From Abandoned Gas Station to Arts + Resilience Community Hub: Seattle’s Mini Mart City Park

By Catherine De Almeida

Introduction

John Sutton, Ben Beres, and Zac Culler—Seattle-based artists collectively known as SuttonBeresCuller (SBC)--envisioned turning a the ubiquitous, often overlooked corner store into something radically different: an artistic expression of a mini mart as a park. The original idea was sparked by a $1,500 grant to reclaim Sunhome Mini Mart on 85^th Street NW and 15^th Avenue NW in Ballard, one of many sites the City of Seattle had acquired for proposed monorail stations in the early 2000s.^[1] Before its slated demolition, SBC imagined cutting holes into the roof, planting trees inside, and transforming the structure into a verdant public sculpture. SBC lined up donations from local nurseries to transform the minimart into a surreal urban oasis. Ultimately, after voters rejected the monorail project in 2005,^[2] the City began selling off acquired properties like Sunhome, forcing SBC to find a new path forward to make this project idea a reality.

They applied for a Creative Capital grant three times, finally receiving the $50,000 award in 2008 to fund their proposal to create a mini mart park. This award was a turning point that shifted the project’s scale and trajectory. Creative Capital funds ambitious, socially-minded projects while providing professional development and mentorship, and is known as a highly prestigious award in the arts that launches artists’ careers. SBC originally proposed Mini Mart City Park (MMCP) as a temporary, six-month park-like installation in an abandoned gas station or convenience store—finding a future for their initial vision for the Sunhome Mini Mart. During the grant retreat, where awardees present and receive peer feedback, another artist suggested the work should be permanent.^[3] Ben Beres recalled that the Creative Capital retreat was a turning point: shifting their mindset and vision of MMCP from a short-term pop-up to something long-lasting that the community could live and grow with over time.^[4] The Creative Capital grant set MMCP’s 15-year journey in motion, and ultimately changed the art careers of John, Ben, and Zac.

When they returned to Seattle, SBC began their search for a local property they could repair while also achieving this expanded vision. Partnering with Emery Bayley from the Environmental Coalition of South Seattle (ECOSS), who had documented every former gas station in the Pacific Northwest (Figure 1), they sifted through over 700 potential sites in Seattle / King County alone, mailing hand-written inquiries to distant property owners, even to unresponsive P.O. boxes in Texas.^[5] Their search eventually led them to the former Perovich Bros. Gas Station in Georgetown, on the corner of Ellis Avenue S. and S. Warsaw Street, across the street from Boeing. “We found this place and, ironically enough, it was housing equipment for environmental remediation,” Ben Beres recalled, “The company was removing oil tanks.”^[6] The site’s owners, Roy and Randy, both art supporters, met with SBC and agreed to lease the property, clearing the way for the next phase of their experiment.

As an artist group, SBC’s work ranges from installations and gallery works to performance and public projects that play with “identity, perception, and instinct.”^[7] Known for playfully reinterpreting familiar forms and transforming them in material, space, and place in unexpected ways, MMCP became their largest and most ambitious public sculpture—in scale, duration, and impact. Its realization depended on an extraordinary collaboration: SBC; architects Jon Gentry and Aimée O’Carroll of GO’C; community organizations like Dirt Corps and Duwamish Valley Youth Corps (DVYC); and dozens of volunteers, artists, neighbors, and city staff, whose stories and experiences are intertwined with each other and the site. Together, they navigated bureaucratic hurdles, technical complexities, and financial uncertainty with unwavering perseverance, dedication, and creativity. This case study is about transformation and evolution—of individuals, of a community, and of a site that continues to adapt with the people and place that surrounds it.

While rooted in the locality of a specific neighborhood, MMCP’s story reflects broader national themes, conditions, and issues of brownfield reclamation and reuse, yet stands apart as an exceptional project in how it resists conventional, market-driven development. This case study begins with the site’s history, both as one of hundreds of thousands of abandoned gas stations polluting landscapes across the United States (US), and locally as a site in Seattle’s Lower Duwamish Valley shaped by industrial legacies, neglect, and reinvention. From there, it critiques typical redevelopment practices of abandoned gas stations and brownfields more broadly—which often lack meaningful public engagement—and presents MMCP as a counterpoint: a project designed and built with community, not simply for it or for another one entirely.

To present MMCP as an exemplary case study, the following sections trace its evolution: from its early vision and pivotal decision-making moments, through co-developed and co-constructed processes that demonstrate how each participant has had a stake in and influence on the project; to its current role as a cultural center and, most recently, a designated Resilience Hub meeting every day and emergency needs in Georgetown. MMCP has been a catalyst for those directly involved in its visioning and making, and for the neighborhood’s growing network of artist-focused and -led projects. It both shapes and is shaped by its local context. This case study ends with project outcomes, lessons learned, and emerging theory on how projects like MMCP can inform future practice by guiding the adaptive reuse of abandoned gas stations as critical and enduring community anchors that serve the needs of their neighbors.

Gas Stations, Underground Storage Tanks (USTs), and Petroleum Brownfields

Gas stations are synonymous with America’s automotive landscape, spanning larger-scale interstate rest stops in rural areas to locally run urban neighborhood corner stores. Their current regulated form evolved over more than a century of technological change, cultural influence, and city planning, from improvised roadside fueling stations to branded national networks.^[8] Standardized design and distribution patterns of gas stations make them a utilitarian land-use typology applied almost anywhere. Their ubiquity, however, hides specific and shared environmental legacies they leave behind. By the mid-20^th century, the industry’s shift from above-ground to underground storage tanks (USTs) reduced fire and safety hazards and freed up surface space, but early uncoated steel tanks corroded easily, leaking petroleum and hazardous substances into surrounding soils and groundwater.

These leaking USTs (LUSTs)—an acronym Ben Beres still finds darkly humorous^[9]—are a major contributor of petroleum contamination nationwide. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that roughly half of all brownfields involve petroleum contamination, a majority from former gas stations.^[10] While most remediation projects treat cleanup as a technical hurdle toward market-driven redevelopment, MMCP approached it differently: as an opportunity to make the process visible, participatory, and creative. As GO’C’s Jon Gentry recalled, the design was not only about the building, but it also “had to orchestrate a process that supported environmental goals, community goals, and creative goals with SBC to find a solution that best met all these needs.”^[11] This balance—between cleanup, collaboration, and creativity—set the project on a distinct path from most brownfield redevelopments, one of its defining features.

Site History: The Former Perovich Brothers Gas Station

The future MMCP site—6525 Ellis Avenue South in Seattle’s Georgetown neighborhood^[12]—operated as the Perovich Brothers Gas Station^[13] from 1926 to 1975 and reflects national trends of small gas stations’ rise and decline. Like many small, family-run service stations, in its early decades it served its immediate neighborhood and supported the area’s industrial backbone, including Boeing Field. A 1930s archival photo labels it the “Airport Service Station,” highlighting its role in fueling both local traffic and regional transport.

By the 1970s and 80s, costly upgrades required under new federal UST regulations^[14] made continued operation financially unfeasible for many independent fueling stations, including Perovich Brothers, causing them to close. After closing, the Perovich Brothers site saw a series of intermittent uses: a flower shop and storage facility (1980-83), a dry cleaner (1983-85), and periods of abandonment.^[15] Each left new traces of contaminants—chlorinated solvents from the dry cleaner, pesticides likely from a nearby nursery, and petroleum from old tanks that had never been properly removed. The site’s physical condition deteriorated, leaving behind 5 underground storage tanks (USTs) with a total capacity of approximately 50,000 gallons, and pipelines for gasoline, diesel, and waste oil.

