HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016/05/23 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA
MAY 23 2016
5:30 p.m. BBQ – Westwood Hills Nature Center
6:15 p.m. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION – Westwood Hills Nature Center
Discussion Items
1. 6:15 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – June 6 & 13, 2016
2. 6:20 p.m. Open Meeting Law Update
3. 6:50 p.m. Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update
4. 7:35 p.m. SWLRT Updates
8:05 p.m. Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
8:10 p.m. Adjourn
Written Reports
5. April 2016 Monthly Financial Report
6. Public Art Initiative – 4900 Excelsior
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request.
To make arrangements, please call the Administration Department at
952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting.
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: May 23, 2016
Discussion Item: 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – June 6 and June 13, 2016
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council and the City Manager to set the agenda for
the Special Study Session on June 6, 2016 and the regularly scheduled Study Session on June 13,
2016.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the agendas as proposed?
SUMMARY: At each study session approximately five minutes are set aside to discuss the next
study session agenda. For this purpose, attached please find the proposed discussion items for
the Special Study Session on June 6, 2016 and the regularly scheduled Study Session on June 13,
2016.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Tentative Agenda – June 6 and June 13, 2016
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – June 6 and June 13, 2016
JUNE 6, 2016
6:30 p.m. – Special Study Session (Community Room)
Tentative Discussion Items
1. Update on Bass Lake Preserve Improvements – Engineering (50 minutes)
Follow up from April 4 study session to discuss Bass Lake Preserve Improvement project.
Immediately following City Council Meeting – Special Study Session Continued
(Community Room)
Tentative Discussion Items
2. PLACE Update – Community Development (35 minutes)
PLACE will present its preliminary concept plans for the properties on either side of the
Wooddale LRT Station. City Council will be asked for their input.
JUNE 13, 2016
6:30 p.m. – Study Session (Community Room)
Tentative Discussion Items
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes)
2. Assessment Policy - Financial – Engineering (45 minutes)
The updated assessment policy for the various improvements will have funding implications.
The purpose of this item is to discuss staff recommendation for funding of the improvements
identified in the Assessment Policy.
3. Use of the Remaining Former Holiday Station Property w/ an Interest in SFH’s – Community
Development (30 minutes)
Discuss the future land use of the former Holiday (Roger’s) gas station and convenience store
site located at 5430 Minnetonka Blvd. Council Member Susan Sanger suggested City Council
discuss changing the land use guidance and zoning of the property from commercial to single
family residential.
4. MnDOT Highway 7 Rehabilitation Project – Engineering (30 minutes)
In 2018, MnDOT has scheduled the rehabilitation of Highway 7 between Shady Oak Road and
Louisiana Avenue. This project includes; pavement rehabilitation, intersection improvements,
and potentially the closure of the direct access into Knollwood Mall. Closure of the access
would require municipal consent. Representatives from MnDOT will be at this meeting to
discuss the proposed improvements.
5. American Legion Proposed Liquor Ordinance Amendment – Administrative Services (20
minutes)
Follow-up discussion with City Council regarding the proposed ordinance amendment
requested by the American Legion to exempt clubs from the 50/50 food & beverage
requirement. Representatives from the American Legion will be in attendance.
Written Reports
6. Assessment Policy - Financial
7. April 2016 Financial Report
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: May 23, 2016
Discussion Item: 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Open Meeting Law Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required. Staff has invited City Attorney Soren
Mattick to provide an overview and refresher for the Council and City Manager on the legal
requirements related to complying with the Open Meeting Law.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: Periodically the City Attorney has been asked to provide an overview and refresher
course for the Council and City Manager on the legal requirements related to the Open Meeting
Law. Given we have a new Council, the timing seemed appropriate to have this discussion once
more.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Information from the City Attorney
Prepared by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Title: Open Meeting Law Update
OPEN MEETING LAW - MINNESOTA STATUTES CHAPTER 13D
1. Purpose
Prohibit actions from being taken at a secret meeting where the interested public cannot be
fully informed of the decisions of public bodies or detect improper influences.
Ensure the public’s right to be informed.
Give the public an opportunity to present its views.
2. Rule
All meetings of the City Council must be open to the public, subject to a few exceptions.
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13D.
3. What is a meeting?
Synopsis:
A meeting exists when a quorum of the City Council is together and 1) Makes a decision
concerning city business; 2) Discusses city business; or 3) Obtains information on city business.
A quorum or more of a council should not attend neighborhood meetings in which
development, zoning, local improvement or assessment procedures or other matters affecting
the city are the subject of discussion.
Attendance by a quorum or greater of training-type sessions is permissible, however, members
should refrain from discussing specific local issues.
Case Law:
In St. Cloud Newspapers, Inc. v. District 742 Community Schools, 332 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 1983),
seminar-type meetings were attended by the school board and various administrators of the
school system. The presentations were made by school administrators to provide information
on topics relating to school administration. The Supreme Court held that the gatherings
constituted meetings. The Court said discussions were held concerning matters which could
foreseeably require final action by the board. The Court said meetings include those at which
information is received which may influence later decisions.
Chance or social gatherings are not considered meetings; however, a quorum of council
members may not use the guise of a social gathering to receive information or discuss official
business. Berglund v. City of Maplewood, MN, 173 F.Supp.2d 935 (D.Minn. 2001).
Engaging in casual discussions can be a trap for the unwary. In Thuma v. Kroschel, 506 N.W. 2d
14 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993), the mayor and two council members attended a meeting of the Afton
Planning Commission. Although the evidence was conflicting, there was evidence that the
mayor and council members went to a coffee area outside of the chambers and returned eight
minutes later; and that they were speaking together in the coffee area and looking at a
document. Upon returning, the mayor addressed the Planning Commission, indicating that he
had signed a contract for an emergency well repair which was the subject of the Planning
Commission’s discussion and that it would not matter what the Planning Commission decided.
Although the mayor and the council members denied they had met to discuss the well contract
during the Planning Commission meeting, the trial court found that there had been a meeting,
and found the mayor and council members in violation of the Open Meeting Law.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 3
Title: Open Meeting Law Update
4. Serial Meetings
Synopsis:
Serial communications (“round robin”) of a quorum of committee members in any format will
constitute a meeting and is prohibited. This includes communication via email, phone call, or
letter.
If a Council Member wishes to share information with other members, s/he should do so
through the City Manager. The Council Member may request the City Manager distribute
materials to others. The communication should not invite response to or discussion between
any Council Members, including replies to the person making the distribution request.
Case Law:
In Moberg v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 281, 336 N.W.2d 510, 518 (Minn. 1983), the court noted that
the quorum requirement of the Open Meeting Law could be circumvented by “serial face-to-
face or telephone conversations between board members to marshal their votes on an issue
before it is initially raised at a public hearing.” The court held that “serial meetings in groups of
less than a quorum for the purposes of avoiding public hearings or fashioning agreement on an
issue may also be found to be a violation of the [Open Meeting Law], depending upon the facts
of the individual case.”
In a recent district court case, Funk v. O’Connor, et al., No. 10-CV-14-547 (First Judicial District,
Carver County, Mar. 31, 2016), a Carver County Court ruled that four members of the Victoria
City Council committed 38 intentional violations of the open meeting law. The court found
that there were numerous occasions where certain council members communicated with each
other in a “chain-like” fashion by email, text, or phone call.
5. Email communication between Councilmembers.
If email communication is necessary, limit to less than a quorum of council members.
o The recipient of an electronic message or inquiry should reply only to the sender, should
not copy others on the reply and should not forward the original e-mail to other Council
Members.
o The sender should not forward or copy the recipient’s reply to any Council Member.
o The City Manager should be copied on all electronic correspondence.
Electronic communications of meeting materials should generally be conducted in a one-way
communication from the City Manager to the City Council.
o Council Members may receive agenda materials, background information, and other
meeting materials via e-mail attachment or other electronic means (such as file sharing)
from the City Manager.
o If a Council Member has questions or comments about materials received, s/he should
inquire via electronic means directly back to the City Manager or to the department
head associated with the agenda item and also copying the City Manager. A Council
Member should not copy other Council Members on his/her inquiry.
o If the clarification is one of value to other Council Members, the City Manager may send
follow-up materials or information to the full Council.
If a Council Member receives an electronic communication from any source related to City
business and distributed to multiple Council Members, (e.g. – an e-mail sent to the entire
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 4
Title: Open Meeting Law Update
Council from a member of the public), s/he should reply only to the sender. The reply should
not be copied to all on the original distribution or forwarded to any Council Member.
Email communications between Council Members that involves city business is public
information. It doesn’t matter whether the email was sent from personal computer or a city
owned device. Further, emails involving city business that are sent from personal email
accounts are also public information.
6. Penalties
A person who intentionally violates the law is subject to personal liability in an amount not to
exceed $300.00 for a single occurrence.
o The personal liability may not be paid by the City.
A person who has been found to have intentionally violated the law in three or more actions
shall forfeit any further right to serve on the governing body or in any other capacity with the
public body for a period of time equal to the term of office such person was then serving.
In addition to the above, the court may award reasonable costs, disbursements and attorneys’
fees of up to $13,000.00 to any party in an action.
o The City may pay the costs, disbursements or attorneys’ fees incurred by or awarded
against any of its members in an action under the law.
No monetary penalties or attorneys’ fees may be awarded against a member of a public body
unless the court finds that there was a specific intent to violate the law.
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: May 23, 2016
Discussion Item: 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The purpose of this report and study session presentation is to
provide the City Council with the results of the final Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan.
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS: Does the Master Plan present ideas consistent with the direction
the City Council would like to see for future planning of the Westwood Hills Nature Center?
In preparation for future discussions about possible improvements to the Nature Center, is the
information provided in this master plan sufficient, or is there other information the Council
desires?
SUMMARY: The city hired Miller Dunwiddie Architecture to create a comprehensive master
plan to address the facility development and programming goals for the Westwood Hills Nature
Center. The Westwood Hills Nature Center interpretive center is undersized and the building is in
poor condition. The poor conditions of this facility and the success of the programs we offer at this
site, with limited program space, were the impetus behind a master planning process. After
undertaking a community engagement process, the master plan includes components such as a
facility study and program evaluation including: site plans and location of a new interpretive
center, assessment of multipurpose rooms with educational components and options for a large
gathering space, parking lot needs, etc. along with current and future program needs.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Master Plan study is budgeted at $50,000
and was approved in the 2015 CIP budget. At this point in time, it is estimated the improvements
to the Nature Center, including a new interpretive center building and enlarged parking lot, is in
the $12 million range (very preliminary).
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community. St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental stewardship.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan
Prepared by: Mark Oestreich, Manager of Westwood Hills Nature Center
Jason T. West, Recreation Superintendent
Reviewed by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3) Page 2
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The Westwood Hills Nature Center interpretive center is undersized for the
programs we offer. In addition, the building is in poor condition. When it rains, water seeps through
the walls causing puddles to form on the floor. The heating system is also in poor condition. The
poor conditions of this facility and the success of the programs we offer at this site, with limited
program space, were the impetus behind a master planning process. The master plan includes
topics such as a facility study and program evaluation including, but not limited to, site plan and
location of the interpretive center, assessment of multipurpose rooms with educational components
and large gathering space, parking lot needs, along with current and future program assessment
needs.
Citizen input has played a key role in this plan. There have been several events conducted where
Miller Dunwiddie gathered input from the community in regards to developing the master plan.
PUBLIC PROCESS: Residents were included in the process listed below.
Program and facility survey for participants of the following events:
October 16 & 17: Halloween Party (Westwood Hills Nature Center)
- Approximately 200 participated in the survey
October 23: Halloween Party (The Rec Center, 3700 Monterey Drive)
- Information on public meetings distributed
On-line survey
35 on-line surveys were completed
Initial Public Input Meeting (Westwood Hills Nature Center):
October 27, 6 – 8 p.m.
- 20 attendees at meeting
Second Public Input Meeting (Westwood Hills Nature Center):
January 12, 2016, 6 – 8 p.m.
- 35 attendees at meeting
Citizen input played a key role in shaping this plan. This really helped the architects understand
the first-hand issues with the current facility. Meetings were publicized via postcards sent to
residents, the city’s website and social media, informing the School District, utilizing an email
blast to past program users and promoting the meeting on Park TV. To gain additional input, Miller
Dunwiddie met with parks maintenance staff, programming staff, and volunteers.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: The common themes that emerged from the master plan are
as follows:
Moving the building location closer to the parking lot for convenience and accessibility yet
keeping it tucked back into the trees to keep a more natural setting as much as possible.
Increasing the number of parking stalls to accommodate all the users of the building and
outside amenities.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3) Page 3
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update
Increasing the size of meeting rooms to allow for accommodating 50 people in each small
multi-purpose rooms and allowing them to open up to have capacity for 150 participants for
special events and large gathering space.
Design the interpretive center building to incorporate net zero/energy efficient standards.
Current interpretive center location would be repurposed as an outdoor education/community
gathering space.
NEXT STEPS: Staff is not expecting a decision at this meeting. This meeting was intended to
present the Master Plan and the concepts that came out of the process. Should the Council at some
point in time want to continue the plan for a new facility, the next steps are as follows:
Schematic Design Phase
Design Development Phase
Construction Documents Phase
If a new building is not in the plans for future consideration, facilities maintenance staff will have
to undertake a significant effort to evaluate the existing facility and plan for major renovations. At
this point, we do not have an estimate as to what that might cost. Brian Hoffman will be present at
the meeting if there are further questions about the existing building.
Master Plan Consulting Services for
May 23, 2016
Submitted by:
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 4
Master Plan
For
Westwood Hills Nature
Center
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Prepared For:
The City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
3700 Monterey Drive
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Prepared By:
Miller Dunwiddie Architecture, Inc.
123 North Third Street, Suite 104
Minneapolis, MN 55401
In Consultation With:
SRF Consulting
One Carlson Parkway North
Minneapolis MN
May 23, 2016
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 5
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
May 23, 2016
City of St Louis Park City Council
Jake Spano-Mayor
Steve Halfin
Susan Sanger
Anne Mavity
Gregg Lindberg
Tim Brausen
Thom Miller
City of St Louis Park City Staff
Operations and Recreation
Cindy Walsh – Director
Jason West – Recreation Superintendent
Inspection Department
Brian Hoffman – Director
Westwood Hills Nature Center
Mark Oestreich – Nature Center Manager
Mark Zembrkyi – Interpretive Naturalist
Becky McConnell – Interpretive Naturalist
Greg Feinberg – Interpretive Naturalist
Carrie Mandler – Secretary / Program Aide
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
i
Page
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 1
Approach
Process
Existing Program and Facility Review ................................................................................................... 3
Background and Facility Timeline
Existing Programming
Built Features
Interpretive Center (6)
Apiary (11)
Overlook Deck (12)
Storage Shed (13)
Site Features
Vision – The Plan ................................................................................................................................ 17
Trends
Community Input and Needs Summary
Program
Concept/Next Steps
Opinion of Probable Cost .................................................................................................................... 29
Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………31
Appendix A
Staff Facility Needs and Review
Appendix B
Community Input
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
1
OUTDOOR LEARNING AT WESTWOOD
APPROACH
The Westwood Hills Nature Center (WHNC) has been a
treasured gem within the City of St. Louis Park since it was
acquired in 1959. This 160 acre park has tremendous
potential to enhance nature and recreational programming
for the community, but is currently limited by the size, poor
conditions, and site facilities of the existing building.
Recognizing this potential, the city determined the need for
this Master Plan.
Successful community spaces must continue to serve the
changing needs of the public and, as such, future planning
and improvements for the current WHNC are needed. The
purpose of this Master Plan is to:
Review the current facility both the building and site to
provide recommended changes and improvements.
Evaluate programming and develop a plan for future
recreational and educational needs.
