And this is precisely the reason we leave decisions up to people who are educated on the matter, and not an ignorant populous.

I am almost 60, and I am very excited to see the Lens completed. I believe, in general, that many older people do not like change, or things that seem too modern or "newfangled". It is the younger respondents who will see the Lens longer in their future. Iconic structures such as the Lens are found in many cities, and they serve as an immediately identifiable representation of the city. Needless to say, I was not contacted by pollsters.

Mr O'Grady-Agreed! When they built the Eiffel Tower, there was rioting in the street.

The Lens has grown on me. It reminds me of the Opera House in Sydney Harbor.

Educated on the matter?

They chose a design that features observing a reef in the middle of an estuary that has visibility of 1-2 feet on a good day. Did they even walk out on the pier and look down before selecting this design? They still haven't noticed that the waters of the bay coats everything placed in it with a thick layer of brown vegetable matter within a year. Now they are talking about underwater cameras?

Then they placed next to it a 'marina' with no breakwater that nobody will ever use because the bay swell will pound boats against the pilings and docks just like the current pier. When was the last time you saw a small craft tied up to the pier? Was anyone who actually owns a small boat consulted on this issue? Look out there right now and look at where the boats are docked. They are clustered within the breakwaters. None are out by the pier.

Then there is the fact that there is no air conditioned building at the furthest extent of the pier, which should have been a basic design consideration. Why wasn't that a criteria in the design contest? This is Florida. People expect a reprieve from the elements.

And that doesn't even consider the fact that the dominant architectural theme of St. Petersburg is Mediterranean Revival and that the overwhelming opinion of the residents is that the new design embrace that theme.

Form is fine, but it must follow function. The Lens design has no functional design elements that are well-conceived.

The lens is a horrible boondoggle, being forced on our city by a bunch of wanna be elites that think their taste in art is all knowing. This is far from over, the "ignorant populous" is not so ignorant as you may think. The people in council will find themselves being voted out of office for this.

Again...I am really looking forward to seeing the completed Lens. Those who oppose it now, should have attended more of the 80 plus (advertised and promoted, public) meetings that were conducted by the City during the review process. The final Lens design is still being developed to work out some of the challenges. Cities, like most things, must evolve to keep pace with changing times. This will definitely end the "God's waiting room" perception of our lovely city. I do hope you will study the concept, make your suggestions for improvements, and embrace this new St. Petersburg feature.

It was a total surprise to see that the three finalists for the pier competition were all avant garde designs. Surprising because I attended the public input meetings and always observed many people asking for a variety of approaches for this important situation. I can only hope that the group formed recently will be successful in a court injunction to stop this process.

Shore Acres Rick-The Lens design was chosen by the people; 68% to be exact, in the publicly held contest. So, you might want to retract your rant, knowing who "they" are.

No one is going to see the completed lens, no matter how much you, and the very tiny minority are looking forward to it. The city council spit in the face of 23,000 registered voters and all their friends and family, something that will NOT go away, no matter how you wish for it. It was political suicide for those that denied a vote to the taxpayers. Now there is a new petition that will NOT take 20 months, it will be done much more quickly. And don't forget the lawsuit against the city, that is still to come....not to mention the rumor of a recall petition for all that voted down the referendum. This very same polling group showed very recently that 68% of people want to refurbish our pier. It is the green thing to do, with less environmental impact. Not to mention we won't have to stare at the ugly tiara for the rest of our lives, or until a cat3 rumbles up the bay, whichever comes first. This process has been orchestrated by a very few, against the very many, and it doesn't even follow the pier advisory task force recommendations. We do not want the leslie curran art pier. Not good for St.Pete.

Bwaaaahahaha Joshua! 68% of 3,000 people! In a contest with only 3 to choose from, ugly, uglier, and ugliest! A CLASSIC example of "push polling"...do you know what that is? Look it up. "chosen by the people" BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA

23,000 registered voters TRULY voted by way of petition, and regardless of a technicality, the message was very clear, they wanted to VOTE on this! A tiny group of people, choosing the lens out of only three options is NOT VOTING. They were SUGGESTION CARDS, not votes. Keep wishing on a lens, it's not going to happen. What a preposterous debacle this council has created. And they have joshua as their cheerleader, someone who thinks registered voters are ignorant trolls. Who do you think voted this crew in joshua? I guess their vote counts when they want to be elected, but now? What gives?

"Joshua Streeter

"N.A.W.-Nah. There are only two council members up for reelection during the next election. Furthermore, if the voting public has nothing else, it's a short memory."
Keep wishing, good luck with that, lol.

