorists use the following three short cuts through the Bay Heights and Natoma Manor neighborhoods: 1.) Southbound motorists on S. Miami Avenue turn right at Samana Drive and pass through the Bay Heights area on Shore Drive East or Bay Heights Drive and then through the Natoma Manor area on Tigertail Avenue. 2.) Southbound motorists on S. Miami Avenue turn { right at Alatka Street and pass through the Natoma Manor area on Alatka Street and Tigertail Avenue. 3.) Southbound motorists on S. Bayshore Drive turn right at Halissee Street and pass .through the Natoma Manor area on Halissee Street and Tigertail Avenue. Page 1 of 2 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS/VS N.W. 2nd Street/Miami, Florida 33125/(305) 5794m • r] Property Owners (Cont Id.) The advantage of these short cuts is that they provide a relief valve for reducing traffic congestion on S. Miami Avenue and S. Bayshore Drive. The disadvantage of the short cuts is that a lot of additional traffic uses the local streets in the Bay Heights and Natoma Manor neighborhoods. At the June 19, 1986 property owner meeting many different methods for regulating traffic were discussed. There was no concensus as to which option should be implemented. Mr. Donald W. Cather, the Director of the Public Works Department, informed the property owners attending the meeting that the Department would mail the following items to each property owner in the two affected neighborhoods: 1.) A letter of explanation. 2.) Maps showing the viable options for regulating traffic. 3.) A list of the viable options indicating advantages and disadvantages. 4.) A return post card that allows the property owners to vote for the options they prefer. This information is enclosed with this letter. Please fill in the post card and return it to the Department by July 9, 1986. ..The Department will tabulate the results and ;include the • information in the City Commission .packet for ,the July 24, 1986 Commission meeting. 0 If you need additional information please contact, Bill Mackey, Highway Engineer at 579-6865. Sincerely, WaldW.ther, P.E. Director DWC:WAM:tmk Enclosures: Maps, list and post card Page 2 of 2 86-641 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF FOUR OPTIONS FOR REGULATING TRAFFIC IN THE BAY HEIGHTS AND NATOMA MANOR NEIGHBORHOODS OPTION # ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES 1, 2 and 3 These options were previous proposals that are not presently under consideration. 4 (1) Motorist on S. Bayshore Drive (1) Ingress and egress cannot shortcut to Tigertail routes for the Bay Heights Avenue an Halissee or Alatka and Natoma Manor Streets. neighborhoods are decreased (2) Motorists cn S. Bayshore Drive and many property owners shortcutting through Bay Heights to must use more circuitous Tigertail Avenue must travel an routes. additional. 4 blocks discouraging (2) Portions of A l a t k a the use of this route. Street,' Noc-a-tee Drive, Halissee Street and Hilola Street may be used by motorists from S. Bayshore Drive shortcutting ttVrough Bay Heights to. Tigertail Avenue until they are discouraged by the additional 4 blocks of travel. 5 (1) All existing ingress and ( 1) After motorists become. egress routes remain open. familiar with all of the (2) Traffic is slowed by having intersections having 3 and stop signs on every intersection, 4-way stop signs, some which discourages motorists from motorists will only slow using the local streets for down at the inter -sections, shortcuts. because they assume the other motorist will stop. The effectiveness ' of this option in reducing shortcut traffic may diminish with time. 6 (1) Motorist an S. Bayshore Drive (1) Ingress and egress cannot shortcut to Tigertail. routes for the Bay Heights Avenue on Halissee or Alatka Streets. and N a t o ma Manor (2) Motorists on S. Bayshore Drive neighborhoods are decreased shorta through Bay Heights and many property owners to Tigertai Avenue will be slowed must use more circuitous by a guard gate on Sawn Drive routes. and additional stop signs cn (2) Bay Heights property Tigertail Avenue, %i.ch will owners must approve a disc=age the use of this route. Special Taxing District to pay for the guard gate and personnel to operate it. 4 86"-6 4 1 7 (1) Motorists on S. Bayshore Drive cart shortcut to Tigertail Avenue on Alatka Street or Samara Drive. (2) Motorists on S. Bayshore Drive using Halissee Street as a shortcut to Tigertail Avenue must travel an ad- ditional 4 blocks dis- couraging the use of this route. M Ingress and egress routes for the Bay Heights and Natoma Manor neighborhoods are decreased and many property owners must use more circuitous routes. (2) Portions of Halissee Street, Noe -a -tee Drive and N.W. 17 Avenue may be used by motorists from S. Bayshore Drive shortcutting through Natoma Manor to Tigertail Avenue until they are discouraged by the additional 4 blocks of travel. fAdfi 17 -1 4t o� a A!Iy ' E- �� NE hA tl` A• TEE CQ ONE WAY �^ AI/AT M OR. 0p� �� J TILER j' TAIL b' ONE WAY MICAI�1 . 