SR 520 Portage Bay CPTED Project Neighborhood Grant ID S14032
Design Report 2015
COVER LETTER
TO: Juan Martinez, NMF Project Manager FR: Neighborhood Planning The report will serve as an advisory document to be consulted as Grant #S14032 WSDOT and The City of Seattle finalize plans to traverse dense urban Seattle neighborhoods with the SR 520 ‘Portage Bay Viaduct’ Steering Committee: Pete DeLaunay, Carl Stixrood, Ron Melnikoff, replacement span, and ultimately create public access under SR520 John Gaines – PBRP Community Council Lorena Eng, WSDOT; John upon completion of the SR520 bridge replacement . O’Neil, Seattle Prep; Jennifer Samuels, Council Member Bruce Harrell The grant funded design provides ‘interim’ and ‘long term’ concepts; RE: Final Report – S14032 S14032 - SR 520 Portage Bay Area however with the Legislature’s recent appropriation to complete SR520, Planning Project Crime Prevention through Environmental Design recommendations in this report will be folded into longer term planning Delmar Dr. under SR520 across Boyer Ave. E. to the Portage Bay for the bridge replacement. Shoreline Ideally the steering committee will continue in an advisory capacity Mr. Martinez during the final design and bid document phase to assure that community generated recommendations in the report are incorporated What follows is the final SR520 Portage Bay Area Crime Prevention into plans as the design moves forward. Through Environmental Design (CPTED) report – Neighborhood Grant S14032. It includes recommendations that will help prevent illicit activity Background under the SR520 bridge by applying CPTED principles. The final report’s recommendations came from three well attended The Portage Bay/Roanoke Park Community Council applied for and community meetings, several site visits, and ongoing dialogue with was awarded a Neighborhood Matching Grant to prepare a landscape property owners; WSDOT, SDOT and Seattle Prep. The goal of the plan that identifies CPTED measures for the area from Delmar Dr. under process was to generate consensus between property owners and SR520, across Boyer Ave. to the Portage Bay shoreline. community stakeholders on how to best deal with the unlawful activity under the bridge. A Steering committee of property owners and community stakeholders including; WSDOT, Seattle Preparatory School, Boating Community, The consensus view of the basic outcomes of the process is clear: Councilmember Bruce Harrell, Seattle Police Department and engaged neighbors, was formed to create a mutually acceptable design consistent • In the interim, prior to construction, maintain the area in a fashion that with their long term plans including eventual reconstruction of Highway reduces the potential for criminal activity 520 and development of the Seattle Preparatory Property. • In the final design for 520, o Provide an open space pedestrian/bike connection from the Following The City’s RFP process, Barker Landscape Architects was Roanoke Park lid across Boyer to the Portage Bay shoreline. selected to work with the stakeholders and property owners to develop a o Accommodate public use in a way that activates the space and plan incorporating CPTED principals for the area. reduces potential for crime
2 The main objective of the design is reduction of crime resulting from illegal uses of the area under and near the west abutment of the Highway 520 Portage Bay viaduct, with consideration for how the Americans With Disabilities Act may apply and how the area may be used, developed and maintained in the short run and after reconstruction of the Highway 520 viaduct.
Conclusion
This Steering Committee has forged an excellent working relationship between community stakeholders and property owners. We propose that the Steering Committee serve in an advisory capacity during the remaining design and construction of the SR520 project to ensure that design intent is achieved and the area under the 520 viaduct is safe and not a constant source of strife for the community and property owners.
3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
City of Seattle - Department of Neighborhoods Juan Martinez, Project Manager
Washington State Department of Transportation Lorena Eng, Region Administrator Kerry Pihlstrom, SR 520 Engineering Manager
Seattle Preparatory School John O’Neil
Portage Bay / Roanoke Park Community Council / Committee Pete DeLaunay, President Ron Melnikoff, Grant Research Carl Stixrood
Landscape Architectural Consultant John Barker, Principal Brenda Snyder, Urban/Landscape Designer
Prepared by Barker Landscape Architects
4 PREFACE A public meeting was held following significant crime incidents in the designated project area. Following the meeting, actions by WSDOT, SPD, SDOT and others included trail improvements, lighting, signing, clearing, improved access and policing agreements. The incidence of illegal activities appeared to have been dramatically reduced by these measures. However a longer term plan was desired by the neighborhood to assure that illegal activities were prevented to the extent possible with CPTED measures and managed effectively if and when they do occur. The Portage Bay/Roanoke Park Community Council received a Neighborhood Matching Fund Grant from the Seattle Department of Neighborhoods in 2014.
This report represents a shared vision for the improvement of the SR 520 corridor between Delmar Drive, Boyer Avenue and the waters edge within the Portage Bay neighborhood of Seattle. Short and long-term conceptual plans within this report respond to community desire for safety and activation of an otherwise vacant open space below the SR 520 bridge, prone to illicit activity. Ideas within this report are preliminary and must be vetted by appropriate agencies. Concept proposed may be modified by unforeseen limitations of both difficult site conditions, property owner constrains, and use constraints.
Barker Landscape Architects
5 TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Project Overview 5 1.1 Project Background 6 1.2 Project Goals 11
2 Site Constraints & Opportunities 13 2.1 Site Analysis 14 2.2 Property Owner Constraints 25 2.3 Precedents 27
3 Community Design Workshop 1 31 3.1 Design Game Results 38
4 Community Design Workshop 2 41 4.1 Concept Review Results 48
5 Community Design Workshop 3 55 5.1 Community Feedback (Survey) 59 5.2 Property Owner (WSDOT) Feedback 63
6 Vegetation Management Plan 65 6.1 Management Zones 66 6.2 General Guidelines 67
7 Next Steps 69
8 Appendix 71
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
6 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
This project aims to gather community input and generate ideas for short term and long term improvements of the open space located below the Portage Bay SR 520 bridge, owned by Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). The site is located at the intersection of the Portage Bay Bridge and Capitol Hill between the streets of Delmar Drive East and Boyer Avenue East in Seattle’s Portage Bay neighborhood. Due to poor lines of site the area below the bridge provides areas of attractive seclusion prone to illicit activity including illegal camping, littering, graffiti and illegal drug sale. Recently significant crime incidents lead to a community meeting. Following the meeting, actions by WSDOT, SPD, SDOT and others included trail improvements, lighting, signing, clearing, improved access and policing agreements. The incidence of illegal activities appears to have been dramatically reduced by these measures, however a longer term plan is desired by the neighborhood to assure that illegal activities are prevented to the extent possible with Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) measures. The SR 520 program will review the concepts explored and approved by this community design effort, to understand how they may be integrated within the future Portage Bay Bridge Reconstruction project.
