Westside 520 Corridor Principles

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Westside 520 Corridor Principles SR 520 Westside Corridor Design Principles UNIVERSAL AESTHETIC VALUES .0 Values describe the foundation upon which principles and measures of project integrity are based. 2 They are statements of the project team’s highest priorities and core beliefs, and aligned with the values expressed to date by the communites. The design principles for each area and place within the Westside corridor are grouped according to these values. CORRIDOR Culture Nature Design Materials GOALS, THEME Community values and Nature and the natural Design integrates the The use of materials the layers of history and surroundings are valued functions of the natural throughout the project MOTIFS AND MATERIALS culture are the sources of CULTURE and protected for the setting with the cultural fulfill their immediate NATURE inspiration for design. functions they serve and purposes and uses of the DESIGN and long-term functional VALUES the settings they create. community to produce needs, conserve a facility that stands the resources, while tests of time. maintaining a high degree of visual quality. .0 1. Draw inspiration from the character of 1. 1. Use a coherent vocabulary of forms, 1. Use high quality and durable materials. the existing community and its history, design. materials, color, character, and texture 2. Consider ease of maintenance and 3 and find value in things that are often 2. reducing maintenance requirements in overlooked. 2. the design. 2. Create a sense of place through spatial to enjoy similar views. 3. design, relationships, and details 3. Protect vulnerable places that may be community, urban development, and at all scales to foster pride and a sense UNIVERSAL that tell the story of its history and nature. of community ownership. landscape. 4. 3. Create a sense of rhythm at a variety 4. Select designs through a careful AESTHETIC 3. Create opportunities for “incidental of scales through a hierarchy of and civilities” where people can rest, cross 5. Design to promote dark sky goals across paths with others, and feel comfortable. the corridor. PRINCIPLES 4. Use wayfinding and interpretive signs, 4. energy. landmarks, and design details to help design elements to the viewer’s distance The Universal Aesthetic Principles are action people orient themselves. from the object and speed along the statements that apply the Universal Aesthetic 5. Connect places with paths and portals corridor or path. Values to the SR 520 project corridor as a whole. that are inviting and draw people toward 5. They describe how places near or elements of a social space. elements or structures as places for the facility could interrelate to meet the aesthetic 6. Provide continuity of path connections design elements that help create visual goals of the corridor. and multiple route options. 7. Identify places of cultural or community 6. Create safe spaces using Crime distinction and regional continuity. 8. Develop East-West corridor unity Design (CPTED) strategies such as high throughout the adjoining SR 520 projects. 7. and for a variety of viewer experiences (boaters, joggers, walkers, cyclists, transit users, and drivers). 8. and materials that are visible from the corridor to support rhythm and corridor 9. Use landscaping to screen residences from public spaces to increase sense of privacy for residents. 10. on bridges, structures, landscapes, and other features of the SR 520 corridor. 1. Preserve the Olmsted legacy by 1. Maintain or restore natural ecology. 1. Reveal and express the beauty inherent 1. .0 applying Olmsted principles of Scenery, 2. in the structure of the bridges. the local residents for the open space 4 overuse. 2. Design bridges to have a graceful, that will be created by the lids, so that 3. Evaluate views of Lake Union, Lake maintenance and safety in these spaces design. Washington, the Olympic and Cascade 3. become points of public pride and are 2. mountains, the Arboretum, Mount types and sizes to be smooth and self-reinforcing. WESTSIDE 520 graceful. 2. enjoy similar views. 4. especially in places where people will 3. Develop physical north-south 4. materials to create a sense of rhythm CORRIDOR and avoid monotony. features on lids, paths and in under- as unifying elements. context, with a record of survivability in 5. Design bridge components to enhance bridge areas. PRINCIPLES similar contexts. 3. Select elements such as rails and signage 5. with a high standard for durability and and integrate into new landscapes. 