1 AVt. THRu STREET c a► SOYTN MAY SHORE ORIvE s � y`n • � � Z O =c= TRAFFIC OIVERTER w V-q o0 i _:Z) A 1 Coll), J oR. 4 ,• I�R tA1L AVt. d' ICAI. SOOT m.y I011t DRIVE � � a ' c • STOP SIGN oR� _ Y e A� V lHORt NNE EAST ET OPTION 4 hs. %Is 0 �rm%' fts�m OPTION 5 4A ►0 r y 0 r srs iMiT IT ►s o*ws /�/ � st oseri usT • saw MY [ IV SwjTII wadi Art. • STOP SIGN ® BARRICADE OPT10N 6 . —� GUARD GATE ... h ,fir. � � Y � ���".�^ •".w�" �"���."y "„ �. ww.o►► �= I M WT sourW-1 � BJ 4PT10N ? rauKi w k'. a �Jmmets .1. Eennti 3305 11 S. W. 17d, Atinuc Minim. 1'1(rriil, :3:3133 July 11, 1986 Honorable J.L. Plummer Commissioner, City of Miami 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, Florida 33133 Re: Bay Heights and Natoma Manor Traffic Control Proposals Dear Commissioner Plummer: The attached letters dated July 7, 1986, July 8, 1986, July 9, 1986, July 10, 1986 and July 11, 1986 have been signed by more than 100 residents of the City of Miami who live in the area that would be adversely affected by the proposal to erect traffic control barriers in the Natoma Manor area. Each of these residents opposes the erection of barricades for the reasons set forth in the letters. Please consider the views set forth in these letters and reject the proposal to erect traffic control barriers in Natoma Manor to benefit the adjacent Bay Heights area. Hand Delivered S ncere yours, /L --� -- James J. Renny ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE NATOMA MANOR AREA OF THE CITY OF MI AMI July 7, 1986 Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami Re: Bay Heights and Natoma Manor Traffic Control Proposals We are writing to express our opposition to the proposal to erect traffic control barricades in the Natoma Manor area to accommodate a traffic problem in the Bay Heights area. The traf- fic problem experienced by Bay Heights residents is not unique. The use of residential streets to bypass traffic congestion on Dixie Highway and South Bayshore Drive by commuters traveling to and from downtown Miami has detracted from the quality of life throughout North Coconut Grove residential areas. What is unique to this particular proposal is that, working with City Officials, the Bay Heights residents have developed a plan that will alle- viate the problem in this specific area by aggravating the problem in the adjacent Natoma Manor area, and, for some Natoma Manor residents, creating intolerable conditions. The residents of Natoma Manor were not advised or consulted about the plan until it was developed and approved by at least some City Officials. After learning of the plan, the Natoma Manor residents met and discussed the plan with representatives of the Bay Heights area. Then, after a full and fair discussion, the Natoma Manor residents developed an alternate plan which would address the problem and provide benefits for both areas without imposing special burdens on one area to benefit the other. The alternate plan calls for three and four way stop signs at every intersection in the area. It would attack- the perceived advantage which induces commuters to leave Dixie Highway and South Bayshore Drive. Coupled with other sensible traffic con- trol signals, it would alleviate the problem. City Officials, however, have opined that so many people would disregard the stop signs that the plan would not produce benefits. We think they are clearly wrong. We agree that some QC -V_A7 Im Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the city of Miami _ 1 7 r 1986 page motorists would disregard the stop signs. But the commuters using our residential streets include a great number of ordinary, law abiding citizens, and clearly many would observe the stop signs. If an appreciable percentage observe the stop signs, it would slow the traffic flow through the area and alter the bal- ance of convenience enough to restrain some and perhaps most from leaving Dixie Highway and South Bayshore Drive. If the Natoma Manor plan is supported by some traffic enforcement efforts, it would clearly provide a complete solu- tion. This area is a substantial net tax generation area. We recognize that the most important responsibility of the police is to attempt to deal with serious crime, but traffic enforcement in the area would clearly produce enough fine revenue to offset the cost, and would not reduce resources available to address more serious crime. We do not think that it is unreasonable to request and expect some traffic enforcement support, and we are confident that with some