A L F O N S O A R C H I T E C T S

Transcription

1 A L F O N S O A R C H I T E C T S

2 A L M A T H E P I E R O F S T. P E T E R S B U R G A L F ALFONSO O N S O A R ARCHITECTS C H I T E C T S

3 ALMA

4 1. Please demonstrate how the project fits within the Pinellas County Water and Navigation permit requirements as it relates to pre versus proposed wall area, roof area, and height differences. WE SPOKE WITH DAVID WALKER AT PINELLAS COUNTY. SEE ATTACHED PLAN AND ELEVATION AREAS. 11. Please confirm that a variance from PCWCNA is no longer required for this project, and that it complies with the FAA cone restrictions for the site. CONFIRMED IN WRITING, SHOWN IN ATTACHED DIAGRAM, AND CONFIRMED WITH DAVID WALKER AT PINELLAS COUNTY WATER PERMIT DEPARTMENT.differences

5

6

7 2. Expound upon and clarify the programming opportunities in the proposed tower structure and how the anticipated modes of transportation will adequately support the tower and event space program opportunities. SEE ATTACHED PLANS FOR EVENT VEHICLE STAGING.

8 3. Please provide a cross section of the pier bridge approach at a minimum of three (3) distinct distances over the water. The distances could be at the 1/3, 1/2 and 2/3 points out over the water, or at reasonable locations based on the features of your concept. In the cross sections, please indicate (with dimensions) zones for pedestrian and bicycle uses and those for vehicular and tram uses. SEE ATTACHED. 2. The activities provided for at the pier head in your proposal could often lead to large numbers of people attending special events. Tram or trolley access might not be appropriate for many of these. Is there a plan to provide for other options to address such needs, and if not, will addressing this affect your cost plan? If it would affect the cost, what would need to be eliminated in order to accommodate such access? SEE ATTACHED PLANS FOR SPECIAL EVENT VEHICLE STAGING.

9 1. In all cases, the information given on transportation options along the pier approach typically focused more on the needs of the pier users and did not as carefully address the needs of maintenance and service vehicles. Please give an assessment of how these other essential needs will interact with and interfere with your plan to transport users. SEE ATTACHED PLAN SHOWING FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS AND ENLARGED SECTION SHOWING SPACE FOR MAINTENANCE VEHICLES AND PEDESTRIANS.

10 1. How wide is the approach to the pier head? Could it support the trolley/looper vehicles and still provide room for pedestrians and bikes? APPROACH IS 30 WIDE, YES. 2. Could limos and/or valet services use the pier approach during special events at the ballroom? YES. 8. Please confirm how guests will be transported to the Waterside Tower and Dance Hall CITY OPERATED PIER SHUTTLE, IN ADDITION MULTI PASSENGER VEHICLES COULD BE ALLOWED OUT ONTO PIER. MULTIPLE VEHICLES CAN BE STAGED AT THE TRANSPORTATION PLAZA AND PIER HEAD..

11 ENLARGED PIER PLAN

12 ENLARGED PIER PLAN

13

14

15

16 EMERGENCY, SERVICE, AND SPECIAL VEHICLE ACCESS

17 SPECIAL EVENTS TRANSPORTATION

18 SPECIAL EVENTS VEHICLE STAGING TRANSPORTATION PLAZA

19 SPECIAL EVENTS VEHICLE STAGING TOWER PIAZZA

20

21 9. Please confirm any activation plans for the pedestrian pier promenade SEE ATTACHED PLANS FOR PEDESTRIAN/BIKING/FISHING/ETC. 6. In the latest design, how big is the kiosk on the approach? Does it have power, water and sewer? THE KIOSK IS 10 BY 15. POWER, WATER, AND SEWER IS PROVIDED. 12. Is the roof of the shelter in the middle of the approach solid to protect from rain or designed to just create dappled shade? PARTIALLY SOLID, PARTIALLY LOUVERED.