Barker Landscape Architects
7 1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND
The Portage Bay/Roanoke Park Community Council received a Neighborhood Matching Fund Grant from the Seattle Department of Neighborhoods in 2014. Stated in the grant application, the community members aimed to hire a consultant for conceptual planning of two public pedestrian trails. The first trail connecting Boyer Avenue and Delmar Drive, to allow greater public visibility of the area beneath the SR 520 Bridge and to help eliminate illegal camping activities, and the second trail to provide shoreline access from Boyer Avenue.
Initial ideas for the two trails expressed in the grant were to: connect a partially improved Seattle Preparatory School access road which extends downward from Delmar Drive to a WSDOT access road which extends upward from Boyer Avenue, and to create a second trail down from Boyer, across WSDOT property, to the shoreline. The community aimed to clear overgrown vegetation near the proposed pedestrian trails to provide better views of the area under SR 520 bridge and towards Portage Bay. Benches and related improvements were also identified as potential improvements in addition to vegetation clearing on SDOT property north of the bridge adjacent to the existing Roanoke Street pedestrian trail.
As part of the SR 520 bridge reconstruction project spanning the breadth of Lake Washington and Portage Bay, WSDOT devised two lid components which better connect neighborhoods currently severed by the SR 520 freeway corridor. WSDOT facilitated an iterative and inclusive design process during 2012 which comprised the Seattle Community Design Process (SCDP); a series of seven public workshops and ongoing conversations with design professionals, contributing agencies and public stakeholders.
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
8 The proposed Roanoke/Portage Bay neighborhood lid will be constructed over what currently Roanoke Area Lid design, WSDOT began to imagine what could happen beneath the new is airspace above the SR 520 highway and will reconnect neighborhoods across the roadway Portage Bay Bridge with the help of community engagement. Recognizing concern for illicit from 10th Avenue East to Delmar Drive East. The lid will span north to south from Roanoke activity, conceptual ideas included an active path, small sports court, clear site lines and ADA Street East to the Federal Avenue East street end. The Roanoke ridge slopes steeply from access. Delmar Drive East to Boyer Avenue East and to Portage Bay. As part of the imagining of the
SITE LOCATION
Source: WSDOT
Barker Landscape Architects
9 Roanoke / Portage Bay Neighborhood Area Schematic Lid Design 2012
SITE LOCATION
Source: WSDOT
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
10 Roanoke / Portage Bay Neighborhood Area Schematic Below Bridge Design 2012
Source: WSDOT
Barker Landscape Architects
11 Roanoke / Portage Bay Neighborhood Area Schematic Below Bridge Design 2012
WSDOT Community feedback for below bridge design:
WSDOT Heard • Improve Boyer Steps • Provide ADA Accessible Access Route • Create shoreline access and use • Address safety under bridge through Access and Activation
WSDOT Explored • Partnership with Seattle Prep for use of adjacent open spaces for paths and activities • Boyer steps can be moved if needed • Evaluated opportunities for shoreline access • Incorporated areas along access path for resting, viewing and activity • Improved site lines and included lighting
Source: WSDOT
Source: WSDOT
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
12 1.2 PROJECT GOALS
Though the course of public outreach we set out to generate both a long and short term plans for the site, guided by the following design principles:
• Create a safe and useful pedestrian route which incorporates CPTED principles
• Create a place of public interest and comfort for all abilities
• Incorporate art into the design and reflect the character of the neighborhood
• Reduce likelihood of illicit activity
• Provide shoreline access
• Take advantage of prominent views to the east and maintain site lines
Barker Landscape Architects
13 CPTED Design Principles (Puget Sound Regional Council)
1 Natural Surveillance: the design and placement of physical features to maximize 6 Activity Support: the planning and placement of safe activities. Key strategies visibility and surveillance. Key strategies include the design, placement, and lighting of include sidewalk and street level activities, such as markets, fairs, and festivals, in key doors, windows, walkways, gathering areas, roadways, and structures. The objectives community areas. The objective is to increase the number of people using a space, are to eliminate hiding places and increase the perception of human presence and thereby enhancing visibility, social comfort, and control. supervision. 7 Social Capital: the social trust, norms, and networks people draw upon to solve 2 Natural Access Management: the physical guidance of people and vehicles. Key common problems, foster civic engagement, and discourage inappropriate behaviors. strategies include the use of real or perceived barriers such as fencing or plantings, and Key strategies include designated gathering areas, social events, and community other wayfinding elements such as lighting, signage, and artwork.The objectives are to programs. The objective is to encourage communication, trust, and collaboration among provide orientation and a pedestrian-friendly environment and to discourage would-be stakeholders and also with the government agencies that serve them. offenders by making noncompliance obvious. 8 Land Use and Community Design: the distribution, location, and amount of 3 Territorial Reinforcement: the use of physical attributes to delineate space and land for various uses; land use density and intensity; and the design elements, strategies, express a positive sense of ownership. Key strategies include the use of art, signs, and overall character of a planning area. Key strategies include team training for landscaping, and boundary treatments as well as the orientation and strategic place of professionals involved in planning and development activities, solicitation of community buildings. The objectives are to define borders, express ownership, and communicate a public safety concerns, and collaboration in problem solving and incorporation of CPTED space is cared for and protected. principles into planning processes. The objectives are to create, or recreate, and manage built environments in a manner that includes consideration for public safety. 4 Physical Maintenance: the repair, replacement, and general upkeep of a space, building, or area. Key strategies include the use of low-maintenance landscaping and 9 Target Hardening: the making of potential targets resistant to criminal attack. architectural materials, trash collection and removal, and other programs to maintain a Key strategies include the reinforcement of entry and exit features, law enforcement clean and orderly environment. The objective is to allow for the continued use of a space or security presence, and security devices such as locks, alarms, and cameras. The for its intended purpose. objectives are to increase the efforts that offenders must expend and the risk of their being identified or apprehended in committing an offense. 5 Natural Imperatives: ensuring access to necessary goods and services including natural light, clean air and water, healthy foods, physical activity, employment, and 10 Order Maintenance: the attention to minor violations and reduction of opportunities housing. Key strategies include pedestrian amenities, public parks, accessible transit for inappropriate behavior. Key strategies include posting rules and expectations, using systems, quality food sources, and education and employment opportunities. The graffiti-and vandalism-resistant materials, and imposing quick, fair, and consistent objective is to promote healthy behaviors and reduce mental fatigue and associated risky consequences for violations. The objectives are to foster safe, orderly, and predictable behaviors by meeting the biological, social, and economic needs of the population. behaviors.
