Seattle Commons — The Case For

Why this is a win for Seattle Repertory Theatre

civic advocacy
The Win

Seattle Rep is a Seattle Center resident — the Bagley Wright Theatre is on the campus, and the organization has spent decades figuring out how to run major theater a monorail ride from downtown. The Arch changes that geography.

A commons operated by Seattle Center opens a downtown performance presence for Seattle Rep and its peer organizations: a black-box space, a rehearsal room, a venue for the programming that doesn't need a 500-seat theater but needs more than a hotel conference room. The Arch's 68 meeting rooms include spaces configurable for intimate performance. The ballroom handles anything larger.

The deeper argument: the capital case for the Arch is partly about Seattle Center's financial future, and Seattle Rep is both a tenant and a stakeholder in how that resolves. If the Arch becomes a downtown extension of Seattle Center, it changes what's possible for every resident organization on the campus — including the ones that have been waiting for a downtown room they can actually afford.

Ask Your AI

Copy this prompt into ChatGPT, Claude, or any AI assistant.

I want to analyze this proposal from the perspective of Seattle Repertory Theatre. 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 Seattle Repertory Theatre: Seattle Rep is a Seattle Center resident — the Bagley Wright Theatre is on the campus, and the organization has spent decades figuring out how to run major theater a monorail ride from downtown. The Arch changes that geography. The full proposal: https://commons.conventioncityseattle.com What are the strongest arguments for and against, from Seattle Repertory Theatre's perspective?