modest traffic enforcement support, the plan would be successful. We are also concerned about the idea of an informal vote of residents of the Bay Heights and Natoma Manor areas. There are more homes in Bay Heights, and we would probably be outvoted. Many propositions favorable to a larger number at the expense of a smaller number would receive a majority vote of those affected, but government is not supposed to operate that way for reasons grounded on the fundamental principles underlying our laws and institutions. We also note that the residents of Bay Heights are con- templating creation of a special taxing district to fund security _:. checkpoints and services. These security checkpoints would fully solve the problems experienced by the Bay Heights residents, and the special taxing district approach would not impose special _ burdens on adjacent areas. The Bay Heights residents can solve their perceived problems without seriously damaging the Natoma Manor area. The barricade proposal is therefore completely unnecessary. Finally, if any barricade is to be erected, it should. be placed at the Tigertail entrance - exit to Bay Heights. That would fully solve the problem. But City Officials have stated _ that the Fire Department would not look with favor on such a barricade because there would then only be one entrance - exit to Bay Heights. But if one entrance - exit was acceptable for Grove 86-641 Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami July 7 , 1986 ............._...... . . Page isle, Brickell Key, The Moorings, Ye Little Woods and Bay Point, it should be acceptable if not ideal for Bay Heights, and it would certainly be far preferable as a solution for a problem experienced by the Bay Heights residents who have chosen to live in a walled community than erection of unacceptable barricades in our neighborhood to benefit theirs. We think the issue is important. We think we are clearly right. We have carefully examined the problem, and cannot under- stand a proper basis on which the barricade proposal suggested by the Bay Heights residents could be responsibly considered as a viable solution. RI VP ADDRESS 2 "J'? 86-641 Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami Jul 7 • 1986 Page a ADDRESS Lt�2, o `t t L 33l3 3 M 1 July 8, 1986 Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami Re: Bay Heights and Natoma Manor Traffic Control Proposals We are writing to express our opposition to the proposal to erect traffic control barricades in the Natoma Manor area to accommodate a traffic problem in the Bay Heights area. The traf- fic problem experienced by Bay Heights residents is not unique. The use of residential streets to bypass traffic congestion on Dixie Highway and South Bayshore Drive by commuters traveling to and from downtown Miami has detracted from the quality of life throughout North Coconut Grove residential areas. What is unique to this particular proposal is that, working with City Officials, the Bay Heights residents have developed a plan that will alle- viate the problem in this specific area by aggravating the problem in the adjacent Natoma Manor area, and, for some Natoma Manor residents, creating intolerable conditions. The residents of Natoma Manor were not advised or consulted about the plan until it was developed and approved by at least some City Officials. After learning of the plan, the Natoma Manor residents met and discussed the plan with representatives of the Bay Heights area. Then, after a full and fair discussion, the Natoma Manor residents developed an alternate plan which would address the problem and provide benefits for both areas without imposing special burdens on one area to benefit the other. The alternate plan calls for three and four way stop signs at _ every intersection in the area. It would attack* the perceived advantage which induces commuters to leave Dixie Highway and South Bayshore Drive. Coupled with other sensible traffic con- trol signals, it would alleviate the problem. City Officials, however, have opined that so many people would disregard the stop signs that the plan would not produce benefits. We think they are clearly wrong. We agree that some Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami July �, 1986 Page motorists would disregard the stop signs. But the commuters using our residential streets include a great number of ordinary, law abiding citizens, and clearly many would observe the stop signs. If an appreciable percentage observe the stop signs, it would slow the traffic flow through the area and alter the bal- ance of convenience enough to restrain some and perhaps most from leaving Dixie Highway and South Bayshore Drive. Y: If the Natoma Manor plan is supported by some traffic enforcement efforts, it