Understand and reflect the need of the community
and identify the vision and path for future
development.
The Master Plan reviewed programmatic and functional
needs as well as existing conditions of the site and buildings.
Through assessment of the nature center, it was determined
that the Interpretation Center building is too small and not
sustainable and the maintenance is determined to not be
cost effective.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
2
PROCESS
In practice, Westwood Hills models
and promotes stewardship,
sustainability, and a deeper
ecological understanding through
direct experience, using our
resources to provide connecting
places and enhance quality of life
in the community.
This Master Plan was completed using a collaborative
approach that focused the creativity of the team and
community on a shared strategic vision that outlines; how
the facility should function, how the facility should and does
engage and fit within the community, and how the facility
maintains a legacy for future generations.
The material presented in this Master Plan is based on: visual
inspections, a review of existing site and facility conditions,
field verifications and oral or written comments from an
online website open throughout the process, community
events and two onsite stakeholder input
meetings/workshops open to the public.
Recommended improvements include: access, wayfinding,
parking, outdoor program space, interpretive features,
building upgrades and other appropriate improvements.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 9
EXISTING PROGRAM AND FACILITY REVIEW
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
3
FACILITY TIMELINE
1930
1957
1959
1960’S
1970
1971
1975
1978
1979
1981
1991
2011
Land used as a fox farm and public golf course
Carl L. Gardner and Associates investigate the feasibility
of the city acquiring all or portions of the Westwood Golf
Course as an addition to the city’s park and recreation
facilities
The City of St Louis
Park acquires 90
acres from the golf
course (Robert
McNulty) for public
park use
The City of St Louis Park acquires additional land
through federal, state, and city grants. Land used as a
day camp
Feasibility study for Westwood Hills Environmental
Interpretive Center is prepared by Brauer & Associates
A citizen’s advisory committee is formed by the St Louis
Park City Council to help plan the Westwood Hills
Interpretive Center
The St Louis Park City Council establishes a Westwood
Hills advisory committee
Building prospectus for Westwood Hills Environmental
Education Center created
Project manual developed for the construction of
Westwood Hills Environmental Education Center-
designed by Smiley Glotter Associates; City Council
approves motion to accept construction bids for the
building
Nature Center building occupied by staff
Westwood Hills Nature Center celebrates its 10th
anniversary; Sunrise Rotary deck built; new trail signs
installed
Westwood Hills Nature Center Celebrates its 30th
anniversary
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 10
EXISTING PROGRAM AND FACILITY REVIEW
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
4
SITE MAP/SITE DIRECTORY
PLAY STRUCTURE
NATURAL PLAY AREA
EXISTING PROGRAMMING
CASUAL USE
The emphasis of the WHNC is to welcome visitors to enjoy
and engage in the natural beauty of the site. Casual use of
the site is available from the main park entrance during
open trail hours – posted as dawn to dusk. Many individuals
use the park for recreational walks throughout the day. The
trail system includes a 5 miles loop around the 60 acre
Westwood
Lake that
takes visitors
through marsh
areas
surrounding
the lake on
boardwalks,
and at grade
trails along the
water’s edge.
Trail spurs also BOARDWALK OVER TURTLE POND
extend into
wooded and prairie
habitats of the site.
Other casual use tends to be focused at the playground
structure, natural play area and climbing formations west of
the parking area. The natural play area which is formed of
natural elements includes all kinds of areas to explore and is
one of the more popular use areas. Accessible public
comfort facilities and an enclosed rental facility are located
in the adjacent building. Picnic tables for casual use are
also located dispersed within this area.
PROGRAMMED USE
WHNC has an ongoing and long term relationship with St
Louis Park Community Education Program and School
District. Programmed activities, either scheduled through
school outing/field trip programs or classes offered by the
center to the public, invite thousands of nature loving
participants each year. Programs focus on activities
available for all ages from preschool to seniors.
Programming at the WHNC is planned around all the unique
features it has to offer.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 11
EXISTING PROGRAM AND FACILITY REVIEW
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
5
HIVES BEHIND THE APIARY
RAPTOR DISPLAY AREA
ANIMAL EXHIBIT
Some of the current planned programs and camps include:
Programming focused on unique natural site features
available at WHNC …
Pollywogs Preschool Camp – utilizing senses to delve
into the woods, marsh and prairie
Nature for the Very Young: Peer into the Pond
Evening Canoeing for Adults
Watershed
…and built features
Puppet Story Time: Buggin Out or Don’t Bee Afraid –
shows given from the puppet stage
Honeybees and Beekeeping
PUPPET STAGE
… and seasonal changes
Nature for the Very Young: April Showers
Maple Syrup
Spring photography
Chickadee Carpentry
Winter Ecology
…and all things natural – some in captivity, some not
Dragons of the Sky
Critters Close Up
Life Under a Log
Everything Grows
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 12
EXISTING PROGRAM AND FACILITY REVIEW
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
6
FRONT APPROACH TO BUILDING
MAIN ENTRANCE
WEST SIDE OF BUILDING
EXISTING BUILDING CONDITION
INTERPRETIVE CENTER - EXTERIOR
The WHNC is in poor to fair condition related to the overall
condition of materials based on their age and original
integrity. The original exterior design utilized a simple
palette of materials consisting of rock faced concrete
block, standing seam metal panels and painted wood
paneling or siding.
- The concrete block and metal panels are in fair
condition with some impact damage in isolated areas.
- The painted wood siding is a style commonly known as
T11 and a typical building material for this period of
construction. This material is in poor condition with
some paint and wood fiber damage where material
has come in contact with grade and/or water. The
use of this material in the construction industry has
diminished due to quality and vulnerability to
deterioration.
- The construction of the exterior walls are simple
concrete block construction with no insulation or vapor
barrier. While a typical detail for the time of
construction, it is not an energy efficient building.
The main entrance approach
is a nondescript opening in
the concrete block wall
facing north. This is not an
ideal or welcoming entrance
point. Additionally, safety
elements for the staff should
be incoporated, as it is
impossible to see people
entering the building. Once
through this opening there is
a single glass and
prefinished aluminum
entrance door visible to the
east or a projecting
vestibule and entrance to
the north. There is no
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 13
EXISTING PROGRAM AND FACILITY REVIEW
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
7
PORTION OF BUILDING BELOW GRADE
differentiation to these entrances, which has led to
confusion for visitors. The projecting glass vestibule opens
into the interior shared use space that can conflict with
programming and building access control.
The back or eastern portion of the building is mostly below
grade and is adjacent to a trail. There is a perennial
problem of water infiltration into the building at this
location. The north end of the building is where the
overnight areas for the resident birds are located. These
are constructed of wood paneling with mesh or screen
opening.
The west elevation faces the water garden and is
comprised of standing seam metal fascia from the roof
edge to approximately
8’ above grade. Below
the metal fascia is wood
paneling with prefinished
aluminum windows and
a glass entrance
vestibule. At the north
end of the west
elevation is a service
entrance for staff. This
entrance is covered on
the interior with blinds as
this door opens directly
into the support and
storage area.
STAFF ENTRANCE/STORAGE AREA
The existing roof membrane is in poor condition with some
seasonal leaking occurring.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 14
EXISTING PROGRAM AND FACILITY REVIEW
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
8
INTERIOR DISPLAYS
STUDENTS ATTENDING PROGRAM
INTERIOR CORRIDOR
INTERPRETIVE CENTER – INTERIOR
The Interpretive Center Building is a 2,700 square foot
municipal facility that is undersized to meet the current
demands of the staff and programming. Due to the overall
scale and layout of the building, it is carefully scheduled to
accommodate the variety of programmatic and functional
needs served throughout any given day. Programming is
often altered based on how many the building can fit or
when there are no other scheduled activities, rather than
what is needed or desired for the community. This limits the
extent and flexibility of the programming offered.
Overall the current building includes; a reception area with
private office, a small gathering space with an operable
vinyl dividing wall and a counter with cabinets and sink at
the far end, a corridor leads to the buildings toilet facilities,
an office area serving staff, and minimal program support
and prep areas. The small gathering space is used for
student orientation, puppet shows, animal observation, and
everything else that the center wishes to do. When the wall
is closed to divide the room, there is the opportunity for the
physical division of people and activities but acoustically
there is minimal separation making concurrent use difficult.
Closing the wall also short circuits the air circulation of the
building’s mechanical system, negatively impacting the
temperature in both spaces.
The exterior entry vestibule at the center of the building
opens directly into the gathering space, and can cause
conflicts for ongoing events. Another conflict to the use of
the space is the care and tending of the program animals.
All care activities occur within the space and typically
require the corridor to be blocked.
Another concern for staff is that they are separated by
having two locations; one at the front of the building and
one at the rear. There is one single window offering
daylight for the staff areas at the rear of the building and
the layout allows no prep, collaborative, storage, or
organizational space. The prep area for the program
animals’ food is combined with other storage and is in close
proximity to the staff area. All of these functions occur in
what was intended as the buildings exit corridor.
The mechanical system and units based on their age are
beyond their anticipated useful life. The original below
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 15
EXISTING PROGRAM AND FACILITY REVIEW
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
9
STAFF PREP
STUDENTS IN CLASSROOM
PROGRAM STAFF WORK AREA
grade slab air distribution system raises concerns regarding
air quality, as well as the integrity of the ductwork.
INTERPRETIVE CENTER
Summary of Exterior/Interior Building Deficiencies-Findings:
Overall building condition is poor
Overall building size is too small for current use
Water infiltration at backside of building is ongoing
concern for building integrity and interior condition of
space
Leaking roof is a concern for material condition and
air quality within space
Energy inefficient building
Entrance is not welcoming and staff cannot see who is
entering front desk area
Multiple sets of doors on west side of building confuse
wayfinding
Location of building farther away from parking lot
than desired for small children, the elderly, or
physically challenged
The location of building means visitor trail access and
vehicle access is on same paved trail, causing safety
conflicts between visitor and vehicle traffic
Building condition and material quality is poor and
lacks the long-term durability of a building that
represents the legacy and character of this site
Building is not large enough to provide necessary
programmatic function for visitors, students or staff
Energy performance and comfort of building is poor
Building provides inadequate storm shelter
Mechanical system is inadequate and includes below
grade duct work which cannot be maintained
This is the only large municipal building in St Louis Park
that is not equipped with a fire suppression system
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 16
EXISTING PROGRAM AND FACILITY REVIEW
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
10
PROGRAM STAFF AREA
PROGRAM RAPTOR HOUSING
INTERPRETIVE CENTER – cont.
Reuse or continued use of building would require:
Complete renovation of all finishes and systems for
continued use including:
Removal and replacement of roof including addition
of insulation to meet energy code. May require
modification at roof edge at metal fascia to conceal
height of insulation
Removal and replacement of damaged wood
paneling
Modification to south entrance to make more
appealing approach and improve safety
Removal and replacement of windows to a thermally
broken system
Excavation, installation of drain tile and waterproofing
at east elevation to correct water infiltration
Correct approach to building to provide accessible
route from parking and trails
Upgrade all finishes
Add additional windows in spaces without or with
minimal natural light
Add approximately 9,000 SF addition to
accommodate programmatic needs including:
classroom space, code compliant toilet rooms,
storage, staff support and animal food prep area
Replace mechanical systems including complete
removal of below slab ventilation system and addition
of new ceiling mounted distribution system
Upgrade all lighting
Install sprinkler and upgrade alarm system
Due to the number of deficiencies and poor conditions of
existing building, reusing the building is not a wise
investment.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 17
EXISTING PROGRAM AND FACILITY REVIEW
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
11
WEST SIDE OF APIARY
VIEW OF APIARY
APIARY
The apiary is a single room used for beekeeping education
and seasonal storage when no longer programmed during
the year. The exterior is of the same painted T11 wood
paneling that is used on the nature center. There is some
visible deterioration and damage of the paneling due to
birds, insects and moisture. The roof is a low slope asphalt
shingle in fair condition. Due to the low slope the life
expectancy of the asphalt is slightly lessened. Based on the
appearance it is within 8 – 10 years of replacement.
Summary of Deficiencies - Findings:
Building material condition and original construction
integrity is poor
Building does serve its intended use but could use
some interior improvements including; platforms for
viewing, carpet replacement and electrical upgrades
in both service and lighting
Location of building could allow it to be used for other
activities related to the pond. Impact to bees would
need to be considered
Reuse or continued use of building would require:
Mainenance and upgrades based on correcting
deficiencies above.
RENTAL SIDE OF BUILDING
PLAYGROUND/MAINTENANCE BUILDING
This structure was recently built to provide a rental
opportunity, accessible public convenience facilities and
maintenance storage adjacent to the play area and
parking. Building was reviewed only as a component within
the park that adds to programmatic support. Building
currently is used by Nature Center staff as a covered
support space for programming in inclimate weather.
Overall, the building meets its intended purpose.
Summary of Deficiencies - Findings:
Recent construction - no deficiencies to note
Reuse or continued use of building would require:
Ongoing maintenance as required to maintain current
condition
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 18
EXISTING PROGRAM AND FACILITY REVIEW
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
12
OVERLOOK FROM WATER FEATURE
OVERLOOK FROM RAISED WALK
OVERLOOK DECK
The overlook deck is a raised wood structure with supporting
posts, metal rod and wood rail with a split shed roof. The
lookout is in good condition. It was originally designed and
built as a destination to experience both the lake and the
man made water feature and garden. There is furniture
that sits under the roof structure for casual seating but limits
the use of the feature for larger groups. The overall size and
experience does not invite many to use on a regular basis.
Summary of Deficiencies - Findings:
Building material condition and original construction
integrity is good
Programmatically it could be improved to allow better
accommodation for group use. In particular, the
seating that is available for casual, individual use is in
the way when a group uses the space.
Reuse or continued use of building would require:
Possible addition towards lake to create separate
classroom or individual use areas
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 19
EXISTING PROGRAM AND FACILITY REVIEW
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
13
SOUTH CORNER OF BUILDING
SHED ENTRANCE DOORS
STORAGE SHED
The storage shed is comprised of three areas: one area is
enclosed by walls and a gable roof served by a single
aluminum man door, another area is enclosed with walls
and a shed roof accessed by plywood hinged double
doors and the final area is a fenced exterior storage yard.
All three areas are simple wood structures that are in poor
condition. Condition or existence of structural footings is
unknown. The gable roofed portion has a plywood floor
presumably over grade. The pitched roof end of the
building and the fenced in area have dirt floors. Overall
condition of the structure is poor and is not ideal for
intended programmatic needs.
Summary of Deficiencies - Findings:
Building material condition and original construction
integrity is poor
Building does not provide necessary programmatic
function for dry and rodent proof storage
Location makes the storage building one of first
structures to be seen by visitors upon arrival and forces
visitors to walk on the same paved trail as service
vehicles going back and forth to the storage shed
Reuse or continued use of building would require:
Removal is recommended.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 20
EXISTING PROGRAM AND FACILITY REVIEW
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
14
ENTRANCE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD
ENTRANCE SIGN
ENTRANCE DRIVEWAY
WESTWOOD HILLS ACCESS
The nature center’s central location within the west metro
area provides convenient access for many local schools
and area residents to explore an intimate natural resource
environment which offers interaction with a wide variety of
water, vegetation, and wildlife resources. While there are
many attractive features and amenities that make the
nature center a highly valued facility for the city and its
residents, opportunities exist to plan for new improvements
which can better meet the needs of all nature center user
groups.
The main public vehicular access for the nature center is
located on the south side of the property along West
Franklin Avenue. Efforts should be made to reorganize
some of the landscape and sign elements along the street
edge to improve visibility of the entrance and create a
better sense of arrival for visitors.
Surrounding private property, steep topography and
wetlands limit other public access opportunities for the site.