22

23 1. Explain how you envision the servicing of your solution will occur. Servicing relates to deliveries, maintenance, locations for support services equipment, etc. specifically explain distances and how you would maneuver to accomplish this. SEE ATTACHED PLANS. 8. How many square feet is the tower bar? 735 SF 9. What are the dimensions of the actual dance floor (length and width, not just square footage)? APPROX. 70 X 88 WITH 51 X 87 EXTERIOR SPACE. Is there also room for storage of tables and chairs when not needed for an event? YES - SEE ATTACHED PLAN. 10. Where is the "back of house" space to support the ballroom, and the tower restaurant? SEE ATTACHED PLAN. 7. Please confirm how all back of house operations will be addressed at the Waterside Tower and Dance Hall at the pier head. SEE ATTACHED PLAN.

24 PIER HEAD- LEVEL 1

25 PIER HEAD- LEVEL 2

26 3. I'm not clear, after the reductions were made to bring the project within the budget, how many floors are in the latest tower design? What are the approximate dimensions of each floor (approximate length and width, not just square footage)? Which floors are air conditioned? TOTAL OF 7 FLOORS SEE ATTACHED TOWER SECTION AND ON PLANS FOR DIMENSIONS AND AREAS. PARTIAL FLOOR 6 (LECTURE AUDITORIUM) AND FLOOR 7 OBSERVATION DECK ARE AIR CONDITIONED. 4. How many can be seated in the tower auditorium? 70

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34 7. How many toilet fixtures are in the entire project and where are they located? SEE ATTACHED PLANS FOR RESTROOM LOCATIONS. TOILET FIXTURE QUANTITIES TO BE DETERMINED AT TA LATER DATE.

35 BATHROOM LOCATIONS

36 1. Please confirm how your proposed concept supports the Plan Themes as noted in the draft St. Petersburg Waterfront Master Plan, including: THE ALMA PROJECT PROVIDES A DIRECT RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING THEMES: a. Stewardship of the waterfront environment a sustainable relationship between the natural and built environments b. Enhancing the experience of the water expanding St. Petersburg as a waterfront destination for boaters and non-boaters c. An active waterfront parks system diversifying the activities of the waterfront to meet a growing community d. Economically vibrant downtown places leveraging the economic potential of in-water and upland areas along the water s edge e. A connected, accessible downtown + waterfront, continuous linkages, service oriented parking + transit, increased public access 2. Confirm how your solution is meeting the intent of the waterfront master plan, especially utilization of uplands i.e. restaurants. TO BE DISCUSSED IN PRESENTATION.

37 3. In connection to the masterplan, if parking and driving was totally eliminated, how do you envision your solution maintaining its feasibility? OUR DESIGN IS STILL FEASIBLE BUT CONVENIENT ACCESS FOR THE PUBLIC WOULD BE MORE CHALLENGING. CURRENTLY THE DISTANCE FROM BAYSHORE DRIVE TO OUR TRANSPORTATION PLAZA (WHERE VISITORS ACCESS THE PIER SHUTTLE) IS APPROXIMATELY 1770 FEET. IF THE 2ND AVENUE APPROACH DRIVE IS ELIMINATED, ALONG WITH THE PELICAN AND DOLPHIN PARKING LOTS, THE CITY WOULD NEED TO PROVIDE INTERCITY BUS/TRAM/TROLLEY TRANSPORTATION FOR PATRONS WANTING TO ACCESS THE GATEWAY, GARDEN, PIER AND TOWER ELEMENTS OF OUR PROJECT. IN ADDITION A CONVENIENT PARKING LOT WITH ADEQUATE PARKING WOULD NEED TO BE PROVIDED NEARBY.

38 2. Please confirm the M/WBE participation on your team ALFONSO ARCHITECTS WILL SERVE AS THE LEAD ARCHITECT AND IS AN MBE FIRM. VOLTAIR IS THE LEAD MEP, FP ENGINEER AND IS AN MBE AND MALL BUSINESS ENTERPRISE.

39 3. In your own words, please describe how your proposed solution addresses what didn t work in the past on the Pier. TO BE DISCUSSED IN PRESENTATION.

40 4. Please respond to the key findings in the Lambert Advisory Comparative Assessment of Economic Benefits dated March 11th, SEE ATTACHED LAMBERT REPORT WITH HIGHLIGHTED FINDINGS. 5. Please provide a brief one-page chart noting how your proposal in its current form addresses all pier working group required elements. SEE ATTACHED PAGE FROM THE CURRENT ST PETE PIER WEBSITE.