would clearly provide a complete solu- tion. This area is a substantial net tax generation area. We recognize that the most important responsibility of the police is to attempt to deal with serious crime, but traffic enforcement in the area would clearly produce enough fine revenue to offset the :ems cost, and would not reduce resources available to address more serious crime. We do not think that it is unreasonable to request and expect some traffic enforcement support, and we are confident that with some modest traffic enforcement support, the plan would be successful. } We are also concerned about the idea of an informal vote of residents of the Bay Heights and Natoma Manor areas. There are more homes in Bay Heights, and we would probably be outvoted. Many propositions favorable to a larger number at the expense of a smaller number would receive a majority vote of those affected, but government is not supposed to operate that way for reasons grounded on the fundamental principles underlying our laws and =_:y= institutions. We also note that the residents of Bay Heights are con- templating creation of a special taxing district to fund security checkpoints and services. These security checkpoints would fully solve the problems experienced by the Bay Heights residents, and the special taxing district approach would not impose special burdens on adjacent areas. The Bay Heights residents can solve their perceived problems without seriously damaging the Natoma Manor area. The barricade proposal is therefore completely unnecessary. Finally, if any barricade is to be erected, it should be placed at the Tigertail entrance - exit to Bay Heights. That would fully solve the problem. But City Officials have stated that the Fire Department would not look with favor on such a barricade because there would then only be one entrance - exit to Bay Heights. But if one entrance - exit was acceptable for Grove 0 86-641 3 Honorable Mayor and Colmissioners of the City of Miami �u y 8 , 1986 Page 3 Isle, Brickell Key, The Moorings, Ye Little Woods and Bay Point, it should be acceptable if not ideal for Bay Heights, and it would certainly be far preferable as a solution for a problem experienced by the Bay Heights residents who have chosen to live in a walled community than erection of unacceptable barricades in our neighborhood to benefit theirs. We think the issue is important. We think we are clearly right. We have carefully examined the problem, and cannot under- stand a proper basis on which the barricade proposal suggested by the Bay Heights residents could be responsibly considered as a viable solution. ADDRESS 9 r � I 7 • t i Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami July 8 , 1986 Page 4 ADDRESS 04 12 m July 9, 1986 Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami Re: Bay Heights and Natoma Manor Traffic Control Proposals We are writing to express our opposition to the proposal to erect traffic control barricades in the Natoma Manor area to accommodate a traffic problem in the Bay Heights area. The traf- fic problem experienced by Bay Heights residents is not unique. The use of residential streets to bypass traffic congestion on Dixie Highway and South Bayshore Drive by commuters traveling to and from downtown Miami has detracted from the quality of life throughout North Coconut Grove residential areas. What is unique to this particular proposal is that, working with City Officials, the Bay Heights residents have developed a plan that will alle- viate the problem in this specific area by aggravating the problem in the adjacent Natoma Manor area, and, for some Natoma Manor residents, creating intolerable conditions. The residents of Natoma Manor were about the plan until it was developed some City Officials. After learning Manor residents met and discussed the of the Bay Heights area. Then, after a the Natoma Manor residents developed would address the problem and provide without imposing special burdens on other. not advised or consulted and approved by at least of the plan, the Natoma plan with representatives full and fair discussion, an alternate plan which benefits for both areas one area to benefit the The alternate plan calls for three and four way, stop signs at every intersection in the area. It would attack the perceived advantage which induces commuters to leave Dixie Highway and South Bayshore Drive. Coupled with other sensible traffic con- trol signals, it would alleviate the problem. City Officials, however, have opined that so many people would disregard the stop signs that the plan would not produce benefits. We think they are clearly wrong. We agree that some - 86-641 F Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami Ju y 9 , 1986 Page 2 motorists would disregard