Convention traffic is cruise traffic. Visitors who extend their Seattle stay
to experience a commons are visitors who may start or end a cruise here.
A more activated downtown is a more attractive port city. The Port has an
institutional interest in Seattle's vibrancy as a destination, and the Arch
as a commons is the most significant potential addition to that destination
in a generation.
Ask Your AI
Copy this prompt into ChatGPT, Claude, or any AI assistant.
I want to analyze this proposal from the perspective of Port of Seattle.
There's a civic proposal to convert the WSCC Arch building at 7th & Pike into a year-round public commons operated by Seattle Center.
The case being made to Port of Seattle: Convention traffic is cruise traffic. Visitors who extend their Seattle stay
to experience a commons are visitors who may start or end a cruise here.
A more activated downtown is a more attractive port city. The Port has an
institutional interest in Seattle's vibrancy as a destination, and the Arch
as a commons is the most significant potential addition to that destination
in a generation.
The full proposal: https://commons.conventioncityseattle.com
What are the strongest arguments for and against, from Port of Seattle's perspective?