Petition Closed

Build Blue Pier

This petition had 111 supporters


Build the Blue Pier design. Let activated, urban, public, green space serve as St. Petersburg's "icon" versus a static structure.

First and foremost, this is about fighting for public space. In signing this petition we are sending a message that we want sustainable, activated, public, green space as the main theme for our new pier. We believe that local ecology should guide the design and that, out of the 7 designs, Blue Pier best exemplifies this theme.

• We believe that St. Pete can find it's "icon" in first-class, activated, urban green space versus building a static structure that the city will be left on the hook to maintain. Let us not succumb to the false confidence of the Bilbao Effect and rely on the success of the High Line Effect. (unfamiliar with these? Click the links at the bottom of the page). In short: Focus on space over building a structure.

• We believe that since Blue Pier requires the lowest subsidy, it positions itself as a leading design amongst the finalists.

• We believe that Blue Pier will succeed because it doesn't waste usable, activated space with traffic lanes and parking spaces such as is the case with designs such as Destination Pier or Alma who tie up their pier structures with traffic lanes and a ~1500ft concrete walkway respectively. We believe that Blue Pier will provide a successful urban space that people will use just as they use other parks along our waterfront -- Florida thrives on a reputation of year-round wonderful weather and beautiful outdoors and that communities the world over have shown that they will use walkable, bike-able, hike-able, run-able parkland...so will we.

• We believe that the Blue Pier design is the best use of urban space because, on-top of providing recreation space, it also provides exceptional leisure space, viewing space, and a true engagement in Florida's native ecology.

• We believe that Florida's native environment as expressed in the Blue Pier design will always be on-trend and that if we make the icon of our new pier a building, that we'll be pushing the pier issue onto the shoulder's of the next generation who will be left with trying to figure what to do with a structure that will surely look outdated in another couple of decades (hence the issue we're dealing with now).

• We believe that the more the public is engaged with Florida's natural habitats, the more apt they are to preserve them over time. This is a long-term view that will serve the longevity of our community.

• We understand that Blue Pier provides adequate observation space for visitors and residents alike to enjoy the view of Tampa Bay as well as the St. Pete cityscape.

• We believe that Blue Pier is a design that is applicable to all ages and demographics. Whether or not you have $.50 or $50.00, you'll be able to use and enjoy Blue Pier. Blue Pier is age and class neutral.

• We believe that an emphasis on requiring fine dining within the new pier denies the fact that Beach Drive and the Central Avenue Corridor exist. We believe that downtown St. Pete provides a growing and exceptional array of fine dining experiences and that the pier design doesn't need to include that in the initial groundwork. Blue Pier offers a quick, fun, cheap, and accessible dining experience in it's plan while also providing future space for fine-dining commercial establishments to develop if they see fit. We believe the pier should be about the broad array or people that exist in our community, not just just fine-diners.

• We believe that the Lambert Report strongly backs Blue Pier as a winning design. We believe that, although Blue Pier doesn't provide "event" space as does Alma, the environment that Blue Pier provides for such a broad audience supersedes having to include formal event space. We believe that, although Blue Pier doesn't include an "environmental education pavilion" that the Lambert report is correct in acknowledging that, although the other proposals provide environmental education pavilion space, that that space will serve to be inadequate at accomplishing their function as they are woefully small in size with relation to their application. We STRONGLY believe that Blue Pier IS the environmental education space and doesn't need a pavilion to suffice an engagement with Florida's natural environment. We believe that Blue Pier engages the public in earth science and the natural environment in a much more hands-on, experiential manner than the other designs.

• We believe that if we put an emphasis on activated urban space that people will use it an that it will serve the public directly. Secondarily, we believe that it will boost the surrounding economy, increase property values, and attract commercial interest. We believe in the sequence of the above variables. We don't believe that the city should build a building, gift it to commercial interests, and then hope that people visit it. We believe that that is the wrong approach.

• We feel that the Pier Selection Committee's decision to remove Blue Pier was in error.

• We think that the committee didn't fully understand what Blue Pier offered and urge them to reengage that design into their decision making process.

"St. Pete deserves more public, urban, green space. The philosophy of the current pier process is backwards: Spend the better part of $50 million on a building that will house restaurant space in the hopes that a private operator will be able to a) fill it and b) last. Our philosophy should be this: Build public space that people will enjoy, recreate in, kayak through, and picnic at. A place for photographs and lunch breaks, an “iconic” destination space. Provide a thriving customer base that private developers will want to build commercial space around. Icons can be space, not just buildings. If Blue Pier is a “leap of faith” we should’ve jumped. Instead of reinventing an antiquated, inverted pyramid, born out of the 1970’s brutalist architectural movement, or erecting a tower that bears no thematic relevance to St. Pete, we should invest in the timelessness of Florida’s ecology -- something residents enjoy and people travel far and wide to experience. 50 years from now, Florida’s environmental wonders and urban space will still be on-trend. The icon=building delusion saddles our children with the problem of what to do with a structure designed in the image of a future that never materialized. Alma depends on large swaths of land dedicated to parking lots and Destination Pier throws away real estate with traffic lanes extending to the Pyramid. We deserve space. Build Blue Pier. Invest in community, in a theme relevant to our city. Invest in open public green space."
-Ryan Mitchell

Please build Blue Pier.

Blue Pier: http://www.stpete.org/newstpetepier/docs/blue_pier.pdf

The Lambert Report:
http://www.newstpetepier.com/docs/Lambert_Advisory_Pier_Economic_Impact_3_11_2015.pdf

Bilbao Effect: http://www.cnu.org/cnu-salons/2013/06/starchitects-and-bilbao-effect-new-urbanisms-role

The High Line Effect: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charles-a-birnbaum/the-real-high-line-effect_b_1604217.html

 

 



Today: Ryan is counting on you

Ryan Mitchell needs your help with “Build Blue Pier”. Join Ryan and 110 supporters today.