the stop signs. But the commuters using our residential streets include a great number of ordinary, law abiding citizens, and clearly many would observe the stop signs. If an appreciable percentage observe the stop signs, it would slow the traffic flow through the area and alter the bal- ance of convenience enough to restrain some and perhaps most from leaving Dixie Highway and South Bayshore Drive. If the Natoma Manor plan is supported by some traffic enforcement efforts, it would clearly provide a complete solu- tion. This area is a substantial net tax generation area. We recognize that the most important responsibility of the police is to attempt to deal with serious crime, but traffic enforcement in the area would clearly produce enough fine revenue to offset the cost, and would not reduce resources available to address more serious crime. We do not think that it is unreasonable to request and expect some traffic enforcement support, and we are confident that with some modest traffic enforcement support, the plan would be successful. We are also concerned about the idea of an informal vote of residents of the Bay Heights and Natoma Manor areas. There are more homes in Bay Heights, and we would probably be outvoted. Many propositions favorable to a larger number at the expense of a smaller number would receive a majority vote of those affected, but government is not supposed to operate that way for reasons grounded on the fundamental- principles underlying our laws and institutions. We also note that the residents of Bay Heights are con- templating creation of a special taxing district to fund security checkpoints and services. These security checkpoints would fully solve the problems experienced by the Bay Heights residents, and the special taxing district approach would not impose special burdens on adjacent areas. The Bay Heights residents can solve their perceived problems without seriously damaging the Natoma Manor area. The barricade proposal is therefore completely unnecessary. Finally,•if any barricade is to be erected, it should be placed at the Tigertail entrance - exit to Bay Heights. That would fully solve the problem. But City Officials have stated that the Fire Department would not look with favor on such a barricade because there would then only be one entrance - exit to Bay Heights. But if one entrance - exit was acceptable for Grove 2 1.: 8onorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami JU y 9 1986 Page 3 Isle, Brickell Key, The Moorings, Ye Little Woods and Bay Point, it should be acceptable if not ideal for Bay Heights, and it would certainly be far preferable as a solution for a problem experienced by the Bay Heights residents who have chosen to live in a walled community than erection of unacceptable barricades in our neighborhood to benefit theirs. We think the issue is important. We think we are clearly right. We have carefully examined the problem, and cannot under- stand a proper basis on which the barricade proposal suggested by the Bay Heights residents could be responsibly considered as a viable solution. NA RULE i / ADDRESS -9 I l6 zI Xm=-_ &JL,- �M 2 q Honotable Mayor and Commissioners of the City -of Miami July 9 _ . 1986 ADDRESS !� Ti it/OC 4 -E t Ae, / G 3 00 hoc -,4 - �P- FA 1 W4 J-6Z 'A (� -Z 4 Alzl-� Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami July 9 _ , 1986 ADDRESS 'jcu�ey lJ� OVE17f 12 0 I Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami July 9 , 1986 NAME ry�,I3k4r� tJPrk��Av r2�^j ADDRESS 2601 J}AQ -555Z- 5�-- i I Honorable Mayor and Commiegionere of the City of Miami Ju1v 9 _p 1986 a_a i ADDRESS 2�2�1 1� �L�ssEF sT 2,i7 w MMMMMMIW Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami July 9 r 1986 NAME ADDRESS ,05—;v-"n , - 3 21,, 7 3 -IS IZ111e7A7 --5X Vc, r'O '00or FO aploelj;:�-4e�l le. 86-641 0 Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami July 9 p 1986 NAME MV' o 13,n_ _ . �,w�-t ADDRESS f3s Ij :3 j 111h, //" z - zt-je-e 3 ADDRESS J6 Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the Cit.ly 9ir 1986 NAME 1 ' , MRW---N Q" _c, - I 86-641 �N Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami July 9 , 1986 NAME 6 RIA I A L =5 o M" n" ==Ow"iw!)K2O( ADDRESS �(G� Attu l 6 sa 7IZ41�, a* Fasr,.