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
14 2 SITE CONSTRAINTS & OPPORTUNITIES
Site constraints include steep slopes and areas of potential land slide. Additional weight, water saturation, or heavy vegetation removal may lead to slope instability. Steep slopes also pose challenges for future establishment of an ADA pathway. Noise and shadow from existing and future SR 520 structures create harsh conditions for plants and may lead to proposed rest areas being less attractive to community members able to access more attractive open spaces. The prevalence of invasive plants on the site create challenges for vegetation management, removal and native habitat establishment. Limited views to the site, particularly to the crevasse underneath the bridge, create places which currently feel unsafe to the general public. Space below the bridge aslo provides an attractive area for illegal camping.
Views towards the east offer expansive views of Portage Bay, the Cascade Mountain Range, and the underbelly of the bridge. The bridge underbelly serves a tall wall-less ‘room’ with large columns which create a cathedral like atmosphere. An opportunity exists to treat existing and future bridge columns as sculptural elements by adorning them with mural. Thinning of vegetation will open views to the east as well as views through the site, reducing the likelihood of crime. Access to the water may be established along with shoreline habitat improvement, and a small kayak launch. Creating an ADA accessible path through the site will increase activity, visibility, safety and provide a new route for students, cyclists and others on foot.
Barker Landscape Architects
15 2.1 SITE ANALYSIS
The following diagrams explore various components of the site which will influence future design. The area labeled as the ‘Cave’ as shown on the Site Concerns diagram is the approximate location of the crevasse of the bridge which has attracted illegal activity. Overgrown vegetation located along the periphery of the site blocks views inward. Current pedestrian access is provided along the northern edge of the site in the form of a pedestrian trail and three sets of stairs, located on Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT) property. A maintenance road serving WSDOT property slopes up from Boyer. A maintenance road serving Seattle Preparatory School property slopes down from Delmar Drive. Bagley Viewpoint located along the northwestern edge of the site and a piece of of Interlaken Park property located along the southwestern edge, are owned and managed by Seattle’s Department of Parks and Recreation.
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
16 Site Concerns
Barker Landscape Architects
17 Current Pedestrian /Vehicular Access Routes
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
18 Bus Stops & Bicycle Access Routes
and Bus 49 stop
Barker Landscape Architects
19 Site Topographic Lines & Steep Slopes
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
20 Property Ownership
Barker Landscape Architects
21 Site Concerns
Litter Illicit Activity Hidden Spaces
Overgrown Site Lines Blocked Views No ADA Access
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
22 Site Photo location
BOYER AVENUE
7 6 11 8 DELMAR DRIVE
4 5 12 9 10
13
3 2
1
Barker Landscape Architects
23 Site Photos
1
2
3
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
24 Site Photos
4
5
6 7 8
Barker Landscape Architects
25 Site Photos
9
10
11 12 13
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
26 2.2 PROPERTY OWNER CONSTRAINTS
Initial design component ideas were reviewed by property owners who provided feedback on the feasibility of potential design components. Seattle Preparatory School Property owners were not amenable to ideas such as Skate-friendly Plaza or Sports Court, Dog Park, Bat Houses, Multi-use Game Plaza or Community P-Patch being established on their property. As our design process processed it became clear that the most appropriate use of Prep Property was pedestrian access, particularly ADA access, along the western half, if needed, and that the eastern half of the property should be preserved for potential future development. As indicated in a January 23, 2015 e-mail to the project team, Seattle Preparatory School would like to review a proposed memorandum of understanding that clarifies the process and outcomes. The e-mail expressed concerns about a trail -even a temporary one - that denies access to those with physical limitations. Liability is an important factor to Seattle Preparatory School; use of Seattle Prep Property for trail or other public purposes would require limiting liability of Seattle Preparatory School to zero in terms of trail construction and users. WSDOT clearly stated their initial concerns and constraints, described on the following page.