6. maintenance. The Westside Corridor Design Principles and Criteria describe the desired visual and aesthetic features. character and qualities of the corridor between 7. I-5 and the west high rise of the Evergreen Point of elements, to enhance awareness Floating Bridge. of changes in speed and approach to DESCRIPTION 8. The rolling terrain of northeast Seattle is materials visible from the neighborhood comprised of a north-south trending ridge-valley system that slopes northward toward the basins 9. containing Lake Union, Portage Bay, and Union Bay. This unique landscape required the SR 520 explore cut, elevated, and bridged community character. profiles. Thus, four distinct project areas within the Westside corridor are defined by these basins and plateaus. They are the Roanoke plateau, the enclosed Portage Bay basin, the Montlake hills, and the expansive Union Bay basin. DRAFT August 2011 Roanoke Design Principles .1 4 ROANOKE AREA AREA PRINCIPLES CULTURE NATURE DESIGN MATERIALS 1. Retain and enhance neighborhood 1. Evaluate views from 10th 1. Design the ramp bridge connecting 1. Select materials that are consistent connections to Roanoke Park and Avenue East toward the Olympic I-5 and SR 520 to be graceful. with the character of the homes in Interlaken Park. Mountains and to Portage Bay the Roanoke historic district. 2. Use the lid to reconnect and the Cascade Mountains to community activity centers. the east, and provide 3. Use interpretive markers to opportunities to enjoy similar describe the evolution of the views. Olmsted landscape and the effects of SR 520 on the landscape. 10th & DELMAR PRINCIPLES 1. Conserve and reuse elements 1. Select a lid planting palette that 1. Create aesthetic continuity between 1. Select materials complementary from the existing Bagley relates to the existing forest the 10th & Delmar Lid and the I-5 to the context and style of the Viewpoint that are valued by the trees and understory adjacent Enhanced Pedestrian Crossing. buildings and Roanoke and Bagley local residents and park users. to the 10th & Delmar Lid. 2. Use the lid as an opportunity to Viewpoint parks. 2. Create lids as urban open spaces 2. Create a natural-looking create additional paths that separate 2. Ensure high quality craftsmanship, that encourage pedestrian transition from lid surface to motorized traffic from especially on the lid where people activities and provide meeting native topography and non-motorized traffic. will have time to observe details places. landscape on north and south 3. Use “visual friction,” like closer and small features. 3. Cultivate a sense of stewardship sides of 10th & Delmar Lid. spacing of elements, to enhance among the local residents for the awareness of changes in speed and open space that will be created approach to nearby intersections. by the lid, so that maintenance 4. Provide a safe pedestrian and safety in this space become connection from the 10th & points of public pride and are Delmar Lid to Boyer Avenue. self-reinforcing. 5. Use natural features and plantings 4. Provide clear pedestrian to screen adjacent residences from connections to Roanoke Park. the 10th & Delmar Lid users. 5. Provide paths across the 10th & 6. Integrate utilities into the 10th & Delmar Lid that are in scale and Delmar Lid structure in a way that style with surrounding minimizes distractions and visual neighborhoods and parks and clutter. accommodate diverse users. 6. Evaluate views from the 10th & Delmar Lid of Portage Bay and provide opportunities to enjoy similar views. I-5 CROSSING PRINCIPLES 1.Optimize views of the urban 1.Use vegetation along the path to 1. Create aesthetic continuity between 1. Ensure high quality craftsmanship, skylines and Lake Union shoreline. protect diverse users from the 10th & Delmar Lid and the I-5 especially along the pathway nuisances and harm and create a Enhanced Pedestrian Crossing. where people will have time to pleasing, naturalistic environment. observe details and small features. 2. Use pedestrian-scale lighting to provide safe passage along the enhanced pedestrian crossing. CRITERIA CRITERIA CRITERIA CRITERIA CRITERIA DRAFT August 2011 Portage Bay Design Principles 4 .2 PORTAGE BAY BASIN AREA AREA PRINCIPLES CULTURE NATURE DESIGN MATERIALS 1. Evaluate views from the 1.Ensure the new nearshore 1. Create interesting, attractive, and 1. Select durable materials and neighborhohood to Portage Bay, landscape has characteristics of the easily maintained spaces and finishes that are resistant to mold and provide opportunities to native slope and shore habitat. facilities in under-bridge areas. and staining especially where enjoy similar views. 2. Support actual and perceived user 2. Avoid crea ting “orphaned” places natural light is not present. safety with appropriate landscape that might become misused or design and planting. feel unsafe. 3. Provide for interpretive and distinctive amenities near shore habitat or surface water treatment. BOYER STEPS & UNDER-BRIDGE PRINCIPLES 1. Integrate under-bridge areas with 1. Use natural features and plantings 1. Apply CPTED principles to ensure 1. Ensure high quality craftsmanship existing and anticipated Montlake to screen adjacent residences from clear sight lines and visibility west on and around the Boyer steps, as Playfield Master Plan and Interlaken the bridge. and east from Boyer Avenue. people will have time to observe parks, trails, and public 2. Use vegetation and urban features 2. Provide a safe pedestrian details and small features. infrastructure to create intriguing, to provide visual relief and connection from Boyer Avenue to 2.
