The Pier Looks more like a prison than a tourist attraction or a park

Opinion by: E. Eugene Webb PhD
Coauthor of: So You Want Blog .

In a panic to get the Pier demolition process started, the Kriseman administration quickly canceled security protection for the Pier, and erected a mesh covered used chain link fence across the Pier approach.

The net effect is to create something on the water front that looks more like the entrance to a prison than a tourist attraction.

With no daytime security, regardless of what the City Legal department says, the Pier is now a safety risk, ripe for vandalism and who knows what else.

Elsewhere in social media, saintpetersblog, a City attorney says he doesn't think there is a liability to the City, but that will be a pretty weak explanation if someone's child or a wandering tourist is killed or injured.

The Corps of Engineers says it could be fall before all of the pieces are in place for the permits, and while it is quite likely the Corps is getting some political heat, my experience is they don't respond real well to that kind of pressure.

Some attempt to protect the public (this fence doesn't qualify) and the image of the Pier and downtown would seem to be a wise plan.

It would only make good sense for the Administration to keep things neat, clean and safe around the Pier approach since a lot of people walk down that way and a fence like that is really tempting to a lot of people.

This is yet another short sighted knee jerk reaction by an administration that is so fixated on getting their way and tearing down the Inverted Pyramid that they are exercising no reason in their decision making. Same approach will likely carry right into the design review process.

It is also interesting that the City's New Pier Web site has not been updated since July 9, 2015. That's just about the time the demolition Permits thing blew up.

So much for transparency and timely updating.

E-mail Doc at mail to:dr.gwebb@yahoo.com or send me a Facebook (Gene Webb) Friend request. Please comment below, and be sure to share on Facebook. See Doc's Photo Gallery at Bay Post Photos.

Disclosures:
Contributor: Waterfront Charter Amendment (Vote on The Pier), Carly Fiorina for President

Is the Pier approach really safe for those demolition trucks and equipment?

Opinion by: E. Eugene Webb, PhD
Coauthor of: So You Want to Blog

After being told repeatedly that the Pier approach was unsafe for pedestrians now the approach will be used to haul thousands of tons of debris as the inverted pyramid is torn down. There will also be a lot of construction equipment needed to complete the demolition process.

You may also remember that "safety" was one of the reasons given for shuttering the Pier over a year before any final decision was made.

It will be interesting to see what safety precautions Glasbrenner takes in terms of truck size and load size as the demolition process begins. Limitations on size and weight of demolition equipment could seriously affect the time to complete the demolition phase.

It is a real dilemma for the Kriseman administration. They want the inverted pyramid gone as soon as possible to help avoid a referendum and it is also in Glasbrenner's interest to get the job done as soon as possible.

Check out the Sonny Glasbrenner website for some stunning views of the Pier.

My guess is the Pier approach had a lot more life left in it than Foster, Kriseman or Connors wanted the public to know about, but then it would be a shame to see one of those shiny 12 wheeler dump trucks sitting on the bottom of the bay.

E-mail Doc at: mailto:dr.gwebb@yahoo.com or send me a Facebook (Gene Webb) Friend request. Please comment below, and be sure to share on Facebook and Twitter. See Doc's Photo Gallery at Bay Post Photos

Disclosures:
Contributor: Waterfront Charter Amendment (Vote on The Pier), Carly Fiorina for President.

City caught with its Pier Park permits down

Opinion by: E. Eugene Webb PhD
Coauthor of: So You Want Blog .

  

Just when it looked like the Pier issue was pretty much settled and I would have to search for something new and dumb to write about, Tampa Bay Times Staff writer Waveney Ann Moore put up an article: No clear answer on when Pier can come down.

And I was starting to worry about what to blog about.

It is starting to look like the Kriseman administration's dedicated leader of the charge to demolish the Inverted Pyramid has once again put his foot in his silver tongued mouth.

I was at the meeting when Karl Nurse asked Connors about the permitting, First Connors said yes they had all the permits, and then he said they didn't need an Army Corps of Engineers Permit to tear down the Inverted Pyramid since it was above the water.

Didn't sound right to me; given that the Pier sets right in front of the largest marina in Florida, the Vinoy basin and marina and the City's mooring field.

That makes all of the water around the Pier and the Pier head navigable water.

But everyone on Council was so anxious to get this deal done and behind them no one followed up.

Quoting from Waveney's article: "Last week, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers spokeswoman Nakeir Nobles told the Tampa Bay Times that since the Pier is over navigable waters, the agency must issue a demolition permit for the entire structure — the approach, or bridge, the pyramid and the area surrounding it. Further, she said, work cannot begin until an agreement concerning historic preservation is finalized. The tentative timing for that is this fall, she said."

For now they have pushed Tom Gibson, the City's Director of engineering, out in front to try to explain what's going on. Gibson, whose forte has never been explaining things to the press or the public, just seemed to further confuse the whole issue.

Gibson, in true engineering fashion, demonstrated why the City hires consultants as he blamed to whole mess on the consultant hired to get the permit.

Then there is the whole historic preservation agreement which the Corps says must be completed before demolition can begin. That could take months.

In addition, has anyone checked with the Army Corps of Engineers to see if they will need permits to moor those barges used to haul away debris?

By the way, has anybody checked with Glasbrenner to see what kind and how big the cranes will be and with the FAA to see if they have any issues?