Barker Landscape Architects
27 Portage Bay Area Public Trail Access WSDOT Project Constraints September 2014
The Portage Bay/Roanoke Park Community Council is sponsoring a neighborhood Utilities project to deter illegal activities in the vicinity of the Portage Bay Bridge between • Both Delmar Dr E and Boyer Ave E carry multiple existing utility lines both above Delmar Drive E and the Portage Bay shoreline. The project will be incorporating Crime and below ground; Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) techniques, which would consist of • Existing WSDOT storm sewer and under drain pipes run underground just south a combination of trails/viewpoints, vegetation clearing and management, lighting, and of the Portage Bay Bridge. There is one existing WSDOT storm drainage outfall public use management. that is located at the shoreline below the south side of the Portage Bay Bridge; and Soil conditions and geologic hazards • Utility locations in this area are based on as-built plan information and therefore • The proposed pedestrian trails would pass through an active landslide area; are considered approximate. Field verification is required. • Soil conditions are highly variable and heterogeneous; • Soil is typically moisture-sensitive and would be unworkable when wet; Portage Bay shoreline • Any heavy structures would likely need to be supported on deep foundations; • Design of the trails/improvements would need to conform to Seattle Department • Shallow and deep foundation design would need to consider impacts from of Planning and Development requirements for Environmentally Critical Areas potential landslide movement; (landslide hazard area); and • Design would need to consider impacts to the stability of the existing landslide, • The shoreline area is subject to environmental regulations under the purview of particularly surface water runoff and drainage; various federal, state, and local environmental resource agencies. • The trails/improvements could be subject to damage from landslide debris that originates outside the project area, e.g. upslope from the improvements; and Design of new Portage Bay Bridge • The design of the new Portage Bay Bridge will address potential impacts from • The pier column and foundation locations for the new Portage Bay Bridge the landslide area. The bridge foundation design could include large-scale structures are conceptual and therefore subject to continued refinement as the improvements to the landslide area. bridge design progresses; and • Any improvements proposed for this area that would create ground disturbance • The bridge configuration includes a new ADA accessible trail connection should be consulted with a licensed geotechnical engineer. between Delmar Dr E and Boyer Ave E, starting from Delmar on the south side of the Portage Bay Bridge South and descending to Boyer under the new bridge. Break in WSDOT limited access limits • Implementing pedestrian facilities within WSDOT right of way in this area could Future Portage Bay Bridge construction considerations trigger a requirement for an approved break in limited access. NW Region would • The entire area underneath the Portage Bay Bridge will be closed to the public be responsible for coordinating the access break approval with HQ and for extended periods of time during bridge construction; and potentially FHWA. • The WSDOT owned property south of the Portage Bay Bridge between Boyer Ave E and the shoreline (former Frolund property) will likely be used for contractor staging purposes during construction of the new Portage Bay Bridge.
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
28 2.3 PRECEDENTS
Several examples of WSDOT below-bridge activation exist within Seattle’s city limits. Bridge columns in Ravenna and International District neighborhoods are painted with bright murals. Fremont neighborhood has become known for a large toll sculpture, a sculptural urban icon, located under Highway 99‘s Aurora Bridge. In addition, murals have been painted along 46th and 38th underpasses. Colonnade Park below I-5, connecting Eastlake and Capitol Hill neighborhoods incorporates the first urban mountain bike skills course, trails, and an of-leash area for dogs.
Barker Landscape Architects
29 Precedents
GreenLake Painted Columns
Fremont Troll
I-5 Colonnade Park
ID Painted Columns
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
30 Existing Freeway Corridor Public Art
Barker Landscape Architects
31 Site Opportunities
Open Site Lines/Viewpoints Public Art ADA/Bike Access
Active Space Habitat Improvement Water Access
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
32 3 COMMUNITY DESIGN WORKSHOP 1
On March 5th 2015, the first of three community design workshops took place. Approximately 20 community members attended. Forming groups, attendees participated in a Design Game during which they were asked to imagine both interim and long term site improvements with the understanding that interim improvements would be destroyed during bridge reconstruction. A design Game Board was provided displaying a scaled aerial view of the site. A custom collection of hand drawn design elements which participants were able to cut out and arrange on the site plan as they desired, were also provided. Participants were given 45 minutes for this exercise after which they were asked to present their ideas to the larger group.
Prior to the design game a presentation was given. Following site analysis participants were shown inspirational images related to art, access, vegetation thinning, habitat improvement, and passive and active play. They were asked to keep the following design principles in mind:
• Create a safe and useful pedestrian route which incorporates CPTED principles • Create a place of public interest and comfort for all abilities • Incorporate art into the design and reflect the character of the neighborhood • Reduce likelihood of illicit activity • Provide shoreline access • Take advantage of prominent views to the east and maintain site lines
Barker Landscape Architects
33 Inspirational Images
Wild Flower Meadow Shoreline Access Habitat Enhancement ADA Multi-use Trail Bike Route
Sculpted Landforms Dog Park Thorny Shrubs Edible Fragrant Colorful
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
34 Inspirational Images
Seat Boulders
Small Rest Spots Mosaic Installation Playful Art Overlooks
Artistic Paving
Sculpted Seating Iconic Sculpture Vegetation Thinning
Barker Landscape Architects
35 Inspirational Images
Urban Wildlife Viewing
Prohibitory Cobble Community Garden Skate-friendly Plaza Murals
Artistic Lighting Way-finding/Interpretive Signs Game Courts/Plaza Community Orchard
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
36 Design Game Board
Barker Landscape Architects
37 Workshop Materials
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
38 Completed Design Game Example
Barker Landscape Architects
39 3.1 DESIGN GAME RESULTS
Community members imagined both long and short term improvements for the site. For the interim plan groups supported installation of benches, a community orchard, bird house clusters, lighting, improved beach access, safe crossings, creating a mural wall, and vegetation clearing among other design elements. For the long term plan groups imagined columns painted with murals, an iconic sculpture, artistic lighting, interpretive signs, beach access, habitat restoration, small game plaza, ADA access, and the establishment of a series of overlook and picnic areas. The following matrix highlight in green the design elements which were chosen more than once during the design game.
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
40 Preferred Design Element Tally
Barker Landscape Architects
41 Preferred Design Element Tally
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
42 4 COMMUNITY DESIGN WORKSHOP 2
On April 2nd 2015 Barker Landscape Architects presented three sets of interim and long term site improvement conceptual plans. Concepts aimed to incorporate design ideas imagined by community members during the first community workshop’s design game exercise. These three schemes proposed a range of ideas of how site improvements could improve safety, access and activity prior to the bridge reconstruction as well as afterward. Following introduction of the three sets of concepts community members were given time to study and critique design ideas. They were asked to vote for their favorite design elements as well as their preferred overall interim and long term plans. Participants were instructed to:
• Respect every ones input, record all ideas and share information
• Vote for your favorite overall Interim Plan and Long Term Plan using the large sticky dots (these can be different concepts)
• Vote for your favorite design elements using the small sticky dots
• Please use sticky pads (or draw directly on plans) to suggest different ideas or to point out things which you think are missing
• 30 Minutes to review, then briefly share your thoughts with the room.