Several nature center spur trails also connect to residential
neighborhoods on the east and west sides of the property.
Pedestrian access to the nature center building is
approximately four hundred feet from the existing parking
lot which presents some difficulties for physically challenged
visitors and seniors to walk to the building because of steep
trail gradients. Identifying alternative trail alignments or
providing better proximity between the building and
parking lot should be evaluated as part of future
improvements to be implemented at the nature center.
Some consideration should be given to adding a second
small canoe launch area on the south side of the lake to
allow for more convenient access to the lake from the
nature center and visitor entrance.
Summary of Deficiencies-Findings:
Lack of signage or visual cues to direct pedestrians or
vehicles and to indicate entrance
Orientation/condition
Reuse or continued use of site requires:
Upgrade signage within the community and at main
entrance
Improve organization of landscape and other visual
cues to demarcate entrance
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 21
EXISTING PROGRAM AND FACILITY REVIEW
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
15
TRAIL ACCESS FROM PARKING
TRAIL ACCESS
The existing pedestrian trail and boardwalk system provides
access to most areas of the property and several overlooks
allow visitors the opportunity to get close to the shoreline of
Westwood Lake.
Summary of Deficiencies-Findings:
Physical separation or distance from amenities and
topography of trails limit access to some features
Reuse or continued use of site requires:
Relocation of features and upgrades to trails and
access to allow physical access for all
EXISTING PARKING
PARKING
With increased programming and larger events being
hosted at the nature center, the existing parking lot and
drop off area are not large enough to meet the demand
for general public parking and school user groups. To
prevent the need for parking in adjacent residential streets,
opportunities exist to expand parking capacity south of the
current parking lot where there would be minimal impacts
on existing vegetation and nature center amenities.
Reconfiguration of the parking area will also allow for
surrounding walk circulation to be improved to avoid
conflicts between vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
Summary of Deficiencies-Findings:
Current configuration does not meet current or any
proposed future needs of site
Access of vehicles and pedestrians can be in conflict
with current configuration
Reuse or continued use of site requires:
Expansion and reconfiguration of parking is required
for current and future needs
Allow overflow parking, detailed in natural materials,
so that it is experienced as natural open space when
not being used for vehicles
Reconfigure trail and walk access within and
adjoining parking areas
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 22
EXISTING PROGRAM AND FACILITY REVIEW
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
16
HILLSIDE PRAIRIE NEAR ENTRANCE TO PARK
TOPOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE
Steep topography and natural drainage ways throughout
the property minimize the potential for expanding trail
systems and adding new amenities at the nature center.
Consideration for any new trail, site, or building
improvement should strive to integrate sustainable design
solutions to ensure storm water runoff is treated onsite, and
grading and vegetation impacts are minimized to protect
the sensitive natural resource environment of the park.
Summary of Deficiencies-Findings:
Natural site features, specifically changes in
elevation, make trail access and erosion an ongoing
concern
Reuse or continued use of site requires:
Expand looped trail circulation around the
perimeter of an expanded water garden area
within the current nature center building footprint.
Integrate best proactive storm water management
TURTLE POND
NATURAL RESOURCES
A wide variety of natural resources exist throughout the
nature center including lake, pond, and marsh water
resources, maple basswood and pine forests, and upland
prairie located on the southeast corner of the property.
With a natural resource management plan in place, efforts
should continue for eliminating invasive plant material to
improve the overall quality of vegetation and wildlife
habitat in the park. Consideration should also be given to
expanding natural resource interpretive opportunities
throughout the park.
Summary of Deficiencies-Findings:
Outdoor educational components could be
expanded to include more interpretive signage
along trail systems
Reuse or continued use of site requires:
Create facility that can support expanded
programming
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 23
VISION
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
17
TRENDS
The designers of successful space that serves the public
must continually challenge the ability of space to be
flexible, convenient and easily maintained. The design for a
nature center increases this need by adding activities that
include animals and mud.
The trends in design for these facilities must push the
boundaries of both physical and operational design and
management. Modern design for these facilities is also
asked to respond to continually changing social trends and
demographics. The increased awareness of the health
benefits of nature have caused our society to realize that
the flip side of not addressing this benefit is a generation of
people with a nature deficit disorder. The long term impact
being, not just to an individual, but to the overall
environment, as an adolescent’s concern for the world
around them has declined.
Expanding programming or creating programming that
increases an interest in gardening, foraging and
beekeeping, to name a few, all play a major role in
reigniting a concern for the environment for both youth and
older generations. Addressing sustainable practices and
conservation awareness allows members of the community
to learn these values early in life and to become lifelong
learners. Having a nature center that provides a wide
range of learning gives it the stability to be and remain at
the center of a communities focus.
Being a center that can be flexible and offer a variety of
nature based recreation opportunities also increases its use
and viability. This emphasis can relate to small measures like
expanding use and variety of trails to creating
demonstrations and interactive learning opportunities.
Opportunities that create memorable experiences.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 24
VISION
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
18
COMMUNITY INPUT
Based on an understanding of the existing conditions and
conversations with the community and staff, it is very apparent
that the (WHNC) does a number of things wonderfully. The
WHNC also has a number of challenges. The programming,
energy, and creativity of the staff often make up for the
challenges of the building and space.
The main emphasis and focus of the community comments
that were gathered online, during the Halloween party, and
during the first community meeting, is that WHNC is great as it
is. Change very little unless change is required to allow WHNC
to function and continue to offer the great programming it
always has.
Many of these sentiments are not new to the center or
program. Some of the original programming work that was
completed prior to the construction of the 1981 building
identified a number of needs that still remain today. The
existing building does provide a space for staff and a space to
gather but does not provide room to truly realize the WHNC’s full potential.
A number of the program aspects outlined during the early planning for the original 1981 WHNC area
all sentiments that align and resonate with the information received and discussed with the
community, city, and staff. These program aspects include:
Support full range of environmental programs
Reflect concern of awareness for natural environment
Meet challenges of seasonal needs for curriculum
Flexible and adaptable design to meet variable situations
Nature is the focal point of the site-not building
Building should complement site and blend into surroundings
Function is to support programs
Design should express need to conserve and utilize various forms of energy available
Ease of maintenance
Configuration of rooms should create feeling of openness and intimacy with the outdoors
Minimize visual and audio distractions
This original vision for the center’s main focus is still valid today. It demonstrates how the center has
been steadfast in its goals. It also demonstrates that there is a parallel to the issues identified by staff
and the community today and that a number of the issues and goals remain unsatisfied. The
challenges of the existing building make the full realization of these aspects very difficult. The limited
space and inability to divide the space both physically and acoustically limits the ability to achieve
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 25
VISION
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
19
many of the center’s goals. Programming is often altered based on how many the building can fit or
schedules are based on when no other activity is scheduled onsite rather than what is needed or
desired for the community.
Based on the deficiencies, needs, and how the site is currently configured, the design team looked at
a number of options. These options included expanding the existing building footprint at the current
location or providing a new facility at numerous locations on the property. A presentation of the
options was made to city staff. Based on city staff input, a preliminary recommendation to relocate
the main building to the south was presented during the second community meeting.
At the meeting, the design team discussed the facility’s needs and offered images and diagrams of
how a new facility could be designed and situated on the site and to determine peoples’ reaction to
a number of varying facility types. Removing the existing building allows expanded programming to
occur adjacent to the water feature and garden. Bringing the facility building further to the south also
allows parking to remain relatively in the same location. This keeps the impact of the construction on
the site to a contained area and allows the many other natural features of the center to remain
untouched.
Those attending felt that the ideal building would fit into the larger natural context of the site and
would disappear. Images of grass roofs and open window walls for viewing were preferred over more
utilitarian structures. Planned outdoor space was discussed and opportunities for development of
alternative gathering areas within the building were reviewed but overall the comments reflected on
what the facility needs to do in order to perform and maintain the great feel and function of it
currently offers.
Energy efficiency and sustainable practices were seen as opportunities and necessities.
Alternative energy and best practice for thermal performance were noted. These goals were also
reinforced at the city level and future design should strive to meet the criteria of net zero.
Similar nature center facilities either just completed or in planning, confirm the vision and necessary
physical changes needed at the WHNC. Eastman Nature Center just recently completed a new
building and determined that in order to adequately provide the space and facility they need, the
new building needed to be just under 12,000 SF. Many of these facilities include ample staff space for
quiet work, activity preparation, and storage. Two to three classrooms, sized to accommodate 50
students is very typical. Varied types of gathering from small groups to areas that can hold mid-sized
events are designed into the overall layout.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 26
VISION
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
20
RECOMMENDED LAYOUT AND PROGRAM-SITE
Build a New Nature Center Building
The reorganization of some outdoor spaces and amenities at the nature center will allow for more
activities and functions to be better accommodated and expanded where necessary to meet current
programming needs.
The following
recommendations
have been identified
to be addressed as
part of future
improvements to be
made at the nature
center.
Trail Circulation and
Wayfinding
With a desire to retain
as much existing trail
circulation as possible,
some minor trail
realignments and
connections will be
needed to
accommodate the
new building location
and expanded water
garden area where
the current building is
located. The more
centralized location for
the proposed new
building should also
provide the
opportunity to establish
a more visible trailhead
which can orient and
direct visitors to other
destinations at the
nature center.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 27
VISION
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
21
Additional Parking
In order to meet the demand for additional parking at the nature center, the parking lot has been
reconfigured and expanded farther to the south to accommodate additional spaces and a more
expansive drop off area to the meet needs of school bus groups and summer camp activities.
Sustainable design strategies for incorporating permeable paving, storm water infiltration basins and
security lighting should all be incorporated into redesign of the parking lot.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 28
VISION
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
22
Expanded Outdoor Classroom Area and Water Garden
Based on the need to be able to accommodate larger groups of visitors and allow for more
programming opportunities, an expanded outdoor classroom and water garden area is proposed
where the current nature center building is located. This will allow for a wider variety of activities and
events to be hosted at the nature center in a large dedicated outdoor gathering space to be used by
school children and adult groups.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 29
VISION
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
23
Expanded Natural Play and Outdoor Education Area
Opportunities should be explored for expanding natural play features to complement the existing
structured play equipment and climbing boulders which are a popular destination for local
neighborhood residents. New types of natural play to be introduced could include water play,
boulder climbing embankments, and an adventure trail which could offer creative mobility challenges
for children. Other considerations for enhancing educational components to this area of the nature
center could include expanding participatory garden areas and developing outdoor exhibit and work
spaces to support nature center programming.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 30
VISION
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
24
Improved Canoe/Kayak Launch
The current location of the existing canoe/kayak launch area is challenging to access for nature
center staff and user groups and does not offer nearby conveniences like toilet facilities, drinking
water, and seating areas. Options should be considered for installing vault toilets and other amenities
at this location
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 31
VISION
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
25
INTERPRETIVE CENTER BUILDING – PROGRAM FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION
The programmatic needs for interior space outlines a building around 12,000 SF. This is similar to
the space requirements outlined for the original 1980 program and still remains the requirement
today. This area was also reviewed in comparison to a number of other nature centers and is very
comparative to the functions and needs accommodated.
Current
Proposed 2016 Needs-
Future Building Design
Entry
Recessed feeling-uninviting. Entrance 600 SF
Area sets overall character and tone for the
building and center experience. Welcoming.
Point of control and orientation. Possible point
of sale for retail.
Offices
Manager’s Office:
Isolated at front of building.
Combined office/staff area 1600 SF
Large open office with flexible work stations
and collaboration areas. Direct connection to
entrance. Proximity to educational areas.
Access to support, storage areas and exterior.
Break area is included within space. Views
out to site and to spaces within building.
Naturalist’s Office:
8 staff members share small office with minimal
natural lighting and no views.
Intern work space:
No assigned area-prep, storage, and support are
located in what was originally designed as an exit
corridor.
Secretarial:
Open counter that controls one door of building
but has no connection to building or site.
Workshop
Some activities occur in staff corridor. Support/Storage 1400 SF
Space designed to include shelves and bins
for storage and would include work area that
is separated to control dust. Provide with
ample light and ventilation.
Reading Resource Area
Resources are on shelf in corridor within the staff
area.
Rest/Relax 600 SF
Quiet area with views for bird watching.
Furnished with comfortable furniture for
individual use or casual gathering. Some
storage for reading materials.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 32
VISION
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
26
Exhibit Area
Multi-purpose area Display/Animals 800 SF
Transition area between gathering space and
classrooms. Animal display and education.
Animal habitats would back against animal
care support space so that cage cleaning
and feeding can occur from support area and
not public area. Area would include
refrigeration and sink for storage and prep.
Oversized mop sink would be provided for
cage cleaning.
Main Auditorium
Multi-purpose room-combined with exhibit area Gathering/Exhibit 1200 SF
Space for interactive display and play.
Display area could include teaching tool for
how the physical building powered by
alternative energy sources is performing.
Space becomes point of engagement and
orientation for activities within building and
those that expand out into the site. Access to
all areas of the building flow through this
space. Views and natural light are
fundamental to making the building part of
the overall environment.
Art/EducationArea
No defined area Multi-Purpose Rooms 1-2 2000 SF
1000 SF each designed for educational
material delivery and hands on interaction.
Ability to join rooms for larger functions. Views
and access to exterior.
Multi-Purpose Classroom
Combined with exhibit area Multi-Purpose Room 3 1000 SF
Designed for wet work. When combined with
other rooms becomes food service area.
Kitchen Area/Serving
Small area is provided in corridor by staff area
and separate counter area with multi-purpose
room is provided
Serving 700 SF
Is it not intended or recommended to provide
a kitchen but the building will be able to
accommodate catering. Within the loading
and service area space will be designed and
identified for food service with appropriate
power, ventilation, and plumbing.
Circulation
Corridor at back of building Corridor 700 SF
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 33
VISION
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
27
Restrooms
Restrooms 600 SF
Family and all access restrooms meeting full
occupants load of building. Separate staff
area with shower.
Mechanical/Electrical
Building lacks temperature control and compliant
energy code and life safety features.
Mechanical 800 SF
Design of building envelope and systems
should address goal of a net zero facility.
Building will require full sprinkler system.
Electrical service should be reviewed to
accommodate actual loading and need of
building.
TOTAL 12,000 SF
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 34
VISION
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
28
NEXT STEPS
There are multiple phases to designing a project before it is
constructed. These phases are as follows:
1. Feasibility Study/Master Plan (current step)
2. Schematic Design
3. Design Development
4. Construction Documents
This report compiled information that is at a master planning phase.
The next steps would be review of the provided program and
progression to a Schematic Design level. Following the Schematic
Design phase process to Design Development.
During Design Development, the design team works closely with the
owner group to finalize the design, i.e. room layouts. This is also the
time to determine if the work will be completed in phases, and what
those phases will be. During this phase, interior finishes should be
reviewed and it is also standard to engage the services of a
construction estimator to review costs and present an updated cost
estimate to ensure the project is still on budget, and if not, determine
what changes can be made.
After all of the design decisions have been made, it is customary to
move into the Construction Documents phase. This is when all of the
small details are worked out and construction documents are
generated for contractors to work from.
After the design phases are complete, the architect should be
engaged to provide assistance with Construction Administration
which includes:
a. The bidding phase, i.e. contractor selection.
b. Attend construction meetings.
c. Prepare observation reports for tracking construction
progress.
d. Respond to contractor’s requests for information,
changes, and review payment applications.
e. Conduct final site observation punch list
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 35
OPINIONS OF PROBABLE COST
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
29
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
Each cost is individually calculated to include construction general conditions (permits, construction
equipment rental, etc.), and escalation at midpoint of construction. All costs are provided in May 2016
dollars. Cost includes an allowance for building FFE (furniture, fixture, equipment allowance) but does
not include other Owner costs, also known as soft costs. Design fees can represent between 9% and
12% of the overall construction fee dependent on number of required consultants*. Design fees are
not included in the design costs outlined below. The scope of this project would include at a minimum
the following consultants: Architect, Civil Engineer, Landscape Architect, Structural Engineer,
Mechanical and Electrical Engineer. Other disciplines that could be included on the team are:
acoustical designer, lighting designer, energy modeling (if not included in mechanical engineer’s
scope), systems programmer (if interactive energy program exhibit is desired), exhibit designer and
animal specialist.
