The debate over Ocean Drive’s future took center stage, sparked by a court order mandating the reopening of the street to vehicular traffic. The city manager provided a historical overview, explaining that the commission had previously directed a one-way southbound traffic configuration, which evolved into a pedestrian promenade. However, recent litigation and directives from Miami-Dade County have led to a judicial order to reverse these changes, highlighting a complex legal backdrop.

The city attorney clarified that the county’s directive to remove the pedestrian plaza stemmed from safety concerns raised during legal proceedings. An appeal process has been initiated by the city, with the argument that traffic flow should be governed by the county rather than the courts. The city manager further highlighted the financial implications of reverting to the two-way configuration, estimating costs in the six-figure range.

Public comments revealed a community deeply divided on the issue. Residents and business owners expressed contrasting views on the impact of the pedestrian promenade. Some, like Irene Bigger of the Art Deco Neighborhood Association, argued that the pedestrian setup aligns with Miami Beach’s cultural branding and enhances the city’s appeal as a destination. Bigger emphasized the health and environmental benefits of a vehicle-free Ocean Drive.

In contrast, business owners like Mana Sabri voiced concerns about the negative impact on commerce, reporting a significant decline in customer traffic since the closure to vehicles. Sabri described fears of bankruptcy and an uninviting atmosphere harming business prospects. Other speakers echoed similar sentiments, urging the city to collaborate with business owners to alleviate the situation by reopening the street to traffic.

The debate also touched on safety considerations, with some residents advocating for the preservation of the pedestrian promenade as a means of enhancing safety and reducing crime. A commissioner acknowledged notable improvements in safety, attributing them to increased police efforts and a reduction in drug-related issues. The police chief supported this view, citing a 12% reduction in crime and a 16% decrease in service calls since the road closure, while emphasizing the importance of maintaining emergency vehicle access.

On the other hand, some residents, like Vanina Tagon, argued that the closure has transformed Ocean Drive into a “Dead Zone,” increasing the risk of accidents and hindering emergency services. Tagon, representing over 170 residents, called for the immediate reopening of the street.

Financial concerns were also a part of the discussion, with speakers like Mitch Novic highlighting the economic implications of maintaining the promenade. Novic pointed to a drop in resort taxes and questioned the rationale behind spending $700,000 annually on private traffic management and additional costs for events and repairs. He urged officials to control spending, particularly given its impact on housing affordability and the residential population.

As the meeting progressed, the commission members engaged in a broader discussion about the future vision for Ocean Drive. Reflecting on the historical allure of the area, speakers argued for a balance between nostalgia and modern urban planning, advocating for a pedestrian-friendly environment that enhances business and residential life. Suggestions included creating a sculpture garden and themed events to boost attraction while maintaining the promenade’s benefits.

Commissioner Fernandez emphasized the importance of careful language during discussions, noting that narratives shaped in the room could extend beyond it. Fernandez supported the promenade as an asset but acknowledged the need to respect judicial authority. The commissioner suggested exploring options for regaining local control over traffic management by seeking county permission, promoting a collaborative approach to resolving jurisdictional issues.