PALMETTO BAY RESIDENTS & MORE LOCALS OPPOSE THE 87th AVE. BRIDGE & APPEAL TO COMMISSIONER DANIELLE COHEN HIGGINS AND THE ENTIRE TPO TO REJECT IT
704 Comments
F
franklyn Williams
5 years ago
I m a long-time resident on Palmetto Bay AND I am a real estate investment consultant for the same. Placing a bridge to connect traffic flow is NOT a very thought out plan. I absolutely oppose the bridge!!
The areas South of the Canal AND North of the canal are NOW very private areas and house values remain steady. Opening the road to heavier traffic will ABSOLUTELY change the area and allow SHORTCUT crazy drivers to use now peaceful streets to beat the traffic. THIS will drop property values and cause lower sales prices along the route.
PLEASE USE COMMON SENSE AND WIDEN 168 ST AND CREATE A PROPER TRAFFIC FLOW.
A
Anonymous
5 years ago
NO BRIDGE!
A
Adam Levy
5 years ago
Please NO BRIDGE!!!
A
Alejandro Paret
5 years ago
I live on 87th Ave South of the proposed bridge. I used to support the idea of the bridge but I have changed my mind. It will indeed bring a constant flow of traffic through the neighborhood that would not normally be there. The other projects that have been on the docket for years(i.e. old cutler and 136th st circle) need to be completed first before taking on more projects.
C
Caleb Gonzalez
5 years ago
The bridge will bring more traffic, not only from nearby communities but from communities very far south trying to avoid US1. This will increase danger from vehicles to property, noise pollution, increased risk of personal injury to our residents and especially our children. I have myself witnessed people speeding through my side streets in malbrook and almost hitting my children on bikes. This bridge will most certainly increase traffic in the side streets.
D
Dario Di Fazio
5 years ago
I oppose a building of the bridge at in Palmetto Bay over SW 87th Ave, between SW 164th St and SW 163rd Terrace. I have a rsident for 17 years. I moved here for the tranquility and safe environment that Palmetto Bay offer. Building this bridge will not improve traffic flow. It has altready been proven in past studies. On the contrary, will bring traffic to all the alternate streets. It will created an unsafe environment for our kids with cars speeding in our neighborhood. I believe the $3.1 should be invested in our school system, not trying to make a peaceful a quiet neighborhood into a highway.
J
Jesus Gomez
5 years ago
NO to a bridge. A bridge would unleash a torrent of cars that would gridlock 87th during peak hours, and fill it with exponentially more traffic, as well as attracting drivers to all surrounding non-county roads.
B
Beatriz Rutmann
5 years ago
Bad idea, A bridge would unleash a torrent of cars that would gridlock 87th during peak hours, and fill it with exponentially more traffic, as well as attracting drivers to all surrounding non-county roads.
S
Santiago Gomez
5 years ago
Only more problems. A bridge would unleash a torrent of cars that would gridlock 87th during peak hours, and fill it with exponentially more traffic, as well as attracting drivers to all surrounding non-county roads.
V
Vanessa Echegarary
5 years ago
NO to A bridge would unleash a torrent of cars that would gridlock 87th during peak hours, and fill it with exponentially more traffic, as well as attracting drivers to all surrounding non-county roads.
A
Andres Gomez
5 years ago
Featured
Im a resident of 87th aveand i oppose to the bridge. A bridge would unleash a torrent of cars that would gridlock 87th during peak hours, and fill it with exponentially more traffic, as well as attracting drivers to all surrounding non-county roads.
L
Ljerka Kolb
5 years ago
How will the bumper to bumper gridlock not happen on the last northern stretch of 87th Avenue that dead-ends if this bridge is built? It will be choked, and for what? A few minutes saved commuting for some? This is not even close to being fair. The assertion that this bridge is needed by all southern Dade is a fallacy that is perpetuated to justify this destructive bridge.
S
Selma Seigel
5 years ago
No
J
Joe pliner
5 years ago
Hell NO
A
Anne Orel
5 years ago
No
E
Enid Pliner
5 years ago
No
O
O Gonzalez
5 years ago
NO
D
Dylan Rene
5 years ago
NO
A
Arlene Pliner Rene
5 years ago
NO
J
Jack Pliner
5 years ago
We have enough traffic we don’t need any more traffic no to the bridges!!!!!!!!!!
I m a long-time resident on Palmetto Bay AND I am a real estate investment consultant for the same. Placing a bridge to connect traffic flow is NOT a very thought out plan. I absolutely oppose the bridge!! The areas South of the Canal AND North of the canal are NOW very private areas and house values remain steady. Opening the road to heavier traffic will ABSOLUTELY change the area and allow SHORTCUT crazy drivers to use now peaceful streets to beat the traffic. THIS will drop property values and cause lower sales prices along the route. PLEASE USE COMMON SENSE AND WIDEN 168 ST AND CREATE A PROPER TRAFFIC FLOW.
NO BRIDGE!
Please NO BRIDGE!!!
I live on 87th Ave South of the proposed bridge. I used to support the idea of the bridge but I have changed my mind. It will indeed bring a constant flow of traffic through the neighborhood that would not normally be there. The other projects that have been on the docket for years(i.e. old cutler and 136th st circle) need to be completed first before taking on more projects.
The bridge will bring more traffic, not only from nearby communities but from communities very far south trying to avoid US1. This will increase danger from vehicles to property, noise pollution, increased risk of personal injury to our residents and especially our children. I have myself witnessed people speeding through my side streets in malbrook and almost hitting my children on bikes. This bridge will most certainly increase traffic in the side streets.
I oppose a building of the bridge at in Palmetto Bay over SW 87th Ave, between SW 164th St and SW 163rd Terrace. I have a rsident for 17 years. I moved here for the tranquility and safe environment that Palmetto Bay offer. Building this bridge will not improve traffic flow. It has altready been proven in past studies. On the contrary, will bring traffic to all the alternate streets. It will created an unsafe environment for our kids with cars speeding in our neighborhood. I believe the $3.1 should be invested in our school system, not trying to make a peaceful a quiet neighborhood into a highway.
NO to a bridge. A bridge would unleash a torrent of cars that would gridlock 87th during peak hours, and fill it with exponentially more traffic, as well as attracting drivers to all surrounding non-county roads.
Bad idea, A bridge would unleash a torrent of cars that would gridlock 87th during peak hours, and fill it with exponentially more traffic, as well as attracting drivers to all surrounding non-county roads.
Only more problems. A bridge would unleash a torrent of cars that would gridlock 87th during peak hours, and fill it with exponentially more traffic, as well as attracting drivers to all surrounding non-county roads.
NO to A bridge would unleash a torrent of cars that would gridlock 87th during peak hours, and fill it with exponentially more traffic, as well as attracting drivers to all surrounding non-county roads.
Im a resident of 87th aveand i oppose to the bridge. A bridge would unleash a torrent of cars that would gridlock 87th during peak hours, and fill it with exponentially more traffic, as well as attracting drivers to all surrounding non-county roads.
How will the bumper to bumper gridlock not happen on the last northern stretch of 87th Avenue that dead-ends if this bridge is built? It will be choked, and for what? A few minutes saved commuting for some? This is not even close to being fair. The assertion that this bridge is needed by all southern Dade is a fallacy that is perpetuated to justify this destructive bridge.
No
Hell NO
No
No
NO
NO
NO
We have enough traffic we don’t need any more traffic no to the bridges!!!!!!!!!!