A 25% design and construction contingency is standard for programming. This contingency is included
in the numbers listed below. As decisions are made throughout the design process and the project
moves closer to the completion of construction documents, new estimates should be prepared and
contingencies can be lowered. However, it is recommended that owners maintain approximately 10%
for contingency during construction for unforeseen conditions.
New Building Construction $8,820,000
New building construction (building envelope, finishes and systems, utilities, net zero)
Exhibits – public art/interactive displays
Landscaping – perimeter of building
Demolition of existing nature center
FFE (furniture, fixture, equipment allowance)
Parking Lot Expansion $580,000
Parking lot and drop off area (assume 100 spaces)
Lighting
Permeable paving parking bays
Expanded Outdoor Classroom and Water Garden Area $450,000
Outdoor classroom
Expanded upper pond and garden area
Upper pond bridge crossing
Garden and outdoor classroom trail circulation
Lawn staging areas
Hillside trail and overlooks
Boulder outfall stream and lower pond
Lawn staging areas
Stream boardwalk crossing
Lower trail boardwalk crossing
Turtle pond
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 36
OPINIONS OF PROBABLE COST
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
30
Expanded Natural Play and Programming Area $100,000
Boulder scramble
Water play and stream and pond
Log balance
Adventure trail
Outdoor exhibit/classroom area
Butterfly garden
Vegetable garden plots
Expanded lawn/picnic area space
Interpretation/wayfinding signage
Canoe/Kayak Launch Improvements $52,000
Toilets
Drinking water
Subtotal
Design Fees (12%)*
PROJECT GRAND TOTAL
$10,002,000
$1,200,000
$11,202,000
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 37
SUMMARY
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
31
The Westwood Hills Nature Center has been a treasured gem within the City of St. Louis Park since it was
first acquired in 1959. After completing the master plan study we find ourselves with exciting possibilities
to expand the programming and facility opportunities. A new interpretive center will create an
improved gathering space for quality of life in the community. Recommendations within this plan
address the current demand and future needs of drop in visitors, program participants and people
seeking solitude, simultaneously.
For nearly 60 years the city has been on a path of preservation, education and creating community
gathering space and with the possibilities in this plan Westwood Hills Nature Center is poised to move
forward for the community to enjoy many more years in the future.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 38
APPENDIX A
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
Appendix A
APPENDIX A-INDEX AND DESCRIPTION ...............................................
Staff Facility Needs/Review
Site Visit and Staff Conversation/Interview
• Pre-meeting questionnaire and response - Provided to staff prior to meeting to
direct conversation.
• List of existing site amenities – Common list started prior to site visit and staff
conversation. Used to double check all amenities were part of the
conversation.
• MDA/SRF Interview Notes – Notes taken during the site visit and in conversation
with staff including:
- Deficiencies, concerns and or interesting information regarding the sites
existing conditions
- Discussion of existing programming
- Visioning of potential programming
• Staff Matrix of Needs – completed by the Westwood Hills staff to summarize their
challenges
Review/Concept Update Meeting
• Meeting Minutes
1
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 39
APPENDIX A
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
Appendix A
STAFF FACILITY NEEDS/REVIEW .............................................................................
Site Visit and Staff Interview
• Pre-meeting questionnaire and response
• List of existing site amenities
• MDA/SRF Interview Notes
• Staff Matrix of Needs
Review/Concept Update Meeting
• Meeting Minutes
3
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 40
PROGRAMMING QUESTIONAIRRE
Westwood Nature Center, St Louis Park Page 1
In preparation for our meeting we would like you to review and respond to the following:
1. How is the space/area used?
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
2. What limits your use of the space/area? Condition, size, materials, lighting……some ideas,
please describe your concerns.
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
3. What is the space/area missing or lacking?
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
4. What activities do you currently not program because of the space/area?
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
5
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 41
Page 3 of 5
To model and promote stewardship, sustainability, and a deeper ecological understanding through
direct experience, using our resources to provide connecting places and enhance quality of life in the
community.
How is space/area used?
Drop‐in gathering space for families
Lunch spot for hiking groups and birders
Educational Exhibit Area for walk‐in visitors and programs
Classroom for school‐age and preschool
Kitchen for wild edibles classes, syruping and cidering
Arts and crafts space
Storage for program supplies
Staff meetings
City meetings
Volunteer breakfast
Preschool play area
Wildlife viewing
Volunteer service projects
Canoe equipment should be stored in a structure near the canoe dock
Snow shoe equipment needs to have a storage building near the Interpretive Center
Center needs a fully functional kitchen
Dishwasher should not be in program space
Severe weather shelter area is a must
Exhibit (general walk‐in)
Teaching
Staff meetings
Storage
Animal display and care
Hiking (outdoors)
Rentals – weddings, birthdays, private parties
School field trips
Public programs
General public use, walking, running, birding, fishing, canoeing, snow shoe
Passive recreation – quiet space
What limits your use of space/area?
Size and lack of separate areas
Needed for multiple use at one time
When in use for programs/classes, no room for drop‐in/walk‐in visitors and groups
Staff meetings in public space
Banks of fluorescent lights are good for some programs but not conducive to night and evening
programs – too bright and harsh
Water leakage impacts programming space
All tile leads to noise challenges and “cold” feeling
Each classroom should be self‐contained for basic instructional requirements, such as:
o Cabinet space
7
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 42
Page 4 of 5
o Computer with large screen display
o Whiteboards
o Counter space
o Sink
o A/V wiring
o Runners for pictures
o Area rugs
Hallway nearly impossible for general public during summer camps, winter break camps, etc.
Privacy – separate rooms for specific uses
Inability to have multiple programs at once or multiple rentals – requires more staff
Animal care – crowded and causes traffic jams
Place for meetings away from public
Bathrooms around N.C. (?)
People knowing about WW’s location
What is the space/area missing or lacking?
Separate area for staff meetings
Lunch area for staff
Public exhibit area
Storage not adequate for needs and not protected from mold and animal damage
Area for Jr. Naturalists to be when waiting for shifts to start or for rides to pick up
Volunteer area
An area with a cozy feel and comfortable chairs
Consolidated office area
See #2
Animal exhibits should have a complete working/care area directly behind the exhibit
Storage area (larger) for class supplies
More filing space
Separate conference area
Separate storage building for seasonal equipment near the Interpretive Center
Dedicated public seating area
Lunch area for large groups – 150 students
Break area
Separate rooms – some for public, meetings, programs, preschool, etc.
Green energy uses – solar panels?
Artwork
Better, more interactive play spot for kids
Café? Gift shop?
Interactive exhibits
Community garden
Full kitchen
Shower/locker room
Storage
More bathrooms or even just 1 more family/individual
Permanent archery
1 window!
8
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 43
Page 5 of 5
Copy machine around corner (noise distractions)
Park Packs and rental equipment in front desk area storage room
Animal care access that does not block hallway
Keep door that can close to exhibit room lockers
Shower room – indoor/outdoor for traffic flow
Concession area
Big window meeting room in front with curtains
Auditorium planetarium
Auto door timed opening
Laundry facility (mini)
Larger shelter venue
Larger parking area
What activities do you currently not program because of the space/area?
Groups over 75 at a time for building use
Limited on concurrent groups
Lose non‐formal, educational space/general public space when have camp or large programs
Interactive – crawl and explore
Green energy and also as educational piece
Separate programs and audiences cannot be scheduled for identical time periods due to space
limitations
Expand area to include a coffee shop center
Expand space for large gathering, separate from program areas
Add additional dioramas
More than 2 classes
All day school field trips for large groups – 150 students
Watershed, “green energy” windmills, solar panels
Preschool
Weddings – better private room rental
Geology, hydrology, climbing, cross‐country skiing, scientific method, astronomy, physics,
energy, fishing
Shelters – classes would have more space to build
Prairie trail would be nice addition
9
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 44
LIST OF EXISTING SITE AMENITITIES
Vehicle Access and Parking - General public and Operations/Maintenance
Entrances
Signage
Parking lots
Trail circulation
Pedestrian access from community
Surfacing and stair systems
Wayfinding
Interpretation
Accessibility and connectivity
Outdoor Programming Areas/Amenities
Prairie, Pine, Maple/Basswood , Marsh Areas
Westwood Lake
Boardwalks, piers and overlooks
Playground
Climbing rocks
Water garden
Deck and overlook
Amphitheater
Apiary Area
Garden and misc. outdoor education and gathering spaces
Picnic Area
Canoe/kayak facilities
Public Art
Buildings
Interpretive Center
Brick House
Maintenance building/shed
Others…
11
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 45
WWNC Building Item/Issue What’s working What’s not working What’s needed Notes Office Space for staff Everyone has their own desk, phone and pc. Use of natural light‐windows Key pad entry lock on doors Very cramped desk space. The offices are located at either end of the building. Very noisy atmosphere. Hard to control temps. Staff offices located together. Adequate desk space. Better HVAC control Exhibit/Display Space Some moveable exhibits Lots of windows Outdoor view of pond/wildlife No permanent space dedicated to exhibits/displays. Exhibit room separate from classrooms or other uses. Physical building used as a teaching tool/exhibit. Classrooms & Auditorium Exit to outdoors from classroom Windows Cupboards, countertops, sink in classroom No dedicated space for teaching students. No area for large assembly or presentations. Auditorium Several classrooms Av/IT in classrooms Storage space Over capacity. Storage spread out among several remote locations. Need ladders to get items down from top shelves. Ample storage space that is low and located in the same building. Room for future storage. Front Entry Sound door separating classroom from receptionist desk Noise. Drafty/cold. No windows. Too small‐no gathering area No visual of people entering. More natural light. Room for retail sales. Vestibule. Better Temp control. Welcoming feel. View of outside of front door. Open close sign Copy Center/Office Supplies Ricoh Machine. Too small. Limited storage space for supplies, maps, brochures, etc. 2 separate locations. Copy Center in 1 location. Central storage for all office supplies. 13Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan UpdatePage 46
Animal Care/Displays Front viewing area w/backside entry Modular Exhibit (Multi‐animals) Limited display area. Hallway blocked off whenever the cages are being cleaned/feed. Prep area separate from cages. Animal located in several areas. Better location of animal display. Larger habitat spaces with more features. Combine food prep area and displays. Keep all of the animals together and prep area. Have care access separate from public spaces. Staff Kitchen/Break area Dishwasher Space for staff to take a break away from their desks. Fridge space. Kitchen area. Staff Fridge. Dishwasher. Tables for break. Counter space Restrooms Large Hand washing sink outside of Bathrooms Too small for the number of people that use this building. Capacity for larger events. Larger restrooms. Staff Showers. Limited access to outside. Exhibits in bathrooms. Family Restroom. Water leaking along east side of building’s foundation into building. Leaks down wall and floods hallway floor. Drain Tile. Heating/cooling of building Tough to regulate temperature. Reused equipment. System designed for wood burning. Consistent temperatures. More energy efficient system.Green technology‐ Green roof, solar, geothermal, natural air movement. Interpretation/Signage Pests Mice, Moths eating items in storage and on display. Dying and smelly mice in ductwork and ceiling. A Hungry Cat. 14Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan UpdatePage 47
Preschool Play/Learning area Too small. Not dedicated to this use. Have to set up take down frequently. Large enough room for this age group. Larger space for free play/exploration. More Pre‐school sized themed exhibits. Chair & Table storage area Too small. Difficult to access items from closet, especially when a group is using that room. Dedicated storage area for these items. Adequate size. Educational Program Kitchen Kitchen to use for programs: Maple Syrup, Honey Harvest, Apple Press, edible foods, camps, sleepovers, etc. Staff Locker rooms with showers. Lack of storage for personal items – boots, coats, etc. Changing area, lockers and showers. Meeting room with large conference table. No permanent location. Meeting room with large table that is kept set up. Av equipment – TV, pc, screen, document camera, etc. Separate entrance w/ability to lock/limit entrance to the rest of building. Library Organized by current Library Standards. Not near program staff offices. Not enough shelf space. No public access. Large enough capacity for future growth. Area that the public could access. 15Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan UpdatePage 48
Staff Mailboxes Security Space Secure space for routing mail to staff that is not in the public space. File Storage Space Secure Storage More Capacity Secure Location Fire Protection CO2 Protection Smoke Detectors Eye wash station No Protection except for plug in CO2 and 2 smoke detectors Fire sprinklers for building CO2 Detectors Smoke Detectors Emergency Lighting Eye wash station Mechanical Room/Janitor’s Closet Locked/secured Lack of space Program Items stored in same location. Adequate space for Mechanical/cleaning supplies Location to store program supplies. Water garden Landscape Visually appealing space for public use. Attracts wildlife Photo spot To keep this in its current location. Too established to move. Parking Lot Limited parking spaces. Far from main building. Not visible from bldg. Lot fills up and traffic gets congested coming & going. More spaces. Permeable surfaces. More rain gardens. Spaces for busses to loop around. Re‐Design of current lot. Signage for when the lot is full. 16Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan UpdatePage 49
Trail System 3 ½ miles of trails. Diversity of habitats and surfaces. Maintenance To keep this in its current location. Too established to move. Would need to realign the trailheads if the building location changed too much. Puppet Theater Permanent stage. Hidden access door. Excessive Noise. Located in Exhibit area. Incorporate space in classroom for theater. Roof White roof keeps building cooler Leaks seasonally. Doesn’t drain to scuppers. Blinding to look at. (Reflection) Roof that drains correctly. Built to support solar? Green rooftop? Gathering spot for walk in visitors No space for public while there are programs going on. No place to hang coats. Public space separate from program space. Rocking Chairs for wildlife viewing. Coat storage. Stroller parking area. Severe Weather No good places to have large groups of people go during a siren. A safe, secure place for 50‐75 people to go during a siren. Covered entry & bldg. overhang Able to use sidewalk under overhang to program outdoors on rainy days. Limited space Incorporate a larger covered outdoor space attached to building. IT/Technology Wifi hotspots Security cameras Webcam PC’s, printers Cable TV Smart Board in classroom Projection cameras Additional security cameras Meeting room equipped w/technology. Electronic monitors for program marketing. 17Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan UpdatePage 50
Page 1 of 9
Westwood Hills Nature Center
Existing Programming
Winter
Kick sledding/snow shoe
o Brick House – seasonal
o Apiary and near vestibule within building
Winter survival – Fort building
Winter ecology
Overnight – Tent
Winter camp – family
25
Rental – Access
Tent/provide
Requires leaving front desk
Fire pit – Brick House
40 person – remote
o 100 acres land
o 60 acres water/marsh
Evening program
Solstice
Owl
Campfire
Scout
Baker – 20 minutes
Camper cabin
Brick House – community rental
Center – regular staff
Took around 10 minutes
Ampitheater
1‐2 minute walk
50 current
100+ desired
Entire day to dry
Separation of program, toilet/infrastructure
Memorial – concert series
o Competitive
Dodge
Eastman
19
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 51
Page 2 of 9
Weddings ?
Where, how
75 or less
Ceremony
Minneapolis golf reception
Ideal onsite
Large meeting space – missing from City
Parking
Evening program
Distance – delivery
Drop off
o Drive & walking
Transition
o Calm/connect
91’ accessible
Golf cart transport – 1 cart
Garage
Volunteers
Main sign – orientation
Bus parking
2 hour program
Middle school – 3 buses
394 signage – marketing bootcamp
Signage – small scale, major intersections
Where are you? I didn’t know you are here?