Recommended publications
  • The Eastlake Bungalows Northgate
    THE EASTLAKE BUNGALOWS NORTHGATE GREENWOOD BALLARD GREEN LAKE THE EASTLAKE BUNGALOWS UNIVERSITY FREMONT DISTRICT WALLINGFORD MAGNOLIA INTERBAY QUEEN ANNE CAPITOL HILL SEATTLE CBD CENTRAL DISTRICT WEST SEATTLE OFFERING The Eastlake Bungalows are situated in Seattle’s beloved Eastlake neighborhood renowned for its striking views of Lake Union, downtown Seattle and Queen Anne. The property itself contains two separate tax parcels, each with two duplexes built in 1990. The properties are being advertised both as an 8-unit sale or as individual fourplexes. The properties consist of (4) 817 SQFT 2x1 flats, (2) 1118 SQFT 2x1.5 townhome units, and (2) 704 SQFT 1x1 townhomes. Each unit conveniently has a full-size washer/dryer set and 7 off-street parking spaces are available off of the alley. The property presents the prospective Buyer with a newer construction value add deal with massive rental upside in one of Seattle’s most popular neighborhoods. The Eastlake Bungalows were designed by renowned architect Charles Edelstein with the vision of creating a houseboat style community steps away from Lake Union. Each unit has a separate entrance with walkways in-between the bungalow like structures. None of the units share a common wall to the sides. NAME The Eastlake Bungalows ADDRESS 2212-2216 Minor Ave E, Seattle, WA 98102 TOTAL UNITS 8 BUILT 1999 SQUARE FEET 6,912 Total Net Rentable PRICE $2,950,000 PRICE PER UNIT $368,750 PRICE PER FOOT $427 CURRENT GRM/CAP 17.7/3.1% MARKET GRM/CAP 13.6/4.6% This information has been secured from sources we believe to be reliable, but we make no representations or warranties, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy of the information.
    [Show full text]
  • High School Attendance Areas MAP ID #001
    ADOPTED 20091118 High School Attendance Areas MAP ID #001 J N U E E A N V N I A T N 145TH ST NE E A N 145T H S V T 8 D A A 8 I R S T E IM H D H O I N N T N NE 145T H ST D E E R A 5 S Y R 1 N V E D A N E M E E W V N Y A E JACKSON PARK GOLF COURSE T I E NE 141ST ST H C T N E 4 E E 8 N E K V N A E A N 1 3 L 0TH ST NE 130T H S V T E H A V T 9 0 H A 0 0 T T H 1 NORTHACRES PARK 8 H T 0 E NE 1 125T H S 0 T NE 125T H S A N T 3 V E Ingraham NE 132ND ST E V NE 132ND ST N A E T S S N N E 1 A E E N N E N N V V D E N 115TH ST E H A A L V O V P P L A N A A O M Puget R T T O I E S N S H Nathan Hale N D NE S 124T H CARKEEK PARK T O R ST NE 1 A T 2 1 23 4T H ST E T I 1 Y 5 R P E N N A D W O U I NE 110TH ST I D A Y A N Sound R A Y T E E D N E M W N N 10 R N 5TH ST E T N L E L MEADOWBROOK PLAYFIELD E P V W E R NE H A V 103RD D N ST T N A NE 116TH ST E R NW 10 6 T H 0TH ST W 7 I E S D N NE 100T H ST AN T 8 D V U N O R J 9 O A O E IT NW 96TH ST AN N R M D 5 R NE 112TH ST T L O O H O NE 95TH ST W N 92ND ST NE N 92ND ST E MATTHEWS BEACH PARK E N 90TH ST R NE 106T H ST T G S GOLDEN GARDENS PARK NW 85TH ST T N 85TH ST NE 85TH ST E K W NE 85TH ST R N MAPLE LEAF PLAYGROUND A 18TH A E VE NW 80TH ST M V E N 80TH ST E SAND POINT COUNTRY CLUB A NE E N 80TH ST T N AVE W N TH W S 15 E W E N A E E V D V I V E A V A R V E A V 3 T A NE 7 H R A 5TH ST S N H E T L 1 T Y H S NE 5 E 73RD S T M 0 3 T W T V 2 8 A S A A R E WARREN G.
