Comments on the Cooper Robertson Plan for Bicentennial Park

March 12, 2007 Comments on the Cooper Robertson Plan for Bicentennial Park by the Parks & Public Space Committee of Miami Neighborhoods United Summary of What the outcome of the 2004 charette was: When 300 plus charette participants said and drew in February of 2004 they wanted the park to remain mostly green, to be improved naturally with the usual features found in parks including: large shade trees with benches, meandering pathways with lighting, lush South Florida landscaping, play areas for children including a carousel and interactive fountains, a historical plaque walk, play fields for adult sports, places to swim and places interact with the bay including kayak rentals, small kiosks for drinks and snacks and views to the ocean. 25% of the tables said they wanted two museums but drew them no larger then 1.5 acres and described them as modest in size. There was consensus that Bicentennial Park should remain a traditional green passive park with limited commercial activities as Bayfront Park with its amphitheatre and shopping complex was already the active, high-density, high use part of our waterfront. While the word “activating” the park was used by the participants, activating was never defined as high density use by large numbers of people attending organized events. The words passive, natural and quiet were the words used most. Participants said it was not important that the park had to “pay for itself” with commercial events. Participants expected a quality natural park as part of regular city services. What the Cooper Robertson Plan for Bicentennial Park calls for: Bicentennial is just over 29 acres, CR’s plan uses far to much acreage, nearly twenty five acres, for museums, restaurants, undefined “auxiliary” buildings, maintenance buildings, ingress and egress roads, underground parking entrances, hard surface promenades, and “open green space” with no apparent use, with just 4-5 acres dedicated to landscaped areas. Why have the public’s wishes been completly squandered for the sake of pleasing political elite? Why did The City of Miami not communicate the wishes of the people to the design firm? Common Sense Miami has taken on the project of once again championing the people’s wishes. Here is what we would like to see: All buildings, excluding the existing pump station, should be confined to a maximum of three acres total, ten percent of the park area. If there is to be a museum building, it should exhibit our historical connection with the Miami River, Biscayne Bay, the ocean and the related industries. It is unclear if the proposed grand promenade in front of the proposed museums is placed on the same axis as the Government Cut waterway as was suggested by charette participants so as to provide clear views to the ocean or if it rather provides vehicular access and outdoor exhibit space for museum related shows to be held in the park. If we are to have clear views to the ocean, then perhaps this promenade should be repositioned as a view corridor to the ocean instead of an accessory to the museums. Instead of just 4-5 acres of landscaped gardens, we suggest at least 18 of the 29 acres be heavily landscaped so a to provide the user a visual and experiential relief from the built environment as we need natural places to sit, walk, run, play, bike and swim. We believe the current park failed because of the abundance of concrete along Biscayne Boulevard. The Cooper Robertson plan should be modified to bring more green and shade trees to the edge of Biscayne Boulevard and as the charette participants suggested the green needs to continue across Biscayne Boulevard with a green way to Overtown. While the long sweeping nearly straight pathways in the CR plan may be great for biking and security, they will not provide the natural experience Miami residents want and need. Perhaps with the conversion of 12-14 acres of open green space, roadways and buildings into landscaped areas as suggested above the nearly straight pathways will serve as a means to get from one point to another quickly via running or biking in contrast to the needed landscaped areas where walking and sitting will be enjoyed. Without more landscaped areas the park is far to formal and unnatural, the opposite of what the charette participants ordered. Written by Steve Hagen Edited by Jenna Balfe