Comment of the Week — Thinking Big on the Bayfront

10Oct2008 Filed under: Best Practices, Convention Center, Economic Development, Erie bayfront, Erie, Pa., Tourism Author: Peter Panepento

An anonymous commenter has floated a pretty grandiose idea as a potential new development at the vacant GAF site on the bayfront.

Here’s what he had to say about it:

I made a proposal about a year and a half ago to build a indoor white sand beach with palm trees, aquarium and restaurant complex on the waterfront. It was based on an existing 10 year old project in another very depressed city. It has been so successful that it raised existing real estate values in this depressed city, that it even attracted new real estate developers. It generates about 1.2mm visitors per year and creates about 2m local jobs. This would be mainly used by adults. The teenagers could be bused up to Splash Lagoon. I want it to be a tranquil and relaxing place for adults with a small kiddie pool. You could use existing parking infrastructure on the bayfront that sits empty 9 months out of the year. A trolley bus can take passengers back and forth from the convention center and hotel on the water.

The waterfront is shut down 9 months out of the year due to bad weather. Most people fly south for vacation. I believe if such structure was built on the waterfront it would attract tourists from Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Cleveland and Canada. It would add new business to both the convention center and the hotel on the water. Most important is it is based on an existing organization with 10 years of profits.

I’ve done a bit of research on this plan — Moody Gardens in Galveston, Texas — and it’s definitely ambitious.

The development features a 10-story glass pyramid with an indoor tropical environment, an IMAX movvie theater, a science center, an aquarium, and much more. It is adjacent to a major hotel and waterpark.

Best yet, it was backed largely by private money (a foundation, in fact).

According to the Moody Foundation’s Web site, the attraction brings in about $36 million in business, and it generates many millions more for surrounding businesses.

The commenter who brought this to our attention says he believes he has enough interest to make a similar project happen in Erie.

Do you think such a thing would work? Is it worth pursuing? Would it complement our other downtown attractions?

I certainly think it’s worth discussion. Chime in and let me know if you agree

Tags: bayfront, convention center, Erie, Pa., hotel, Moody Gardens, Tourism

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

18 Responses to “Comment of the Week — Thinking Big on the Bayfront”

DAT
October 10th, 2008 at 10:56 am

I’ve been to Moody Gardens in Galveston (several years ago). It’s a beautiful facility and as the writer mentioned it is part of a foundation (with healthcare I think). It’s for adults as well as families. As I recall all the pool areas are outside. But that may have changed since I was there last.

Now the question is - would it work in Erie? I wasn’t sure Splash Lagoon would be successful, but it really seems to have staying power. Of course that remains to be seen as the economy continue to tighten.

I think an idea like that is very interesting but only something that should be done by the private sector.

BTW - Moody Gardens also has a number of terrific activities. See for yourself http://www.moodygardens.com/ and click on attractions.
Black Jack
October 10th, 2008 at 2:23 pm

Sounds like an incredibly cheesy idea… very dated. Why not use that parcel of land and reuse some of the old brick industrial buildings (like any other city does - Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, etc.) for a mix of entertainment options (bars, restaurants, etc.) coupled with public park land; a development that would benefit locals and visitors alike. This is what any other city with sound planning would do.

The land does not have to used for some extravagant development like the above-mentioned half-witted pipe dream; just something that will add value to the convention center/hotel and spur new development in the area. People coming for conventions want decent places to eat and drink within a convenient distance, not a place to go drop 100 bucks at an artificial indoor beach.

If we really need one of those, then let ol’ nick scott build one on his property.
Ed Tonkin
October 10th, 2008 at 5:06 pm

The idea is not necessarily cheesey or dated, but it really depends upon who is going to finance it. Private monies, build, almost, whatever you want. The state, and by that I mean the government at whatever level, should not be providing loans, financing, or building an attraction there, period. If Erie is to grow as a tourist town we need another 365 day option on the waterfront.

Moody Gardens is beautiful, but is supported by a huge private foundation. The man made beaches are great, but I’ve seen plenty of kids their, rather “disadvantaged” if memory serves me right. I can see a Moody Gardens or DuPont Gardens or Mystic Seaport or any number of other “high end” tourist attractions there. All it takes is money.