Funny...the vast majority of my friends are very positive about the Lens. Have you studied, and I mean really, objectively studied the design; because I have, and it has lots to offer besides extraordinary aesthetics. The sad reality is that even if 68% of the population would like to refurbish the existing pier, it is just not possible. Independent studies have repeated shown that it is beyond repair. I suppose it could be completely rebuilt, but the current pier is extremely dated in a style which has long past it's period of popularity. And, it costs the city residents something like $1.5 million in annual subsidy just to keep it open. The Lens, on the other hand, captures wind energy, solar energy, and rainwater to water the associated landscape. It is indeed a "green" structure. Take an in-depth look...and be objective. You may be surprised.

to Joshua Streeter...what is in the City Council members that gives them their omniscient powers?

I never said that city council was omniscient, Dick. Just smarter than people who were lied to by Vote on The Pier.

10% of the electorate signed a petition stating that they want a vote, a majority of the StPetePoll.com results prefer "nothing" over the "Sidewalk", a new group of influential folks are planning another petition, Kathleen Ford has an active lawsuit to slap an injunction to prevent further expenditures on "the sidewalk". You can whine about "the process" all you want. Perception is reality, and the perception is this entire idea needs to be re-evaluated. Period.

I see the lenS as non functional and incongruous. If there was a focus on utility and function then I would be much more open to the design bit since it fails to provide local function in terms of dockage bait store and a good platform for the Johnny Renos and other Businesses i think it will be seen As a failure. Kind of makes me think of the Detroit people mover as it failed to Steve a pratt function and was built purely as a design feature I.e. a total over budget failure

Mr Streeter you sure are passionate about the Lens. You troll through every story about the Pier and snipe almost every dissenting post. Which leads me to believe you have skin in the game. Does Leslie Curran or Lisa Wannamacher have you on the payroll?

Was this a scientific poll?

Bill Ogrady---if you know so much about preservation, you would know that age is not the only factor..
Architectural significance, and economic impact are other reasons for preservation, and the pier is quickly getting to 50 years regardless.
Joshua Streeter, who CARES if Tom Lambdon lives in Safety Harbor? Pinellas pays half of the 50 million. Not to mention he lived in St.Pete for 30 years, graduating from NEHI...he's not some transplant from Wisconsin.
Vote on the pier did not change any question, they were simply trying to work with council to come up with language they found acceptable, and that was turned around by some in council that they changed it...what a load of bull.
It remains to be seen what happens in court with Kathleen Ford.
YOU have not been a part of this process, you did not go to the pier advisory task force meetings, nor the endless council meetings and workshops...I didn't see you there. The VERY REASON we have a petition process is for when the public feels like our elected leaders are on the wrong path, regardless of how hard they worked on a specific AGENDA. Tell me this: When did the city know that the wording of the petition was not legally binding?
The pier building is in fine shape, it's part of our history, a landmark, an icon. St.Petersburg Preservation came forward in support of refurbishing...they are the experts wouldn't you say?
You want your precious lens? Let it go head to head in a referendum with a refurbishment option.

Joshua Streeter once suggested to the vote on the pier people that they should have wined and dined council to influence them. Should have schmoozed them by taking them out to lunch. Sucking up to politicians with agendas is not only disgusting, it shows the type of person you are. I laughed when they told me of this.....I told them no amount of sucking up would change the minds of the mental midgets controlling things right now. They have to be forced. If hear leslie curran say "moving forward" one more time and I might vomit. Joshua sucks up to council, he's their lap dog.

The Lens-The New St. Pete Pier is a beautiful addition an up and coming downtown as opposed to the ghost town that the current Pier has become. People have mentioned form over function, how can you look at the inverted pyramid and honestly say it anything but. We the tax payers are housing a bunch of tacky tourist shops and over-priced shoddy restaurants. The New Pier is an opportunity to continue the reinvention of downtown. What is unique about St. Pete is the different pieces of architecture located throughout our streets and neighborhoods. This new Pier will continue the growth and development of the downtown area.

The Columbia at the Pier is a shoddy restaurant, beichler? Just why did Cameron Diaz dine there and not on Beach Drive when she was in town to watch the Yankees and Rays play?

Joshua Streeter, you embarrass yourself by mentioning a roller coaster, something Tom Lambdon proposed in the 1980's, LOL. Mentioning that means you are swallowing the pablum fed to you by council and the mayor. This never had anything to do with a roller coaster, how embarrassing for you.

Z and Rick from Shore Acres-

You two both sound reasonable, and educated on issues surrounding the Pier. I'd love to discuss your alternative views at a Lens presentation. Is there one coming up?

It's the citizens who have already shaped the redesign on some features, and if this train is rollin, let's make sure we make it the best we can (even if we disagree on it being the ultimate best vehicle).