How much longer is City Council going to sit on the dais and drink up everything Mike Connors tells them. They have been misled or lied to so many times I would think they would finally figure out that this is a means justifies the end game and the end game is to tear that Inverted Pyramid down.

With these kinds of shenanigans right out of the gate, it is hard to imagine what will go on in the Pier Park design meetings and what stories will be concocted to get Council to buy into what will be a "changing design".

Nothing better than this permit debacle, could make the case for the Waterfront Referendum and the absolute need to put control of the waterfront in the hands of the public.

Every time you turn over a rock in this project it becomes clearer you can't trust the administration, and City Council seems incapable or unwilling to act properly, ask the right questions and get the documentation to protect the City's most valuable asset.

E-mail Doc at mail to:dr.gwebb@yahoo.com or send me a Facebook (Gene Webb) Friend request. Please comment below, and be sure to share on Facebook. See Doc's Photo Gallery at Bay Post Photos.

Disclosures:
Contributor: Waterfront Charter Amendment (Vote on The Pier), Carly Fiorina for President

The stampede to the new Pier

Opinion by: E. Eugene Webb, PhD
Coauthor of: So You Want to Blog

As expected, it looks like the Kriseman Administration is about to attempt yet another Hail Mary in the continuing saga of the new St. Pete Pier.

On Thursday's Council agenda is the new Pier Park design for approval, the construction manager contract for approval and the Pier demolition contract for approval.

None of these items has been seen by the public, there has been no formal presentation for public information or comment, the City's New Pier Web site has not been updated since May and my guess is Council will get final details as late as Kriseman and Connors think they can get away with.

What does the "in budget" Pier Park really look like?

Where are the renderings so the public and the Committee that so aptly recommended this design could compare reality with the BS they were sold?

Will the County issue the needed permits?

Will the State issue the needed permits? Not Just Connors saying so has the state seen the new design?

What about the bond issue? How much? When? Who?

Why the rush?

If it's so the Mayor can have Pier Park as a second term campaign bragging point, believe it when I say by the time Kriseman thinks about running for a second term the Pier will be the last thing he wants to talk about.

No, the rush is all about getting ahead of a potential referendum. Hold the defrocked Pier Park design details as long as possible, get the Pier demo started before the referendum so the outcome cannot affect the Pier which will lower turnout and improve the chance the referendum may fail.

Back City Council into a corner with a bunch of hyped up claims that if they don't move now, some great calamity may happen, like a referendum.

Somebody in the Kriseman administration needs to explain why they don't want the people to have a voice. And don't give me, or the public, the BS that they already had their chance. Not on this version of the design.

City Council must also consider they are being hustled into spending almost $50 million for something a majority of the people don't want.

There is no rush. Let's put the final design on the table and let everyone have some time to look it over and comment. Who knows? Maybe of couple of tweaks and everyone's view might change.

For now Mike Connors is going to back a truck up the Council dais and dump a load of crap backed up by his folksy rhetoric and thinly veiled threats if action is not taken now.

There is little honor and no shame in the Kriseman administration. They manipulated the Pier process and the Selection Committee and now they will try to manipulate the City Council.

Council should table this whole package, hold a couple of public comment sessions and give the public some time to weigh in.

E-mail Doc at: mailto:dr.gwebb@yahoo.com or send me a Facebook (Gene Webb) Friend request. Please comment below, and be sure to share on Facebook and Twitter. See Doc's Photo Gallery at Bay Post Photos

Disclosures:

Contributor: Waterfront Charter Amendment (Vote on The Pier), Carly Fiorina for President

The Incredible Shrinking Pier

Opinion by: E. Eugene Webb PhD
Coauthor of: So You Want Blog .

It was somewhat amazing to watch at Thursday's St. Pete City Council meeting as Pier Park simply shrank right before the City Council's eyes and no one even mentioned: bait and switch, change of scope, what will it really look like or can we have a look at what the real renderings will look like.

The footprint had already shrunk by almost 25% or so to get some hope of permitting and those towering trees that looked like 30 foot Oaks, quietly shrunk to 30 foot native plants, make that palm trees.

The real issue here is City Council may have bought themselves a $33,000,000 pig in a poke. Forget the inverted pyramid, what will this thing really look like?

Here is a given.

The Kriseman administration will get a deal on Pier Park if Mike Connors has to unload the dirt for the event field from the truck himself with a shovel and a wheel barrow to make the budget.

Under no circumstances, at any cost, for any reason, no matter what, come hell or high water these negotiations with the Pier Park group cannot fail because the State Statute requires that if they do the City MUST negotiate with the second ranked and that is Destination Pier.

From the Kriseman administration's position that cannot happen!

 

This deal will be filled with enough holes to embarrass a sieve.

 The City will pony up "in kind" services, provide "staff support", agree to "finish" certain parts of the structure, "haul away debris at City cost or no cost for undefined "City Purposes", waive permitting costs on an on the list will go.

Pier Park could not be permitted and most likely not built within the budget as originally designed. As the wheeling and dealing begin in the design phase the real question is who is watching the chickens and the answer is the silver haired fox.

E-mail Doc at mail to:dr.gwebb@yahoo.com or send me a Facebook (Gene Webb) Friend request. Please comment below, and be sure to share on Facebook. See Doc's Photo Gallery at Bay Post Photos