For my money an “ERie Village” of yore @1840’s, with various sailing ships and stores, like Mystic Seaport, with restaurant and bars handy would be good for all. Has anyone talked to Scott or Nelson? Their imput, if not investments, would be welcome. Erie Downtown Partnership, please take note. Can we tie this into an attraction for Seniors as well as the general public?

Money makes the world go around. Let’s have it go around Erie before we committ to anything.
Erie BlogWatch
October 10th, 2008 at 7:37 pm

How about a heated retractable dome over Presque Isle ?

In season, crank it back and the peninsula would be open-air just like it is now.

The other 9 months of the year, close it up and you could still enjoy the beach etc.

When it is cloudy out, they could project holograms of the famous sunsets or borrow the IMAX projector from Tom Ridge center to show movies on the inside of the dome.
Phil G
October 11th, 2008 at 9:14 am

To contribute to the CONSTRUCTIVE comments: I agree with the suggestion that who finances the project is important. Moreover, the design, purchasing (equipment/decor/etc.), and marketing are key elements to avoiding a cheesy or unprofitable setup. Innovative thinking in this forum would be appreciated. I would like to see a good use of Erie assets, even if the development is not targetted at my demographic.
Dale Hannah
October 11th, 2008 at 9:48 am

Phil, creative, innovative, thinking requires that all thoughts and ideas, no matter how seemingly ridiculous, be respected. The premise being that from the tongue-in-cheek comment may well flow other ideas that do indeed have merit. This process is called ‘Brainstorming’.
julio c reyes
October 11th, 2008 at 10:29 am

Peter,

The basic problem today with any development is that most of them are just copy-cats which do not have any character.

Since Walt Disney created Disneyland and maybe even earlier everybody wants to follow that model. It works for a little while until the next Disneyland comes around. The same is true for any Convention Center, Stadium, Mall, etc.

Obviously it is impossible to change that pattern. So, we need to follow that path to be able to “compete”. However, specifically about the Bay Front Black Jack is correct rather than building an artificial place that will charge $100.00 we should use something already built and still charge the $100.00.

The secret is to build on top of what we already have. As he recommended reuse the old brick buildings and make the place attractive to the visitors for shopping, drinking and dinning. Once you have the place properly setup for traditional tourism then you could start building the place for all year use.

We have to assume that our newly created monster (the convention center) will be able to attract a couple of conventions in the middle of the winter and people attending those events will need food and drinks. We need to move people between that area and downtown. Now, that the monster is operational notice there is a corridor between the convention center and the hotel so use the same concept to move people all around that area in the winter (I always preferred tunnels better), have a nice free shuttle. Of course a train, monorail or a funicular will be much better, here of course for mass transportation I am just dreaming.

Now, to go year around, we need to slightly change the use and attractions with the seasons without having to change the whole place’s infrastructure.

For example right in the middle of the winter offer luxury ice fishing booths right on the lake and charge $100.00 a day. Have the local restaurants in that area gets a piece of the pie by cooking the fish according to the (tourist) fisherman specifications.

Africa is already using eco-tourism which really means you visit and stay with the locals eating local food and enjoying local things with some comfort. It will be really silly to build a football stadium in the Ngorongoro crater to attract tourists the same way that it will be really silly trying to change Presque Island or build anything like artificial beaches on the Lake. .

It is much easier and better to build supporting infrastructure around our assets rather than damaging them. Unless of course you are a big developer making you money building fake places with planned obsolescence.
MGR
October 11th, 2008 at 1:28 pm

The original idea posted is interesting and has some level of originality, better than the standard “mixed use development” pitch that gets bandied about which really means a few restaurants, some standard retail chain stores, maybe an independent store either selling typical wholesale lines or producing some fairly run of the mill consumer product, and a couple apts. or hotel spaces. However, I think Julio has this one dead on. In the end, these concepts rarely possess any sustainable competitive advantage, offer nothing unique, and are often simple mutations of other existing establishments. The luxury ice fishing booths with a prepare to spec restaurant is original and provides a distinct experience to those that enjoy such an activity. You can’t get that on Peach St.