• Your votes & review will be used to create the final Interim and Long Term Plan for the site, to be presented at the next community meeting
Barker Landscape Architects
43 Concept A ‘Ribbon’ Interim Plan
Concept A interim plan proses the establishment of an ADA access route leading from the southern section of Prep Property to the northeastern corner of the site. One picnic/overlook is established to the south of the existing bridge, and is pared with a wildflower meadow and community orchard. Sharp boulders are installed within the crevasse of the bridge to deter illegal camping. An alternate non-ADA hiking trail is created leading from Delmar and across Boyer down to the waters edge. Improved crossing for Seattle Prep students is implemented near Delmar’s intersection with 11th. Vegetation is thinned in key areas and replanted with low growing plants. Visualize Viewlands 2014 - Viewlands 44 Concept A ‘Ribbon’ Long Term Plan
Building upon the interim plan Concept A Long Term Plan proposes several more overlook/ picnic areas, a sculptural element within the crevasse of the new bridge which discourages illegal camping, ADA trail as well as hiking trail, a plaza with artistic lighting, columns with mural paintings, a natural drainage element, small game plaza, improved crossings, community orchard, wildflower meadow, restored beach habitat and kayak launch, and clear site lines with planting no taller than three feet.
Barker Landscape Architects
45 Concept B ‘Existing Amenity’ Interim Plan
Concept B Interim Plan proposes improving and connecting existing access roads, creating a route which could easily be patrolled by law enforcement, while offering a non-ADA pedestrian route. Overgrown vegetation is thinned and replanted with low-growing plants. A wildflower meadow is proposed with a hiking trail which leads across Boyer to the shore. Improved crossing for Seattle Prep students is implemented near Delmar’s intersection with 11th.
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
46 Concept B ‘Existing Amenity’ Long Term Plan
Concept B Long Term Plan connects the access roads and establishes an ADA pedestrian path. The crevasse of the bridge is eliminated through the construction of a wall below this portion of the bridge (area accessed through a maintenance door). This wall is painted with mural. Along the eastern edge of this wall is a strip of sharp boulders as well as a sculptural element potentially reusing columns from the old bridge. A wild flower meadow with sculpted landform is created, and a community orchard is established north of the new bridge. Large concrete terraced stairs step up from Boyer to a small game plaza. Shore access, kayak launch and small parking lot are provided.
Barker Landscape Architects
47 Concept C ‘Switchback’ Interim Plan
Concept C Interim Plan proposes the establishment of a non-ADA switchback trail which connects to the existing WSDOT access road and SDOT pedestrian trail. The crevasse of the bridge is fenced in, a wildflower meadow is established along the northern edge of the site.A pedestrian trail provides non-ADA access to the shore. Improved crossing for Seattle Prep students is implemented near Delmar’s intersection with 11th, and overgrown vegetation is thinned.
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
48 Concept C ‘Switchback’ Long Term Plan
Concept C Long Term Plan proposes placing sharp boulders within the crevasse of the bridge to deter illegal camping. Columns are painted with murals. Two overlook/picnic areas are established, one up from Boyer connecting to the access road and a set of stairs, and one near the shoreline adjacent to a restored beach, small kayak launch and parking lot. An ADA switchback trail combined with stairs makes it way down from Delmar and continues on to connect to an overlook and pedestrian path. A community orchard is established near the southeast corner of the site. Site lines are opened through vegetation thinning and low plantings.
Barker Landscape Architects
49 4.1 COMMUNITY FEEDBACK
Receiving six votes, Concept B Interim Plan received the greatest number of votes among the interim plans. Concept A Long Term Plan and Concept B Long Term Plan nearly tied with A receiving four votes and B receiving three votes. When voting for their favorite design elements community members were drawn to the idea of the concrete stepped plaza up from Boyer leading to a small games plaza, lookout/picnic areas, multiuse plaza with artistic paving, beach access, improved habitat and kayak launch, ADA pathway, community orchard, mural walls and columns painted with murals. The following matrix tally all votes and list them from highest to lowest.
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
50 Concept A ‘Ribbon’ Interim Plan Vote Results
Barker Landscape Architects
51 Concept A ‘Ribbon’ Long Term Plan Vote Results
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
52 Concept B ‘Existing Amenity’ Interim Plan Vote Results
Barker Landscape Architects
53 Concept B ‘Existing Amenity’ Long Term Plan Vote Results
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
54 Concept C ‘Switchback’ Interim Plan Vote Results
Barker Landscape Architects
55 Concept C ‘Switchback’ Long Term Plan Vote Results
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
56 5 COMMUNITY DESIGN WORKSHOP 3
A final community design workshop was held on May 16th 2015. Twenty-one people were in attendance. Community members were presented with the results of the second community meeting and a final schematic interim plan and long term plan. Participants were then lead on a site walk tour and were given a survey asking for their thoughts on proposed design components. Prior to creation of the plans more detailed guidance was provided by WSDOT which eliminated the possibility of establishing pedestrian access prior to bridge reconstruction. Establishment of a non-ADA access route through the property was found to be prohibited by WSDOT, while substantial grading needed to establish and ADA route through the property was also prohibited. In response the final interim plan focused mainly on opening views through vegetation thinning and vegetation management. Seattle Preparatory Academy expressed desire to help establish a future ADA route along the western edge of their property, and interim plans to thin vegetation and open site lines, but preferred the eastern half of their property remain untouched by permanent improvements. The long term plan worked to combine design elements preferred by community members during the second community design workshop, as well as to respond to property owners needs.
Barker Landscape Architects
57 Final Schematic Interim Plan
The final schematic interim plan focuses primarily on the thinning of existing vegetation to open up site lines. WSDOT and Seattle Prep maintenance roads are maintained, hedges currently located on Seattle Parks and Recreation property are removed, areas of overgrown vegetation along either side of the existing pedestrian trail to the north of the bridge are thinned. An area of sharp boulders is installed in the crevasse of the bridge, while still allowing access for bridge maintenance. A silt fence along the eastern edge of WSDOT maintenance road is removed to improve visibility, and an ADA path requiring minor grading is established below Boyer to a temporary overlook/picnic area.