�Lj- A July 10, 1986 Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami Re: Bay Heights and Natoma Manor Traffic Control Proposals We are writing to express our opposition to the proposal to erect traffic control barricades in the Natoma Manor area to accommodate a traffic problem in the Bay Heights area. The traf- fic problem experienced by Bay Heights residents is not unique. The use of residential streets to bypass traffic congestion on Dixie Highway and South Bayshore Drive by commuters traveling to and from downtown Miami has detracted from the quality of life throughout North Coconut Grove residential areas. What is unique to this particular proposal is that, working with City Officials, the Bay Heights residents have developed a plan that will alle- viate the problem in this specific area by aggravating the problem in the adjacent Natoma Manor area, and, for some Natoma Manor residents, creating intolerable conditions. The residents of Natoma Manor were not advised or consulted about the plan until it was developed and approved by at least some City Officials. After learning of the plan, the Natoma Manor residents met and discussed the plan with representatives of the Bay Heights area. Then, after a full and fair discussion, the Natoma Manor residents developed an alternate plan which would address the problem and provide benefits for both areas without imposing special burdens on one area to benefit the other. The alternate plan calls for three and four way every intersection in the area. It would attack' advantage which induces commuters to leave Dixie •South Bayshore Drive. Coupled with other sensible trol signals, it would alleviate the problem. stop signs at the perceived Highway and traffic con - City Officials, however, have opined that so many people would disregard the stop signs that the plan would not produce benefits. We think they are clearly wrong. We agree that some 1 Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami July 10 , 1986 Page a,k motorists would disregard the stop signs. But the commuters using our residential streets include a great number of ordinary, law abiding citizens, and clearly many would observe the stop '- signs. If an appreciable percentage observe the stop signs, it would slow the traffic flow through the area and alter the bal- ance of convenience enough to restrain some and perhaps most from leaving Dixie Highway and South eayshore Drive. ~' If the Natoma Manor plan is supported by some traffic enforcement efforts, it would clearly provide a complete solu- tion. This area is a substantial net tax generation area. We recognize that the most important responsibility of the police is to attempt to deal with serious crime, but traffic enforcement in the area would clearly produce enough fine revenue to offset the cost, and would not reduce resources available to address more serious crime. We do not think that it is unreasonable to request and expect some traffic enforcement support, and we are confident that with some modest traffic enforcement support, the plan would be successful. We are also concerned about the idea of an informal vote of residents of the Bay Heights and Natoma Manor areas. There are more homes in Bay Heights, and we would probably be outvoted. Many propositions favorable to a larger number at the expense of =` a smaller number would receive a majority vote of those affected, but government is not supposed to operate that way for reasons z grounded on the fundamental principles underlying our laws and institutions. We also note that the residents of Bay Heights are con- templating creation of a special taxing district to fund security checkpoints and services. These security checkpoints would fully solve the problems experienced by the Bay Heights residents, and the special taxing district approach would not impose special burdens on adjacent areas. The Bay Heights residents can solve their perceived problems without seriously damaging the Natoma Manor area. The barricade proposal is therefore completely unnecessary. Finally, if any barricade is to be erected, it should be placed at the Tigertail entrance - exit to Bay Heights. That would fully solve the problem. But City Officials have stated that the Fire Department would not look with favor on such a barricade because there would then only be one entrance - exit to Bay Heights. But if one entrance - exit was acceptable for Grove 86-641. Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami July 10 , 1986 page 2 motorists would disregard the stop signs. But the commuters using our residential streets include a great number of ordinary, law abiding citizens, and clearly many would observe the stop signs. If an appreciable percentage observe the stop signs, it would slow the traffic flow through the area and alter the bal- ance of convenience enough to restrain some and perhaps most from leaving Dixie Highway and South Bayshore Drive. If the Natoma Manor plan is supported by some traffic Jenforcement efforts, it would clearly provide a complete solu- ,s. tion. This area is a substantial net tax generation area. We recognize that the most important responsibility of the police is to attempt to deal with serious crime, but traffic enforcement in the area would clearly produce enough