To take the use of existing facilities a step further, I suppose we could preserve some portion of the existing building and remaining old equipment to create an actively operating museum showing how shingles used to be made. Kind of a quirky idea for the tourist crowd that might get a kick out of it if we themed it as a historical experience. We could make it better if we dudded it up to look like the old Watson’s plant that it was originally and incorporated it as part of a two stop tour combined with the Watson Curtze mansion. My guess is that GAF probably left the equipment idle on site and from what I have heard, some of that stuff is pretty ancient. It sure wouldn’t cost much to do it and we could sell the low volume of shingles produced to non-profits at cost to keep the operating expenses low.
Cletus
October 11th, 2008 at 1:48 pm

^^ Many of the buidlings on the site are not that old and have no historical/architectural significance. Bu t he 1860s-era brick industrial buildings are what the newer sunbelt cities would kill for, and often attempt to replicate in their new developments. Erie needs to stop knocking its industrial brick buildings down… it is destroying Erie’s architectural heritage and character. Just recently, I noticed the massive brick structure along E12th at the old Kaiser Aluminum plant has been demolished. Shame on us for continuing to let this happen for the past 30 years.

Something original on the GAF property is needed, but not something so original that it does not produce adequate revenue throughout the year.
TJ
October 12th, 2008 at 1:39 am

No offense MGR, but that is a typical politicians view.
Nice idea but very expensive.
- Old equipment is expensive to maintain
- materials are not free
- the shingles you produce WILL BE more expensive than market price
-operating expenses will far exceed any visitation revenues
- it would take at least 15 people to run the operation on a minimum scale

Don’t forget to add the 5% entertainment tax
julio c reyes
October 12th, 2008 at 8:05 am

TJ,

I have absolutely no clue how the shingles are made. But I basically agree with MGR with a little creativity and ingenuity you could sell wherever to a tourist.

Tourists are looking for a picture opportunity and something that was there and it is does not longer exist to pass it on to their future generations.

You do not need to run the whole factory. You run a sampling and maybe you put a final cover to the shingles to make a souvenir. With technology these days you could print a high resolution picture on a cake why not in a shingle.

The old machinery is solid gold (really needed these days) if properly cleaned even if you do not run it for crying out loud. Of course GAF could make some money selling that machinery to China or Mexico the same way IP sold the paper production line to a company in Mexico.

I want to make it very clear that this concept is in addition of other things oriented to high end tourism.

There are a few places around the US that use this concept. In fact big franchises are using memorabilia why not in the lake front. We must use what you have rather than becoming a copy-cat and attempting to open a planet Hollywood or Disneyworld franchise.
MGR
October 12th, 2008 at 8:52 am

TJ is correct if we had that place running at any type of scale, it would be costly and it probably wouldn’t pull enough visitors on its own. I was thinking Julio’s ice fishing & restaurant idea could use most of the space and maintaining one building of the Watson facility with machinery, etc. would be a cool boutique add-on there that would get volume from general bayfront visitors, people who buy cruises on the Niagara, convention center visitors, and ice fishers. Maybe someday that cruise ship terminal will even see a cruise ship. It would be a crazy idea to think that using the whole site as a homage to shinglemaking would draw enough visitors, so I haven’t gone full politician. I think if we used a limited portion of that site to be a window into industrial life at the turn of the century, it has some draw.

To be honest, I thought of it as I was writing the paragraph above it, so it is an off the cuff idea. After I wrote it, I went to see if anyone else had done something like this and found these guys in Bethlehem - http://www.nmih.org/. I don’t know how well it has done or if it is up and running, but it seems to be larger scale than what I envisioned. What is really interesting is that it is funded by the Smithsonian Institution, which would be an ideal partner for such a venture. According to their site, there are 156 affiliate museums.

Franchising and building copycat facilities works, despite the lack of originality and cultural value, because people count on having the same experience over and over. I just can’t see doing something like that downtown or on the bayfront where we should have originality. If we for some odd reason feel the urge to build Disney-Erie, we can just drop it on Peach Street where 95% of everything is franchised and it will seem very natural.

Quick note to Cletus, actually the old Kaiser buildings are not abandoned structures being demolished. Accuride Corp. which is owned by Kohlberg, Kravis, and Roberts one of the largest PE groups in the world operates there. My guess is that they took that section of the building down because it wasn’t being used and it might lower their taxes.
George Vietze
October 12th, 2008 at 9:04 am

Erie is being exposed to many people who previously only thought of Erie as an old “Rust Belt City” and are now discovering a new and more progressive opportunity of new growth and new politics. The new comprehensive master plan policy being implemented by the Mayor and others in coordination with the Authorities will disclose what properties are available for development and under what terms and conditions will comply with the proposed master plan. This is the begining of a marketing package that not only our representatives, the Chamber of Commerce, the Manufacturing Association, our own Economic Development community and others to follow but the private sector will have more faith in dealing with the underlying politics and private development will come forward and form partnerships with our community and move Erie to the next level of its future potential.