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
58 Final Schematic Long Term Plan
The final schematic long term plan proposes to eliminate the future bridge crevasse through A stepped plaza with central stair from Boyer leads to the small games plaza while a the construction of a wall, the space within may be left void for maintenance purposes, wildflower meadow is established along eastern edge of Seattle Prep property. A small accessed by a maintenance door. The wall exterior is proposed to be decorated with mural, parking lot provides parking for shoreline access, kayak launch and improved habitat. A picnic it may also become a green wall if vines such as Virginia creeper are planted along its edge. lookout/picnic area overlooks the shore and sits adjacent to a community orchard managed Artistic lighting is proposed beneath the bridge along with mural painted columns, small by a local organization such as City Fruit. Improved crossing for Seattle Prep students is games court and overlook/picnic area. The maintenance roads are improved and connected, implemented near Delmar’s intersection with 11th, as well as long Boyer. Vegetation is providing easy patrol, an ADA pathway is combined with stairs from Delmar to the shoreline. thinned and site lines are kept clear.
Barker Landscape Architects
59 Site Walk Tour Map
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
60 5.1 COMMUNITY FEEDBACK (Survey)
During the site walk tour participants were given maps and surveys with associated ‘talking points’. As different locations were observed and discussed on the walk survey participants were encouraged to provide written feedback on the survey sheet. This walk focused primarily on interim site improvements. The response of all respondents is documented below.
1. Access to shoreline 3. Thin trees and clear high shrubs/vines Very nice - important feature Excellent Less of a priority to me since this isn’t as much of a crime area Yes ADA access may not need stairs, definite kayak launch and proper ground cover to Good idea, get parks to create clean green bins to get ride of yard waste prevent erosion Yes Eliminate parking lot and small boat launch in final design Yes! Yes! Especially along west side of Boyer Great! kayak launch here takes pressure off of Montlake launch (bevers, ducks are very Very important, especially in interim wonderful there! Good idea. Maintenance agreement must be developed on specifics with WSDOT and Parking lot here will be used by boaters, yacht club users and adjacent condo. Lack of Seattle Prep (also SDOT and possibility Seattle Parks in other locations). parking in area. Parking available at Montlake Playfield which has kayak launch area. There is a wetland that must be protected that limits size of kayak launch at this site. 4. Remove temporary sediment fence Good 2. Potential temporary ADA path to viewpoint, clear blackberry Yes bramble Yes Maybe move further south/closer to condo for better view (i.e. not bottome of bridge) Yes Less of a priority to me since this isn’t as much of a crime area Yes A designated small blackberry section would be good (maintained) Helpful for site visibility Clear brush Great idea, nice site for orchard (it’s wet enough now) site elevations may change the 5. Thin trees and clear high shrubs grade of spots on (Frolund) property Also good This is okay if approved by WSDOT. Orchard in area will not be possible as area Yes designated as viewpoint on Boyer in this area shoreline permit. Will also change use from Yes open park area to other use. Yes Yes Very Important This is not needed here for bridge site visibility SDOT much agree for changes. Might be used if attractive landscaping is put in place which community would have to maintain.
Barker Landscape Architects
61 Additional Community Comments
6. Bridge character/columns 9. Potential viewpoint Maybe an artist would like to make us a Portage Bay Troll Very nice are to regain a view, would also need extensive tree thinning Not a top priority Lower priority, not an ideal viewpoint Low priority Good however it is next to another larger view point that needs hedges and trees topped Murals could be pained on columns off to get the view back Do not paint - merely cover to blend in Yes Bright designs, use kids from Seward and Montlake Schools Definitely! Attractive improvement, depends on final bridge design Good ides. May provide best visual access to upper part of bridge or south side. Some brush clearing may be needed. 7. Thin trees and clear high shrubs/vines Needed 10. Remove hedge Yes Good Yes Lower priority Yes Certainly lower Yes Yes, remove hedge and cut back trees Same as #3, the existing trail area also needs to be considered as alternative route for Yes, especially for views final ADA trail as selected site is steep, landslide area and maybe used as area for bike Definitely! ramp to Delmar/Interlaken from new freeway Great idea. May provide best visual access of under bridge ‘cave area’ along with clearing done in #12 and #13. 8. Remove hedge Lower priority, not an ideal viewpoint 11. Thin trees and clear high shrubs/vines Certainly lower Good Yes, open views Yes Yes, especially on SDOT/Parks property, what about destabilizing slope? Yes Useful if it can provide good visibility to bridge area in conjunction with #7, if not, best to Yes remain as barrier to site access Yes, especially at bench Yes Need SDOT approval. Clearing here might not improve under bridge visibility. Removal of buffer to adjacent residences may not be desirable.
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
62 Additional Community Comments
12. Pathway safety/site line improvement • Long term plan should merge ADA access with wider curves to be welcoming of Good bicycles. Living near pathway - safety is a concern, maintain pathway keep clean Yes • Our organization has invested a considerable amount of effort toward restoring the wet Yes lands, known as the South Portage Bay Restoration Area next to Montlake community Clear center, with a grant received from the Seattle Department of Neighborhoods. Dave has Yes been responsible for the huge number of subsequent improvements, e.g. trails, clean Clearing of area needs careful study so under bridge ‘cave area’ can be seen both from up, and maintenance of the wet lands, all on a volunteer basis. The result has been Roanoke Street pathway and #8 hedge above. Need WSDOT and SDOT maintenance a notable increase in wildlife and a unique and pleasant place for people to enjoy the agreement. beavers and seasonal changes in shorebird populations.
13. Existing dirt pathways to bridge (eliminate) • My concern is that if we designate the Montlake facility as the principal boat-launch Good area for South Portage Bay we will greatly increase the people-presence on the Yes, open up view shoreline (launching and take-out) and on the water, adversely affecting the wildlife Clear population (shore birds and beavers) we have worked so hard to establish and grow. Join bike/ped path on 520, remove hedge at Bagely Viewpoint Yes, I would support the some version of plans presented at our last meeting (Saturday) Same as #12, might be useful to put boulders along start of trail to block access if they or other proposals which provide launch access well removed from the Montlake launch do not block views. site.