By the early 2000s, environmental assessments showed petroleum-contaminated soil and groundwater, and asbestos and lead from peeling paint in buildings (Figure 2). They also documented other environmental conditions, such as how the land was built atop eight feet of dredged fill (evidence of the area's transformation from estuary to industrial zone), and groundwater only 8-13 feet below the surface, flowing southwest toward the Lower Duwamish Waterway, a designated Superfund site as of 2001.^[16] Property boundaries are artificial and all sites are connected; contamination is often not isolated and environmental impacts are cumulative. Linking to a broader regional story of environmental degradation and decades on unregulated discharge in the Duwamish Valley, pollutants from the Perovich property migrated elsewhere, while contaminants from neighboring properties such as King County International Airport also migrated to the site.^[17]

Many gas station closures left behind contaminated properties in working-class and historically marginalized neighborhoods, compounding environmental and social burdens. Although relatively small compared to major industrial polluters, the Perovich site follows national trends as it contributed to cumulative pollution burdens in Georgetown and the Duwamish Valley.^[18] Residents in these historically redlined, working-class neighborhoods experience numerous environmental injustices: they face higher pollution exposure, fewer health protections, and an eight-year shorter life expectancy compared to wealthier Seattle neighborhoods.^[19] When SBC encountered the property, it was in active industrial use ironically storing cleanup equipment from an environmental remediation company. This layering of histories—fueling station, mixed industrial tenants, and remediation staging ground—and therefore contaminants, made it both an emblematic brownfield and an ideal canvas for the transformation SBC envisioned. With the owners, Roy and Randy, willing to lease the property to support an arts-led development, the site was poised to shift from environmental liability to a vibrant community hub and asset that, through local action, reimagines industrial legacies to create healthier, more equitable urban futures. To understand how distinct MMCP’s process was, the following section contrasts it with conventional approaches to brownfield redevelopment that dominate practice.

Conventional Approaches to Redeveloping Brownfields + Reimagining Gas Stations and Beyond

Since 1995, the EPA’s Brownfields Program has supported the cleanup and reuse of contaminated sites, including former gas stations, landfills, and other industrial properties, investing over $2.7 billion through grants and leveraging over $22 billion in private and public investments.^[20] The program aims to reduce environmental hazards, catalyze economic growth, and revitalize communities by assisting with site assessment, cleanup, and redevelopment.^[21] Although it increasingly incorporates environmental justice principles and supports disadvantaged communities,^[22] brownfield redevelopment often defaults to “dig and haul” or “cap and contain” approaches when addressing site contaminants, and commercially viable uses such as chain retail and office complexes that can sideline community priorities and accelerate gentrification.

MMCP took a different approach. As Aimée O’Carroll of architecture firm GO’C recalled, early advice SBC received suggested they could “basically build a lead bathtub…you create this island of land that isn’t toxic…but it doesn’t really do anything for anyone else or anything long term.” That idea “went out the window fairly quickly” as the team pursued active, long-term cleanup.^[23] On the ground through the landscape design and construction, Dirt Corps’ pedagogy turned remediation and landscape construction into shared making: “they just said, go, go do, which was pretty incredible…we’d never built a green roof [before]…[we had] no equipment, all buckets” Roseann Barnhill, Director of Dirt Corps shared.^[24] The scale of participation was real, not symbolic as “30 youth and 25 or more adult learners,” including herself, who were given full agency to imagine and create the urban oasis. In practice, those hands-on roles and collaborative creative methods blurred the line between activation (opening the site to public use) and engagement (building long-term, long-lasting reciprocal relationships), which is precisely where MMCP’s arts-based model diverges from standard redevelopment practices. Although challenges persist, MMCP demonstrates how petroleum brownfields offer significant opportunities for community-centered revitalization when projects are shaped by inclusive planning and equity goals, and how community-led design and programming can transform environmental liabilities into cultural and civic assets.

Layered Site Contexts: Georgetown’s Industrial Past and Creative Present

SBC leased the site from its owners, Roy and Randy, in 2008. Early environmental assessments revealed daunting realities: a deep plume of petroleum contamination, a complicated legacy tied to Boeing’s wartime fuel storage, and a labyrinthine regulatory path. Instead of deterring the team, these obstacles became part of the project’s creative energy. As Ben Beres put it, “It’s so messed up it might just work”^[25]—a philosophy that sustained them through 15 years of bureaucratic hurdles, funding gaps, and construction setbacks on the path to transform this former gas station into a vibrant hub for art, environmental action, and resilience-building. Guided by the ethos of “cleaning earth with art,”^[26] MMCP took shape as a community-led project that transformed the former Perovich Brothers Gas Station into a park and arts center—a vibrant hub for art, environmental action, and resilience-building in Seattle’s Georgetown neighborhood.

MMCP sits within Georgetown, one of Seattle’s oldest and most distinctive neighborhoods. Tucked between the Duwamish River, Interstate 5, and Boeing Field / King County International Airport, Georgetown’s geography within the Duwamish Valley has long shaped its identity. Once an independent town annexed by Seattle in 1910, it grew as both an industrial and agricultural hub, supporting lumber transport, hops farming, and a thriving beer industry. The brewing legacy continues to thrive today with local institutions such as Georgetown Brewing Company and Jellyfish Brewing Company. Industry, however, has left lasting marks on the landscape, especially widespread contamination. Decades of shipping, manufacturing, and waste disposal along the Lower Duwamish River led the EPA to designate its five-mile stretch as a Superfund Site in 2001. The former Perovich Brothers Gas Station, later to become MMCP, sat across Ellis Avenue from Boeing Field within this landscape of industrial intensity and environmental harm​.

Yet, Georgetown is also defined by its resilience and creative culture. A vibrant Arts and Cultural District,^[27] its gritty industrial fabric of brick warehouses, metal shops, and fabrication yards has been repurposed into a robust arts ecosystem of artist studios, makers-spaces, galleries, and small manufacturing shops (Figure 4).^[28] Georgetown’s quirky personality is also reflected in its parks, such as the iconic Hat n’ Boots roadside sculpture in Oxbow Park created by Seattle artist Lewis Nasmyth, its regular art walks, and its reputation as a tight-knit, artist-friendly community.

Equinox Studios, a collaborative and dynamic arts space, exemplifies this transformation.^[29] Founded in 2006 by artist Sam Farrazaino, he purchased a World War II-era factory building and 28,700 square foot property, and converted it into affordable workspaces ranging from 120 to 3,000 square feet. It now houses over 100 artists and artisans working in metal, wood, glass, ceramics, music, and performance. By keeping rents affordable and events public, Equinox has served as a bastion against gentrification pressures.^[30] Its community-driven ethos that has reclaimed Georgetown’s industrial legacy has helped preserve its creative identity even as the city changes around it,^[31] and parallels MMCP’s trajectory. MMCP also tapped into this creative social infrastructure. As Jon Gentry recalled, parts of the project “took on a life of their own” where “local artists like Chris McMullin did a pivot window…and a local sign painter did all the big lettering on the building,”^[32] making MMCP feel like it was made-in-Georgetown, not dropped in.

This rich and layered context within the Duwamish Valley and Georgetown neighborhood—industrial legacies, environmental challenges, creative reinvention, and collective action—set the aspiration for MMCP. Emily Kelly, executive director of MMCP, elaborated more on the importance of this geographic and community context: “Where we’re situated, the Duwamish Valley and Georgetown neighborhood, really defines a lot of the work that we do, acting as an example of what remediation could look like and creating opportunities for youth to engage with and learn about what’s happening on the site.”^[33] Like Equinox, MMCP insists on the possibility of reclaiming and reimagining Georgetown’s industrial legacy for community benefit. As Ben Beres of SBC reflected, the project emerged from an ambition to “do right by a piece of land that humans had so thoroughly messed up”—and to do so not by erasing the past, but by transforming it into a catalyst for resilience and creativity, while also filling in a needed gap as “a neutral space in Georgetown where there isn’t a community center.”^[34] Ben’s reflections on MMCP underscores its primary purpose: to model visible remediation while offering a welcoming, everyday hub for neighbors, turning a small, contaminated parcel into a civic arts anchor that feels integrated into the neighborhood.

Pursuing a Vision through Exhaustive Environmental Site Assessments

When SBC identified and leased the former Perovich Brothers Gas Station in 2008, they found a site emblematic of Georgetown’s broader struggles of industrial decline and environmental degradation—an abandoned, contaminated relic of an industrial past. Early site assessments revealed a complex mix of petroleum contamination in the soil and groundwater, asbestos and lead from deteriorated buildings, and even a hidden wartime legacy—Boeing had discretely stored jet fuel there during World War II, which became the primary obstacle to redevelopment. Rather than walk away, SBC began the long process of Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs), working with King County Brownfields Program with federal EPA support^[35] to pursue their efforts to clean up and redevelop the property. Serving as an informational baseline, these studies were a required first step before purchasing the contaminated property. Over nearly 5 years, each ESA revealed a new set of challenges as the extent of contamination became clearer and remediation strategies evaluated. The site’s contamination became a catalyst for SBC as they slowly, and sometimes apprehensively, continued to commit to the site’s transformation.