160 acres
Regional audience – not regional park
13 gates – security
3 public pedestrian gates
1 key card
Brick House
Small lot
Plowing not issue
Security
Long‐term maintenance
No staff
30+ accessible (possible double)
Summer camp issue
20
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 52
Page 3 of 9
Canoe
Park & Ride
o Louisiana
No facilities
No storage for paddles and jackets
Trailer at Brick House
Gate from Park & Ride – not accessible
Winter Bird
Lake Trail
Schrub car
T dock
Nothing by canoe dock
Trail
Runners
Congestion – with kids
Birders – no blinds or off shoots
Hikers – picnic only by pavilion
Schools
Repeat customers
o Minimum outreach, word of mouth
Birthday parties act as outreach
Schools – repeat programming
Family
Rotate programs
Amazing Race
Balance Saturday/Sunday
o Rentals
o Birthday
o Family
o Adult 1/season
Early childhood
o Puppetry
o Cross market with tot program at City
Coordinate with Golden Valley for some programming
Home School Jamie
Volunteer Ron
Eagle Scout Mark
Maintenance Becky
Jr Naturalist Carrie
Customer/Office Manager
21
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 53
Page 4 of 9
2nd graders – honey bees
50 kids – 1 bus – 2 kids
Exhibit time
Costume characters or puppets – split 2
o Costume storage
Honey extraction demo
Aviary
o Conversation
o Demo – open hive
Video
Apiary
Viewing
o 20 max
Beekeeping not ideal – splitting requires more staff
o Shade
o Nectar source distance
o Wind
Able to accommodate access via trail
o Door difficult
o Winter – access difficult
Apple Cidering – autumn leaves and apples
Pavilion
o Pre‐K
o Duration limited by water off at building
o Distance back and forth for 3‐4
o Hard to meet schedule
Summer Camp
Use pavilion for lunch and picnic
Grass field – games
o Difficult location by drive, sloped
Lawn – drop off
Playground camp
Walk in control during programs
Pond Study
Pavilion and Center
Cage storage – buckets/nets
T dock – 2/3 classes
Dry year challenges
Boardwalk
Ideal for study
Access/prep challenge
Facilities
22
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 54
Page 5 of 9
Water
Raptor Exhibit
Informal contact and tour
Fishing Lake – stocked
Lamp Lighter & Klodt more positive (Lake Report) – requires deeper pocket
Canoe off of dock – adult evening
Trail
Screen maintenance
Debris/storms/vandals
Lake will overgrow
Toilets needed at canoe location
Walk or drive for program
Sun shelter
No archery desired
Archery provided at Brick House – program
Storage rack only on far side of lake
10 canoes – can trailer, not requested
Winter
No lake access without staff
o Policy not signed
Snow shoe rental on lake with staff
Citizens Assisted Monitoring
Barr Basset Creek – grade B rec value
Nets & cups / aqua scope – kids on belly
Natural cat(?) edge
Openin g view shed, DNR/maintain
Staffing/maintenance
Lean staffing
2 college kids – summer
Evening cleaners
City – responsive service
Provide for others – Minnetonka, Plymouth . . .
23
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 55
Page 6 of 9
Quarterly meeting
Richfield
Maplewood
Roseville
Eden Prairie
Fridley
Bloomington (closest)
Osseo/Dayton (closest)
Exhibit/program conflict within building
Sentence to Serve – snow removal
Raptor Mew
Night habitat
Connected to building
Raptor Center – metal walls ideal model
Edible garden – non profit
Veggies/mushrooms/shade
City maintains box
Wetland?
Pond comes into building – lightening
Pavilion – rental
Summer months – restroom open (Eastman)
o 8a/4:30p or with rental
o Maintenance not
Halloween
Summer lunches and overflow
Apples
Honey extraction
Seating and acoustics
Garbage dump – problem
Climbing racks
Popular use and photo
Additional element coming
Snow shoeing
Main building
2 carts – 3 car
Wall hanging – drying limited space
o Wood Lake – fireplace
24
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 56
Page 7 of 9
Building – no observation
All naturalists out of Westwood
Utilize other facilities
Ice fishing not successful
4 years – paved 3rd surface
Ideal reclaim/compact
Lot surface coated
Trails mixed results with coating
Roller blade/skates not ideal
Building below grade duct
1pm program(?)
Turtle pond
______(?) Potential
Galvanized steel w/floats
Rail loose/splintering
Deck replaced but slimy/slippery
Apiary
Can do 2 per day
Schools want all day
1/2 class – 15 ideal
Lighting – highlight interior of hive
Storage fall/winter
Standard
Color stain
Green standing seam
Never enough power and water
Access and capacity
Mark
Jason
Mark Zembryki
Rutager(?)
Irrigation
Not utilized
Native
25
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 57
Page 8 of 9
Hose bib by AC!! New building
Winterized fountains – 2
Plow out
Picnic shelter
No facilities after October
Back‐up generator
Fully powered
Natural gas
Drainage
Trails and ice
Fire
Distance
Hydrant
Exterior
LED(?) conversion
Heads only
Cameras
Current, fairly new
Functional
Storage
City
Require staff to move
Smart siding preferred
ADA Report
Secured – uncovered
Change to per project
Shaded trail
Melting and freezing
Trail/Pedestrian
Occassional drive use
Shared usage not ideal
Garbage
Enclosed ideal
26
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 58
Page 9 of 9
Snowy year
Haul/stockpile
Possible loss of stall
Pavilion
25 to 30 not posted
Sunflower board
Acoustics
Summer lunch
Playground program
Rental – evening
Men/Women’s bath only storm shelter
$125k CIP(?), 12 year cycle less than 5
5‐12 year desire, 3‐5
Modified hybrid – natural/other
Pour in place rubber – desired
Concrete perimeter
Donated to kids across world
Bird nest – public art
Interactive from arboretum
6‐7 years
Agreement yearly
27
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 59
Page 1 of 5
Westwood Hills Nature Center
Desired Program
What’s missing?
Full day – older kids
Place for meals – older kids
50 limits #
Currently serving 2nd and under
Preschool
Public adult gathering – casual
Retail
Night sky – sky lab
New Hope
Robbinsdale
South Minneapolis
Plymouth
Edina Minnetonka
Sept/Oct/Nov/May/Apr
Archery Range
Sound pollution from planes
Animal care – blocks public access
Storage, Eastman
Laundry, shower
Lunch staff
Copy office/workroom
Office – sound, isolated
Family drop off
Staff proximity public
Operable building
Backstage – limited space
Taxidermy
Meal moths – Richardson
Westwood – What is this place?
Peace/tranquility – safe
29
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 60
Page 2 of 5
Information – what is here
Beyond programming
Passive learning
Winter increase
What activities – competition of surrounding facilities
Enrichment/education
Hours/facilities
Are you welcome?
Character
Cozy space, activity
Function
Edible
Water
Preschool – family center room
Severe weather
Classroom – storage within
Water component by playground
Get wet and muddy – hydrology
Green energy – sustainable and education
B3 – City voluntary
Art
Introaction
Community Garden
Cave
Bats
Bouldering
Staff and space – 9 to 2
What brings them back?
Safe, tranquil for a fun education experience
30
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 61
November 20, 2015 Page | 1
WESTWOOD HILLS NATURE CENTER
In practice, WHNC models and promotes stewardship, sustainability, and a deeper ecological
understanding through direct experience, using resource to provide connecting places and
enhance quality of life in the community.
Missing/desired design elements - Building
Food
Dining area for full day kids
Serving/catering for rentals
Lunch spot for casual use
Classroom
Preschool
Storage
Wet and muddy
Food demonstration
Teaching aids
Retail
Exhibit area
Sky lab
Staff Support
Laundry
Shower
Break/lunch area
Meetings
Weather shelter
Green goals/Alternative power
Building performance
Education
Companion/alternative toilet area
Missing/desired design elements - Site
Canoe equipment storage – near canoe dock
Snow shoe equipment storage - near main building
Halloween party supplies/props/costumes
31
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 62
APPENDIX A
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
Appendix A
STAFF FACILITY NEEDS/REVIEW .............................................................................
Site Visit and Staff Interview
• Pre-meeting questionnaire and response
• List of existing site amenities
• MDA/SRF Interview Notes
• Staff Matrix of Needs
Review/Concept Update Meeting
• Meeting Minutes
33
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 63
MEETING MINUTES
Date: 20 November 2015
RE: Westwood Hills Nature Center
Review/Concept Update
From: Denita Lemmon
A) Progress to date
1) Community Input
Input from the website and events (Halloween event and community engagement meeting)
have been very helpful. The majority of the input is along the lines that Westwood should
remain the same quiet place with a continued focus on education. There continues to be
some activity on the website. The amount of input received is typical for this stage of the
process where the input requested is more open ended. Once there are concepts to share we
often see an increase in activity. This is typically limited to individuals who are either
associated with or have a previous connection with the center.
2) Building Site Assessment Findings
MDA and SRF did complete a site and building review. The center overall is very well
maintained. There are a few areas where edges of trails or paths need more continued
maintenance. The site feature with the most need is the turtle pond. The building is very
typical for its design and year of construction. Based on today’s standards for construction
and in particular energy performance the building is deficient. There are programmatic issues
but physically the below grade ducts, water infiltration at the back wall and thermal properties
of the roof, walls and windows are a concern related to the longevity of the building.
While onsite for the assessment time was also spent understanding the deficiencies relative to
program.
Concerns noted related to the site are:
Parking space quantity and quality
Parking adjacency to Nature Center – distance and steepness of route between
parking and Nature Center
Limited open space for gathering/orientation/break out of groups
Limited size of amphitheater
Concerns noted related to the building are:
Lack of storage for educational materials
Lack of space for animal maintenance and food prep
Connection of staff to front entrance is needed
Limited staff break or personal food prep
No storm shelter
Difficult to organize and store backpacks and things for students in current corridor
configuration
35
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 64
SLP1505 20 Nov 2015
Westwood Hills Nature Center Page 2
U:\SLP\SLP1505\Documentation\A1_Proj Mgmt\SLP1505 151119 Review Minutes.docx
Cont. - Concerns noted related to the building are:
Difficult to host more than one event at a time
No space for general visitor if class or school group is onsite
Space is really ‘alive’ and difficult to control sound
Arrival to building is not inviting
B) Initial Concept Ideas
Based on the input MDA/SRF completed a number of options to begin the concept development
discussion. There were 6 options presented – Concept A to F.
Concept A – This option is for an addition/remodel or new construction at the existing nature
center location. This option would minimally impact the site as the majority of the building is or
could be built on disturbed soil. This may not be as high of a concern at Westwood since the
overall property was previously disturbed and most of the natural setting is less than 30 years old
in its development. This site continues the connection to the water feature but does not improve
accessibility or visible access. The building could be reused but based on required
improvements including energy efficiency there is not a high level of integrity to the structure.
Concept B – Shifts the building to the south. This does not improve accessibility but may allow
greater site development related to the water feature. Perhaps, allowing for an improved outdoor
classroom space.
Concept C – Places building adjacent to parking. This improves access and visual connection.
Also allows accessible access to water and apiary from nature center. Based on design could
allow deliveries from paved parking area.
Concept D – Similar to C. Both concepts push parking lot farther to the south to expand capacity
and accommodate building locations.
Concept E – Takes a broader view of the overall property of the center and places facility closer
to developed area of 394 frontage road. This was not seen as ideal for nature center due to light
pollution, access and proximity to development (car dealerships).
Concept F – Similar to E however, this could be an option for a satellite facility for picnicking and
convenience associated with the canoe access, use and rental.
Two initial concepts for the building addition or new construction were also briefly discussed. The
ability to expand or combine space into flexible rental space was discussed. Staff ability to have
visible access to the entrance and to have ample ‘back of house’ space was desired. The
building design should consider sustainability. The extent and budget for sustainable strategies
needs to be determined. A net zero building requires the addition of alternative energy sources.
This could greatly impact budget.
C) Next Steps
1) Development of Concepts
MDA/SRF will wait to continue concept development until after staff has an opportunity to
review with City Council the parameters. Some of the issues they need to address include:
- Interest in new construction
- Interest in expanding programming – in particular adding a preschool or to what extent
rentals should be considered
36
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 65
SLP1505 20 Nov 2015
Westwood Hills Nature Center Page 3
U:\SLP\SLP1505\Documentation\A1_Proj Mgmt\SLP1505 151119 Review Minutes.docx
- Level of sustainability – does building want to be net zero or meet some other benchmark
2) Review other Facilities – possible tour of Eastman or other with Westwood staff?
Staff has reviewed other facilities and provided images of likes and dislikes. MDA has the
images and will consider these aspects in the concept development.
3) Focus Group Sessions
Intent of sessions was to review concepts. These will be scheduled once these can move
forward based on City Council input.
4) Community Review
This is scheduled for January 12. What can and should be presented needs to be vetted.
5) Final Report
Based on scheduling of focus groups MDA/SRF will complete final report and schedule
presentation. Based on Community Review schedule and timing of focus groups this could
push final presentation into Feb.
SERVICES SCHEDULE
SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB Dates
PROJECT KICK OFF Complete
INFORMATION GATHERING Complete
FACILITY/PROGRAM INFORMATION
Survey/Charette Complete
Observe events Complete
Review other facilities (4)
MDA will tour Eastman on own. Photos of other aspects provided by
staff for design use.
2 Focus group sessions (5,6)
Review meetings (7,8) Complete
Meeting minutes
MASTER PLAN
Concept designs
Review meeting (9)
Final Presentation (10)
37
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 66
39
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 67
40
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 68
41
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 69
42
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 70
43
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan UpdatePage 71
TOILET
ROOM
REST/RELAX
ENTRANCE
EXISTING BUILDING
TIERED
SEATING
EXISTING WATER
FEATURE
DISPLAY/
EDUCATION
STAFF
SUPPORT/
STORAGE
MULTI-
PURPOSE
ROOM
MULTI-
PURPOSE
ROOM
PUPPET STAGE
FIREPLACE
WOODLINE
11/20/2015
CONCEPT PLAN-CURRENT SITE
WESTWOOD NATURE CENTER45Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 72
TOILET
ROOM
REST/RELAX
ENTRANCE
11/20/2015
VIEW TO
LAKE
VIEW TO
PRAIRIEVIEW TO
WOOD
WOODLINE
CONCEPT PLAN-NEW HILL SITE
WESTWOOD NATURE CENTER
DISPLAY/
EDUCATION
SUPPORT/
STORAGE
STAFF
MULTI-
PURPOSE
ROOM
MULTI-
PURPOSE
ROOM
PUPPET STAGE
TIERED SEATING46Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 73
APPENDIX B
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
Appendix B
APPENDIX B-INDEX AND DESCRIPTION ..............................................
Community Input
Halloween Party
Family participation in voting for favorite activities onsite. Kids and family members in
attendance were asked to vote on their favorite activities at Westwood. The outcome
of the voting was not the goal but rather to let members of the community know about
the community meetings and to allow the team to invite them to the conversation.
Community Meetings
Materials presented at 2nd meeting for discussion.
The attendees were split into two focus groups and spent time with each group
during the duration of the meeting. One group focused on the site the other
focused on the building.
Website Input – SIDEWALK
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 74
APPENDIX B
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
Appendix B
COMMUNITY INPUT ................................................................................
Halloween Party
• Family participation in voting for favorite activities onsite
Community Meetings
• Materials presented at meeting for discussion
Website Input - SIDEWALK
3
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 75
5
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 76
6
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 77
7
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 78
APPENDIX B
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
Appendix B
COMMUNITY INPUT ................................................................................