41 Summary of St. Petersburg Pier Comparative Economic Benefits Revenue can be maximized from more restaurant/bar/entertainment areas along the pier Desire to have meeting/banquet areas be integrated with other uses such as restaurant or observation area and to be of modest scale and a modest portion of overall budget Cultural/performance/artistic spaces would be unsuccessful without proper funding from philanthropic or government sources Must be an area that both tourists and locals can enjoy

42 Structure/Observation Tower at End of Pier to Drive Visitation Concerns: Having an interesting structure (with activities) at the end of the pier head is not enough to draw visitors long-term. Activities must be integrated into the upland, along the pier, and at the pier head, in a seamless way, to become a must-see jewel. Dining Concerns: A demand for more restaurant/banquet/drinking space than what is currently proposed. Current proposed spaces fall short of the amount that is considered economically beneficial. The 3 proposals which expand dining into two of the areas of the pier and upland redevelopment include ALMA

43 Event Space Only ONE PROPOSAL, ALMA, has allocated indoor space (4,000 square feet) for meeting/banquets. SPACE WILL BE HEAVILY USED, PROVIDE JOBS, AND CREATE ACTIVITY ALONG PIER. Most proposals include large, open air, non-formal space for flexible congregational events. Environmental Education Four proposals include shell space for a potential environmental education center ALMA sets aside land for a future marine discovery center 40,000-50,000 minimum square feet would be required for discovery/educational space: all proposals fall short of this space Attractions Family entertainment and attractions are a strong draw for families and visitors and ALL PROPOSALS have elements to attract children and families to the pier. Desire to seek out more vendors for family oriented entertainment

44 Transient Boat Docking Other Ancillary Activities The transient boat slips provide another way for visitors to access the pier and added slips are of demand downtown considering existing marinas in Downtown St. Petersburg act as boat parks and have very limited transient access for day visitors. Slips would provide little profit but require little maintenance All proposals include ancillary activities including biking and watercraft rental, limited retail and recreation kiosks, and a location for fishing that will help activate the pier for locals and visitors

45 ALMA - PIER WORKING GROUP REQUIRED ELEMENTS 1. Observation/Viewing Areas Exceptional 2. Dining Options Destination dining included at upland and casual café at pier head 3. Cycling, Walking & Jogging...Generous 4. Transportation Options...Tram/Trolley, Waterland/Ferry and pedestrian adequately included 5. Fishing..Extensive w/ 18,592 dedicated SF 6. Boat Dockage..In Central Basin as part of City grant 7. Environmental Education...Dedicated upland for future development 8. Flexible Event Space Flexible event space at pier building at 8,615 SF dance hall and large open-air park setting upland at Gateway Lawn 9. Bike & Watercraft Rental.Available 10. Retail..Minimal

46 27. Please describe how each key element of your proposal is accessible to persons with disabilities. ADA ACCESSIBILITY HAS BEEN INCORPORATED INTO ALL ASPECTS OF THE GATEWAY, THE GARDEN, THE PIER, THE PIER HEAD AND THE TOWER THROUGH THE USE OF: LEVEL SIDEWALKS CURB CUTS AND RAMPS AT ALL PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR CROSSINGS TACTILE DEVICES AT ALL PEDESTRIAN DECISION POINTS ADA COMPLIANT RAMPS AT ALL PEDESTRIAN GRADE CHANGES ADA ACCESSIBLE ELEVATORS AT ALL MULTIPLE LEVELS INCLUDING THE WATERFRONT RESTAURANT AND TOWER

47 28. Please expand on your February 11th presentation supplement response regarding the gateway projection walls and the maintenance of open views in each direction. What water views will be affected, and what will be enhanced through this design? How does framing enhance views around the area? THE CONCEPT OF FRAMING VIEWS WILL BE EXPANDED UPON DURING THE PRESENTATION.

48 VIEW FROM PROPOSED PROJECTION WALL LOCATION

49 4. Are you confident that the solution as depicted will be carried out through the design process without significant changes? YES.