SBC quickly learned that the environmental hurdles were substantial. A Phase I ESA completed by an engineering company, CDM Smith on November 7, 2008, confirmed the site’s high likelihood of petroleum contamination from its former use as a gas station. Historical records indicated multiple USTs and spills, raising the possibility of contaminant migration to the Duwamish River and its designated Superfund area.^[36] Phase I ESA findings recommended further investigations to confirm the presence and extent of contamination. The subsequent Phase II ESA in February 2009, also by CDM Smith, involved geophysical surveys, borings, and chemical analysis to determine the extent and type of contaminants in the soil and groundwater.^[37] It documented petroleum hydrocarbons (diesel- and gasoline-range organics), BTEX compounds including carcinogenic benzene, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and heavy metals, particularly lead. The contamination was most severe 4-10 feet below ground surface (bgs), corresponding to the former UST piping and tank zones. By April 2011, with SBC leasing the property under an option to purchase, a second Phase II ESA was conducted under EPA’s Targeted Brownfields Assessment Program.^[38],[39] This confirmed a contaminated groundwater plume moving southwest, high concentrations of the extremely toxic compound vinyl chloride, likely from the site’s former dry-cleaning period, and additional petroleum impacts. These studies culminated in a UST Investigation in August 2012, conducted by CDM Smith on behalf of King County, which confirmed that historical tanks had been removed, though residual contamination persisted.^[40]

The official remediation recommendation was conventional: excavate and haul contaminated soils to a landfill. Emily Kelly and Ben Beres reflected on this process together. Emily shared, “My understanding of those assessments is that it confirmed there weren’t any PCBs or forever chemicals and opened the door for a more thoughtful approach to remediating the soil.” Ben Beres responded, “Yeah, we’re in meetings with people in EPA or the Department of Ecology. And they’re like, ‘Well, it’s kind of a bummer, there’s not these bad chemicals.’ That thinking is so backwards, but they said, ‘It would open you up for more grants.’ Well, we’ll get there [financially], but I’m glad it’s not completely toxic.... But they had suggested to dig 20 feet down, remove all the dirt, and ship it to eastern Oregon. I saw that it was going to cost over $2 million, and to build this and do all the testing and everything was at $2.3 million. So, it would have doubled the budget and then not solved any of the problem of the plume in the street on the east side and the south side.”^[41] Committed to an alternative philosophy of environmental care, SBC refused this “dig and dump” approach that would export risk. Instead, they sought a strategy that would heal the site—an in-situ air sparging and vapor extraction system. As Aimée O’Carroll of GO’C explained, the integrated system, developed by environmental consultants G-Logics, offered “a way to manage the toxins in the earth and to continually clean it. It wasn’t a static solution. It’s going to be something that works for many years to come.”^[42] Installed beneath the building footprint, this innovative system actively cleans the earth by treating contaminated soils and groundwater—transforming the site into a living and visible demonstration of environmental resilience as part of MMCP’s public education mission.

While environmental testing dragged on for years, SBC refused to let the process stall momentum. They activated the site through temporary art installations and shows, and public events, using music, sculpture, and paintings to keep the site visible and maintain community energy (see Figure 5).^[43],[44] SBC also received an Art Matters Grant to can their “Not Non-Toxic” dirt as a fundraiser,^[45] motivated by the idea that if enough people bought cans of dirt, one person and one can at a time, the property could eventually be cleaned. This period of creative activation amidst bureaucratic delays laid the foundation for a participatory, community-rooted approach that would define MMCP’s next phases.

Patchwork Funding, Community Capital, and Creative Resilience

Making MMCP’s vision a reality required an extraordinary patchwork of funding. SBC’s attendance in neighborhood meetings early on allowed them to gain immense support and momentum from the community to develop the project, including support for conducting the ESAs. SBC creatively sought multiple funding streams and competitive grants to support the high costs associated with remediating a polluted site and constructing its new vision—the project has been almost fully funded through grants and donations. With each grant application, though, the future of the project hung in the balance. “If we don’t get this grant, it’s over,” Ben Beres reflected. He continued, “There was this huge fear of embarrassment or public shame [for] walking away [after receiving] at that point over $100,000 in county money.”^[46] While SBC received support throughout the process, they were also met with skepticism as more time passed. “I think there’s something about artists that when you tell them no, there’s a stubbornness that if you make it to a certain point as an artist, [and] you’ve been told no so many times, that it’s almost a motivating factor…at one point, [we received] 14 no’s in a row for some grants, which is just devastating. But then you get one for 150 grand, and you’re like ‘all right, it’s happening,’” Ben Beres shared.^[47] Through these moments of trial and tribulation, at times nearly ready to give up, came glimmers of hope and the push to continue as community members and other collaborators believed in the project, donating and committing their time and energy to ensuring its success.

From the start, SBC pursued an innovative compilation of funding from federal, state, county, and city sources, alongside philanthropic foundations and community contributions (Figure 5). To cover costly ESA reports, site preparation, and community programming, funding came from EPA, Washington Department of Ecology, and King County, and the City of Seattle. Local funders included 4Culture, a King County arts fundraising organization that has been a major believer and supporter of MMCP ($200,000 facilities grant devoted to New Cultural Destinations^[48]), Seattle Department of Neighborhoods ($100,000, with a community match of $265,010 in 2016^[49] and $25,000 with a community match of $135,368 in 2019^[50]), Seattle Office of Arts and Culture, Creative Capital ($50,000), Seattle Parks Foundation, and many others. By the end of 2016, SBC had raised a total of $500,000 to fund the project’s construction.

Grassroots strategies also played a critical role. Their innovative “Not Non-Toxic” cans of dirt fundraiser—selling sealed cans of dirt from the site—turned contamination into an object of collective investment. Community members and arts supporters bought these cans of dirt, symbolically and materially participating in cleanup as SBC raised more funds from smaller contributions. Alongside grants and donations, and perhaps more important, was the gift of time and expertise from dozens of passionate and tenacious participants who gave thousands of hours to help ensure the project’s completion. Volunteers poured hours into labor, local artists lent creative work, and contractors and suppliers donated time, materials, and equipment. Environmental attorney Scott Johnson, taking on MMCP as his first pro bono client, guided SBC through complex environmental liability issues. Strategic fundraising consultants, Scandiuzzi-Krebs, have supported MMCP’s early artistic ambitions into a financially sustainable nonprofit enterprise.^[51] GO’C, too, donated schematic design labor at a pivotal moment.^[52]

Financing also shaped construction logics. Aimée O’Carroll from GO’C noted that the extended timeline, “worked in their favor in that [it allowed SBC to] raise money. They kind of needed it in a way to get to the point of construction…because money would be released based on phases of construction, like grants related to specific portions of work. It was quite a stilted process that we were all a part of to get the building finished one way or another.”^[53] That phasing—release of funds tied to discrete scopes combined with a complex and arduous permitting process—slowed things at times, but it also synchronized fundraising, permitting, and community momentum, which allowed for more time to deepen partnerships and secure a broader base of support. The result was not only capital raised, but also accumulated community capital: board service, pro-bono help, donated materials, and repeated acts of trust. Community capital for MMCP is layered; it is financial, creative, and relational, and was as critical as traditional funding streams. It deepened ties to Georgetown, sustained SBC through long permitting delays, and ensured the project would remain accountable to its neighbors.

Project Planning + Design Development: From Sculptural Idea to Community Arts + Culture Hub

By 2013, with 4Culture’s critical support, SBC formed the non-profit Mini Mart City Park and purchased the 5,300 square-foot property. They had persevered through years of environmental assessments, regulatory hurdles, and near-abandonment of the project. Now stewards of the land, they turned toward the enormous challenge of translating their vision into built form. SBC’s early visions were a sculptural intervention or pavilion hovering over contaminated ground (Figure 6),^[54] drawing inspiration from Gas Works Park. Ben Beres elaborated more on this vision, “[We thought] this was going to be more of a sculpture, and it was this big mound.”^[55] As SBC considered how they would have the project be publicly accessible, they questioned their initial vision: “How do we shift from [an] accessible open park to more of a structure inside…to house [remediation] equipment…it took us 15 years to open, but we had so much time to thoughtfully engage, adapt, and adjust…we were told no so many times that we had the time to make this be what it needs to be in the space and community that it is [in].”^[56] As those years passed, their initial sculptural vision expanded in dialogue with community needs. Public forums, workshops, and art shows surfaced strong calls for open space and flexible public programming. Through MMCP’s early years, SBC learned that they needed a space that could not only spark imagination, but also function as a gallery, meeting place, public park, and now, resilience hub.

