Facility programming in revitalized former industrial waterfront piers correlates more strongly with the age structure of surrounding neighborhoods and the extent of tourist visitation than with household income levels, according to a new exploratory comparative study published in Architectural Research. The study, conducted by Htet Won Yan and Keojin Jin, analyzes four major North American piers to determine how demographic characteristics of nearby populations should inform the selection and proportion of commercial and recreational facilities. By comparing census tract data with measured floor-area allocations, the researchers identify patterns that challenge the conventional retail planning assumption that income is the primary driver of facility demand in mixed-use waterfront environments.

The research addresses a significant gap in waterfront revitalization literature, which has historically prioritized spatial configuration, governance, and environmental sustainability over systematic analysis of user demographics. While existing scholarship acknowledges the importance of social sustainability and public access, it rarely provides a replicable method for translating nearby demographic characteristics into specific facility-mix decisions. This study proposes a transferable procedure that links program mix to catchment-level user-context profiling, offering a practical tool for early-stage design decisions in the adaptive reuse of former industrial infrastructure.

To conduct the analysis, the researchers selected four case studies: Pier 17 and Pier 57 in New York, Pier 57 in Seattle, and Pier 39 in San Francisco. These piers were chosen for their post-industrial origins, multi-facility commercial programming, and the availability of comparable demographic data. For each location, the team defined a 15-minute pedestrian catchment, approximated as a 1.2-kilometer radius from the main public entrance, to represent the local population most likely to use the pier in everyday life. This catchment was profiled using American Community Survey 2019–2023 five-year estimates, focusing on age structure, median household income, and occupational profiles.

Facility mix was measured by classifying active programmable spaces into four categories: table-service dining, counter-service dining, retail, and recreation or entertainment. The researchers estimated floor areas by tracing tenant footprints from ground-floor plans published by pier operators and architects, verifying dimensions against documented structural references. Circulation spaces, such as corridors and waterfront promenades, were excluded from the calculation to focus on active program allocation. The resulting proportions describe the distribution of publicly accessible programmed area, providing a standardized metric for comparison across the four distinct urban contexts.

The demographic profiles of the four catchments revealed that all were affluent by national standards, yet their facility mixes varied significantly. The catchments for Pier 17 and Pier 57 in New York had median household incomes approximately 1.7 times their respective city medians, while the Seattle and San Francisco catchments were closer to their city averages. Despite this income similarity, Pier 17 allocated approximately 93% of its active programmable floor area to table-service dining, whereas Pier 57 in New York devoted only about 49% to table-service venues, with a substantial portion dedicated to public and educational spaces.

The study found that age structure was a more reliable indicator of facility type than income. The two catchments with the highest shares of residents aged 60 and over, Pier 57 in New York and Pier 39 in San Francisco, coincided with the largest shares of free public, educational, and family-oriented recreational space. In contrast, the two youngest catchments, Pier 17 in New York and Pier 57 in Seattle, featured programs dominated by table-service dining. This suggests that older, multi-generational populations support a greater proportion of public amenities and recreational facilities, while younger, working-age populations align more closely with dining-led programming.

Visitor orientation also emerged as a critical factor in determining facility mix. Using normalized online visibility indicators, such as Google Maps reviews per 1,000 catchment residents, the researchers categorized the piers by their reach beyond the local resident base. Pier 39 in San Francisco, identified as tourist-dominated, displayed the most diversified facility mix, including a substantial 38% share of retail space. Conversely, the two most locally oriented piers, the Pier 57s in New York and Seattle, had little to no retail component. This indicates that a tourist-dominated visitor base drives demand for retail and diverse entertainment, while locally oriented piers prioritize services for nearby residents and workers.

Occupational profile provided less discriminatory power in this analysis, as professional occupations accounted for 40% to 63% of employed residents in all four catchments. The only notable occupational distinction was the high share of STEM workers in the Seattle catchment, which reinforced the interpretation of that area as a young technology workforce. However, this factor did not add an independent dimension to the facility mix beyond what was already explained by age and visitor orientation. The findings suggest that planners should weigh age structure and non-resident user base size at least as heavily as income when programming waterfront piers.

The study acknowledges several limitations, primarily that the four cases are located in the United States and possess distinctive landmark assets that may independently influence facility programming. For instance, Pier 39’s sea lion colony and Pier 17’s rooftop concert venue likely shape visitor engagement and facility demand in ways that co-vary with demographics but cannot be isolated in a four-case design. The researchers emphasize that these correspondences are exploratory patterns rather than statistically generalizable causal relationships. The catchment definition, based on a Euclidean radius, is a planning proxy rather than a verified boundary of actual visitor origins, and facility area estimates carry an inherent measurement error of 10% to 15%.

