Council Member Littrell mentioned the following matter at the neighborhood's Monday's meeting after the council had already made a decision to go ahead with this plan:

Council approved a plan for a new boardwalk along the Vinoy Basin downtown. The 986-foot boardwalk would span the seawall from the Renaissance Vinoy Resort to the Pier's approach.

If after reading the information in this note and related stories you do not think this is a good idea, I highly encourage you to contact all Council Member Litrell and all Council Members. As she said, what was done can be undone. Act now. Because the area involves environmentally sensitive seagrass, I trust that the permitting process will result in delayed construction for a period of time.

All who spoke in the meeting were against this project because it would obscure a beautiful and unique section of the downtown waterfront which is especially picturesque in the morning and on moonlit nights. With Council's approval, that view will be obstructed by a boardwalk jutting 32 feet into the basin.

When an informal vote of sentiment was taken about this project in the meeting, the overwhelming vote was against the project.

This project apparently has received little public attention. All who spoke in the meeting were surprised to first learn about it in the meeting, and especially surprised that a decision had already been made.

I recall reading about the proposals in the newspaper but not about a decision. A little research revealed that there were just two ''inside story'' articles which mentioned it, and the final decision was buried at the end of a third story. Links to the articles are provided below.

The only opinions for the project mentioned in the articles were downtown business people who lauded the increased business that they would receive. There was only one statement that it might benefit citizens; Council Member Bryon (who intiated this idea) said, ''I see this as something that every citizen of St. Petersburg will enjoy.'' Since I do not own a boat and I know practically no one who does own a boat, I don't know who he refers to.


May 2
Council lets museum assume debt

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/sptimes/access/331944631.html?FMT=FT&FMTS=FT&PMID=33031&desc=Council+lets+museum+assume+debt


April 25
Boardwalk may grace waterfront

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/sptimes/access/328318001.html?FMT=FT&FMTS=FT&PMID=33031&desc=Boardwalk+may+grace+waterfront


August 26
City may gain a new place to moor and stroll

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/sptimes/access/155558871.html?FMT=FT&FMTS=FT&PMID=33031&desc=City+may+gain+a+new+place+to+moor+and+stroll

Some ideas are good

As a postscript, I meant to mention that I think the basic proposal is good -- to provide recreational boaters a place to moor -- but I think the implementation is very bad.

It seems to me that there are many areas alongside the causeway to the Pier and the Pier itself which would be much better suited to the stated purposes. For example, the area along the pier where the submarine was supposed to moored is completely unused and prime for the sort of ''enhanced used'' that the Council seems to envision.

But I think the Council is philosophically wrong that the existing area needs to be 'made more useful' and that attitude is the antithesis of the original purpose of the waterfront. The was started when William Straub promoted that the city purchase that land and remove existing wharves so that the waterfront more become more scenic and accessible.

Despite that vision, nearly our entire downtown waterfront EXCEPT the proposed area is occluded with docks and marinas, etc. And now Council has decided to take the last pristine area and ... add more docks! I think this is a bad idea. (I guess my opinion is obvious!)