14. Thin trees and clear high shrubs/vines • I think we should emphasize the improvement of the walkway(s) from Boyer to both the Good Bagley lookout, and to Delmar. The city is emphasizing safe walking routes to schools, Yes and walking access to [perhaps reduced] bus routes/stops. With better sight lines and Yes paths, both will be important. Yes Clear • I favor the kayak launch and a small parking lot/place under 520 or near the proposed Do not see purpose this serves unless adjacent steep area is developed for viewpoint, lookout on the Froland property. A launch point there will be part of the “water trail” this has not been discussed but might be good idea. we are trying to establish (with WSDOT’s help and appearing on their designs/talking boards). It will alleviate pressure on the Montlake launch point (quite far from parking) and thus alleviate “people” pressure on the beaver lodges, waterfowl habitat, and the other birds we have worked so hard to attract to the So. Portage Bay restoration area.
• The designs feature the south and sunny side of the 520 bridge both now and later. It is great, and will attract people to this space and activate it.
Barker Landscape Architects
63 Additional Community Comments
• With the increases in people using the food banks, I favor a community orchard - the • I too wonder about the link for pedestrians and bikes from the new 520 side path to fruit gleaners from City Fruit are anxious to have more fresh fruit for the food bank Delmar lid and or Boyer. It also seems as though connecting the new bike trail that will patrons and are well-organized to care for and harvest the fruit. I even see “socks” come down through Interlaken to the proposed Pedestrian/Bike lane on the south side on the apples on trees (to prevent apple maggots) right now along the Burke Gilman of SR 520 will have a big impact on what happens in the space above and below SR trial near Dunn lumber. We should invite Montlake and Seward school children to 520. I would hope that in the final design these connections would be thought through participate. Seward school kids have a pea patch at the Fairview P-Patch, and very carefully as a total picture and not in a segmented fashion. I also think that a Montlake is developing a garden on site. Part of our kids education ought to be meadow of wildflowers would be lovely. As for painting on the cement barrier along knowing more about where our food comes from and how to care for fruits and veggies. Boyer, perhaps we could enlist young artists from Montlake Elementary School or Tops at Seward. Summer students at Coyote Central (arts program) might be interested as • I am concerned about the link for pedestrians and bikes from the new 520 sidepath to well. Delmar lid and or Boyer. This should appear in the final report.
• Viewpoints and sight lines are very important and as many as possible should be developed. I am excited about the hedge removal on Delmar opening up views I have never seen before behind that Laurel hedge!
• I do have concerns about the size of the parking lot that will connect to a boat launch under 520. There will need to be a time limit set in some way as I can see four or five people coming in the morning and not leaving until later in the day. The street is busy and there are already parking issues along Boyer at that place and further north, especially on days when Yacht Club members are using their boats. The excess parking fills the streets and goes into the neighboring streets
• It was suggested that temporarily that the cement barrier that is along Boyer under 520 might be painted with some colorful design. Get the neighborhood kids involved? Or the artists who are working next to the Canal Market?
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
64 5.2 PROPERTY OWNER (WSDOT) FEEDBACK Interim Plan • Any work outside of WSDOT ROW (e.g. tree and vegetation removal, etc.) would have • Although the structure clearance from slope to bridge bottom is better than other areas to be coordinated with property owner (e.g. Seattle Prep). along the corridor, which allows for more light for plants (some also from gap between • Thinning trees and removing vines could reduce soil anchoring and allow more water to bridges), plantings would likely require at least some irrigation, even robust, drought- penetrate the slope, leading to reduced stability. No issue for just cutting and trimming. tolerant natives. It would be good to compare conditions (geological, light, etc.) and Extensive thinning/removal of brush and trees would have to be evaluated. Probably design at Colonnades Park at I-5 which has a steep slope, recreational cycle paths, and both by a geotech and an arborist (or similar). some planting on the slope between structures as well as at the edges. • If there is thinning of vegetation, required replanting of lower growing native species • It appears you are proposing to relocate the maintenance access road outside of may help alleviate some concerns about erosion and other potential movement issues. WSDOT right of way. This would have to be approved by the affected property owner. • Utilizing the services of an arborist to limb and/or prune trees may be an alternative to • Same comments as the Interim regarding the ADA path between Boyer and the water. removal. • The area designated as “B” on the sketch is labeled filled area below bridge. If I • Proposed improved crossing would have to be coordinated with SDOT—the SR 520 understand the sketch correctly the “B” area is actually retained fill between the lid and program has proposed a crossing with the reconstruction of Delmar Drive bridge (lid). the PBB abutment. We do need to provide access to inspect the bridge bearings, so • ADA path from Boyer to shoreline is feasible with a larger switchback but would likely we can’t completely eliminate “crevices” adjacent to the abutment. However, the new require walls and structure to support and more or less grading depending on its siting. abutment once the new Portage Bay Bridge is built will be located East of the existing There may be a risk to the existing landslide to construction this that would need to be abutment, so this concept may already be addressed as part of the new bridge design. considered. There are known sensitive areas in this location as well that would likely be There will be one pier located between the new abutment and Boyer and one pier impacted with construction of this path and therefore require mitigation. located between Boyer and the water. The exact locations and size will be determined • Any changes to Bagley Viewpoint would need to be coordinated with Seattle Parks. through final design. • Placement of the sharp boulders, “C”, needs to allow access for inspection of the bridge • The painted columns shown, “D”, don’t reflect the final configuration for the new Portage bearings at the abutment. Bay Bridge. As final design progresses, we can provide this information. • Adding “sharp boulders” under the bridge would increase loads on the slope and may • It is unclear if the access road “H” as shown meet the necessary grades for an access present a risk to the landslide that should be evaluated. road. This would need to be further evaluated through design. • Several features appear to be beyond WSDOT right of way and therefore we have not Long Term Plan provided comment on those elements. • Proposed grading--fill and cut—needs further evaluation of the existing topography and • The proposed improvements are located in a mapped landslide hazard area. slope condition. There appears to be a lot of flat areas, e.g. E and F Paved Area and Instrumentation in the landslide area shows that portions of the slide are slowly creeping Game Plaza, and that may not be feasible with the way currently shown, unless the downhill. Any proposed improvements should be designed and constructed so that they intent is to terrace, but still would be challenges in terms of the requirement for lots of do not decrease the overall stability of the slide area. In areas where the slide is slowly cut and fill and walls in a landslide zone. creeping downhill, the improvements would have to improve the overall stability of the • There is precedence with other WSDOT projects for painting columns (I-5 Ravenna slide area in order to be feasible. Maintaining or improving the stability of the slide Park and Ride and International District, West Approach Bridge North) – there is a could require significant additional costs. defined process to follow.