Halloween Party
• Family participation in voting for favorite activities onsite
Community Meetings
• Materials presented at meeting for discussion
Website Input - SIDEWALK
9
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 79
LegendContoursTrailsParcelsAquatic BedEmergent VegetationForestedMoss/LichenRock BottomRocky ShoreStreambed (Intermittent)Scrub-ShrubUnconsolidated Bottom (Basins & Channels) Unconsolidated Shore (Banks & Sandbars)0100 200Feet[Improve nature center wayfinding and interpretive opportunitiesIdentify alternate programming and amenities for existing nature center site Identify opportunities for expanding parking areasIdentify potential location for a new nature center building siteExpand the interaction opportunities with turtle pondIncrease opportunities for interaction with lake edgeContinue to manage elimination of invasive plant material throughout nature center Identify opportunities for year round use of nature centerIdentify opportunities for enhancing canoe/kayak landing areaExpand nature play opportunities adjacent to existing playgroundEnhance visibility of nature center entranceApiaryPavilionIssues and OpportunitiesWestwood Hills Nature CenterSt. Louis ParkMNwood chip trailcrushed stone trailpaved trail11Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan UpdatePage 80
Building & Parking Layout Plan
Westwood Hills Nature Center
St. Louis Park MN
prairie
overlook
apiary
play
bou
l
d
e
r
sshelterservice
access
drive new buildingpotential lake
views from
building
+34 parking
spaces
optional bus
parking area
expanded
water feature
turtle pond
patio space
with seat wall
+70 car
parking lot
with permeable
parking bays
turn around/
drop off area
48’ radius
stormwater
treatment
wayfinding kiosk
existing turn
around area
expanded
outdoor
classroom space
expanded water
garden area
12
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 81
Preliminary Recommendations
Westwood Hills Nature Center
St. Louis Park MN
new expanded
parking lot with drop
off area (60-80 cars)
expanded natural
play opportunities
existing picnic/
gardening area
new nature center
building area
expanded outdoor
classroom and lawn
area
expand water garden
down to lake trail
expanded garden area
wood chip trail
crushed stone trail
paved trail
prairie
play
pines
north 0 50 100
apiary
turtle pond
wetland
WESTWOOD LAKE
13
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 82
Tree House
Fort Building
Log Balance Walk
Water PlayRope and Net Play
Gardening
Boulder Scramble
Preliminary Recommendations
Westwood Hills Nature Center
St. Louis Park MN
14
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 83
Outdoor Classroom & Nature Garden Area
Westwood Hills Nature Center
St. Louis Park MN
open lawn staging
areas
boardwalk
crossing
overlook
shelter
maintain open
views to lake
outdoor classroom
space (30-50 person
capacity)
existing nature
center building
expanded pond
and garden area
overlook
firepit
new hillside trail
new lower water
pond fixture
existing timber
stairs
to
overlook
to
apiary
15
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 84
16
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 85
Canoe/Kayak Landing & Trail HeadWestwood Hills Nature CenterSt. Louis ParkMNdrop off areastaging areascanoe/kayak launchvault toilet8-10 space parking lotWESTWOOD LAKEWAYZATA BOULEVARD17
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan UpdatePage 86
19
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 87
21
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 88
22
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 89
23
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 90
APPENDIX B
Westwood Hills Nature Center Miller Dunwiddie Architecture
Master Plan
SLP1505 May 23, 2016
Appendix B
COMMUNITY INPUT ................................................................................
Halloween Party
• Family participation in voting for favorite activities onsite
Community Meetings
• Materials presented at meeting for discussion
Website Input - SIDEWALK
25
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 91
3/14/16, 10:44 AMExport: Are there any new activities or amenities you would like to see offered? - mySidewalk
Page 1 of 6https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5521/export
Post:
Posted: September 29, 2015 3:22 PM
We stwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan
Are there any new activities or amenities you
would like to see offered?
Likes: 0 Responses: 24
Responses:
Posted: October 9, 2015 5:19 PM
Susan Bloyer
Bird-watching, maybe some local stewardship activities, planting native species of
wildflowers like Echinacea.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 11, 2015 9:27 PM
Sarah Reuben
Expanding the edible garden and allowing for lots of hands-on learning. Consider
expanding the building closest to the parking lot to include additional visitor space and
resources. Incorporating an area for hands-on water learning and play.
Likes: 1
27
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 92
3/14/16, 10:44 AMExport: Are there any new activities or amenities you would like to see offered? - mySidewalk
Page 2 of 6https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5521/export
Posted: October 12, 2015 6:31 PM
Victoria Thor
Decide if the nature center will be focused on the natural world or human amusement.
It would be a great loss if human amusement is placed above preservation. Tours by
naturalists are great. Bird watching activities would be welcomed. Focus on
stewardship of our natural world through educational programs for children and adults
would be most welcomed.
Likes: 1
Posted: October 12, 2015 7:2 PM
Rachel Rickert
I would love to see a community garden that kids can become involved in. It would be
neat if there was a visitor social networking board that you can post and share bird
watching and nature photography to.
Likes: 1
Posted: October 12, 2015 9:17 PM
Chelsey Bahe
I refer many of the families I work for to Westwood as a first family nature experience
beyond their backyard. So, some type of family group that meets regularly in all types
of weather and is lead by a naturalist but with no specific theme or lesson would be
fun. Like a playgroup or nature club for all ages of kids and their families.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 13, 2015 3:39 PM
Billie Reaney
This natural preserve is an extraordinary asset to the city. Whatever you do, keep it
focused on nature in all its glory. A little more parking is needed -maybe provided right
outside the preserve itself. Handicapped access - can inventive minds come up with an
ingenious but not intrusive method for easier access to the interpretive center?
Likes: 0
Posted: October 15, 2015 8:29 PM
Rita Martinez
Handicapped access needs to be improved. I would love to see regularly schedule
naturalist led walks/gatherings specifically for older adults
Likes: 1
28
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 93
3/14/16, 10:44 AMExport: Are there any new activities or amenities you would like to see offered? - mySidewalk
Page 3 of 6https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5521/export
Posted: October 16, 2015 5:42 AM
Victoria Thor
I would like to see more native flowering plants added to the "Prairie" area to attract
more butterflies and birds, and along the upper trails- plants that would survive grazing
deer. The more diversity of plant life, the more diversity of wildlife we would have the
opportunity to observe. Think "rewild."
Likes: 1
Posted: October 16, 2015 7:25 PM
Cassandra Lyons
I am a Life Coach and I would love to offer classes to the community on living the the
life you desire, while integrating nature walks. I would love to be able to hold these
classes at the nature center Brick House.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 17, 2015 11:40 PM
Sharon Abelson
I think the Nature Center is a great asset to SLP and the greater community. Please
keep it wild. It is such a great oasis in the city. I love the new upper pond and waterfall.
It is lovely. I love that kids come to learn about and be in nature but I'd like to see more
adult classes offered especially about foraging.
Likes: 1
Posted: October 18, 2015 11:8 AM
Chelsey Bahe
Nature preschool. The kind where the kids are outside most of the time in all weather
and there aren't strict lesson plans, curriculum or learning objectives. Something that
incorporates nature preschool with playwork principles and had teachers who were
trained in playwork and child led learning.
Likes: 1
Posted: October 18, 2015 2:26 PM
Billie Reaney
I agree that this is a great place for children. I know that home-schoolers use the facility
and the naturalists to augment their lessons. But is it viable to add in pre-schoolers if
that would require more staff with the training in playwork and child led learning?
Likes: 0
29
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 94
3/14/16, 10:44 AMExport: Are there any new activities or amenities you would like to see offered? - mySidewalk
Page 4 of 6https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5521/export
Posted: October 26, 2015 5:53 PM
Susi Saxl
Presentations to adults on how to create your own natural areas to attract wildlife,
birds, etc.
Likes: 0
Posted: November 17, 2015 3:58 PM
Samantha McKinney
Allow dogs on leashes to be on the trails. It really limits how much I use the park.
Likes: 0
Posted: November 17, 2015 8:35 PM
Victoria Thor
Keep pets out of the center! They would have a negative impact on the wildlife that
resides there. We are visitors in their home. Walk the dogs in the neighborhood or go to
a dog park.
Likes: 0
Posted: December 6, 2015 3:15 PM
Scott Oreschnick
I would like to see a skateboard park in the northwest corner.
Likes: 0
Posted: December 6, 2015 4:21 PM
Victoria Thor
Hi Scott, I agree there is a need for skateboard parks for our teens to use. I don't think
the Nature Center is the proper location for that. Better to install one at the park near
SLP Jr. High. A skateboard park just might prove to be too risky a legal venture for the
city to pursue. We need to consider what our teenagers would like to see when
planning for our city parks.
Likes: 0
30
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 95
3/14/16, 10:44 AMExport: Are there any new activities or amenities you would like to see offered? - mySidewalk
Page 5 of 6https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5521/export
Posted: December 6, 2015 4:24 PM
Billie Reaney
This is a nature center, not a park. It is meant to be as close to nature as possible, so
that children and others can learn about and appreciate nature. That goal is not
consistent with skateboard parks or gardens or golf - to name a few. Those things are
worthy and should have their places in parks but not in a naturalist area..
Likes: 0
Posted: December 7, 2015 12:11 PM
Scott Oreschnick
Victoria- my mistake. I was linked to this page responding to a question for
Calhoun/Harriet. It was not meant to be for Westwood hills.
Likes: 0
Posted: December 7, 2015 5:43 PM
Victoria Thor
Now worries. Teens and young adults need to be part of the plan for any park service. :-
)
Likes: 0
Posted: January 9, 2016 7:48 PM
Jessica Laabs
Outdoor yoga classes.
Likes: 0
Posted: January 9, 2016 8:35 PM
Billie Reaney
Again, this is not a park. It is a wild life area. Nature unscripted. That should be the
focus of the people who come. Classes for yoga or singing or javelin throwing or egg
coloring are all perfectly nice activities, but not here.
Likes: 0
Posted: January 12, 2016 4:48 PM
Shandra Dayton Prowell
I realize my mile-marker comment should have been here.
Likes: 0
31
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 96
3/14/16, 10:44 AMExport: Are there any new activities or amenities you would like to see offered? - mySidewalk
Page 6 of 6https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5521/export
Posted: January 12, 2016 10:20 PM
Chelsey Bahe
The kids said that they wish there was a fort city and a big fallen tree to climb. A
smaller playful element along the path near the canoes would be nice. Nothing big,
even a couple of stumps or a fort or fallen tree would do.
Likes: 0
32
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 97
3/14/16, 10:05 AMExport: What do you like to do when you visit Westwood Hills Nature Center? - mySidewalk
Page 1 of 4https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5523/export
Post:
Posted: September 29, 2015 3:24 PM
We stwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan
What do you like to do when you visit Westwood
Hills Nature Center?
Likes: 0 Responses: 19
Responses:
Posted: October 9, 2015 3:31 PM
Andrea Nyhusmoen
We like to play on the playground, walk the trails, attend the Halloween Party and
Winter Solstice Walk, and check out the Interpretive Center.
Likes: 1
Posted: October 9, 2015 3:35 PM
Agata Wang
We walk the trails, attend the family programs (Branching out, Bug Houses, etc), play in
the playground, and check out all the items at the Interpretive Center
Likes: 0
Posted: October 9, 2015 4:37 PM
Jennifer Deming
We enjoy walking the trails at Westwood Nature Center, especially the one around the
lake. Our children like the new playground as well.
Likes: 0
33
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 98
3/14/16, 10:05 AMExport: What do you like to do when you visit Westwood Hills Nature Center? - mySidewalk
Page 2 of 4https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5523/export
Posted: October 9, 2015 5:15 PM
Susan Bloyer
I like to walk the trails, look at the exhibits, participate in programs. I like adult
programs, though.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 9, 2015 5:29 PM
Kimberly Holien
We use the playground, walk around the lake, use the wooded trails and visit the
animals.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 11, 2015 9:7 PM
Sarah Reuben
We walk around the lake, use the playground, and go inside the building to look at the
animals, furs, skulls, etc.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 12, 2015 6:24 PM
Victoria Thor
I walk the trails for exercise, take photos, but I come to connect with nature and to see
the wildlife. We are so fortunate to be able to see mink, deer, turkey s, song birds, owls,
water birds...
Likes: 0
Posted: October 12, 2015 6:56 PM
Rachel Rickert
Walking the boardwalk around the lake and the trails.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 12, 2015 8:21 PM
Andrew Hogg
Kids like playground, hiking, and looking at the stuff and animals in the nature center
Likes: 0
34
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 99
3/14/16, 10:05 AMExport: What do you like to do when you visit Westwood Hills Nature Center? - mySidewalk
Page 3 of 4https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5523/export
Posted: October 12, 2015 8:48 PM
Chelsey Bahe
We mainly use the trails and the playground. We like to have picnics at Westwood and
meet up with friends to play and explore. The kids have loved participating in programs
and seeing puppets in the past but their schedule doesn't allow for much of that now.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 15, 2015 8:26 PM
Rita Martinez
Walk the boardwalk around the lake and trails
Likes: 0
Posted: October 16, 2015 7:13 PM
Cassandra Lyons
Walk the trails, visit the owl and the hawk, walk through the grounds outside the nature
center facility enjoying the view and the waterfall, talk with other visitors to see what
they have seen along the trail.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 17, 2015 11:20 PM
Sharon Abelson
I like walking the paths around the lake and throughout the center. I enjoy seeing the
wildlife and vegetation the nature center has. I also enjoy seeing the hawk and other
creatures.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 26, 2015 5:51 PM
Susi Saxl
Being able to walk the trails, kids programs, being in nature so close to downtown is
truly amazing.
Likes: 0
Posted: November 17, 2015 3:56 PM
Samantha McKinney
I like to head down to the boardwalks and view the wildlife.
Likes: 0
35
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 100
3/14/16, 10:05 AMExport: What do you like to do when you visit Westwood Hills Nature Center? - mySidewalk
Page 4 of 4https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5523/export
Posted: January 9, 2016 7:43 PM
Jessica Laabs
Kids programming, Halloween party, picnics, playground, trails. Great birthday party
location as well!
Likes: 0
Posted: January 11, 2016 5:44 PM
Helen Keuning
We enjoy the trails and boardwalks, the playground, the programming and the amazing
naturalists!
Likes: 0
Posted: January 11, 2016 9:24 PM
Megan P
The programs (for families, day camps and puppet shows), hiking and exploring the
trails, boardwalks and docks, looking for nature art, enjoying the playground, visiting
the animals in the nature center and enjoying the quiet.
Likes: 0
Posted: January 12, 2016 4:45 PM
Shandra Dayton Prowell
Taking my children for walks to explore and look for wildlife, letting my kids play at the
playground, nature summer camps, and runs/walks on the paths by myself
Likes: 0
36
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 101
3/14/16, 10:42 AMExport: What facilities or programming would you like to see improved to make you visit more often? - mySidewalk
Page 1 of 5https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5522/export
Post:
Posted: September 29, 2015 3:23 PM
We stwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan
What facilities or programming would you like to
see improve d to make you visit more often?
Likes: 0 Responses: 22
Responses:
Posted: October 9, 2015 5:17 PM
Susan Bloyer
For me, it's a question of time. However, I would prefer more adult-oriented programs. I
minimize my activities with kids, even though volunteering on Mother Nature's Trail is a
tradition.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 9, 2015 5:29 PM
Kimberly Holien
It would be nice to have swings at the playground. Having earlier hours on the weekend
would also be a good improvement.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 11, 2015 9:19 PM
Sarah Reuben
Expansion of the playground as well as placing the taxidermied animals closer to eye
level for better viewing/observation. It would also be great if each animal's natural
habitat could be re-created.