fine revenue to offset the cost, and would not reduce resources available to address more serious crime. We do not think that it is unreasonable to request and expect some traffic enforcement support, and we are ks confident that with some modest traffic enforcement support, the plan would be successful. We are also concerned about the idea of an informal vote of residents of the Bay Heights and Natoma Manor areas. There are more homes in Bay Heights, and we would probably be outvoted. Many propositions favorable to a larger number at the expense of zF a smaller number would receive a majority vote of those affected, 4:. but government is not supposed to operate that way for reasons ,: grounded on the fundamental principles underlying our laws and institutions. We also note that the residents of Bay Heights are con- templating creation of a special taxing district to fund security checkpoints and services. These security checkpoints would fully solve the problems experienced by the Bay Heights residents, and the special taxing district approach would not impose special burdens on adjacent areas. The Bay Heights residents can solve their perceived problems without seriously damaging the Natoma Manor area. The barricade proposal is therefore completely unnecessary. Finally, if any barricade is to be erected, it should be placed at the Tigertail entrance - exit to Bay Heights. That would fully solve the problem. But City Officials have stated that the Fire Department would not look with favor on such a barricade because there would then only be one entrance - exit to Bay Heights. But if one entrance - exit was acceptable for Grove :.M t 1 y Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami July 10 , 1986 Page Isle, Brickell Key, The Moorings, Ye Little Woods and Bay Point, it should be acceptable if not ideal for Bay Heights, and it would certainly be far preferable as a solution for a problem experienced by the Bay Heights residents who have chosen to live in a walled community than erection of unacceptable barricades in our neighborhood to benefit theirs. We think the issue is important. We think we are clearly right. We have carefully examined the problem, and cannot under- stand a proper basis on which the barricade proposal suggested by the Bay Heights residents could be responsibly considered as a viable solution. z IFffj'M� ADDRESS e ZZCo 35' �5tv I mac. .2-CO3sSGv 66-641 2 t Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami Jury 10 , 1986 Page NAME ADDRESS ' 536 '� 3 5LL) 1- 14— A*E m m, rti July 11, 1986 Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami Re: Bay Heights and Natoma Manor Traffic Control Proposals We are writing to express our opposition to the proposal to erect traffic control barricades in the Natoma Manor area to accommodate a traffic problem in the Bay Heights area. The traf- fic problem experienced by Bay Heights residents is not unique.. The use of residential streets to bypass traffic congestion on Dixie Highway and South Bayshore Drive by commuters traveling to and from downtown Miami has detracted from the quality of life throughout North Coconut Grove residential areas. What is unique to this particular proposal is that, working with City Officials, the Bay Heights residents have developed a plan that will alle- viate the problem in this specific area by aggravating the problem in the adjacent Natoma Manor area, and, for some Natoma Manor residents, creating intolerable conditions. The residents of Natoma Manor were not advised or consulted about the plan until it was developed and approved by at least some City Officials. After learning of the plan, the Natoma Manor residents met and discussed the plan with representatives of the Bay Heights area. Then, after a full and fair discussion, the Natoma Manor residents developed an alternate plan which would address the problem and provide benefits for both areas without imposing special burdens on one area to benefit the other. The alternate plan calls for three and four way stop signs at every intersection in the area. It would attack. the perceived advantage which induces commuters to leave Dixie Highway and South Bayshore Drive. Coupled with other sensible traffic con- trol signals, it would alleviate the problem. City Officials, however, have opined that so many people would disregard the stop signs that the plan would not produce benefits. We think they are clearly wrong. We agree that some 86-641. M Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami July 11 , 1986 Page 2 motorists would disregard the stop signs. But the commuters using our residential streets include a great number of ordinary, law abiding citizens, and clearly many would observe the stop signs. If an appreciable percentage