In 2014, nearly a decade into the project’s original idea, SBC partnered with GO’C, a newly formed Seattle-based architecture firm known for its minimalistic, site-responsive designs that reinterpret the Pacific Northwest’s built landscape. The serendipitous collaboration began after Ben Beres read about their floating sauna project on Lake Washington while sitting in his own sauna. Intrigued, he invited Jon Gentry and Aimée O’Carroll to visit and walk the site, and they learned about SBC’s ambitious vision: to create a space that would house an art gallery, community space, and public park while addressing environmental contamination.^[57] As a young firm with a limited portfolio of built work, they “felt very lucky to be working with them,” Jon Gentry described. He continued, “We knew this was going to be a special project, but it was going to be a long, hard fight…we were just so excited to make some new drawings and renderings of this cool community space.”^[58] GO’C took on the schematic design phase pro bono, offering new energy and technical expertise, drawing inspiration from 1930s-era gas station structures (Figure 7).

SBC had initially hoped to preserve the existing 450-square-foot building and in 2014, commissioned a regulated building material survey to assess hazardous materials within the site’s structures.^[59] It revealed asbestos and lead, which then required the development of a demolition and hazardous material disposal plan compliant with environmental health regulations. These findings, combined with the structure being too small to host desired community meetings and gatherings, prevented the reuse of the existing structure. Developing strategies for active environmental remediation was also essential. A supplemental Phase II ESA in 2017 delineated the extent of petroleum contaminated soil and groundwater and confirmed a path to integrate soil-vapor mitigation and in situ treatments system during construction.^[60]

By May 2018, all former structures had been removed from the site. “The existing building was too gone, we couldn’t really salvage anything,” said Jon Gentry.^[61] GO’C developed the design for a new, 1,500-square-foot building surrounded by a 3,000-square-foot park, supporting a publicly accessible green space that serves the environment and community. The structure is divided into two primary spaces: a gallery and community center at the front of the building facing Elliot Avenue South, and a storage and utility box at the back of the building. The two enclosure boxes are separated by an open-air courtyard between them, creating a strong connection between built and open spaces. The design honors the spirit of the old gas station by incorporating familiar forms like overhanging chunky canopies over a forecourt, exposed structural details like x-bracing, a pivoting window reminiscent of roll up doors, polished concrete floors, circular columns, clapboard siding, and hand-painting signage.^[62] The architecture would, most importantly, create flexible, adaptable spaces to accommodate art exhibitions, workshops, meetings, and outdoor events.

The building’s environmental performance was central: it incorporates a green roof planted with drought tolerant sedums and grasses that increases the thermal mass of the structure while providing wildlife habitat, bioretention planters that filter stormwater runoff from the roof, permeable paving, radiant floors, and passive design features and ventilation strategies that reduce the building’s carbon footprint (Figure 8). These features compliment the active soil remediation system operating underneath. The design had to account for environmental remediation, community utility, and artistic expression.

Drawing from the site’s history as a filling station, Jon Gentry described the project as “a new filling station, for filling one’s soul with art and community” rather than filling a car with gas.^[63] He continued, “we really did take that to be the soul or spirit of the building. How can it host the community in a new way?”^[64] One way the project answers Jon’s question was how community was engaged and centered through every stage of the project to ensure it would meet their needs. Once clean up and demolition were underway, SBC initiated engagement with community members and prioritized community input to ensure the MMCP design would reflect the needs and aspirations of Georgetown residents. They hosted public forums to share plans, solicit feedback, and incorporate local ideas into the design, while art workshops and preview events were conceved to build enthusiasm as the project was introduced to the neighborhood. SBC worked with key community organizations such as the Duwamish River Community Coalition (DRCC), ECOSS, Georgetown Community Council, and Georgetown Arts & Cultural Center to ensure they were able to reach the diverse communities that reside in Georgetown and South Park.^[65] They also built artistic partnerships by inviting local artists to contribute ideas for how the space could be used to ensure the site would be an active and evolving cultural hub. These engagement sessions influenced key decisions, from the types of programming the space would support to design details that addressed accessibility and usability. A strong need for open space and a community gathering space surfaced through these meetings, which strongly informed the design of the project. Community input was directional rather than prescriptive. The overall project ultimately became the instrument for a community practice already underway, one that centered engagement for its activation.

Participatory Construction: Dirt Corps., Duwamish Valley Youth Corps (DVYC), and Community-Led Making

Immense grassroots momentum was built to make MMCP a reality, and finally they broke ground in July 2018. MMCP embraced a collaborative construction model that empowered local residents, youth, and green jobs training workers to physically build the project, particularly the landscape and plantings. SBC and partners hosted volunteer parties, art workshops, educational and participatory build events that blurred the lines between activation and engagement: the community was not only watching the project take shape, but they were also shaping it themselves. SBC engaged community-based organizations that support workforce development, such as Sawhorse Revolution, Dirt Corps, and Duwamish Valley Youth Corps (DVYC). Even as the COVID-19 pandemic complicated timelines and logistics, the team adapted with flexible, iterative, problem-solving strategies that kept momentum alive.

A pivotal partner who was engaged early on was Dirt Corps, a community-based green jobs training organization that supports environmental restoration and workforce development, provides hands-on learning experiences for adult workers, and prioritizes women, people of color, LGBTQIA+, and veterans.^[66] Led by Roseann Barnhill and Michael Lewis, Dirt Corps was invited to conceptualize and implement MMCP’s landscape design, and were treated as co-creators, not contractors. Dirt Corps had full autonomy and agency to make decisions about how the landscape and green roof would be implemented and planted, learning themselves along the way.^[67]

Dirt Corps facilitated a participatory design process with DVYC youth mentors in 2018 and 2019. Youth explored the site and visited nearby parks like Gas Works Park and Olympic Sculpture Park for inspiration. “We had several meetings where we talked about what would you like to see in a community-based arts space?” recalled Roseann Barnhill as she described the youth engagement process.^[68] They developed programs and themes, sketched concepts, and developed the idea of MMCP as a “migratory oasis” in Georgetown. Barnhill explained, “They were really excited to think about it as this…place that people came to bring their things and pass through. The theme of the design they came up with was migration. And they had some elements like the art wall, which they ended up installing, which was really cool because [the youth] loved this idea of people tagging and leaving art behind as they passed through…and they kept talking about it as an oasis, like a place where they could stop and rest.”^[69] Guided by the youth’s input, Roseann, who has a horticulture and restoration background, designed the landscape to reflect themes of movement and resilience from a variety of locales that resonated with where the youth and their families were from. “We ended up selecting plants that were from the south…planting in the front is from California, down to Baja. The plants in the front were kind of roadside weeds, medicinal herbs kind of flowers. [The youth] wanted it to look like [what] they found in some old photos of gas stations from Route 66 with tumbleweeds and wildflowers, and in the back and in the wetland area was Pacific coast plants, so it was this idea of Four Corners plants.”^[70] Drought-tolerant sedums were selected for the green roof.

Participatory construction extended into technical green infrastructure. Dirt Corps’ adult trainees—many early in their careers—installed green infrastructure features like rain gardens, the green roof, plantings, and gabion retaining walls. The gabion build in November 2019 was a key participatory construction event.^[71] Local suppliers (NK Stones Inc and West Seattle Landscape and Stone Supply) provided cages and rock, while Dirt Corps, DVYC, and SBC volunteers assembled and filled them onsite. Barnhill emphasized the training dimension: “The gabions, green walls, raingardens, and green roof were all adult learners, learning specific job skills and interacting with the other artists and installers to figure out how to do it.”^[72] Green wall panels, whose patterns reflect the history of soil contamination and remediation of the site, were designed by Dirt Corps’ Jose Narvaja with SBC, manufactured by local artist Patrick Nelson from Irish Steel, and installed by Dirt Corps and MMCP board members (Figure 10). Tools and methods were simple, but effective: shovels, wheelbarrows, and gloves for moving gravel and planting on the ground and for the green roof installation; design sketches and planting lists as shared guides. The process turned construction into an experimental classroom: a site for skill-building, artistic fabrication, testing and developing construction methods, and ecological restoration.