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive List of Seattle Parks Bonus Feature for Discovering Seattle Parks: a Local’S Guide by Linnea Westerlind
    COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF SEATTLE PARKS BONUS FEATURE FOR DISCOVERING SEATTLE PARKS: A LOCAL’S GUIDE BY LINNEA WESTERLIND Over the course of writing Discovering Seattle Parks, I visited every park in Seattle. While my guidebook describes the best 100 or so parks in the city (in bold below), this bonus feature lists all the parks in the city that are publicly owned, accessible, and worth a visit. Each park listing includes its address and top features. I skipped parks that are inaccessible (some of the city’s greenspaces have no paths or access points) and ones that are simply not worth a visit (just a square of grass in a median). This compilation also includes the best of the 149 waterfront street ends managed by the Seattle Department of Transportation that have been developed into mini parks. I did not include the more than 80 community P-Patches that are managed by the Department of Neighbor- hoods, although many are worth a visit to check out interesting garden art and peek at (but don’t touch) the garden beds bursting with veggies, herbs, and flowers. For more details, links to maps, and photos of all these parks, visit www.yearofseattleparks.com. Have fun exploring! DOWNTOWN SEATTLE & THE Kobe Terrace. 650 S. Main St. Paths, Seattle Center. 305 Harrison St. INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT city views, benches. Lawns, water feature, cultural institutions. Bell Street Park. Bell St. and 1st Ave. Lake Union Park. 860 Terry Ave. N. to Bell St. and 5th Ave. Pedestrian Waterfront, spray park, water views, Tilikum Place. 2701 5th Ave.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 106 Technical Report: Volume 2 Built Environment
    SECTION 106 TECHNICAL REPORT: VOLUME 2 BUILT ENVIRONMENT SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, I-5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT P REPARED FOR: Washington State Department of Transportation I-5 to Medina: Bridge Replacement and HOV Project 999 Third Avenue, Suite 2424 Seattle, WA 98104 Contact: Steve Archer 206.805.2895 P REPARED BY: Gray Lane Preservation and Planning 5312 50th Avenue South Seattle, WA 98118 Contact: Connie Walker Gray 206.718.1095 June 2011 Gray, Connie Walker, Christopher Hetzel, Melissa Cascella, S. Orton, and Lori Durio Price. 2011. Section 106 Technical Report: Volume 2 Historic Built Environment, SR 520 Bridge Replacement Program, I-5 to Medina: Bridge Replacement and HOV Project. June. Seattle, WA. Prepared for the Washington State Department of Transportation, Seattle, WA. Contents List of Exhibits ........................................................................................................................................ iii List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ..................................................................................................... vii Page Chapter 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................1-1 Chapter 2 Historic Context ..............................................................................................................2-1 Early Exploration and Settlement .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Housing Choice Voucher Program
    Housing Choice Voucher Program Seattle Neighborhood Guide 190 Queen Anne Ave N Seattle, WA 98109 206.239.1728 1.800.833.6388 (TDD) www.seattlehousing.org Table of Contents Introduction Introduction ..……………………………………………………. 1 Seattle is made up of many neighborhoods that offer a variety Icon Key & Walk, Bike and Transit Score Key .……. 1 of features and characteristics. The Housing Choice Voucher Crime Rating ……………………………………………………… 1 Program’s goal is to offer you and your family the choice to Seattle Map ………………………………………………………. 2 move into a neighborhood that will provide opportunities for Broadview/Bitter Lake/Northgate/Lake City …….. 3 stability and self-sufficiency. This voucher can open the door Ballard/Greenwood ………………………………………….. 5 for you to move into a neighborhood that you may not have Fremont/Wallingford/Green Lake …………………….. 6 been able to afford before. Ravenna/University District ………………………………. 7 Magnolia/Interbay/Queen Anne ………………………. 9 The Seattle Neighborhood Guide provides information and South Lake Union/Eastlake/Montlake …………….… 10 guidance to families that are interested in moving to a Capitol Hill/First Hill ………………………………………….. 11 neighborhood that may offer a broader selection of schools Central District/Yesler Terrace/Int’l District ………. 12 and more opportunities for employment. Within the Madison Valley/Madrona/Leschi ……………………... 13 Neighborhood Guide, you will find information about schools, Belltown/Downtown/Pioneer Square ………………. 14 parks, libraries, transportation and community services. Mount Baker/Columbia City/Seward Park ………… 15 While the guide provides great information, it is not Industrial District/Georgetown/Beacon Hill ……… 16 exhaustive. Learn more about your potential neighborhood Rainier Beach/Rainier Valley …………………………….. 17 by visiting the area and researching online. Delridge/South Park/West Seattle .…………………… 19 Community Resources ……………….…………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Shoreline Master Program Restoration and Enhancement Plan
