Aligning Facility Mix with User Demographics in Former Industrial Waterfront Piers: An Exploratory Comparison of Four North American Cases with Implications for Busan North Port

When a city's port moves away from the center, leaving behind a string of empty, rusting piers, the usual plan is to turn them into places for people to walk, eat, and play. This process, known as waterfront revitalization, has transformed many industrial edges into vibrant public spaces over the last few decades. However, a persistent question remains for the next generation of these projects: who are these spaces actually for? Planners often assume that if a neighborhood is wealthy, the new pier should feature expensive restaurants and luxury shops. If the area is poor, they might assume only basic needs can be met. But this simple equation of money to amenities often misses the deeper reality of how people live. A neighborhood might have high incomes but be filled with elderly residents who need quiet parks rather than loud bars, or it might have young professionals who want quick, affordable meals instead of fine dining. The challenge is to figure out how the specific mix of people living nearby—their ages, their jobs, and their daily habits—should shape the actual buildings and businesses on a pier, rather than just guessing based on a single number like average income.

A team of researchers from Pusan National University set out to solve this puzzle by looking at four famous piers in North America that have been successfully turned from industrial sites into public destinations. They chose Pier 17 and Pier 57 in New York, Pier 57 in Seattle, and Pier 39 in San Francisco. These are not just random spots; they are former cargo docks that now host a wide variety of activities, from restaurants and shops to museums and amusement rides. The researchers wanted to see if the people living within a fifteen-minute walk of each pier could predict what kind of facilities ended up there. To do this, they mapped out the neighborhoods around each pier, counting how many people lived there, how old they were, how much money they made, and what kind of work they did. They then measured the actual space inside each pier, calculating exactly how much floor area was dedicated to table-service dining, quick-service food, retail shops, and recreation.

The results of this comparison revealed a surprising truth that challenges the standard way planners think about these projects. The researchers found that the wealth of the surrounding neighborhood did not determine the type of businesses on the pier. All four piers were located near affluent areas, yet the mix of facilities varied wildly. For instance, the pier in New York surrounded by the wealthiest residents was almost entirely filled with expensive, table-service restaurants and event venues, with almost no shops or public parks. In contrast, another New York pier, also surrounded by wealthy residents, was filled with a food hall of quick-service stalls, public classrooms, and free gathering spaces, with no retail shops at all. The difference was not money; it was age. The area around the restaurant-heavy pier was filled with young adults in their twenties and thirties, while the area around the public-space-heavy pier had a much older population, with a significant number of residents over sixty-five.

The study suggests that the age of the local population is a far stronger guide for planning than income. When the surrounding neighborhood is full of young, working-age adults, the piers tend to become destinations for dining and entertainment, often catering to a crowd that wants to spend money on experiences. When the neighborhood is older and multi-generational, the piers tend to prioritize public spaces, educational areas, and family-friendly recreation. The researchers also found that the type of visitor matters. The pier in San Francisco, which attracts a massive number of tourists from all over the world, ended up with a balanced mix of everything: plenty of shops, many restaurants, and large attractions like an aquarium and a carousel. This suggests that when a pier is designed to draw in visitors from far away, it needs a wider variety of options to keep them interested, whereas piers that serve mostly local residents can focus more narrowly on the specific needs of those neighbors.

One of the most critical findings involves what happens when a neighborhood is split between rich and poor. At one of the New York piers, the surrounding area included both very wealthy financial districts and much poorer neighborhoods. The researchers observed that the pier's programming followed the wealthy segment almost exclusively, offering high-end dining that the poorer neighbors could not afford, while largely ignoring the needs of the lower-income residents living just steps away. This highlights a risk in the planning process: if developers only look at the average income of an area, they might miss the fact that the poorest residents are being left out. The study indicates that for a pier to truly serve its community, it must look at the specific mix of people, not just the average.

The researchers applied these lessons to a real-world planning problem in Busan, South Korea, where a former port area is currently being redeveloped. The neighborhoods next to this new project are among the oldest and lowest-income in the city, yet the area is also a hub for tourists and cruise ships. Based on the patterns found in the American piers, the researchers suggest that a "premium dining" model would be a mistake for Busan. Instead, they propose a balanced mix that includes affordable, quick-service food, everyday shops, and plenty of free public space for the elderly residents who already live there. This approach would ensure that the new pier serves the people who are already there, rather than just the visitors or future wealthy residents.

Ultimately, this research offers a new way to think about building waterfronts. It moves beyond the idea that money is the only thing that matters and suggests that the age and daily lives of the people nearby are the true keys to success. By carefully studying who lives within walking distance, planners can design piers that feel natural and useful to the community, rather than just being a collection of expensive shops that no one nearby can afford. The study does not claim to have a perfect formula for every city, but it provides a clear, practical method for asking the right questions before the first brick is laid. It shows that the most successful piers are not just built for the highest bidder, but are carefully tuned to the rhythm of the people who live right next door.