Advertisement

Editorial: Move forward with Pier Park

 
By picking a concept that extends St. Petersburg’s bustling waterfront park into the bay, the pier selection committee embraced a flexible, innovative vision for revitalizing the city’s centerpiece public space.
By picking a concept that extends St. Petersburg’s bustling waterfront park into the bay, the pier selection committee embraced a flexible, innovative vision for revitalizing the city’s centerpiece public space.
Published April 24, 2015

By picking a concept that extends St. Petersburg's bustling waterfront park into the bay, the pier selection committee embraced a flexible, innovative vision for revitalizing the city's centerpiece public space. Adjustments are likely as with any $46 million construction project, but the Pier Park concept is transformative and exciting. It expands a world-renowned green space, and it offers a welcome path forward for resolving St. Petersburg's painful divisions over replacing the outdated inverted pyramid with a pier for future generations. The City Council should embrace Pier Park on May 7 and direct Mayor Rick Kriseman's administration to begin negotiations with the design team.

The pier selection committee, six individuals of varied backgrounds from the public and private sectors, performed a yeoman public service by sticking to state law and considering multiple factors in a very deliberate process. By a 5-1 vote late Thursday night, the committee chose ASD architects and RogersPartners of Tampa and Workshop:Ken Smith of New York to design the pier project and oversee construction. Committee members studied documents, asked good questions and considered hours of public comment that revealed thoughtful support for all three finalists.

The result is a plan that fills the daunting gap between the uplands and pierhead with family-friendly activities, multiple access routes, event spaces and a shady "coastal thicket" boardwalk. The city's economic comparison of plans called it a "seamless transition" from uplands to pierhead. At the eastern end, a four-story "Pier Overlook" is flanked by a sloping lawn that can hold 4,000 people and concrete floating docks for fishing and lounging. A 7,600-square-foot ground floor restaurant intrigued the committee with its ability to accommodate large crowds outside the building and air-conditioned diners inside.

The latest city analysis concluded that Pier Park's operating subsidy would run about $300,000 higher than for the competing Alma design and roughly equal to subsidies for Destination St. Pete Pier. As contract negotiations proceed and the design evolves, Kriseman should stay alert for changes that could raise costs. The city must also verify the ASD team's assurances that the floating docks can withstand hurricane winds and remain safely open all but a few days a year.

Committee members seemed assuaged by Destination St. Pete Pier's explanation of how it would manage private vehicle access to the pierhead. The committee also acknowledged that Destination's creative renovation of the inverted pyramid drew the most support in an online opinion survey. But the committee resisted considerable public pressure to base its decision too heavily on a single survey that drew a relatively small response. The City Council should do the same.

The controversy over the future of the pier has gone on long enough. There have been years of studies, public hearings and false starts. The City Council approved the Lens proposal, and opponents forced a voter referendum that killed it. It is time to move forward with the Pier Park team's visionary approach.