1. Case Study #3: The Park East Freeway Corridor Redevelopment Plan 64 acre site Planning began in middle 90s Demolition of elevated freeway began in late 2001; completed in early 2003

3. Park East Freeway Corridor Redevelopment Plan Negative aspects of the existing spur: –“over-designed” Elevated freeway 3 lanes of traffic in both directions –Auto access to downtown/neighborhoods was limited to only two exits (like the sparse hierarchy) –Both a real and symbolic barrier separating downtown from the newly revitalizing neighborhoods to the north –Freeway spur “blighted” 64 acres of land, artificially depressing land values, not the “best and highest” use –Dominant land use adjacent to the spur was surface parking lots

4. THE PLAN 1. Tear down the spur, and then… 2. Rebuild the street grid –Multiple routes into downtown and neighborhood 3. Construct pedestrian scale and monumental boulevard as “gateway” to downtown where the spur once existed 4. Free-up 64 acres of developable real estate 5. Re-weave the fabric of downtown into the fabric of the neighborhoods creating the unified urban texture 6. Develop the land, Increase the tax base 7. Capitalize on the emerging downtown housing boom 8. Create three “urban districts” each with it’s own identity 9. Re-weave the River back into the fabric of the city, increase access to it, and elevate it to a natural and public amenity.

6. 1. Rebuild the street grid

8. Construct ped-scale “gateway” to downtown

10. 3. Free-up 64 acres of developable real estate

12. 4. “Re-weave” urban fabric of downtown into surrounding neighborhoods. (development will increase the tax base)

15. “Re-weaving” implies mixed use

16. 5. Create 3 “districts”; each with its own identity

17. McKinley District: Corporate/hotel Higher density Still mixed use

22. Upper Water: lower-rise and nearly exclusively residential

25. 6: “re-weave” the river back into the city

31. Controversial Elements of the Plan The Pro-Freeway Constituency –Loss of quick access –Loss of parking lots The anti-gentrification Constituency –Housing activists –Community groups Brewer’s Hill Harambee

32. Community Benefits Agreement (CBA) Affordable Housing Provision “union wage” Provision Minority contractors provision Pros/Cons