The findings have direct implications for second-wave port-city revitalization in Asia, particularly for Busan North Port in South Korea. The districts adjoining the Busan North Port site are among the oldest and lowest-income in the city, with more than 30% of residents aged 65 or over. Unlike the affluent North American catchments, the Busan context features a polarized population with a large, transient, higher-spending visitor flow from cruise terminals and the main railway station. The study suggests that a premium, dining-led model similar to Pier 17 would be inappropriate for Busan, which instead requires a balanced mix that explicitly provides for existing residents through affordable counter-service dining, everyday retail, and age-friendly recreational space.

By demonstrating that demographic catchment analysis can identify potential facility–demographic mismatches before major capital commitments are made, the study offers a low-cost instrument for hybrid waterfront planning. The procedure allows planners to integrate community socioeconomic characteristics into early-stage programming discussions, moving beyond abstract goals of social sustainability to concrete, analytically actionable decisions. This approach is particularly relevant for Asian port cities where hybrid governance structures are being established but demographic-responsive programming methodologies remain underdeveloped.

The research contributes to a broader agenda for user-centered waterfront design, repositioning demographic analysis as a supplementary instrument for industrial pier revitalization. While the study does not propose a fixed typological framework, it provides a comparative interpretation of how different demographic conditions align with specific facility proportions. Future research should extend the case base to Asian piers and integrate post-occupancy behavioral mapping to test whether the identified demographic–facility relationships correspond with observed movement patterns and visitor behavior in these new contexts.

The study’s methodological framework relies on a specific operationalization of the 15-minute catchment, defined as the set of census tracts whose population-weighted centroids lie within 1,200 meters of the pier’s main public entrance. This Euclidean radius approximates the distance covered in 15 minutes at a design walking speed of 80 meters per minute. The researchers explicitly note that this geometric proxy does not perfectly replicate a street-network isochrone, meaning tracts at the margin of the catchment may fall just outside the boundary. For example, lower-income Chinatown tracts south of Pier 39, with centroids located 1.2 to 1.4 kilometers from the entrance, were excluded from the analysis, a limitation that suggests the actual income diversity of the surrounding area may be higher than the summary figures indicate. The demographic data were compiled from the American Community Survey 2019–2023 five-year estimates, the smallest geography at which age, income, and occupation are all published simultaneously.

Facility area measurements were derived from ground-floor plans published by pier operators and architects, which were placed to scale in AutoCAD and traced as closed polygons. To ensure accuracy, tenant boundaries were verified against official directories, Google Maps imagery, and video walkthroughs, while plan scales were checked against documented structural dimensions, such as the 146-foot girder span of Pier 57 New York. The traced dimensions agreed with these references within 3% to 7%. However, the researchers acknowledge an estimated error of 10% to 15% per facility due to line placement on raster plans and potential changes in tenant boundaries since the plans were drawn. Because all categories within a single pier are measured on the same plan, the resulting proportional shares are insensitive to uniform scale errors, which affect only the absolute area calculations.

The analysis distinguishes between active programmable spaces and circulation areas, excluding corridors, waterfront promenades, stairs, and service zones from the denominator. This exclusion allows for a comparison of active program allocation rather than total pier area, which can vary significantly based on geometry and access configuration. Open-air facilities are included only if they are operated as named, ticketed, or managed attractions with a defined footprint, such as the Great Wheel at Pier 57 Seattle or the sea lion docks at Pier 39. Undifferentiated open space, including the rooftop park at Pier 57 New York, is treated as parkland and excluded from the floor-area calculation, meaning the reported recreation shares may understate the significance of these attractions relative to their visitor draw.

Visitor orientation was characterized using normalized online visibility indicators, including Google Maps review volumes and Instagram post counts, to assess the reach of each pier beyond its resident catchment. These metrics were normalized by catchment population and years since reopening to account for differences in opening dates, such as Pier 39’s 1978 reopening versus Pier 57 New York’s 2023 opening. The researchers caution that these indicators reflect destination reach and platform behavior rather than facility performance or success. The inventory of facilities represents a snapshot of the 2024 survey date, excluding units that were unoccupied at the time, such as a bar at the river end of Pier 57 New York that opened in 2025. This temporal specificity ensures that the reported proportions describe the allocation of publicly accessible programmed area at a specific point in time, rather than a long-term average.

Subject of Research: 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

Article Title: 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

Article References: Won Yan, H., & Jin, K. (2026). 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. Architectural Research, 28(1), Article 33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44515-026-00038-6

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s44515-026-00038-6

Keywords: Aligning, Facility, User, Demographics, Former, Industrial, Waterfront, Piers, Exploratory, Comparison, Four, North