Currently viewing the tag: "Gus Pego"

At last week’s 2013 Transportation Summit, Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) District 6 Secretary, Mr. Gus Pego, was in attendance.

Gus PEGO

Gus Pego, FDOT Secretary, District #6.

This was my first encounter with Mr. Pego in person and, despite the criticism we tend to launch at his district, he seemed like a really nice guy.

He was extremely diplomatic during the Summit. He didn’t seem to get defensive when audience members highlighted the contradictory and misguided actions of his agency. Generally, it appeared as if he has developed rather thick skin to cope with the criticisms launched at his agency (many of which have admittedly come from TransitMiami).

Mr. Pego’s demeanor reminded me of a political figure: an approachable, laid-back kind of guy who would be entertaining to have a beer with, but probably not one with whom you’d want to get into anything even slightly resembling a discussion of philosophy.

Nonetheless, you have to give the man credit. His job cannot possibly be easy.

I was among the (surprisingly few) private citizens who questioned Mr. Pego on the role FDOT plays here in Miami.

I asked him specifically about the proposed swap between FDOT and the City of Miami for some downtown Miami streets.

FDOT_CoM_Transfer

The core of my question was simple: “Why does FDOT want our streets?”

His answer was deceptively reassuring to me; it went something along the lines of:

  • Typically when there’s a transfer of road jurisdiction, the municipality [in this case the City of Miami] will try to offset the costs of taking over control and maintenance.
  • To offset the costs of controlling and maintaining new streets, the municipality will typically forfeit control of other streets.
  • The municipality will typically request that FDOT assume responsibility of these other streets to avoid the extra financial burden.

All right . . .  so . . . the City can’t carry the supposedly heavy costs of running its own streets, so it goes to FDOT asking for help. FDOT generously helps them out by taking new streets off their hands. Hmm . . .

It seemed to make sense (for about 11 seconds). But something still didn’t sit right with me. FDOT seemed way too gung-ho about the whole thing.

The last part of Pego’s response was the real doozy:

  • If the City of Miami determines that they wish to keep jurisdiction of those streets [as opposed to exchanging them for jurisdiction over Brickell Avenue], then FDOT would be fine with that.

At that point, I thought to myself: Man, this guy’s not the transportation megalomaniac those weirdos over at TransitMiami often try to make him out to be. He’s just a good, straight-talking guy. That’s all. . . .

Ah, but then I found FDOT’s official position on the proposed swap. Then I realized that us summit attendees had been duped. Those words were spoken just to appease those in the crowd who applauded the question.

The truth of the matter is that FDOT does indeed want our streets.

Take, for example, this excerpt from the June 3, 2013 letter from FDOT’s Mr. Gus Pego to Mr. Johnny Martinez, City Manager for the City of Miami:

The [Florida Department of Transportation] has recently completed a countywide analysis of potential roadway transfers […]. The proposed roadway transfers should prove to be beneficial for the City and the State. We look forward to working with the City of Miami in a mutually beneficial relationship to effect these transfers.

Or, here’s the formal City of Miami piece of legislation in the form of a resolution. It  also demonstrates how FDOT isn’t the selfless hero Mr. Pego wanted to portray it as:

Whereas, the [Florida Department of Transportation] has determined that it would be beneficial to the State of Florida to assume jurisdictional responsibility for [all the roads listed in the table below].

miami_to_fdot

So . . . FDOT is not, in fact, coming nobly to the City of Miami’s financial rescue as Mr. Pego would like to have us think. Quite the contrary, FDOT is in it for it’s own good, not the well-being of the community.

We can be sure that FDOT does indeed want our streets. The real question persists, though: Why?

They’ve studied our streets, and they’ve targeted the ones they want most. They have plans for them.

What those plans are, I do not know. Mr. Pego, we’d love to hear your thoughts on the matter . . .

 

This article was edited for content on 6/13/13 from it’s original format.

Tagged with:
 

Tomorrow, on Thursday, June 13, the City of Miami City Commission will consider Resolution #13-00581.

This resolution would formalize the transfer of virtually all of downtown Miami’s Brickell Avenue from the jurisdiction of the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to the jurisdiction of the City of Miami.

Think about that: Brickell Avenue. It’s the core of our financial business district and a burgeoning residential and commercial area.

One wonders why FDOT ever had control of one of our city’s most important thoroughfares in the first place.

fdot_to_miami

It’s great news. Our city’s streets belong in the hands of our own local municipalities. They don’t belong in the hands of techno-bureaucrats up in Tallahassee, nor in any other one of FDOT’s just-as-detached satellite offices.