    Margaret Glowacki DPD Shoreline Master Program Ordinance EXH C August 27, 2012 Version 1 AUGUST 2012 Restoration and Enhancement Plan FINAL Exhibit C to the DPD Shoreline Master Program Ordinance Margaret Glowacki DPD Shoreline Master Program Ordinance EXH C August 27, 2012 Version 1 FINAL RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT PLAN CITY OF SEATTLE SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM Prepared for City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2200 Seattle, Washington 98124 Prepared by Anchor QEA, LLC 1423 3rd Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98101 August 2012 Exhibit C to the DPD Shoreline Master Program Ordinance ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND COLLABORATORS This report was prepared by Anchor QEA, LLC, with input from the City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development. Review of the report was conducted by the following City of Seattle departments: Public Utilities, Transportation and Parks and Recreation. The base information for this report is from Seattle’s Shoreline Characterization Report completed in March of 2009, available on DPD’s website at: http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/Planning/ ShorelineMasterProgramUpdate/ReportsMaterials/default.asp. The contributions of these authors and reviewers are acknowledged and appreciated. Final Restoration Plan i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Plan Purpose and Scope ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN 1 SR 520 Montlake Phase Update 2 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN SR 520 Montlake Phase Update Table of Contents
    Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan SR 520 Montlake Phase Update DECEMBER 2017 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN 1 SR 520 Montlake Phase Update 2 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN SR 520 Montlake Phase Update Table of contents Executive summary ......................................................................................................... 5 What is the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan? .............................................. 5 Gathering public feedback .................................................................................................... 7 Traffic management measures ............................................................................................. 7 Chapter 1: Background ................................................................................................... 8 Montlake Phase NTMP goals ............................................................................................... 8 City of Seattle projects .........................................................................................................11 Existing conditions .................................................................................................................11 Traffic operations and volumes .........................................................................................12 Chapter 2: Public involvement ....................................................................................18 Public outreach informs the NTMP .................................................................................18
    [Show full text]
  • City of Seattle Department of Finance and Administrative Services
    City of Seattle Department of Finance and Administrative Services March 31, 2015 The Honorable Nick Licata Seattle City Hall 501 5th Ave. Seattle, WA 98124 Councilmember Licata, I am forwarding to the City Council an annual report of all real property under City ownership. The annual review supports strategic management of the City’s real estate holdings. City needs change over time, so the annual review is intended to create opportunities to find the best municipal use of each property or put it back into the private sector. We update this information to avoid holding properties without an adopted municipal purpose. Each January, FAS initiates the annual review process. City departments with jurisdiction over real property assure that all recent acquisitions and/or dispositions are accurately represented, and provide current information about each property’s current use, and future use, if identified. Each property is classified based on its level of utilization -- from Fully Utilized Municipal Use to Surplus. As of March 20, 2015, the City had ownership interests in 1,189 property management areas. (There are additional property management areas where the City may have only a leasehold interest, easement or other property right). Significant changes in 2014 include the purchase of the four-acre site of the new North Police Precinct (FAS) and Seattle Public Utilities sale of a 6.3-acre portion of the Kent Highlands Surplus Property. City Light acquired over 230 acres of wildlife mitigation land in Skagit County. If you have questions about the report or about FAS’s role in managing the City’s real property assets, do not hesitate to contact me at 684-0503 or Chris Potter at 386-1576.