Joshua Streeter

4:52 pm on Friday, September 21, 2012

"OK then, tell me what motivated him to work so diligently on this issue?"
You don't deserve a response, but I'll give one to you anyway. Tom called me back in 2010, after the vote to demolish. He was very unhappy that they voted to demolish without a referendum. He knew a lot about the pier from when he DID try to put a coaster there in the 80's...he was very familiar with the process of doing ANYTHING on the waterfront, and was amazed that they were doing this without a referendum.....you can't sneeze at the waterfront without a referendum, and rightly so. He did it for the RIGHT reason....that people were denied a vote on such a landmark of our city. I agreed with him, and the petition was filed not long after that in November of 2010. Not once did a roller coaster come up, except from the mouth of the mayor, who knew about the coaster in the 80's. The mayor started going around, even on TV, telling people that the coaster was Tom's goal. At the time we thought it was funny, because if that was all he had, he didn't have much since it wasn't true. But yet, the mayor, and other council members kept on lying about it. Kept on telling people that he wanted to build a coaster, so some people believed the lie. See, they were lying about this from the very beginning, that's why I lost all respect for them from the start. You don't play paddy cakes with liars, you out them as liars.

Joshua Streeter

4:59 pm on Friday, September 21, 2012

"I also answered a request (some called it intimidation) to meet in person to discuss from those at Vote on the Pier. I showed, no one else did."
THIS IS A LIE. YOU WANTED TO MEET SOMEONE FROM VOTP AT THE PIER AND SAID YOU WOULD BE THERE, THAT'S IT. NO ONE "INTIMIDATED" YOU...MAN YOU ARE SUCH A LIAR. No one asked to meet you there, and no one said they would meet you, or go to meet you. You just put it out there that you were going, and if someone wanted to be there, that's where you would be. Like discussing things in person with you would change your mind. This takes the cake, you sir are a liar.

Joshua Streeter

4:51 pm on Friday, September 21, 2012

"Because she knew no one would be there to bother her! HA!

You kinda left the door wide open for that one, Jeannie."

This shows exactly the kind of jerk you are. Like the Colombia is empty, LOL...or 800K people don't visit the Pier on a slow year. You laugh as hundreds of people lose their jobs. Karma is a bitch, get used to it.

I think in the end the whole pier thing is just a big diversion by the Foster Administration so that while we are focused a couple of thousand feet offshore the city administration can do whatever it wants anywhere in the city. A 12 million dollar budget deficit and they point at public safety and threaten it instead of cutting administrative positions in other departments.

Look at the city marina. They took over the ships store from someone who ran it for 25 years profitably. He did it with 2 employees under him to run the ships store and the fuel dock. The city now has a new Marina supervisor and a Ships store supervisor in the same building and it now takes four employees to do what two did under private management. This is all because the failed real estate agent Chris Ballestra wants to show Rick Mussett that he knows how to make money. Both of these jokers make over $100 k and sit in offices in city hall. Ballestra has been in the middle of the Pier hearings- he is the one that looks like the piggy that went to market- and manages all of the downtown that the $50 million could be spent in.

Open your eyes St. Petersburg- the city has been stolen away by a wrinkled grinning mayor and an entrenched administration.

Joshua Streeter-"I made a decision in 2006 to use my real name on anything online."
HMMMM, interesting that you have this fake profile on facebook:
JESS STRAUSSER
https://www.facebook.com/jess.strausser?fref=pb

And yes I have taken a screenshot of it.

My joke profile with scribbled on fake mustache? The profile that I specifically pointed out to VOTP belonged to me? I hid nothing, and only used it to post when VOTP banned me...3 times.

Again, Nicholas Weathersbee, stop this. No one wants to see us go back and forth online.

I forgot that I also have a badly photoshopped sombrero on my head, and I even mockingly posted from my real account so people know it's me. Yes, nefarious, me, with my "fake" profile.

I showed a friend of mine visiting from out of town a picture of The Lens. His comment was where do we think we are, Dubai ? We then went out to the Pier and had a wonderful lunch at Cha Cha Coconuts. The food, the breeze, the entertainment and the view were great. I go regularly to the Columbia. I'm glad the Gonzmarts' plan to keep a Columbia restaurant downtown but half the fun of going there is getting there and the view. You'll have neither from the Dolphin Parking lot. Part of the attraction of the restaurants on the Pier is that you're out on the water with a great view. When The Pier is destroyed and the Lens is built any of the Pier restaurants and shops that decide to stay in business will just be another downtown waterfront business, competing with all the great ones already there. IMHO the city refused to put the Pier's future to a vote is because the remember what happened when they wanted to bulldoze Albert Whitted Airport and build parks, apartments, condos and restaurants on the land. The citizens voted NO and we still have an airport which has a nice restaurant. If we, the citizens of St. Petersburg are borrowing $50 million dollars we should use it for something we really need, like a new Police Headquarters, instead of a partially completed piece of art that we're now finding out is not being built the way it was promoted and only the city council knew that the $50 million was only buying us the basic structure.