The process was not without challenges. Coordinating dozens of volunteers, balancing youth creative input with technical feasibility, and navigating permitting and COVID-19 delays stretched the team and slowed progress. Barnhill reflected, “There was a lot of mutual inexperience, but a lot of passion…[SBC] was very patient with us as we were trying to figure things out…I know I learned from that, and I can build those into my projects now.”^[73] Yet those challenges seeded resilience. Planting evolved across seasons and cohorts: “When we did the final planting of the wildflower meadow, youth came back the following year, and [it was] a different group of youth [who] helped us plant that.”^[74] Iteration makes the park a living canvas that supports skill-building and participatory change, is continuously renewed by new hands, and forever evolves with the community.

Dirt Corps’ role was transformative: they trained a new generation of green workers in applied, hands-on techniques of rain garden construction, green roof installation, and ecological design, while embedding community labor and imagination directly into MMCP’s fabric. SBC and GO’C supported Dirt Corps’ leadership, providing them with genuine autonomy over significant aspects of the landscape design and installation. MMCP was an immense learning opportunity for Dirt Corps, allowing them to pilot construction techniques and engagement strategies that they have continued through their training programs, including using MMCP as a classroom. The participatory aspects of making and building the project reinforce community ownership and belonging to the site and the neighborhood. As Roseann reflects, “[SBC was] inspired by the option of letting the youth and Dirt Corps really drive that process. We were a young company at that time, and we had to learn how to do a number of these things…They trusted us to just go and do our thing…it is extraordinary that groups like us could have this much freedom.”^[75] This trust deepened local ownership and cemented MMCP’s identity as both a neighborhood park and a training ground for environmental justice leadership through participatory making processes that supports learning and community investment.

Dirts Corps engagement was one of many acts of collective making. Prosocco donated exterior weatherproofing, which was installed by SBC.^[76] A large pivot window, a main feature of the space along the south gallery wall, was created and donated by local artist Chris McMullen. When open, the large window provides a strong connection to the park, and during events, is a café window. MMCP’s first wall mural was created and donated by Urban Artworks’ youth team, who continues to create and install murals on the site (Figure 10). Ben Beres reflected on the arc of this long participatory process: “We spent 15 years of our life, thousands of hours, and turned this gas station into a community center…we have had so many people help…it’s getting more and more away from SBC and into this community…and it’s a special feeling to help usher something into the world and then…hand the keys over.”^[77] His words underscored that MMCP’s making was always more than construction: it has been a collective act of engaged activation that transformed a contaminated site of harm into a place of shared pride (Figure 11).

Post-Occupancy Phase: Programming the Present + Building for the Future

After nearly two decades of visioning, collaborative design, fundraising, construction, initiating environmental remediation, and hosting countless community gatherings, MMCP officially opened to the public in 2022.^[78] Its opening marked not only the completion of an exhaustive construction project, but also the realization of a living, evolving platform for community resilience, creativity, and environmental action. Today, MMCP stands as a dynamic arts and cultural hub, intentionally designed to adapt and meaningfully host community events, showcase local art, and support building community capacity, evolving with the community for years to come. Every detail—from the pivoting gallery window that opens onto the park, to the drought-tolerant and native plantings—supports both practical community uses and symbolic storytelling about environmental repair and community determination. As of the 2023 Annual Report,^[79] the air sparging system had removed approximately 97.24 lbs of petroleum hydrocarbons since it started operating in April 2021.

The building’s flexible, open-plan interior, with moveable furniture and modular components, allows for seamless transitions between art exhibitions, workshops, community meetings, educational programming, and pop-up events. Sliding walls contain multifunctional surfaces like display walls for artworks that easily enables reconfiguration. The courtyard between the two building volumes creates a multi-functional outdoor room for concerts, markets, large-scale art installations, movie nights, and easy access loading for the main gallery.

MMCP’s spaces, both inside and outside, were shaped by and for the communities they serve. MMCP has hosted an impressive range of arts and educational programming since its opening (Figure 12), with contributions from over 250 artists, including: Over 20 unique art exhibitions featuring local and international artists (as of 2023); 12 free, artist-led workshops open to the community (as of 2023); film-screenings, immersive performances, and youth-centered educational classes; youth-focused programming developed in partnership with organizations, including an Art and Environmental Programming partnership with DVYC and Urban Artworks’ Youth Apprenticeship Mural Program; and over 300 hours of free meeting space provided to neighborhood groups and nonprofits.

MMCP’s programming has also produced deeply personal and intimate moments that underscored the years of effort it took to bring the project to life. Reflecting on these moments, Ben Beres recalled a night El Sueño, an organization that uses art as a platform for community empowerment and healing, performed at MMCP, as tears of pride swelled in his eyes: “They started singing in harmony in their native Mexican attire, and it was so hard not to burst into tears. This amazing art was being created and [in that moment] all those meetings and frustrations with the blackberries and trying to rent goats [were] wiped away…people are making and are in love with the space…the residencies, people’s first shows—it’s been awesome. Vendors out in the street…it warms my heart, and it was all worth it.”^[80] MMCP continues to raise funds through individual donations, government grants, foundation and corporate giving, and earned income, which they invest back into the site’s continued physical improvements and strengthening social infrastructure through programming and partnerships.

MMCP’s development has paralleled other arts-focused projects in Georgetown. For example, Equinox Studios is actively developing two major projects. The first, the Georgetown Steam Plant, a historic power plant with National Historic Landmark status and a Historic Mechanical Engineering Landmark on the Boeing property, has begun a slow but essential transformation with similar complex contamination challenges.^[81] Across the street from MMCP, key members of Equinox Studios, with others, have formed the non-profit Georgetown Steam Plant Community Development Authority, who is leasing the building from Seattle City Light to transform it into a community cultural center. They are actively working to restore the structure, and host public events and educational programs, such as the recent, first annual Science Fair in September 2024. Another project, The Bend, is led by Watershed Community Development and aims to integrate live/work spaces, affordable housing, and arts infrastructure in a 7-block district near 4^th Avenue South.^[82] The project responds to the growing need for affordable and diverse housing options in Georgetown, while also supporting maker and creative communities that define the neighborhood. They aim to design and build 600 new housing units with a high percentage set aside as affordable and workforce housing to serve households earning below 60% of the area’s median income.

These projects demonstrate how MMCP has been a catalyst for community and arts-focused development in Georgetown, with efforts underway to try and prevent gentrification. As Ben Beres asked in a recent interview with The Seattle Times, “Can the identity remain while growing in a positive way?”^[83] In their 2023 Annual Report, MMCP highlighted how over 750 individuals and 35 organizations collectively contributed more than 40,000 hours of volunteer time to shape and sustain the project—a powerful testament to the deep community ownership MMCP fosters.^[84] This echoes Roseann Barnhill’s impression of MMCP, expressing how different aspects of MMCP’s story is only a footnote, and that “the real story is how the community has made it their own.”^[85] As SBC emphasized, programming is not a static checklist but a responsive, evolving collaboration with the community. MMCP remains deeply embedded in Georgetown’s cultural fabric, hosting events as varied as birthday parties, fundraising galas, memorial services, and town hall meetings for Georgetown’s Community Council.^[86] These values extend to MMCP’s future endeavors.

In 2024, MMCP acquired and upgraded an adjacent building to the north (Figure 13). Nicknamed Mini2, it has expanded MMCP’s offerings to provide a flexible classroom and meeting space on the ground floor for community groups like DVYC to use, accommodating 20 people. The new space includes a small, accessible community kitchen equipped with commercial-grade appliances as well as an upstairs artist-in-residence unit with studio space. This expansion has allowed MMCP to diversify its programming, offering environmental workshops, culinary arts collaborations, and extended artist residencies. The new facility also provides much-needed storage and operational space—responding to a key limitation of the original design expressed by SBC and GO’C. The growing “campus” model strengthens MMCP’s ability to support Georgetown’s creative, environmental, and social infrastructure into the future.