While far from perfect, our local public officials and planners are more sensitive to the day-to-day realities on our streets; they are more aware of land-use dynamics and current and pending real estate developments; they are more conscious of existing long-range and master planning documents (including plans for special districts, public transit corridors, bicycles and greenways, waterfronts, ecologically-sensitive areas, etc.); they typically have deeper, more productive working relationships with other locally-based jurisdictions; they better understand the on-the-ground interplay of bicycle, pedestrian, and motor traffic; they are more sincerely invested in the well-being of the local community of which they themselves are a part; and, most importantly, our local planners and politicians are comparatively far more accessible and accountable to us, the people to whom the streets belong.

FDOT_CoM_Transfer

Note the streets highlighted in blue in the map inset; they run through the City of Miami’s Downtown Historic District, in southeastern Overtown. Those are the streets FDOT wants to take from the City of Miami. In return, the City of Miami would get the one in red, Brickell Drive. Map produced by FDOT.

So all is well in the Magic City, right? FDOT is beginning to realize that its role in 21st century Miami is growing smaller and smaller and we’re more than capable of running our own streets.

The state transportation juggernaut is starting to return our city streets to the local government authorities because it’s reached the undeniable conclusion that local municipalities and counties can run their own streets better than some gigantic, geographically-disconnected government bureaucracy . . . right?

Wrong.

In exchange for relinquishing Brickell Avenue to the City (where it belongs), FDOT wants something — quite a lot, actually — in return. Specifically, FDOT wants several streets running through the Downtown Miami Historic District (see the table below).

miami_to_fdot

In total, FDOT is trying to take 2.4 center lane miles from the City of Miami in exchange for about 1.9 center lane miles.

(A “center lane mile” is the length of the actual road, from point A to point B. A standard “lane mile” takes into account the number of lanes on that same stretch from point A to point B.)

CityOfMiami_HistoricDowntownDistrict
FDOT wants to take = 2.40 miles

FDOT wants to give = 1.92 miles

Thus, not only is FDOT pursuing streets it really has no right to and should have no interest in to begin with, but it’s actually trying to take more street length from the City than it is offering!

The City Commission will be voting on this around 2:00pm on Thursday, June 13.

Mr. Mayor and City Commissioners: Take what belongs to the people of the City of Miami. Bring Brickell Avenue under our local jurisdiction.

But do not, under any circumstances, forfeit those streets in the Historic Downtown District to the State.

FDOT should give = 1.92 miles

City of Miami should give = 0.00 miles

The real question is: Why does FDOT want control of our local streets to begin with?

 

Tagged with:
 

Crash on NE 57th and Biscayne Blvd on Aug. 25, 2012. Third crash in the past 10 days in a 10 block stretch of Biscayne Boulevard. Clearly speeding is a problem.

Just this past week two more crashes occurred on Biscayne Boulevard in the MiMo Historic District. That brings the total crashes to three in the past ten days and 14 in the past two years. Ten days ago I reported about a crash that occurred near NE 54th Street and several MiMo residents sent emails to the FDOT District 6 Secretary Gus Pego and to Commissioner Sarnoff. You can read their emails here.  I wonder if they received a reply from either gentleman?

Crash on Biscayne and NE 60th (8/24/2012). Three crashes in the past ten days within 10 blocks.

Ignoring the problem of the design speed of Biscayne Boulevard is no longer an option. It is only a matter of time before a fatality occurs and it is clear that something needs to be done. Biscayne Boulevard isn’t safe for pedestrians, cyclists or drivers, nor is it a business-friendly street.

Crash on Biscayne and NE 48th Street. This previously unreported accident occurred on June 15th. Source: Transit Miami informant known as agent “B”.

This situation will only get worse if the flawed high-speed design of this road is not immediately resolved. Fourteen crashes, in a two year period, within a twenty-five-blocks isn’t an acceptable safety standard.

Please send an email to the FDOT District 6 Secretary Gus Pego and Commissioner Sarnoff and ask them to make Biscayne Boulevard safer for everyone. Click here to send an email to both gentlemen.

Check out how Biscayne Boulevard should look. Can you imagine a business and pedestrian-friendly MiMo with on-street parking?  Wouldn’t it be nice if cars moved slower through the historic district?  This is all possible- a team from the University of Miami developed three alternative streetscape designs for Biscayne Boulevard. Which alternative do you prefer?

 

Tagged with:
 
This site is protected by Comment SPAM Wiper.