Likes: 0
37
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 102
3/14/16, 10:42 AMExport: What facilities or programming would you like to see improved to make you visit more often? - mySidewalk
Page 2 of 5https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5522/export
Posted: October 12, 2015 6:26 PM
Victoria Thor
I would like to see the nature center stay as wild as possible. I can understand how
young families like the playground but I avoid the busiest times because the loud voices
from the playground chase away the wildlife. I would not like to see the playground
expanded. Let's keep the focus on nature and preserve what we have there. I question
whether the nature center was the best location for a playground. (I realize that there
isn't a playground nearby which may have been the motivation.)
Likes: 1
Posted: October 12, 2015 6:59 PM
Rachel Rickert
It would be lovely if there were additional loppits or archery dates or canoe times.
Some of the programs geared toward older kids and teens are very limited in
availability and conflict with a lot of family schedules.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 12, 2015 6:59 PM
Rachel Rickert
It would be lovely if there were additional loppits or archery dates or canoe times.
Some of the programs geared toward older kids and teens are very limited in
availability and conflict with a lot of family schedules.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 12, 2015 6:59 PM
Rachel Rickert
It would be lovely if there were additional loppits or archery dates or canoe times.
Some of the programs geared toward older kids and teens are very limited in
availability and conflict with a lot of family schedules.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 12, 2015 7:0 PM
Rachel Rickert
It would be lovely if there were additional loppits or archery dates or canoe times.
Some of the programs geared toward older kids and teens are very limited in
availability and conflict with busy schedules.
Likes: 0
38
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 103
3/14/16, 10:42 AMExport: What facilities or programming would you like to see improved to make you visit more often? - mySidewalk
Page 3 of 5https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5522/export
Posted: October 12, 2015 8:52 PM
Chelsey Bahe
Expand the natural play area
Likes: 0
Posted: October 15, 2015 8:28 PM
Rita Martinez
Put in more benches on the trails. Looks like there isn't a way for folks in a wheelchair
or tied to a walker can get down to the lake -please change that. Would like to see
some walks/talks about nature geared towards older adults. Let's have an adult day
camp!!!
Likes: 1
Posted: October 16, 2015 5:16 AM
Victoria Thor
We need to think LONG TERM when it comes to handicap accessibility. It will not be
long until wheelchairs are replaced by exoskeletons that allow people to walk upright.
Before we hack away to create move paved trails, think perhaps of temporary solutions
for handicap accessibility that can be returned to it's more natural state when
technology advances options for those in need.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 17, 2015 11:35 PM
Sharon Abelson
I would like to see more programming geared toward adults. My kids loved all the
nature center classes and camps but they are grown now and I'd like to be able to
attend more classes there. Wood Lake Nature Center in Richfield offers many adult
classes I've been to. I'd especially like to see foraging classes and learn about edible
plants that are right here in our yards and neighborhoods. How about woodworking for
wildlife where you make nest boxes or bird houses (not the child's version). Perhaps a
class on living 'green' by making homemade cleaning supplies, natural lawn and garden
solutions, homemade soaps, etc. Or a class on how to live 'with' wildlife in your
neighborhood - it could include tips for nuisance animals and also how to make more
natural yards suitable for birds or wildlife.
Likes: 1
39
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 104
3/14/16, 10:42 AMExport: What facilities or programming would you like to see improved to make you visit more often? - mySidewalk
Page 4 of 5https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5522/export
Posted: October 21, 2015 5:47 PM
Cindy Henrich
I would like to see the lake get cleared a bit more. Looks like it is filling in.
Likes: 0
Posted: October 22, 2015 11:58 AM
Laura Hedlund
Numerous research studies including http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2247 2137
are demonstrating the link between human health and intact natural space. People who
work with asphalt have higher rates of cancer. Education on the health benefits of
nature will get more people into parks. The University of Minnesota's Center for
Spirituality and Healing is coordinating "Nature Heals" activities including sending 30
days of email. St Louis Park could do a similar effort. Please FEEL the soil. We have so
little intact land left. Ripping up soils, destroying trees, plants and fungi have impacts
which are impossible to see with the human eye. The human heart has the seed the feel
the impact. Do not pave the park. Instead use the millions of dollars to study
accessibility and offer the services which could provide access to underserved..
Likes: 0
Posted: October 26, 2015 5:54 PM
Susi Saxl
Continue to eradicate non-native species like buckthorn.
Likes: 0
Posted: November 7, 2015 7:42 PM
Julie Rappaport
I'd like to see more food foraging classes... The Edible Mushroom Grotto behind the
playground should be offering some King Strophapharius (bigger and better tasting
than Portebello, and more nutritional value, as well.) The Edible Shade Garden next to
the building will be better tended this coming summer, as well, with more public and
FREE classes offered on Edible Food Forests through the Park and Rec Playground
program and SLP SEEDS. I'd like to know what else is edible that grows there, and if it
is safe to eat.
Likes: 0
Posted: November 17, 2015 3:57 PM
Samantha McKinney
I would like the opportunity to have more experience with different species of wildlife.
Likes: 0
40
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 105
3/14/16, 10:42 AMExport: What facilities or programming would you like to see improved to make you visit more often? - mySidewalk
Page 5 of 5https://mysidewalk.com/posts/5522/export
Posted: December 1, 2015 9:1 AM
tracy nordstrom
I like the idea of having more interpretive signage and "experiences" or events that
educate visitors about the indigenous, cultural, and geologic history of Calhoun. I
support restoring the name Bde Maka Ska to the lake. I would like to see a welcome
center on the NW corner of the lake that includes historical interpretation. I love the
land bridge idea over Lake Street.
Likes: 0
Posted: January 9, 2016 7:45 PM
Jessica Laabs
Expanded hours and kid's programming. Also continued art partnerships/installations
like the nest one.
Likes: 0
Posted: January 11, 2016 5:46 PM
Helen Keuning
Having the actual bathrooms near the playgrounds open for public use (not just the
port-a-potty) would elicit a sigh of relief from many moms (and dads)!
Likes: 0
Posted: January 11, 2016 9:27 PM
Megan P
Suggestions or maps/ kits for self guided nature hikes or scavenger hunts that families
could do. I think the current programing and staff are wonderful! More information
about items available for rent.
Likes: 0
Posted: January 12, 2016 4:46 PM
Shandra Dayton Prowell
Mile markers that are easy to read and find so I can track my run no matter which path I
take. And a big yes! to the suggestion about open bathrooms by the playground!
Likes: 0
41
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 3)
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update Page 106
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: May 23, 2016
Discussion Item: 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE:
SWLRT Updates
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff desires to provide the Council a general update on SWLRT
and a discussion of the commitments required from the City for Joint Development at the Beltline
Station.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council have questions or concerns regarding the
information provided in this report.
Joint Development at the Beltline LRT Station – Since early in the SWLRT design process SLP
has pursued TOD development at the Beltline Station. In June and July the SPO will be bringing
the final SWLRT scope and budget revisions through the Corridor Management Committee
(CMC), Executive Change & Control Board (ECCB) and the Met Council (MC) for approval and
authorization to apply to the FTA for “entry into engineering.” The refined project scope & budget
will address the Beltline Station park & ride and TOD site. Discussions with SPO regarding what
commitments are needed from SLP for the Beltline elements are on-going. On Monday City staff
will provide the latest information for discussion. It is expected an SLP resolution of commitment
will be needed in June.
CSAH 25 Conceptual Roadway Layout Request for Proposals
As reported earlier, City staff has been working jointly with Hennepin County on a Request for
Proposals (RFP) to hire a consultant to create a new concept for an urban boulevard along CSAH
25 from Highway 100 to France Avenue. The intent is to create concepts that transform the area,
better utilize the right-of-way, create a more compact roadway and provide alternatives for using
the remaining right-of-way for multimodal travel. A more detailed description of the project is
attached in the discussion portion of this report.
Station Design Committee - The third and final meeting of the Station Design Committee was
held on May 3rd. The Committee reviewed the station colors and panels designed by graphic
designers at the Southwest Project Office (SPO). The Committee thought the panel ideas were
much improved and gave definition to the station areas. Some suggestions were offered to fine
tune the panels, and the illustrations of the revised proposed panels are attached. Staff will ask the
Council to accept the Committee’s recommendations at a future meeting.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Joint Development Concept Drawing
Graphic Panel Designs and Canopy Colors
Prepared by: Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 4) Page 2
Title: SWLRT Updates
DISCUSSION
Joint Development at the Beltline LRT Station
Staff has been working with SPO Staff for the past several years on creating a Joint Development
project at the Beltline Station. The corner of Beltline Blvd and CSAH 25 is regarded as a
“signature” corner, with great potential for transit-oriented development. SPO and City Staff have
worked together and hired consultants to create a concept development plan (attached), conduct a
market analysis, and obtain a Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) grant through the
Regional Solicitation process to fund a portion of the parking ramp. The base SWLRT project
includes only a surface parking lot at Beltline and CSAH 25. The park & ride ramp cuts the land
devoted to the park & ride in half. It frees up land for development at Beltline and CSAH 25. The
City’s share of the costs of the parking ramp and TOD development will be funded from TIF
generated by development at the Beltline Station. The City will need to create a TIF district at a
date yet to be determined. All these efforts enable the City’s goal throughout this process of
transforming the proposed surface parking lot into a parking ramp structure with adjacent
development. More details on needed SLP actions, timing and cost estimates will be provided
Monday night for City Council discussion and direction to staff.
CSAH 25 Conceptual Roadway Layout Request for Proposals
City and County Staff are working together to ask consultants for proposals to create concept
options for transforming CSAH 25 to an “urban boulevard” in St. Louis Park. The cost of the
study would be borne by both agencies, and St. Louis Park staff would provide the project
management. The study would begin in mid-to-late summer, with an expected 6-month timeframe.
Phasing
This portion of the work towards transforming CSAH 25 is intended to identify all of the data and
factors to consider in redesigning the area, and provide concept options to consider. These options
would then be discussed with the property owners and neighbors in a subsequent community
engagement phase, to further consider the factors and impacts involved in various alternative
concepts. When a concept plan is established, future project phases would include a more detailed
engineering and cost estimating phase, and pursuing funding opportunities and options. It is
expected this is a multi-year process.
Request for Proposals (RFP)
The RFP asks consultants to design concepts that address auto, bike, transit and pedestrian access,
mobility and the interface with adjacent property. Concept options will then be reviewed, analyzed,
evaluated and adjusted to appropriate concept(s) for which the consultant will develop an
engineering feasibility level cost estimate. The intent is that the concepts will be approved by the
County and the City for presentation to the public for input and feedback in the next community
engagement phase of work. The concept will be used in conjunction with SWLRT project
planning, redevelopment projects, funding and for the design and programming of future public
improvements in the area.
Outcomes
The outcomes for this study phase are outlined as follows:
Provide design concepts for CSAH 25 that better integrate into the multi-modal
transportation system and support redevelopment through becoming a more compact
roadway and urban boulevard.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 4) Page 3
Title: SWLRT Updates
Create a gateway to the Beltline LRT station area to raise visibility of area and access to
LRT.
Address safety and access in creating a multimodal boulevard that serves pedestrians,
bikes, transit riders, and automobiles.
Seek opportunities for eliminating redundant roadways and utilizing right-of-way for
redevelopment and/or public spaces, increased landscaped areas and additional public
amenities or functions.
Expand Beltline LRT station area walkshed and bike-shed to improve access to/from the
Southwest LRT line.
Improve community look, feel and usability of the street right-of-way for useful and
attractive public spaces.
Next Steps
The timeline for the project is to receive proposals in late June with a consultant beginning in late
summer. It is expected the concept design will take approximately 6 months.
JANUARY 19, 2016 PERFORMANCE
DRIVEN DESIGN.
BELTLINE STATION CONCEPT
CSAH 25PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION FROM FLY-OVER
BRIDGE TO PARKING RAMP
4-LEVEL OFFICE BUILDING SKYWAY CONNECTION FROM PARKING
RAMP TO OFFICE BUILDING
4-LEVEL PARKING RAMP WITH TWO-LEVEL ARCADE ALONG BELTLINE
BLVD FACADE; ONE LEVEL OF RAMP PARTIALLY BELOW GRADE
6-LEVEL MIXED USE BUILDING (STRUCTURE 1):
FIRST FLOOR RETAIL, RESIDENTIAL UNITS, INTEGRATED PARKING
VIEW FROM PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER CSAH 25
MASSING MODEL FROM SOUTHWEST MASSING MODEL FROM NORTHEAST
6-LEVEL MIXED USE BUILDING (STRUCTURE 1):
FIRST FLOOR RETAIL
RESIDENTIAL UNITS
INTEGRATED PARKING
6-LEVEL MIXED USE BUILDING (STRUCTURE 1):
FIRST FLOOR RETAIL
RESIDENTIAL UNITS
INTEGRATED PARKING
SWLRT BELTLINE STATION
SWLRT BELTLINE STATION
NORTH CEDAR LAKE REGIONAL TRAIL
NORTH CEDAR LAKE REGIONAL TRAIL
5-LEVEL BUILDING (STRUCTURE 2):
RESIDENTIAL UNITS
INTEGRATED PARKING
5-LEVEL BUILDING (STRUCTURE 2):
RESIDENTIAL UNITS
INTEGRATED PARKING
4-LEVEL OFFICE BUILDING
4-LEVEL OFFICE BUILDING
4-LEVEL PARKING RAMP WITH TWO-LEVEL
ARCADE ALONG BELTLINE BLVD FACADE; ONE
LEVEL OF RAMP PARTIALLY BELOW GRADE
4-LEVEL PARKING RAMP WITH TWO-LEVEL
ARCADE ALONG BELTLINE BLVD FACADE; ONE
LEVEL OF RAMP PARTIALLY BELOW GRADE
PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION FROM FLY-OVER
BRIDGE TO PARKING RAMP
PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION FROM FLY-OVER
BRIDGE TO PARKING RAMP
GREEN ROOFS AS RESIDENT AMENITY SPACE
GREEN ROOFS AS RESIDENT AMENITY SPACE
RETAIL/COMMERCIAL CORNER WITH OUTDOOR
AMENITY SPACECSAH 25BEL
T
L
I
N
E
B
L
V
D
BELTL
I
N
E
B
L
V
D
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 4)
Title: SWLRT Updates Page 4
SHEET NAME:DISCIPLINE:
NO. DATE BY REVISION / SUBMITTALCHECKDESIGN
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
DESIGNED BY:
DRAWN BY: 04-20-2016
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,
SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY
ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND
THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER
THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
332 MINNESOTA STREET, E1000
SAINT PAUL, MN 55101
219 NORTH SECOND STREET
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401
PANEL GRAPHICS - CONCEPT DESIGN
ARCHITECTURE BELTLINE
BELTLINE STATION
ST. LOUIS LARK, MN
SHEET
6
OF
14
A B C
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 4)
Title: SWLRT Updates Page 5
LO UIS PARK LO UIS PARK LO UIS PARK LO UIS PARK
SHEET NAME:DISCIPLINE:
NO. DATE BY REVISION / SUBMITTALCHECKDESIGN
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
DESIGNED BY:
DRAWN BY: 04-20-2016
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,
SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY
ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND
THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER
THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
332 MINNESOTA STREET, E1000
SAINT PAUL, MN 55101
219 NORTH SECOND STREET
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401
PANEL GRAPHICS - CONCEPT DESIGN
ARCHITECTURE WOODDALE
WOODDALE STATION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MN
SHEET
7
OF
14
A ABC
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 4)
Title: SWLRT Updates Page 6
SHEET NAME:DISCIPLINE:
NO. DATE BY REVISION / SUBMITTALCHECKDESIGN
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
DESIGNED BY:
DRAWN BY: 04-20-2016
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
.. . . . .
