St. Pete Pier redevelopment

[Jasonhouse]

Originally Posted by DShenise

The best part is most of that is basically already done as there are sidewalks connecting all those parks along the NE. Your bridges will hose those yacht basins though. Why not use existing sidewalks, widen as necessary using some distinctive paver for instance, that way you can keep the revenue flowing into the yacht basins and docks?

Part of the answer is because the bridges would be small enough and light enough that they can be automated to raise several times an hour on their own... Plus, I don't know about you, but I boat in and out of that marina with some regularity... There isn't as much boat traffic as you would think there is.

Secondly, making peds go around the two harbors defeats the purpose of linking the parks together with a trail, so that they form a more cohesive unit for large events, and just generally for everyday use by the city's residents and tourists.

[Maxim98]

as a boater and planner, i think jason's got it right.... smart, if obvious. should happen, eventually.

more immediately, making obvious the connections between 1st ave and the waterfront via improved street design/streetscaping could do a fair amount to improve the waterfront for much less money.

[DShenise]

So you were thinking of some short span drawbridge, say 30' across or so. I'd buy the automated thing if this were the EU or Asia, however I think you'd get forced into having someone man the thing for life-safety reasons. A swing bridge would be cool too. Valencia has a very nice looking swing bridge.

[Maxim98]

one of the first steps to making cities more livable is treating people like adults. if other cities can - and do - do it, florida can step up.

funny enough, i've seen the valencia swing bridge in use for their urban circuit, much like what happens in st. pete. coincidence?

[DShenise]

That would be good. St. Pete is significantly more camera friendly than Valencia IMO. But than again, that bridge cost big euros.

[Jasonhouse]

Trust me, such a project would get some serious donations if it was pitched to the right people and companies

I just think it would be a really nice addition to DT, and doing the work to coincide with the design and redevelopment of the pier is a no-brainer.

[DShenise]

Its a $10-$15mil line item on the total bill. My only big concern is the typical level of fearfulness Americans have of things that are remotely "new" or "different". This is especially prevalent in St. Pete where most seem to think the modern world ends at the county line. I think an automated bridge that opened every hour on the hour for 15 minutes exactly would be great. However its very likely some jackhole will try to slip in at 14:58 and than turn around, sue the city. You can't use any optical sensors out there as the salt in the air will cause all sorts of servicing issues. Which is why I think it would end up with some retiree in a booth operating the thing. I only say retirees as that seems to be the demo operating the Bayway bridges.

[TampaMike]

It's official, the Pier is coming down.

[WeatherChannel]

Originally Posted by TampaMike

It's official, the Pier is coming down.

@holes. Yippee, lets spend others peoples money

[TampaMike]

Originally Posted by WeatherChannel

@holes. Yippee, lets spend others peoples money

[Jasonhouse]

Originally Posted by WeatherChannel

@holes. Yippee, lets spend others peoples money

Actually, much of the point of a wholesale redevelopment of the pier is to stop spending so much taxpayer money on the pier longterm. The annual subsidy is approaching $2mil these days and rising, because the place is fundamentally outdated across the board. The causeway, the building, the architecture, the pier's purpose... All of it is outdated and must be redeveloped. Leaving the pier as is, repairing it, or rebuilding the same design are not viable options because they are all too expensive in the long run.

[I-275westcoastfl]

It's not so much that it's outdated vs the fact there is nothing interesting or a genator of revenue.

[Jasonhouse]

^Hence it being outdated... What's there used to be considered interesting by past generations.

[burnside]

This is frustrating. The existing pier building was not bad when it opened. The original casino was not bad when it opened. Their replacement will be not bad when it opens. It will be replaced at some point with yet another not bad project.

The '70s iteration was pretty good - matte, unfinished concrete, solar bronze glazing, the Rockne Krebs laser sculpture, visible many miles out in the Gulf. There was a multi-story central lobby fountain - where the water hissed down glowing monofilament guides. If it were still in that condition, many of us would enjoy it now and talk of demolition would be impossible.

Neglect and of-the-moment alterations to the pier have finally cost us the building itself.

[Jasonhouse]

^I think the problem is that the pyramid's design alone isn't enough to bring people out there. In my personal experience, the only thing that makes the pier worth going to is the ability to fish from it, the Columbia, and the free elevated view of the DT waterfront from the top of the pier.

The pier needs more than this to draw significant, lasting traffic... Maybe a larger retail/entertainment complex, or a functional wharf and fisherman's market, or an aquarium, amusement park, or more likely a mix of such ideas.

[TampaGuy]

Isn't the Pier Aquarium moving out soon?
Hadn't they announced that?

[Jasonhouse]

I think it already moved? Not sure.

[TampaMike]

They plan is to leave by 2012.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/localgo...y-2012/1096682

[TampaGuy]

Originally Posted by TampaMike

They plan is to leave by 2012.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/localgo...y-2012/1096682

The article says the Pier Aquarium gets 93,000 visitors annually, that's a lot more than I would have expected. Just for comparison, the current Dali museum gets 200,000, and their new facility is expecting 300,000 a year.

[burnside]

Jason, I think the discussion hinges on what any of us imagines a pier - any new or old project there - should do. If the object is to see the place almost always teeming with visitors and also attracting local residents frequently, my guess is we're likely at some point to be disappointed.

It's a lost cause for me to plump for the pyramid as it was in the early seventies, except as that might serve as a guide in shaping what will take its place. There was fine dining on the bay side and an informal cafe looking out on the city - both just below the observation deck. The floor below had a good facility for meetings or small conferences. The deck was taken up by a tropical bar with live bands in the evening. There was tourist-oriented shopping on the lobby level. Sunglasses and city-theme items and, for a while, a visitors' bureau.

Perhaps it's the generation gap yawning here but, to me at least, one of the great attractions was that you could catch the place in a quiet mood sometimes, look out over the water and the city, and let yourself breathe for a bit. I'm not sure I measure the pier's success based on maintaining crowds during open hours.

People are terribly busy all day and all week. Sometimes it's nice to have resort to a spot where the rush and rumble are at a safe distance. Back over there. In the city.

Perhaps I'll find myself in the minority here, but I see us - collectively - edging into a world where libraries and museums are scored according to their 'programs', their 'outreach', their activities, rather than on their collections. But piers and parks, libraries and museums have essential points which don't rest particularly on their traffic counts. Or is that sense wholly lost, now?