The Bayfront is the GEM that will attract major developers if the politics embrace and implement a growth opportunity that will allow private investment to flourish.

We are on the right path and these slow economic times are the best time to put the Comprehensive Master Plan and policies in place.
Cletus
October 12th, 2008 at 8:09 pm

MGR,

I know that the Kaiser building was not abandoned and is owned by Accuride. Accuride is building a cheap aluminum, nondescript addition to where they demolished classic brick, industrial architecture… that is the problem. A major problem with Pennsylvania’s antiquated tax code section is that it is cheaper to pay property taxes on an empty lot than it is to pay on a lot with a building on it (even if the building is not currently being used). This gives companies incentive to knock down anything that is not currently being used. Smith Meter, Erie Malleable Iron, and the worst mistake… Commerce Building… among numerous others, are all examples of this. Out of town companies which own the land have no incentive to keep the buildings standing, and it is a shame. Erie has lost so much and it is often cited as an example of the worst cities for architectural preservation in architecture/planning texts.
Cletus
October 12th, 2008 at 8:16 pm

By the way, the above tax code section was implemented in 1909 as a measure to be fair to farmers who owned large tracts of undeveloped land, so they wouldn’t have to pay as high tax on it as businesses in the cities with developed land and much higher revenues. Think PA’s ridiculous tax codes need some updating???

Now companies just utilize this outdated rule to save money by knocking buildings down. It’s epidemic all over PA and nowhere is it more rampant than in Erie… just another resaon we’re seen as uncultured bumpkins by the rest of the cities in the state.
julio c reyes
October 13th, 2008 at 10:51 am

Cletus and MGR,

You are absolutely rights about all those great brick structures being destroyed around Erie for one or another reason.

Unfortunately, sometimes are not only the greedy corporations to pay lower taxes but sometimes also some of our Authorities are destroying our heritage while working with other projects. Grants “free” money talks for mainly new construction.

I believe fixing and rebuilding initially cost more money than new construction but in the long haul its payback will be better.

I whish that in the future any publicly finance project is similar to the Mercantile building. Thinking first how we preserve the architectural style of all those years and then make the place energy efficient.

I really believe that the old brick structures must be preserved. Sooner or later people will recognize not only its historical value but also that there are cheaper to maintain in the long run if the necessary improvements are properly done.

Now, just look around not only around the US but all over the world. It is very typical to reuse an old structure with a new commercial concept.

Even if you open a Mall or a set of Outlets in the GAF and other structures Erie will be way ahead of the game. Just invite the heavy hitters big labels names and I could assure that the Canadians will swim across the lake to shop there rather than going to the Mall in Peach Street

Unfortunately, I already could see the big machinery destroying all those great buildings in the interest of building something new regardless of the commercial concept. What a shame.
anonymous
October 13th, 2008 at 11:35 am

Black Jack: High end resturants and the acquarium would be located on the second floor over looking the beach that would attract visitors from the convention center and hotel. If people did not want to use the beach or go swimming, they could have a relaxing lunch or dinner upstairs. If not hungry, they could go to the acquarium.

A business plan is available. A management team to run it is available. Based on a 10 year history, Moody Gardens in Galvestoon is extremely profitable. You also have more of a tourist base, Canada, Cleveland, Buffalo and Pittsburgh to build one in Erie.

A good 80% of tourists that go to Moody Gardens come from two cities: Houston and Dallas.
julio c reyes
October 13th, 2008 at 12:08 pm

Preserving and/or reusing historical structures.

I guess if people in California not always win to preserve them it will be just natural to see some of those beautiful buildings in Erie gone as well.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-keaton13-2008oct13,0,4080632.story

Oh well, if they build the artificial place on the lake one day it will be its turn to bite the dust and a new cycle will begin.

Entries (RSS)
Comments (RSS)

About 'Outside Erie'

Peter Panepento After more than six years working as a journalist in Erie, I'm now the web editor for the Chronicle of Philanthropy in Washington, D.C., and the publisher of GlobalErie.com. I still maintain close ties to Erie - a community that I care about deeply. I hope this Web site can help inspire a better future for Erie.

Recent Comments
The Latest

Outside Erie