The South Miami-Dade Watershed Study and Plan was completed and delivered to Miami Dade County on April 2, 2007. This Post is a Watershed Study 101. It is written by me so take it as an outsider looking in with general understanding. ( For more editorial comment, also read Gimleteye on Watershed).You might be wondering why did we pay $3,000,000 for this plan and what the hell is it. Oh, this is boring stuff, I have to tell you. The watershed meetings have been going on for years. The meetings were drier than toast and they lasted all day. Torture! And, if you got this far in my post, it is probably torturous reading about it. Ugh. I hate land-use speak.
The Watershed Committee forged ahead, with a membership that butted heads continually. As I said meetings went on for years, people learning about and making decisions on the watershed in Miami-Dade County.
Don’t feel stupid, here is a definition of the term Watershed:
“It is frequently used to refer to the entire area that water flows across, under and through on its way to a common body of water. In hydrologic terms, a watershed is a land area that delivers runoff water, sediment and dissolved substances to a major river and its tributaries. A watershed includes atmospheric, surface and subsurface water.
One of the main functions of a watershed is to temporarily store and transport water from the land surface to the water body and eventually on to the ocean. In addition to moving water, watersheds and their water bodies also transport sediment and other materials (including pollutants), energy, and many types of organisms.”
Our South Dade Watershed is in trouble because of over-development. No surprise there. And the water body we are tryng to protect is Biscayne Bay. In order to be proactive the county (and here is the BIG SURPRISE) decided to put the horse before the cart for once (because of pressure from Biscayne National Park). This was to be a plan on how we were going to grow in the FUTURE in the Southern area of Miami Dade and still protect Biscayne Bay, which needs fresh water intake to survive.
According to the Watershed website:
“Perhaps it takes an apparent roadblock to result in the re-thinking of how decisions are made. The South Miami-Dade Watershed Study and Plan, based on stakeholder input, aims to provide the data, consider the interrelationships, and employ a "systems-thinking" framework to allow decision makers to define South Florida's problems and build creative and sustainable solutions.” And:
“The national and local concern surrounding South Florida's water resources provide for a unique planning effort to analyze critical issues such as:
Urban Sprawl
Degradation of Biscayne Bay, America's Everglades and other wetland ecosystems
Pressures on land/water resources
The future of agriculture in South Miami-Dade County”
Well, the Study finished, not perfect to be sure, but a lot of good information in its pages about growth management, water, and other stuff. Many of the tony surrounding Cities, having not enough background knowledge (because this is tough to explain) saw the study results as the devil’s work. They got scared because the study called for increased density near transportation (This is a 50 year into the future study. What did they expect down the road? It is not about tomorrow).
The County Commission will be discussing it May 8th. Look for the Vile Natacha Seijas to be the loudest advocate to scuttle it. Why? Developers are afraid of it I would suppose. In the middle of a drought, you would think the woman would care about water...
Please comment people who know more than me...and if this subject interests you, the link above will be much more useful than anything I could say.
4 comments:
I know less about it than you but still read your entire post. Therefore I cannot comment on it but I truly appreciate it as an opportunity to educate myself and others.
Thanks for reading to the end Mensa...I have made corrections to it...I have a hard time understanding the mechanics of the study. But I know one thing for sure: We need this watershed protected as much as possible. If you pave over the whole thing, say goodbye to the bay....
I attended most of the Watershed meetings and it was doomed from the start. The committee was skewed with Farm Bureau Insurance board members ( farmers looking to sell) and construction business. The committee was blessed by real estate developer and then County Manager Steve Shiver. If the study concluded the UDB should be moved soon, it would have passed. If it concluded that a move of the UDB was not in the best interest of the Bay and water quality, the votes were there to stop it. That's what happened. After much water modeling with different development scenarios the study concluded a pattern of smart growth around transportation corridors gave the best water results. Moving the UDB was a bad scenarion for water quality.
Because the committee was so heavily represented by the Farm Bureau members, other areas were left with no or little representation. One person represented all of east and west Kendall,one person from a homeowners association represented cities east of US1, no one represented Princeton, Naranja, Goulds and other areas of unincorporated Miami-Dade. Homestead and Florida City (Shiver's hometowns) had representation. When the misinformation started swirling in cities east of US1 and areas west of US1 there was no representative from these areas to say "wait a minute, my area has concerns". Had this been the case, dialogue could have been established. By the time the consultants realized there were problems, it was too late to play catch-up and Commissioner Seijas halted all outreach meetings to assure no negotiations.
Many good things came from the study. Everyone assumed some increased density. But it did not move the UDB until 2025.
Perhaps the qurstion that was never answered was why Miami-Dade had to accommodate any and all projected growth. But that was pre-determined by the County Commission. The Watershed, unfortunately, was not a sustainability study (how many people can we accept and be viable?)rather the mission said "find room for all these people". In my opinion, a flawed mission to begin with.
You can bet one thing though, the Farm Bureau is going to be standing tall and strong next to the commissioner on Tuesday's meeting when they discuss it. I am pretty sure the membership of the FB have been urged to attend the meeting (in mass) to show the commissioner love and support.
I hope that EVERYONE who supports the study takes a lunch and goes to the meeting. I would hate to see the Seijas gang have free run of the room. Don't forget our cities will be there too... supporting the commissioner.
Post a Comment