WUSF Florida Matters St Pete Pier discussion aired August 20th, (Click "Listen" button, 28 minutes) wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/post/florida-matters-st-petersburg-pier-lens The ENTIRE “International Pier Design Competition” selection process was bogus because it was based on RESUMES, NOT PRACTICAL DESIGNS for our weather & community needs. The claim that it was a 4-5 year public input process is a LIE since the “Stage 2” instructions told the 3 design finalists to IGNORE the recommendations of the Pier Advisory Task Force, which also ignores the public input and the “63 meetings.” Ed Montinari refers to this process and the role of the Task Force several times, but ALL of that time and effort was ignored. It is obvious in the failure of the Lens to meet practical considerations, like weather, and there is proof that the design process was derailed in the “Stage 2” document. This document can be seen listed at August 2011 on the Timeline page: savethepier.org/timeline.html Ed Montinari said the Lens would decrease the annual subsidy by 50% but neglected to mention the fact that a refurbished Inverted Pyramid pier with a brand new approach bridge & pier head deck would ALSO reduce the annual subsidy, perhaps 50% or more when considering increased rents from more upscale retail & restaurants. Ed Montinari was correct when he said “A padlocked pier and chain-link fence is not a smart way to move the City forward.” So why didn’t he and the other Task Force members along with the Chamber of Commerce oppose Mayor Foster’s decision to close the Pier for business after it was confirmed that the “Stop The Lens” referendum would be on the Aug 27th ballot and every poll indicated it would succeed? While the pro-Lens people keep using the scare tactic that the Pier would remain closed, as was mentioned in this discussion, the TRUTH is that a new mayor can REOPEN the Pier for business until a plan is in place. At the beginning of the second half of the discussion, the Golden Gate Bridge and Eiffel tower were mentioned as a comparison, but two glaring facts were omitted: 1) the construction for those iconic structures did not require the demolition of an existing iconic structure, (as Mayor Foster & Ed Montinari referred to the Inverted Pyramid at the three public input sessions in Jan. & Feb. 2010), and 2). What is WRONG with the City management & maintenance of the existing pier when other cities are able to properly maintain those structures which are much older than the 40 year old Inverted Pyramid? As for the selection of the people participating in this discussion, as with other Pier discussions in broadcast or in print, the panel seems to be stacked in favor of the pro-Lens group. In this case, Bud Risser of “Concerned Citizens”- “Stop the Lens” was the only person while the “Vote on the Pier” group with their 26,000 signed petitions and currently delayed in the Appeals Court by the City’s request for an extension, was NOT represented. While Mr. Risser did a great job, the fact remains that his air-time was proportional to the other panelists. The facts and poll figures indicate almost a 33-33-33% of the voters who want: 1) The Lens, 2) a Refurbished Inverted Pyramid, 3) a new Pier but more practical & functional than the Lens. The panel did not reflect this reality.
Posted on: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 18:35:22 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015