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,
SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY
ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND
THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER
THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
332 MINNESOTA STREET, E1000
SAINT PAUL, MN 55101
219 NORTH SECOND STREET
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401
PANEL GRAPHICS - CONCEPT DESIGN
ARCHITECTURE LOUISIANA
LOUISIANA STATION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MN
SHEET
8
OF
14
A B
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 4)
Title: SWLRT Updates Page 7
9Louisiana Station: Blue CanopyDraft – Work in ProcessSt. Louis Park Signature ColorStudy Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: SWLRT UpdatesPage 8
16Wooddale Station: Blue CanopyDraft – Work in ProcessSt. Louis Park Signature ColorStudy Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: SWLRT UpdatesPage 9
25Beltline Station: Blue StructureDraft – Work in ProcessSt. Louis Park Signature ColorStudy Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: SWLRT UpdatesPage 10
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: May 23, 2016
Written Report:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: April 2016 Monthly Financial Report
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required at this time.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: The Monthly Financial Report provides a summary of General Fund revenues
and departmental expenditures and a comparison of budget to actual throughout the year.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: At the end of April, General Fund
expenditures total approximately 30.5% of the adopted annual budget. Please see the attached
analysis for more details on specific variances.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Summary of Revenues & Expenditures – General Fund
Prepared by: Darla Monson, Senior Accountant
Reviewed by: Tim Simon, Controller
Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. ) Page 2
Title: April 2016 Monthly Financial Report
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: This report is designed to provide summary information of the overall level
of revenues and departmental expenditures in the General Fund and a comparison of budget to
actual throughout the year.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: Actual expenditures should generally run at about 33% of
the annual budget at the end of April. General Fund expenditures are under budget at
approximately 30.5% of the adopted budget in April. Revenues tend to be harder to measure in
this same way due to the timing of when they are received, examples of which include property
taxes and State aid payments, and seasonal revenues for recreation. A few brief comments on
specific General Fund variances are noted below.
Revenues:
License and permit revenues are at 56.2% of budget due to the fact that the majority of the 2016
business and liquor license payments have already been collected, which is consistent with
previous years. Permit revenue is at 44.4% for the year. The building permit for 4900 Excelsior
Blvd Apartments was processed in April.
Expenditures:
The only expenditure variance is Organized Recreation at 38.3%. This is a temporary variance
because the full 2016 Community Education contribution of $187,400 was paid to the school
district in January.
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Actual $2,755 $5,276 $7,921 $10,378
Budget $2,840 $5,680 $8,521 $11,361 $14,201 $17,041 $19,882 $22,722 $25,562 $28,402 $31,243 $34,083
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
$40,000
$ THOUSANDS Monthly Expenditures ‐General Fund
Summary of Revenues & Expenditures - General Fund As of April 30, 201620162016201420142015201520162016 Balance YTD Budget BudgetAudited BudgetAudited BudgetApr YTD Remaining to Actual %General Fund Revenues: General Property Taxes21,157,724$ 21,176,542$ 22,364,509$ 22,653,095$ 23,597,282$ -$ 23,597,282$ 0.00% Licenses and Permits2,691,518 3,413,682 3,248,158 4,312,700 3,496,177 1,965,455 1,530,722 56.22% Fines & Forfeits320,150 369,545 320,200 263,951 341,200 83,773 257,427 24.55% Intergovernmental1,282,777 1,423,642 1,292,277 1,669,395 1,419,017 404,650 1,014,367 28.52% Charges for Services1,857,718 1,852,274 1,907,292 2,116,313 1,956,593 349,430 1,607,163 17.86% Miscellaneous Revenue1,112,369 1,302,160 1,196,018 1,357,373 977,546 339,040 638,506 34.68% Transfers In1,837,416 1,827,564 1,851,759 1,867,398 1,872,581 620,860 1,251,721 33.16% Investment Earnings *150,000 119,831 140,000 68,908 140,000 - 140,000 0.00% Other Income17,950 13,306 17,900 61,025 27,450 3,417 24,033 12.45% Use of Fund Balance286,325 - 254,891 - 254,891 0.00%Total General Fund Revenues30,427,622$ 31,498,546$ 32,624,438$ 34,370,158$ 34,082,737$ 3,766,626$ 30,316,111$ 11.05%General Fund Expenditures: General Government: Administration939,391$ 980,087$ 979,183$ 1,012,841$ 1,037,235$ 317,591$ 719,644$ 30.62% Accounting876,216 873,987 912,685 902,901 933,624 267,813 665,811 28.69% Assessing559,749 560,979 602,299 601,687 641,038 198,033 443,005 30.89% Human Resources693,598 788,823 805,929 857,950 748,718 252,983 495,735 33.79% Community Development1,151,467 1,118,444 1,245,613 1,253,687 1,385,036 401,720 983,316 29.00% Facilities Maintenance1,053,715 1,039,699 1,094,836 1,072,749 1,115,877 379,225 736,652 33.98% Information Resources1,456,979 1,406,187 1,468,552 1,374,074 1,564,128 467,201 1,096,927 29.87% Communications & Marketing566,801 562,063 635,150 571,815 608,228 176,827 431,401 29.07% Community Outreach8,185 6,680 24,677 22,380 25,587 5,602 19,985 21.89% Engineering506,996 223,491 492,838 381,148 549,251 86,701 462,550 15.79%Total General Government7,813,097$ 7,560,440$ 8,261,762$ 8,051,233$ 8,608,722$ 2,553,697$ 6,055,025$ 29.66% Public Safety: Police7,571,315$ 7,769,592$ 8,511,557$ 8,248,745$ 8,698,661$ 2,870,109$ 5,828,552$ 32.99% Fire Protection3,458,161 3,535,716 3,722,396 3,759,386 4,030,153 1,260,205 2,769,948 31.27% Inspectional Services2,006,200 1,867,618 2,139,325 2,002,445 2,216,075 693,111 1,522,964 31.28%Total Public Safety13,035,676$ 13,172,927$ 14,373,278$ 14,010,577$ 14,944,889$ 4,823,425$ 10,121,464$ 32.27% Operations & Recreation: Public Works Administration222,994$ 236,304$ 232,437$ 213,383$ 241,304$ 70,593$ 170,711$ 29.25% Public Works Operations2,625,171 2,571,496 2,763,735 2,388,560 2,907,781 893,669 2,014,112 30.73% Organized Recreation1,290,038 1,277,046 1,304,470 1,360,454 1,431,260 547,467 883,793 38.25% Recreation Center1,543,881 1,561,224 1,591,115 1,575,042 1,602,935 378,114 1,224,821 23.59% Park Maintenance1,445,813 1,412,612 1,550,033 1,513,700 1,634,249 478,135 1,156,114 29.26% Westwood531,853 508,576 564,055 560,744 576,173 174,766 401,407 30.33% Natural Resources433,750 379,193 472,049 377,617 479,408 74,060 405,348 15.45% Vehicle Maintenance1,285,489 1,323,358 1,333,520 1,118,048 1,358,946 374,205 984,741 27.54%Total Operations & Recreation9,378,989$ 9,269,808$ 9,811,414$ 9,107,547$ 10,232,056$ 2,991,010$ 7,241,046$ 29.23% Non-Departmental: General 4,000$ 7,562$ -$ 123,720$ 30,351$ 10,116$ 20,235$ 0.00% Transfers Out- 1,050,000 - 2,194,245 - - - 0.00% Contingency195,860 13,834 177,984 14,438 266,719 - 266,719 0.00%Total Non-Departmental199,860$ 1,071,396$ 177,984$ 2,332,403$ 297,070$ 10,116$ 286,954$ 3.41%Total General Fund Expenditures30,427,622$ 31,074,572$ 32,624,438$ 33,501,760$ 34,082,737$ 10,378,249$ 23,704,488$ 30.45%* Recorded at yearendStudy Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 5) Title: April 2016 Monthly Financial ReportPage 3
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: May 23, 2016
Written Report: 6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Public Art Initiative - 4900 Excelsior
RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. This report is intended to update the Council
on the process of incorporating public art into the 4900 Excelsior development (former Bally’s
site). Please inform staff of any questions or concerns you might have.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: The 4900 Excelsior development is intended to incorporate a public art element(s)
on the property. The artwork will be privately owned and maintained and located within the
privately owned and publicly accessible civic space on the property.
The artwork will be selected with assistance from public art consultant Jack Becker with Forecast
Public Art. Mr. Becker has provided similar assistance to the City for other public art initiatives.
The selection process will also include input from a committee that has been formed. The
committee consists of Dan Hunt and Jim Hunt with Hunt Development, Brady Halverson and Jack
Boarman with Boarman Kroos Vogel Group, Susan Schneck with St. Louis Park Friends of the
Arts, Kristi Nelson from the Wolfe Park Neighborhood, Stephanie Blom from the Wolfe Park
Condominiums and Heather Keogh from the Browndale Neighborhood. Mr. Becker will guide
the project committee through the process of identifying artists and ultimately help select the
artist(s) and public art feature(s).
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None at this time
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to promoting an integrating arts,
culture and community aesthetics in all City initiatives, including implementation where
appropriate.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Notes from Initial Project Committee Meeting
Prepared by: Breanna Freedman, Community Liaison
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
4900 Excelsior, St. Louis Park
Public Art Project
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 6) Page 2
Title: Public Art Initiative - 4900 Excelsior
4900 Excelsior, St. Louis Park
Public Art Project
Committee meeting notes
April 25, 2016
In attendance:
Breanna Freedman – community liaison (new to public art process)
Kristi Nelson – lift park neighborhood, artist, neighborhood sign designer
Jim Hunt – development team
Heather Keyo (not on Committee) – Kristi and Heather met, wants to be part of it, artist, be
involved in community, Browndale resident
Nicole Mardell – associate planner
Brady Halverson – LA BKV
Jack Boarman - BKV
Sean Walther – planning/zoning supervisor – helping Breanna
Susan Schneck – Friends of the Arts
Forecast Public Art team: Jack Becker and Jen Krava
Overview of the process:
Meet about 3 times (2 more after this). Forecast team will help Committee find an artist and
manage the selection process, create RFQ materials, etc.
Basic approach: Request for Qualifications (RFQ) not RFP (involving submission of proposals).
RFQs are more respectful of artists as professionals; we don’t ask for proposals right away. After
this meeting, where we begin to collect information about the project, budget, timeline, etc. This
is used to draft the RFQ to go to qualified artists.
The RFQ asks an invited group of applicants to submit a letter of interest, work samples (10 images
of previous projects) and a Bio/Resume. Following review of the applications (at our second
meeting) 2 or 3 artists will be selected as finalists. They will be paid to develop proposals to bring
to the committee (for our third meeting). They will be interviewed and then ranked by the
committee through a democratic voting system.
Generally the design that is proposed is not the final design. FPA’s role is minimized after the
artist is chosen. We are glad to be a resource after that point, but typically an artist who has
experience will be able to take it from here. For this project, the artwork will be privately owned
and maintained, but visible publicly. Owner is obligated to spend $75,000 for the public art.
Recommend that $60,000 goes for artwork and $15,000 for maintenance and FPA fees. May be
opportunities for the city to participate in the upfront/process costs (not the artwork costs).
Public Art 101 presentation by Jack:
Public art is about experience, process, and artworks that occupy public space. It is a field of
inquiry, trial and error, cause and effect. Possibilities are endless. Artists are refining what public
art can be all over the world, in many different ways.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 6) Page 3
Title: Public Art Initiative - 4900 Excelsior
Why public art? Connections, audience appreciation of arts, activates civic dialogue, gives identity
and character to communities. Public art types fall on a spectrum from ephemeral to permanent,
and everything in between. Can also range from privately owned but publicly accessible (like this
project), to publicly owned and accessible. Community engagement can take different forms.
There are also several mediums for artistic expression.
Precedents:
Jack presented a variety of public art images: St. Louis Arch – monuments | Watts Towers – Folk
and Visionary Artworks | Glass art | Street painting and art | murals | light/facades |
light/infrastructure | light/projections | water features | platforms/venues | functional streetscape
elements | paving and ground plane | pathways/paving | overhead installations | participatory
culture | plaza sculpture | occupation/intervention | urban sculpture park | found object
sculpture/wayfinding | DIY installation art | art car parades/bike art | social practice/community
engagement | placemaking/land art | performance, festivals, community events, etc.
Public art is beneficial to city building. Artists can help with all sorts of issues and challenges
within the city. We believe artists should be brought in early on in public improvement projects
rather than thinking that art is an “add-on.” SLP is a leader in these areas!
Development & Site:
Next to Excelsior and Grand between Quentin and Princeton. Development currently is a hole in
the ground. 6 story apartment building. Commercial on ground level (Fresh Thyme grocery store).
2 acre site. Grade slopes down from Excelsior to Park Commons Drive (residential underneath)
commercial parkway, then 2 story apartments along Princeton.
Possible green wall along Excelsior Blvd. Green wall suggestion on corner of Quentin (west
elevation) loading zone and grocery parking. Princeton side - entrance to parking, 2 level
apartments, step back U shaped building. Park Commons Drive (north) grade drops, underground
parking becomes more and more exposed, building steps back in upper levels. 66 parking stalls.
On street parking all the way around. Loading docks off Quentin. Roof deck with pool, bocce,
yoga, fitness, club, etc. View from Quentin and Park Commons Blvd – placeholder artwork on
the corner of the building – mural of some type? This is what the council was shown through the
approval process. 2 entrances to the grocer – through the parking ramp and also from the sidewalk.
Visual connection between lobby and street level.
Screens over the commercial parking area – keeps air coming in and out but also visually screens.
Perforated metal panel could be an artistic piece rather than a metal panel. Potentially almost a
block long by 12’ high. 100’ + long. Transom windows across the top.
Park benches on the Excelsior side. Possible to put a bench near the corner mural art? No sidewalk
interior seating situation. People sitting inside are a potential audience, could the artwork be placed
relative to the store seating?
Most vehicular traffic concentrated on Excelsior. Lots of pedestrian traffic. Other three sides
maybe more residential/pedestrian views. People coming to the store will probably turn before
seeing the mural artwork on the corner.
Study Session Meeting of May 23, 2016 (Item No. 6) Page 4
Title: Public Art Initiative - 4900 Excelsior
The “green wall” area on excelsior could be moved to the nw corner (more westerly exposure).
BKV talk to the ownership about this exchange and if it is OK’d. 20 bikes on the bike rack (10
racks). Width of sidewalk is about 20-25’.
Artwork within the masonry – limit to first story because of the way they tie into the other corners
of the building. Would be a lot of visual impact. Wall relief – attachments to the wall. Can’t go in
but can bring the wall out.
Strong argument that it could tie in with the public art of the city along Excelsior Blvd. Could
some part of the work go above pedestrian level to be viewed from a distance? Light could be a
possibility here. There is a white awning element that comes around the corner, stops, then picks
up again.
Combination of bike rack and wall relief. Think about snow removal. With light as part of it.
Incorporates light and sculpture. Creating a pause for those parking their bikes, waiting for the bus,
walking by, etc.
Criteria for Art, RFQ development:
Utilize the space where the green wall is currently placed on Excelsior. This space is approximately
20’ wide by 16’ tall. This will be an invitational call for artwork that consists of masonry/relief,
light, and bike rack elements. Artists could form teams if they would like.
Breanna will send Jen copy about SLP and the neighborhood. Jim or BKV will send information
about the development itself. All of this information will be incorporated into the RFQ.
FPA will put together a RFQ and send to the committee to review by the end of May. Any changes
from the committee will be sent back within a week, then the RFQ will be sent to the artists.
Committee members are encouraged to suggest artists to be considered.
The RFQ deadline will likely be in June, with selection of finalists in early July. Breanna will help
secure a date for our second meeting.