Becoming a Resilience Hub

In December 2024, MMCP reached a major milestone when they completed the installation of a solar panels, with plans to install a solar energy and battery backup system.^[87] Designed to sustain the site’s operations for up to 72 hours during a power outage, this investment was supported by the City of Seattle, Office of Sustainability and Environment’s (OSE) Duwamish Valley Program (DVP)^[88] and aligns with the City’s broader Green New Deal and Climate Resilience goals. To advance these goals, and affirm MMCP’s position in helping to achieve them, on April 22, 2025, Earth Day, Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell issued an Executive Order, signed at MMCP, that calls for Seattle city departments to work as One Seattle to address the current and future climate crisis through a focus on building resilience, reducing greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, and growing a green economy.^[89] An aspect of this work will be to audit and update Seattle’s Climate Action Plan, published in 2013.

MMCP hosted a Resilience Workshop in November 2024 to learn how MMCP can continue to be a critical resource and anchor for the community while building resilience in the Georgetown neighborhood.^[90] Feedback from this session helped to formalize MMCP’s Resilience Hub Program in 2025, which envisions the site as a trusted and safe space for gathering, resource-sharing, and collective action during climate emergencies and other crises.^[91] Key priorities outlined in MMCP’s Resilience Plan include:

1. Support everyday community needs by offering an accessible gathering space, free public WiFi, workshops, and social connection,
2. Serve as an information and resource hub through partnerships with Georgetown’s Gazette, emergency preparedness trainings, and a future community bulletin board, and
3. Strengthen community connections by deepening collaborations with local groups including the Georgetown Community Council, DVYC, and Urban Artworks.

Future improvements under consideration include enhancing passive cooling systems so that MMCP can serve as a cooling center during extreme heat events, rainwater harvesting, enhancing green infrastructure, and translating emergency resources into multiple languages to better serve multilingual and vulnerable populations in the Duwamish Valley. MMCP’s resilience work and plan is not only infrastructural, but also cultural as they explore how art can serve as a tool for processing climate anxiety and grief, envisioning resilient futures, and fostering emotional well-being in the face of environmental uncertainty.

Lessons Learned, Key Takeaways, and Questions for Engaged Design Praxis

MMCP offers a strong case study in community-engaged design, construction, and programming, brownfield redevelopment, and adaptive social, environmental, and climate resilient infrastructure. Emerging from conversations with key players involved with the project and findings from articles and interviews are the following key lessons and critical questions for discussion:

1. Patience, persistence, and adaptability are critical. MMCP’s development stretched nearly two decades and continues to evolve and develop with the community around it. This requires resilience through bureaucratic hurdles, funding setbacks and grant proposal rejections, shifting visions, and changing external conditions. As Ben Beres advises, “Don’t stop when you’re told no. If you have a vision, keep going. You will eventually find [people] who believe in you.”^[92] Given the long arc of this project, how can engaged design practices build in timelines and funding models that account for the slowness—the need to move at the speed of trust—to create and sustain community-centered projects?
2. Genuine agency must be supported with trust. There were multiple layers of trust that were built, sustained, and deepened throughout the process of making MMCP a reality. From the trust between John Sutton, Ben Beres, and Zac Culler to realize this vision to the trust they built with each person and organization who participated in the process. MMCP’s collaborative construction process with Dirt Corps. and youth cohorts exemplifies how giving partners real autonomy—not only token involvement—can build stronger, more lasting outcomes. As Roseann Barnhill from Dirt Corps recalls, “The many hands method was really important… [the success of MMCP] came down to key folks who stayed the course. It’s thriving, and it’s an extraordinary success story. Everything about it was hard but having the community support [sustained it].”^[93] Every project is different, but what structures, both formal and informal, best support meaningful agency for community collaborators during design, construction, and ongoing programming?
3. Environmental healing can be public, visible, and celebratory. Rather than simply removing the contaminants off site or hiding remediation underground, MMCP embraced systems like visible (and loud) air sparging infrastructure, bioretention planters, and green roofs as essential environmental infrastructures that make processes of healing visible. As central elements of the design, rather than obscure them, they are celebrated as learning tools that cultivate the next generation of environmental stewards. Rather than concealed or sanitized, how can environmental repair be made more tangible, educational, and highly celebrated within design projects?
4. Art is a powerful medium for building resilience. MMCP demonstrates how art and culture are not “add-ons” to resilience efforts. They are deeply embedded critical tools for community storytelling, visioning, and healing. In what ways can arts-based methods expand definitions of resilience and foster deeper emotional and social preparedness?
5. Responsive and ongoing stewardship is essential. MMCP’s development and ongoing evolution, including the acquisition of Mini2 and Resilience Hub planning, demonstrates that community spaces must be designed to adapt to changing needs over time. How can design and development processes anticipate and support the inevitable evolution and iteration of community spaces beyond the traditional project completion view in practice?

Toward a Transferable Model of Remediation and Resilience

MMCP is a story of radical possibility: the transformation of a toxic relic of industrial capitalism into a living, breathing community anchor. Through two decades of visioning, patient advocacy, refusal to quit (even when things got really hard), deep community engagement, collaborative making, and creative resilience, MMCP demonstrates that environmental healing and social infrastructure can, and must, be intertwined. At its core, MMCP answers the question of what if instead of hiding contaminated lands away—to distant landfills or camouflaged through greening—they were reclaimed with visibility, collectivity, and creativity? What if instead of erasing industrial histories, they were honored as a foundation for community capacity building, environmental justice, and cultural regeneration? In one way or another, recognizing the past of gas fueling stations, each person who has and continues to engage with MMCP has redefined what fueling means. It generated new forms of energy—cultural, social, and electrical. As GO’C’s architects reflect, MMCP redefines the future of filling stations by, “filling one’s soul with art rather than cars with gas.”^[94]

The dedication and persistence of SBC, GO’C, Dirt Corps, and countless community members and partners have created not only a beloved site in Georgetown, but a powerful proof of concept with much wider relevance. As Ben Beres and MMCP executive director Emily Kelly highlight, although MMCP took the form of an arts-based space, it’s a model that can and should be adapted for other communities in other ways that best fit their needs. Emily Kelly reflects, “Where we’re situated defines the work that we do. [MMCP is] acting as an example of what remediation can look like, and creates opportunities for youth to engage with what is happening on this site and learning about what’s happening on this site… This is a holistic and comprehensive representation of activation and remediation, there are little things that can be taken from this example and implemented in different ways.”^[95] In other words, the physical outcome doesn’t have to be replicated, but more the process, mission, and values, and responding to the local context. A former gas station could also become a community kitchen or food bank, feeding neighbors in need; a neighborhood library offering access to books, internet, and gathering spaces; a resilience center hosting cooling stations, emergency resources, and mutual aid hubs; and/or a youth learning center integrating environmental education and creative expression. As MMCP demonstrates, you don’t have to pick and choose—these uses can be integrated, and the layering of uses ultimately strengthens their effectiveness and impact.

Core transferrable elements are not the specific arts programming, but the philosophies and structures that made MMCP possible, which include:

1. Centering community agency from vision to construction to programming.
2. Refusing extractive remediation models in favor of integrated environmental healing.
3. Blending art, environmental justice, and resilience building as interconnected imperatives.
4. Accepting uncertainty and adaptation as necessary and generative aspects of long-term work.

The proliferation of gas stations and brownfields across the US offers both a sobering challenge and a profound opportunity. Small, contaminated sites that are often considered too costly or complicated to redevelop, could be reclaimed as vital community assets rather than left to decay or sold into private speculation. MMCP demonstrates that with vision, persistence (and stubbornness to prove nay-sayers wrong), creative thinking, and genuine community leadership, even the most compromised landscapes can be remade into sites of healing, resilience, and connection. In doing so, MMCP does not only “clean the earth with art,” it offers a blueprint for cleaning, transforming, and empowering communities to participate in the reimagining of their futures.

APA:De Almeida, Catherine (2025). From Abandoned Gas Station to Arts + Resilience Community Hub: Seattle’s Mini Mart City Park. In Case Studies in Design. PennPraxis, Stuart Weitzman School of Design, University of Pennsylvania.