Barker Landscape Architects
65 WSDOT Feedback (continued)
Long Term Plan • As WSDOT moves in to final design of the future Portage Bay Bridge, retaining walls or other structures may be necessary under the bridge to protect the new bridge piers from landsliding. The proposed improvements may not be compatible with these structures (not yet designed). • Elements B and C (filled area below bridge and mural wall). Placing a relatively large fill near the top of the slope could decrease the stability of the slide area. Mitigation measures, such as lightweight fill or deep foundations would be required. • Elements G and K (ADA Path & stairs and seating steps). Terracing and retaining walls would likely be required in the path design. The terraces or walls could include relatively large fills that could reduce the stability of the slide. Mitigation measures, such as improved drainage, lightweight fill, or reinforced retaining walls (e.g. tieback walls) would be required. • Elements I and L (plants and orchard). If the low growing plants or community orchard require frequent watering or irrigation, the water introduced into the ground could reduce the stability of the slide area. Mitigation measures, such as improved drainage or structural stabilization would be required. • Non-compliant ADA facilities on WSDOT property are prohibited, even recreational trails must comply with ADA standards.
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
66 6 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN
The following draft vegetation management plan provides initial ideas on how to implement the CPTED principle of natural surveillance through the thinning of existing vegetation needed to open views into the site. In addition to vegetation thinning additional actions may be taken to employ the CPTED principles of Physical Maintenance and Order Maintenance through:
• Persistent collection and disposal of all litter found on the site
• Immediate and persistent paint-over of graffiti found on all areas of the bridge
• Mural painting along the existing Boyer retaining wall
Following the establishment of a vegetation management plan a vegetation management agreement must be formed between the community and property owners (WSDOT, SDOT, Seattle Parks, Seattle Preparatory Academy). Who provides the vegetation clearing service, at what frequency, under what guidelines, with what equipment, and who provides needed disposal of green waste, must be agreed upon.
Barker Landscape Architects
67 6.1 MANAGEMENT ZONES
The final interim plan identifies areas of overgrown vegetation which may be addressed through implementation of a vegetation management plan. Priority project areas and phasing may be decided upon through community discussion and formation of a Vegetation Management Advisory Committee.
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
68 6.2 GENERAL GUIDELINES
Vegetation Management/CPTED Advisory Committee Control of Exotic Weed Species
An advisory committee dedicated to the management of vegetation of the site, and Control methods for exotic weed species shall emphasize the least toxic approaches employment of CPTED principles may be formed by community members, public available, emphasizing trimming, mowing, and mulching, as recommended by public agency staff and other interested parties. The committee will be responsible for agency staff. Use of chemical controls will be limited and subject to approval by public conducting field trips to review whether or not the condition of the vegetation meets the agency staff. Herbicides shall be applied by licensed pesticide applicators only, according goals and intent of the vegetation management plan, and whether or not actions taken to label instructions. Target exotic weed species are: follow CPTED guidelines. A designated representative will be responsible for executing the management plan. Rubus discolor, Himalayan blackberry Hedera helix, English Ivy General Management Tasks Polygonum cuspidatum, Japanese knotweed Ilex aquifolium, English holly Vegetation Trimming Prunus laurocerasus, English laurel Trimming of existing low shrub areas every year, trimming of medium shrub areas Clematis vitalba, Wild clematis every two years and trimming of tall shrub areas every four years, as well as thinning of Cytisus scoparius, Scot’s broom existing thickets of small trees. Ulex europaeus, Gorse
Conversion Planting (Long Term Plan) DEBRIS FROM TRIMMING Long-term replacement of shrubs with excessive height with new shrub plantings that maintain maximum specified heights of three feet. • All trimmings, branches and other debris resulting maintenance activities larger than 12 inches by 2 inches shall be removed from the Interim and Long Term Exotic Weed Control site, or chipped for use as mulch on site Both short term and long term removal of exotic weeds, particularly in places where vegetation is blocking views into the site. • Forested Hillside, trimmings, branches and other debris may remain on site provided that: (1) debris is safely disposed of on the ground plane, Slope and Soil Protection i.e., placed so that it will not slide downhill, fall out of trees, etc.; (2) When trimming vegetation and opening views to the site, care must be taken to branches, limbs and trunks are placed across the slope: parallel to the not disturb existing soil. If areas of soil become exposed due to vegetation clearing contours, perpendicular to the flow of stormwater.; (3) debris is protective measures must be taken to prevent erosion. Large plant roots shall be kept in distributed evenly over the site and not massed in piles. place wherever possible.
Barker Landscape Architects
69 Invasive species observed on site
Prunus laurocerasus, English laurel Clematis vitalba, Wild clematis Hedera helix, English Ivy
Ilex aquifolium, English holly Rubus discolor, Himalayan blackberry Cytisus scoparius, Scot’s broom
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
70 7 NEXT STEPS
Recommendation Matrix The SR 520 Public Access Steering Committee will being reviewing their ideas with public agencies and property owners with the aim of clarify interim action items. Future grants may aid in the The following matrix provides a summary implementation of defined action items. Continued coordination with public agencies and property of report recommendations and the CPTED owners, particularly WSDOT, is needed for successful long term visioning and design of the site. As principles they aim to incorporate. funding becomes available for the reconstruction of the bridge this site has the opportunity to serve multiple modes of transportation through the creation of a safe ADA pedestrian and bike-friendly neighborhood route, and the creation of a small kayak launch. Value may be added to the site through the incorporation of art, passive activities, overlooks and a community orchard.
Barker Landscape Architects
71 Next Steps (continued)
SR 520 Public Access - Design Report 2015
72 8 APPENDIX
Barker Landscape Architects
73