If the City Can Manage the Marina, Why Not Gas Plant?

Today, April 30, the city is holding a public meeting to review proposals for the Gas Plant site—and may be moving toward selecting a development partner.

This post is the latest in a recent series asking a simple question:

Should the city lead this development itself?

Across these posts, we’ve pointed out:

• What it looks like when a city leads—using the Stapleton redevelopment as an example
• That hundreds of millions—and potentially more than $1 billion—of value is at stake depending on how the site is developed
• That this value matters—especially as the city considers borrowing $600 million+ for critical infrastructure needs
• And now, just a few blocks away, a clear example: the city is already leading a $165 million marina redevelopment

What the City Is Doing at the Marina

The marina redevelopment is a $165 million project.

And the structure is clear:

• The city is in charge
• The work is being done in phases
• The city is hiring experts and contractors as needed
• The marina remains a public asset, under public control

This is not a developer-led project.

It’s a city-led investment in a long-term public asset.

Why That Matters

The marina sits on some of the most valuable waterfront land in St. Petersburg.

And yet, the city didn’t:

• Hand it over to a single developer
• Lock in a single vision all at once
• Give up long-term control

Instead, it kept flexibility.

It kept ownership.

It kept the ability to make better decisions over time.

Now Compare That to the Gas Plant Site

• 86 acres of prime downtown land
• One of the most important redevelopment opportunities in the city’s history
• A site that could shape St. Petersburg for generations

The Gas Plant site isn’t a $165 million project. It’s much more.

Depending on how it is planned and developed over time, it could represent hundreds of millions—or even more than $1 billion—of long-term value to the city.

That value comes from something simple:

Who controls the land—and when decisions are made.

Because:

• When the city controls the land, it can decide what gets built and when
• As infrastructure goes in—streets, parks, utilities—the value of the land increases
• If the city develops or releases land over time, it can capture that increased value
• If the city sells early, before that value is created, that value goes to someone else 

And yet, the current direction under consideration is very different from the marina:

• Selecting a single development partner first
• Before a comprehensive, city-led plan is complete
• Potentially giving up long-term control and flexibility

The Question That Needs to Be Answered

If the city can successfully manage a $165 million marina redevelopment…

Why can’t it apply that same model to the Gas Plant site?

Why wouldn’t it:

• Create a clear plan first
• Define public priorities upfront
• Phase development over time
• Bring in multiple developers, when and where they are needed
• Retain long-term value for the people of St. Petersburg