MLA: De Almeida, Catherine. “From Abandoned Gas Station to Arts + Resilience Community Hub: Seattle’s Mini Mart City Park.” Case Studies in Design, PennPraxis, Stuart Weitzman School of Design, University of Pennsylvania, 2025

Acknowledgements

It has truly been an honor to work on this case study that showcases Mini Mart City Park (MMCP). The more I learned about this project, and the physical and social impact it has had on the lives of so many people, the greater my appreciation and awe for what this project accomplishes grew. Everyone’s pride for this project has been contagious, and I hope this case study sheds light on the complexities, strength, and dedication of all those involved to ensure this project materialized. The world is better because this project exists. Deep gratitude to Ben Beres of SuttonBeresCuller and Emily Kelly, Executive Director of MMCP, Jon Gentry and Aimée O’Carroll of GO’C, and Roseann Barnhill, Principal and Director of Ecology & Green Stormwater Infrastructure at Dirt Corps, for all generously sharing your time, stories, and candid experiences working on and contributing to this project. Thank you to Penn Praxis, particularly Ellen Neises and Anushka Samant, for supporting the development of this case study, and the guidance you and the other inaugural cohort members, particularly Barbara Brown Wilson, provided throughout the process. A big thank you to Chris Copeland, a UW MLA 2025 student who supported the initial development of gas station maps and models, and trying to make sense of piecemeal data. Last, but not least, thank you to Amelia Jensen for being another set of eyes and a sounding board throughout this process.

Endnotes

1. Ben Beres (SBC) and Emily Kelly (MMCP), interview by author, Seattle, April 18, 2025.

   ↑

2. Larry Lange, “Voters Reject Shortened Monorail Line,” Seattle Post-Intelligencer Reporter, November 8, 2005.

   ↑

3. Jen Graves, “How Creative Capital Replaces the NEA and Taught Artists to be Ambitious,” The Stranger, March 30, 2016.

   ↑

4. Beres, interview.

   ↑

5. Ibid.

   ↑

6. Ibid.

   ↑

7. SuttonBeresCuller: https://suttonberesculler.com/bio/

   ↑

8. The ubiquitous standardization of gas stations evolved over more than a century. Beginning in the late 19th century, gasoline was an oil-refining byproduct, with kerosene dominating the lighting market. Its importance rose with inventions of the internal combustion engine and automobiles in the 1880s and 90s, though early drivers bought it in barrels or cans from general stores and blacksmith shops to manually fuel their cars—a risky, messy process that limited widespread automobile use. The first dedicated gas station, built by Standard Oil in Pittsburgh in 1913, ushered in rapid expansion by companies like Shell, Texaco, and Gulf. In the 1920s, Henry Ford’s mass-produced affordable cars put millions more vehicles on American roads, increasing the proliferation of gas stations. By 1929, there were over 23 million cars and 100,000 gas stations nationwide. Strategically located along roads and highways, gas stations became essential hubs for fueling, commerce, and socializing, shaping urban growth. At their mid-20th-century peak, there were more than 200,000 gas stations nationwide. Competition, industry consolidation, and regulatory pressures forced many smaller operators to close, leaving behind thousands of abandoned sites—many with significant contamination issues. Today, around 115,000 to 145,000 fueling stations are still in operation. See “First Gas Pump and Service Station,” American Oil & Gas Historical Society, accessed August 22, 2025; Kate Yoder, “The Hidden Cost of Gasoline,” Grist, June 14, 2023. ↑

9. Beres, interview.

   ↑

10. According to the EPA, there are approximately 450,000 brownfield sites in the U.S., with around 200,000 involving petroleum contamination. See: “Refueling Reuse: Ecological Revitalization of Abandoned Gas Stations,” and “Underground Storage Tanks (USTs), Petroleum Brownfields,” Environmental Protection Agency, accessed August 22, 2025. The former Perovich Brothers Gas Station, the location of Mini Mart City Park, was one of these estimated 200,000 sites. The agency has confirmed over 560,000 petroleum releases from LUSTs nationwide. See: “Underground Storage Tanks (USTs),” and “UST Finder,” Environmental Protection Agency, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

11. Jon Gentry and Aimée O’Carroll (GO’C), interview by author, Seattle, April 10, 2025.

    ↑

12. Georgetown, one of Seattle’s oldest neighborhoods, became an industrial hub due to its proximity to the Duwamish River, which was straightened and dredged between 1913-1920 to support shipping and industrialization. See: BJ Cummings, The River that Made Seattle: A Human and Natural History of the Duwamish (University of Washington Press, 2022).

    ↑

13. “Property Details for Perovich Brothers Former Gas Station,” Environmental Protection Agency, Cleanups, accessed August 22, 2025, https://ordspub.epa.gov/ords/cimc/f?p=121:31::::31:P31_ID:91422.

    ↑

14. In 1984, the EPA began regulating USTs under amendments to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). This required UST owners to upgrade their systems by installing leak detection, corrosion protection, and spill prevention. These investments were often prohibitively expensive for small operators. See: Yoder, “The Hidden Cost.”

    ↑

15. CDM Smith, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment: Former Perovich Property, Seattle, Washington, November 7, 2008, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

16. “Superfund Site: Lower Duwamish Waterway Seattle, WA,” Environmental Protection Agency, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

17. CDM Smith, Phase II Environmental Site Assessment: Former Perovich Property, Seattle, Washington, April 15, 2009, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

18. See “Duwamish Valley: Background & Resources,” City of Seattle, Office of Sustainability & Environment, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

19. Just Health Action and Duwamish Valley Community Coalition, “The Duwamish Valley Cumulative Health Impacts Analysis (CHIA),” 2013, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

20. EPA Brownfields Program data from 1995-2023. It has supported technical assistance for detailed assessments and cleanup strategies for over 24,000 properties, remediated over 117,000 sites, and opened more than 1 million acres for redevelopment. See: “Brownfields and Land Revitalization Program History,” “Accomplishments,” “Brownfields Program Accomplishments and Benefits,” and “2023 Brownfields Federal Program Guide,” Environmental Protection Agency, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

21. Examples of brownfield redevelopment projects of abandoned gas stations include: Industry City in Brooklyn, New York, a creative manufacturing and innovation; live-work mixed-use residences in Indianapolis, Indiana that combine housing and retail space, where the cleanup was facilitated by a mix of public funds and private investments; Barrier Island Salt Company and Tasting Room in Northampton County, Virginia, a local small business revival; Charles Tartaglia Park, dedicated to a local hero in Brockton, Massachusetts, offering a new community recreation space; and cultural and historic preservation projects along historic corridors like Route 66, converting old gas stations into museums and small businesses celebrating automotive heritage. For more information and examples, see: “Reuse of Abandoned Gas Station Sites,” “Success Stories,” and “New Community Visions for Abandoned Gas Stations,” Environmental Protection Agency, accessed August 22, 2025. ↑

22. See “Biden-Harris Administration Announces $232 Million in Grants to Clean Up Brownfield Sites, Address Legacy Pollution, Advance Environmental Justice, and Spur Economic Revitalization,” September 6, 2024 and “Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act: A Historic Investment in Brownfields,” July 29, 2025, Environmental Protection Agency, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

23. O’Carroll, interview.

    ↑

24. Roseann Barnhill (Dirt Corps), interview by author, Seattle, April 22, 2025.

    ↑

25. Beres, interview.

    ↑

26. “Home Page,” Mini Mart City Park, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

27. “Supporting the Arts and Culture of Georgetown,” Georgetown Association of Arts & Culture, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

28. Margo Vansynghel, “How Georgetown Artists are Flipping the Script on Seattle Gentrification,” The Seattle Times, October 20, 2024.

    ↑

29. Tim Appelo, “Georgetown’s Equinox Studios Gathers and Grows a South End Arts Gang,” Seattle Magazine, January 10, 2017.