observe the stop signs, it would slow the traffic flow through the area and alter the bal- ance of convenience enough to restrain some and perhaps most from leaving Dixie Highway and South Bayshore Drive. If the Natoma Manor plan is supported by some traffic enforcement efforts, it would clearly provide a complete solu- tion. This area is a substantial net tax generation area. We recognize that the most important responsibility of the police is to attempt to deal with serious crime, but traffic enforcement in the area would clearly produce enough fine revenue to offset the cost, and would not reduce resources available to address more serious crime. We do not think that it is unreasonable to request and expect some traffic enforcement support, and we are confident that with some modest traffic enforcement support, the plan would be successful. We are also concerned about the idea of an informal vote of residents of the Bay Heights and Natoma Manor areas. There are more homes in Bay Heights, and we would probably be outvoted. Many propositions favorable to a larger number at the expense of a smaller number would receive a majority vote of those affected, but government is not supposed to operate that way for reasons grounded on the fundamental principles underlying our laws and institutions. We also note that the residents of Bay Heights are con- templating creation of a special taxing district to fund security checkpoints and services. These security checkpoints would fully solve the problems experienced by the Bay Heights residents, and the special taxing district approach would not impose special burdens on adjacent areas. The Bay Heights residents can solve their perceived problems without seriously damaging the Natoma Manor area. The barricade proposal is therefore completely unnecessary. We think the issue is important. We think we are clearly right. We have carefully examined the problem, and cannot under- stand a proper basis on which the barricade proposal suggested by the Bay Heights residents could be responsibly considered as a viable solution. 86-641 s i Honorable Mayor and Commissioners of the City of Miami July11 , 1986 p g NAME 04 ADDRESS 2 July 24, 1986 Honorable Xavier L. Suarez Mayor of the City of Miami City Hall - Dinner Key Miami, Florida 33133 Re: Bay Heights and Natoma Manor } Traffic Control Proposals _F Dear Mayor Suarez: Nine additional residents of the Natoma Manor area have returned from vacations and have signed the letters delivered to you on July 11, 1986 opposing the erection of traffic control barriers in the Natoma Manor area. The informal ballot conducted by the Department of Public Works may be subject to misinterpretation. Two of the options were consistent with the recommendations of the Natoma Manor residents - option 5 (stop signs) 14 and option 6 (stop signs and a guard gate to Bay Heights) were both based on erection of stop signs rather than the traffic control barricades. The only fair interpretation of the informal ballot is that only 11% were in favor of erection of the traffic control barricades and 89% were opposed. 56% were in favor of erection of stop signs (options 5 and 6) as proposed as an alternative by the residents of the Natoma Manor area. A clear and overwhelming concensus emerged at the last meeting attended by over 100 residents of the area against option 4 - the erection of traffic control barricades. A show of hands reflected that about 90% of those in attendance agreed, but the City Officials 86--641 Honorable Xavier L. Suarez July 24, 1986 Page 2 conducting the meeting didn't count the hands raised against option 4. That is why we were required to circulate the letters opposing option 4, and we now respectfully urge the City of Miami to end this threat to our area by permanently rejecting option 4. Sincerel yours, James J. Kenny ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE NATOMA MANOR AREA OF THE CITY OF MIAMI 86--F A. Honorable Xavier L. Suarez Mayor of the City of Miami City Hall - Dinner Key Miami, Florida 33133 James I 7fli Al-ClIM., Miami, Flarf(la :3-3 13:11 CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM i_� L. „ ,_ •t TO Albert Ruder July 1'5. j J19816 1". 21, Management Services Administrator GATE Public .- :otommi ssi on SVBJEC' Meeting of,141 ly._,2A, 1986 FROM Donald W. Cather REFERENCES Bay Heights/Natoma Grove D�o7r,f P lic Works Traffic Plan 1 ENCLOSURES This is to reserve space on the agenda for the Commission Meeting of July 24, 1986, for a public hearing scheduled to be heard at 6:00 p.m. in connection with the new traffic plan being proposed for the Bay Heights/Natoma Grove areas. Back-up material for this item has already been submitted to the agenda office. EMP:bf cc: Juan M. Portuondo Matty Hirai.