A New Vision for Freeway Park - City of Seattle

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Issues Lack of activity. There is little to do in Freeway Park. Office workers use some areas around the Convention Center and around Park Place to smoke, eat lunch on nice days, and to socialize.These “anchor areas” are used because they are open, located near the edge of the park, are sunny during at least part of the day and some amenities are provided. Much of the rest of the park is underused, other than by people walking through. Poor perception. Many people consider the park to be unsafe; to others, it is dark and bleak.Although actual crimes in the park have not been numerous, and security patrols have increased in recent months (from the police, the Convention Center and the Downtown Seattle Association) the presence of people sleeping and using or dealing drugs give the park a poor reputation. Poor connection to adjacent buildings. The park is poorly connected - both physically and visually - to the buildings around it, and as a result, people in these buildings are not providing the much needed “eyes on the street” for the park. Park Place, the Convention Center, Horizon House and the Benaroya building have great potential to provide this informal security. Hidden entrances. Despite the number of entrances into Freeway Park, most are not clearly marked, and the concrete walls and indirect staircases block views into the park.There are, however, several pathways that are well used and that could attract even more people into the park if they were improved. These paths include: from the Pigott Corridor to downtown through the Convention Center; from the corner of 6th Avenue and Seneca Street to the Convention Center or to Pigott Corridor; from the corner of 6th Avenue and University, under Park Place, to Pigott; and from the parking garage to the Convention Center or to 6th Avenue and Seneca. Inadequate signage. Inadequate signage makes orientation within Freeway Park confusing, particularly for first-time visitors. Orientation is further complicated by sightlines to nearby buildings that are often blocked by high walls of concrete and overgrown evergreens.When people don’t know where they are, they feel lost and unsafe. Lack of a broad management strategy that goes beyond maintenance. Currently, there is no entity that has responsibility for managing the activities that need to occur to make Freeway Park into an important place. Much of the success of any park is due to management, and serious considera- 14 A NEW VISION FOR FREEWAY PARK Hidden entrances Risk and perceived risk Isolation from adjacent land uses “Undesirable” activities
tion needs to be given to establishing a well funded and all-encompassing management strategy for the park in the future. A NEW VISION FOR FREEWAY PARK 15
Page 1 and 2: A New Vision for Freeway Park Seatt
Page 3: A New Vision for Freeway Park Seatt
Page 6 and 7: 6 A NEW VISION FOR FREEWAY PARK
Page 8 and 9: mutated with the pines, cotoneaster
Page 10 and 11: Vision & Objectives A city needs at
Page 12 and 13: people who live, work and own prope
Page 16 and 17: Park-Wide Recommendations Included
Page 18 and 19: 18 should occur in the areas of the
Page 20 and 21: 20 A NEW VISION FOR FREEWAY PARK Ex
Page 22 and 23: placemaking evaluations Like best C
Page 24 and 25: SHORT-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS Develop
Page 26 and 27: 26 Plan of the proposed improvement
Page 30 and 31: placemaking evaluations Like best:
Page 32 and 33: The southern end of American Legion
Page 34 and 35: 34 A NEW VISION FOR FREEWAY PARK Pl
Page 38 and 39: windows; from either end of the wal
Page 40 and 41: 40 Plan of the proposed improvement
Page 46 and 47: SHORT-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS Reconfig
Page 48 and 49: Plan of the proposed improvements a
Page 50 and 51: placemaking evaluations Like best W
Page 52 and 53: planters which visually block them
Page 54 and 55: 54 Miller Community Center - a flat
Page 56 and 57: Park Place Plaza, existing Park Pla
Page 62 and 63: Develop an area for games adjacent
Page 64 and 65:
Seneca Street and Hubbell Place ent
Page 66 and 67:
placemaking evaluations Like best:
Page 68 and 69:
Replace the concrete room at the so
Page 70 and 71:
70 Plan of proposed alternatives in
Page 72 and 73:
Freeway Park’s 10 Great Places, w
Page 74 and 75:
74 A NEW VISION FOR FREEWAY PARK
Page 76 and 77:
Community ties: A private group oft
Page 78 and 79:
pays one dollar per year to use the
Page 80 and 81:
Prospect Park in Brooklyn, New York
Page 82 and 83:
Programming: • “7 th on 6 th”
Page 84 and 85:
• Friends of Post Office Square m
Page 86 and 87:
• Soft Costs (Archit./design/perm
Page 88 and 89:
Activities/Events Performances/Show
Page 90 and 91:
Appendix C Crime statistics for Fre
Page 92 and 93:
OTHER CONCERNS/SUGGESTIONS o Take o
Page 94 and 95:
o Removing or relocating of some of
Page 96 and 97:
Appendix E Input from Stakeholders
Page 98:
Appendix F Sources • Brown, Patri
show all

A New Vision for Freeway Park - City of Seattle

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?