    ↑

30. Sacha Bliese-VanDeZande, Equinox Studios: A Case Study, Arts Ecosystem Research Project, SeattleU, 2020.

    ↑

31. Vansynghel, “Georgetown Artists Seattle Gentrification.”

    ↑

32. Gentry, interview.

    ↑

33. Kelly, interview.

    ↑

34. Beres, interview.

    ↑

35. The King County Solid Waste Division’s Brownfields Program, supported by grant funding from the EPA Brownfields Program, partnered with communities to clean up contaminated properties and promote redevelopment. Though the program is no longer in operation, their assistance was critical in helping SBC navigate early assessments, coordinate with regulators, and access federal resources. See: “Brownfields Assessment Grant Profile,” and “Brownfields Assessment Grant Profile: King County,” Environmental Protection Agency; and “King County Brownfields Program Executive Summary for MMCP,” Mini Mart City Park, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

36. Phase I ESA (2008), prepared by Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. (CDM Smith), flagged the Perovich Brothers site as high risk due to its gas station history, multiple USTs, and spill records. Proximity to the Duwamish River and its Superfund designation heightened concerns about groundwater migration. The report recommended further investigation through a Phase II ESA. See: CDM Smith, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment: Former Perovich Property, Seattle, Washington, November 7, 2008, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

37. Also prepared by CDM Smith, the Phase II ESA (2009) investigated contamination from the Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) identified in the Phase I ESA. CDM applied electromagnetic and ground penetrating radar to survey and locate USTs and installed 9 soil borings ranging from 8 to 16 feet bgs to conduct chemical analysis for a variety of contaminants. The Phase II ESA identified 5 potential USTs and several significant environmental concerns that exceeded Ecology Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method A cleanup levels. Contamination was most severe at depths ranging from 4 to 10 feet, corresponding to zones where there was likely leakage from USTs and associated piping. Identified contaminants included elevated levels of diesel-range and gasoline-range organics (DROs and GROs, respectively), high levels of BTEX compounds in the groundwater, with benzene as a particular concern as a carcinogen, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were detected in groundwater samples, suggesting potential migration risks toward the Duwamish River, and elevated PAHs and heavy metals, particularly lead, that indicate legacies of industrial contamination beyond petroleum products, with lead being linked to peeling lead paint from the original building. The report also identified soil vapor intrusion risk into future structures, highlighting the need for vapor mitigation systems as part of a redevelopment plan. See full report for more detailed information: CDM Smith, Phase II Environmental Site Assessment: Former Perovich Property, Seattle, Washington, April 15, 2009, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

38. Targeted Brownfields Assessment (TBA) program is part of the EPA’s Brownfields Economic Improvement Initiative. It was established to empower states and communities to work together to reduce human and environmental health risks, improve the environment, and encourage the reuse of brownfield sites. See: “Targeted Brownfields Assessment (TBA),” Environmental Protection Agency, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

39. The second Phase II ESA (2011) was requested by the City of Seattle Mayor’s Office of Arts and Cultural Affairs, on behalf of SBC, to further evaluate the extent of contamination and determine whether the property’s redevelopment as a public park and community meeting space was feasible. The report was prepared by Environmental International Government Ltd. (EIGov). As SBC had begun the planning process, they garnered strong support from the City, the Georgetown Community Council, and local community groups. These reports were critical in understanding of the property’s environmental liability, extent of the contamination, and whether it would impede or be cost-prohibitive to develop their project. The study also provided a series of recommendations for remedial alternatives for addressing surface and subsurface soils and groundwater contamination. See full report for more detailed information: Environment International Government Ltd., Perovich Brothers Former Gas Station: Phase II Environmental Assessment Report, Seattle, Washington, April 27, 2011, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

40. A final UST Report determined that all five USTs on the property had been removed. See full report for more detailed information: CDM Smith, Final Report: UST Investigation, Former Perovich Property, August 3, 2012, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

41. Beres and Kelly, interview.

    ↑

42. O’Carroll, interview.

    ↑

43. “Construction Fence Mural Project,” Mini Mart City Park, July 9, 2013, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

44. Eric Grandy, “A Punk Show at Mini Mart City Park, a Party on a Fake City Block in a Parking Lot,” The Stranger, August 21, 2009.

    ↑

45. SuttonBeresCuller produced 1,354 cans, each containing 19 ounces of contaminated soil collected from the MMCP site. See: Brett Hamil, “Pay Dirt,” City Arts Magazine, August 25, 2014; and ECOSS, “Get Your Canned Dirt Today! Mini Mart City Park Puts the Fun in Brownfield Revitalization,” October 1, 2014. See the videos SBC produced as part of the artwork and fundraiser: SuttonBeresCuller, “Canned Dirt,” Cheryl Ediss (producer and director), Vimeo, 1 min., 22 sec.; and Front Runner Films, “Canned Dirt Infomercial,” with SBC, YouTube, 59 sec., August 7, 2020.

    ↑

46. Beres, interview.

    ↑

47. Ibid.

    ↑

48. “4Culture Awards MMCP $200,000 Through ‘Building for Culture’,” January 27, 2016.

    ↑

49. “City of Seattle Awards $650,700 for Community-based Projects,” Front Porch, Seattle Department of Neighborhoods, September 7, 2016.

    ↑

50. “Mayor Durkan Announces $544,000 Awarded to 23 Organizations for Community-Initiated Projects,” Front Porch, Seattle Department of Neighborhoods, August 7, 2019.

    ↑

51. Beres, interview.

    ↑

52. Gentry and O’Carroll, interview.

    ↑

53. Ibid.

    ↑

54. Brendan Kiley, “Down on the Corner: SuttonBeresCuller Turns a Contaminated Gas Station into Sculpture,” Arcade Magazine 27, no. 4, (2009): 14-15.

    ↑

55. Beres, interview.

    ↑

56. Ibid.

    ↑

57. Beres, interview; Gentry and O’Carroll, interview.

    ↑

58. Gentry, interview.

    ↑

59. Pacific Rim Environmental, Inc. completed the Regulated Building Materials Survey on July 25, 2014. The study identified asbestos-containing materials in building components (tiles, insulation) and lead-based paint in structural elements, requiring abatement and compliant disposal. Findings, plus capacity needs, precluded reuse of the existing 450-sf structure. See full report from more information: Pacific Rim Environmental, Inc., Regulated Building Material Survey: Mini Mart City Park, Seattle, Washington, July 25, 2014, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

60. SBC commissioned the Supplemental Phase II ESA, which was funded through a Community-Wide Brownfields Assessment Grant to King County Solid Waste Division from the EPA. Completed on September 11, 2017, investigations further delineated the extents of below-ground contamination and determined that it was amenable to remediation by the installation of a vapor barrier and mitigation and treatment system at the appropriate stage of construction. SBC worked with G-Logics, an environmental consultant, to develop and install a soil-vapor extraction and air sparge combination system to address petroleum contamination underground and prevent vapor intrusion into site buildings. Its installation was incorporated into the first phase of construction. Hart Crowser, Phase II Environmental Site Assessment: Former Perovich Property, Seattle, Washington, September 11, 2017, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

61. Gentry, interview.

    ↑

62. Gentry and O’Carroll, interview.

    ↑

63. Gentry, interview.

    ↑

64. Ibid.

    ↑

65. Beres, interview.

    ↑

66. “The Dirt Corps,” Dirt Corps: Community-Based Ecological Restoration, Green Stormwater Infrastructure, and Urban Forextry, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

67. Barnhill, interview.

    ↑

68. Ibid.

    ↑

69. Ibid.

    ↑

70. Ibid.

    ↑

71. “Gabion Retaining Walls with Dirt Corps,” Mini Mart City Park, November 18, 2019, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

72. Barnhill, interview.

    ↑

73. Ibid.

    ↑

74. Ibid.

    ↑

75. Ibid.

    ↑

76. “Waterproof Shell! Prosoco Water and Air Barrier,” Mini Mart City Park, November 18, 2019, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

77. Beres, interview.

    ↑

78. Gayle Clemans, “Mini Mart City Park, a Converted Gas Station in Georgetown, Opens as a Cultural Center after 15 years,” The Seattle Times, February 8, 2022.

    ↑

79. Mini Mart City Park, “2023 Annual Report,” Seattle, Washington, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

80. Beres, interview.

    ↑

81. “Home Page,” Georgetown Steam Plant, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

82. “The Bend: A Live/Work District,” Watershed Community Development, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

83. Vansynghel, “Georgetown Artists Seattle Gentrification.”

    ↑

84. MMCP, “2023 Annual Report.”

    ↑

85. Barnhill, interview.

    ↑

86. Beres, interview.

    ↑

87. Mini Mart City Park, “Resilience Hub Programming Plan,” January 8, 2025.

    ↑

88. “Community Capacity, 2023 Progress Highlights,” City of Seattle, Office of Sustainability & Environment, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

89. Callie Craighead, “Mayor Harrell Issues Earth Day Executive Order to Update Seattle’s Climate Action Plan, Accelerate Emissions Reduction from Transportation,” Office of the Mayor, City of Seattle, April 22, 2025.

    ↑

90. Amy Horn, “Building Community Resilience Together,” Georgetown Community Council, October 30, 2024, accessed August 22, 2025.

    ↑

91. MMCP, “Resilience Hub Plan.”

    ↑

92. Beres, interview.

    ↑

93. Barnhill, interview.

    ↑

94. Gentry and O’Carroll, interview.

    ↑

95. Beres and Kelly, interview.

    ↑