    [Show full text]
  • Location Address Surface
    LOCATION ADDRESS SURFACE AAA (African American Academy) (now know as 8311 Beacon Ave S Grass Van Asselt Elementary; SYSA does NOT use this field for Spring Soccer; see Van Asselt Old location below.) Addams 1 E/W, 2 N/S and Upper (was Summit) 11051 34th Ave NE Synthetic turf; grass Aldercrest Annex 2800 N.E. 200th St. Grass Aldercrest Elementary 2800 N.E. 200th St. Grass Arena Sports (indoor facility) Sandpoint Wy NE. & NE. 74th Synthetic turf B.F. Day 3921 Linden Ave N Grass Ballard High School 1418 NW 65th St Synthetic turf Ballard Playfield Rec. Center 28th Ave. NW. & NW. 60th St Grass Bayview Playfield 24th W. & W. Raye Grass Beacon Hill Elementary 14th Ave. S. & S. Holgate St. Grass Bitter Lake 130th & Linden North Grass Blanchet High School (Naish Field) 8200 Wallingford Ave N Synthetic turf Bobby Morris 11th & E Pine Synthetic turf Briarcrest School 2715 N.E. 158th Grass Brighton 42nd Ave S. & S. Juneau Grass Cleveland 5511 15th South Grass Cromwell Park N 179th & Meridian Ave N Grass N.E. 77th & 25th N.E. Dahl (N, S & W) Grass Decatur now Thornton Creek- see below Delridge Delridge Wy SW & SW Alaska Synthetic turf Denny Park Denny Way & Westlake Ave N Grass Eagle Staff Middle School (formerly WIlson Pacific) Wallingford Ave N & N 90th Synthetic turf East Queen Anne Playfield 1912 Warren Ave North Grass Echo Lake Elementary 19345 Wallingford Ave N Grass Eckstein MS (used both full and mod field) 3003 N.E. 75th St Synthetic turf Einstein School 19343 3rd Ave N.W Synthetic turf Ella Bailey Park 2601 W Smith St Grass LOCATION ADDRESS SURFACE Franklin High School 3013 S MT BAKER BV Synthetic turf Garfield Playfield 23rd Ave E & E Cherry St Grass Garfield High School E Alder & 25th Ave E Synthetic turf Genesee 43rd Ave.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 106 Technical Report
    Sitc~.;u. R()Q.~rI)(, Pf&V'~H;stoy~~C\s~'.r ~ _ ~ ..eJ\~~,c.D \lOMe- ;rta, 8tb04"', A~.s s.a.ttt..\t'J~,e.-~~ ... '" F.e:-~W...lr ~"L..r e, O)~N'"J... I.,~.., ' ~ ~'-'~&&r~ e~\.~4.o·c...~~- y.} •• Ju»' S,t& ~t)~J\ R()U'\O~~&arl<. ~ "s~~t,D's.+r~+ :r..c..\>s ~ "o~\..~~ ~.""c. Cj '" I: ).\..."'\~~~ S.....~..)'f:.', f\' CA) Wt.~ F'a.c..\ ~~ s...~.,••+ 6,4.~'c..~ If/\-/"" ~',....~~\"/('< s;+t..r~.'2. ~&.. Y\.\tf ()~ ..~ ~,.o\o... ic. ~·c•.w,~ E )li011--C-~,,'.+-~"\.h HOt)S& ~)t E ~Q,.~\"~so\oo SMJt1.. ) \',"', c.., Wa.·~ F'a.c..\ W\~ ~.¥'~ Gil Lc....O·c..W\'WWr ~I II-/Itt/ 2,.. , St~..~O~lr R.-.~.~Pa.t\( ~ 1,+.vo 'e. O\~,t~ c..,\c.W\YN.r. ~. \~" l~ tIi.ca~ %(.12., '-Not") ~ 'E S.... ~k) ~\~ c...) W... '" ~,¥'~e..~ ~.. ~c>'c.oY\t\" , tt/,-/,a. .. ' Sit.3:]) .31 R()L~O~.~,,~ *'s",---rc.. b"~+t'c.~ l<;V\~- 'Fri ~WM. M.es~c..Y"~~'t ~ (I. ~~" .." 1 ~tLE ~ ....i'\~, "i~,t.) W .... ~ Fod~~·"~~ (; .., \.~~C>'CIw\~ y{,./zoot 'ti"i" l'" \\.~l"~'"\\o~.- HlJ\Jld H.itlt\ H'5-'\~ll~_~ t!"JM-l") ~.,e.c."1.Y'Ar.L. A\I~" 5..........'''',tdfW\, c..) vJ... '" Fac,.\ ~ ~OY~f~~~ it......., l.-ec..O'c..,.'f't1'rIf/lo /. ~, ~~21It'" 5,,,," ~1> ..-'to Rt>IJAa\(. ~V'~ M;.~.ric.O\.+11d- ~,s~l_-c..n.Lyr;:" ...rr It.~ ~')" H..~~~" Ale- & s-ttt." ~i~,c.) wa..'" Fat.i~ &w. 6~~6c.O'c.Y'''• .,.;../.... 9 ~r~C.:D.'+'I- ~OLW\6~ 9..fk ",i~«i~Dis+f1c.+ c-\-.so" ..""i~~..n a....
    [Show full text]
  • Seattle Parks Superintendent's Subject Files, 1936-1993
    Seattle Parks Superintendent's Subject Files, 1936-1993 Overview of the Collection Creator Seattle (Wash.). Dept. of Parks and Recreation Title Seattle Parks Superintendent's Subject Files Dates 1936-1993 (inclusive) 19361993 Quantity 55.8 cubic feet, (140 boxes) Collection Number 5802-01 Summary Records related to the administration of the parks system and recreation programs. Repository Seattle Municipal Archives Seattle Municipal Archives Office of the City Clerk City of Seattle PO Box 94728 98124-4728 Seattle, WA Telephone: 206-233-7807 Fax: 206-386-9025 [email protected] Access Restrictions Records are open to the public. Languages English Historical Note The Department of Parks and Recreation maintains the City's parks, shorelines, and boulevards; and administers community centers, public golf courses, and other athletic and cultural facilities. Seattle's first park was established in 1884 after David Denny donated land to the City for that purpose. At that time, a three-member park committee, with limited authority, was created to manage the nascent park system. A Board of Parks Commissioners was established in 1890 with control over all public parks and authority to appoint a Parks Superintendent. In 1896, the City Charter created the position of Superintendent of Streets, Sewers and Parks. The Parks Department became a separate entity in 1904. In 1926, a City Charter amendment abolished the position of Superintendent, distributing its responsibilities between the Head Gardener and the Landscape Architect. A 1948 City Charter amendment required the Board of Park Commissioners to appoint a park superintendent to administer the department. In 1967, another City Charter Amendment reconstituted the Board as an advisory body to the Mayor and City Council, changed the agency name to Department of Parks and Recreation, and placed fiscal and operational administration under the superintendent.
    [Show full text]
  • Parks and Recreation
    PARKS AND RECREATION Department of Parks and Recreation Overview of Facilities and Programs The Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) manages more than 430 parks and open areas in its approximately 6,200 acres of property throughout the City; works with the public to be good stewards of the park system; and provides safe and welcoming opportunities for the public to play, learn, contemplate, and build community. The park system comprises about 11% of the City’s land area. It includes approximately 488 buildings, 185 athletic fields, 130 children’s play areas, 26 community centers, 151 outdoor tennis courts, 22 miles of boulevards, an indoor tennis center, two outdoor and eight indoor swimming pools, five golf courses, performing and visual arts studios, boat ramps, moorages, fishing piers, trails, camps, viewpoints, open spaces, a rock climbing site, a conservatory, and a classical Japanese garden. The Woodland Park Zoological Society operates the zoo with City financial support and the Seattle Aquarium Society operates the City-owned Seattle Aquarium. The development of this system is guided by the Seattle Parks & Recreation Plan 2000, the 38 neighborhood plans, the 2008 Parks and Green Spaces Levy, the 2000 Parks Levy, the 1999 Seattle Center and Community Centers Levy, DPR’s annual update to the Asset Management Plan, and by the Parks and Recreation Strategic Action Plan. Funds for the projects in this document come from a variety of sources, including three levies, the Cumulative Reserve Subfund, councilmanic debt, the Shoreline
    [Show full text]