City Council - Workshop Meetings

City Council Workshop Meeting Ash North and South Conference Rooms August 24, 2022 | 6:30 p.m. This City Council Workshop meeting is taking place virtually and at Woodbury City Hall in the Ash North and South Conference Room. Members of the public may attend the meeting in person and may also join the meeting using a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android device. Watch the Live Meeting Public comments will be accepted during the meeting both in person and by using the link to the virtual meeting to join the meeting and then submit your questions via the online Q&A feature within the meeting. Questions regarding the meeting will be taken between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at 651-714-3524 or at council@woodburymn.gov. Questions received after 4:30 p.m. will be responded to in the next three to seven business days. Please note that all agenda times are estimates. 6:00 p.m. Dinner – Birch Conference Room Workshop Agenda 6:30 p.m. 1. Community Engagement Guide 22-213 7:45 p.m. 2. Break 7:55 p.m. 3. Central Park Renovation Project Update 22-214 9:10 p.m. 4. Administrator Comments and Updates1 9:15 p.m. 5. Mayor and City Council Comments and Commission Liaison Updates1 9:20 p.m. 6. Adjournment 1 Items under comments and updates are intended to be informational or of brief inquiry. More substantial discussion of matters under comments and updates should be scheduled for a future agenda. The City of Woodbury is subject to Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities. The City is committed to full implementation of the Act to our services, programs, and activities. Information regarding the provision of the Americans with Disabilities Act is available from the City Administrator's office at (651) 714-3523. Auxiliary aids for disabled persons are available upon request at least 72 hours in advance of an event. Please call the ADA Coordinator, Clinton P. Gridley, at (651) 714-3523 (TDD (651) 714-3568)) to make arrangements.  1 City of Woodbury, Minnesota Office of City Administrator Council Workshop Letter 22-213 August 24, 2022 To: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Clinton P. Gridley, City Administrator Subject: Community Engagement Guide Summary The purpose of this presentation will be to give an overview of the community engagement guide that was created through a collaborative process between community members and City of Woodbury staff. The presentation will include a review of the process that was used to create the guide, the results of that process, and a conversation with the City Council about a few of the considerations that are being recommended. Amanda Koonjbeharry, one of the consultants we have been working with from Tunheim, will be at the workshop to walk through the power point presentation and assist in leading a facilitated discussion about what the final community engagement guide will look like for the City of Woodbury (similar to the pedestrian and bicycle plan process). The presentation will conclude with a discussion about next steps, including training that will happen to ensure that staff are supported and prepared to fully implement equitable community engagement plans on behalf of the City. Recommendation The general contents of the community engagement guide will be presented to the City Council in draft form at the workshop. We are requesting City Council feedback regarding the guide prior to adoption consideration in September. Governance Mode • Generative - Identifying key questions, anticipating future challenges, framing of issues, development of options. Problem-framing. What to pay attention to, what it means, and what to do about it. How does it fit with our mission, vision and values? Fiscal Implications There is a section in the guide that could require future funding for community engagement. This section relates to offering equitable accommodations to remove barriers to participation including offering language translation, sign language interpreters, food, childcare, etc., when appropriate, to accommodate any resident who wishes to participate in our engagement processes. We are looking for feedback from the City Council if you would like the guide and some level of budget allocation to address these barriers that would allow for fuller engagement of our residents. Council Workshop Letter 22-213 August 24, 2022 Page 2 Policy The community engagement strategy falls under the Welcoming and Inclusive Community strategic initiative from previous years, as well as the Quality of Life and Environmental Stewardship critical success factors. Public Process May/June 2022 Consultants conducted one on one interviews with key stakeholders June 1-20, 2022 Community engagement survey shared with staff and the community June 8, 2022 Focus group with interdepartmental community engagement team June 18, 2022 Table and speaking role at the Juneteenth celebration where the community engagement planning process and survey was highlighted June 29, 2022 Two separate focus groups with community and staff June 29, 2022 Council Workshop (1) July 6 – Aug. 1, 2022 Community Engagement Ideation Workshop meetings August 24, 2022 Council Workshop (2) September 28, 2022 Council adoption of the Community Engagement Guide Background Earlier this year, staff began working with Twin Cities based consultant firm, HueLife, in partnership with the public relations firm Tunheim, to create an overall community engagement strategy. The work to create a community engagement strategy evolved into the creation of a community engagement guide, as it became clear through the process that more foundational work needed to be done to create clear definitions, shared values and principles, and commitments to equitable engagement that will guide our work. This guide will serve as groundwork for the City’s philosophical beliefs for how to approach engagement. In the implementation phase of this work, we will create a more detailed toolkit that will guide staff in the process of creating community engagement plans. This presentation will showcase much of the work that was created by community members and staff who were brought together to participate in three separate ideation workshops, which led to recommendations to include in the guide. After the August 24 workshop, the final document will be further refined and presented to the City Council at a September Council meeting for approval. Written By: Shelly Schafer, Community Engagement and Equity Coordinator Approved Through: Clinton P. Gridley, City Administrator Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation Today’s • Review process to date and Purpose Community Engagement Guide framework. • Outline next steps and implementation phase. • Gather feedback from City Council and engage in a discussion about the guide. Agenda Time Agenda Item 5 min Welcome, Agenda and Process Review 5 min Focus Group and Ideation Workshop Review 15 min Community Engagement Guide Outline 5 min Implementation and Next Steps Discussion Process at a Glance Collecting Data Implementation Creating Shared Vision & Strategies Process at a Glance: Part 1 Process at a Glance: Part 2  Focus Groups & Ideation Workshops Summary What worked well? • 20+ people, comprised of staff and community members, participated over the course of a month. • Diversity of race, age, gender, perspective and experience. • Two focus groups and three ideation workshops (13 total hours)  Where do we have consensus? What worked well? • There is a desire for everyone to • Important to reach people who are belong. not typically engaged. • Community engagement is about building relationships (but also • The final product should benefit about building community both employees and community capacity). members. • Need resources to be able to do • Equal opportunity and access for this well. people to be successful.  What are we doing well? What worked well? • Going to Community • Variety of Engagement Tools • Proactive vs. Reactive • Inclusive for all People • Active Partners in Community What are the key issues and barriers to What worked community well? engagement? • Access • Communication • Process • Government • Representation • Community Partners What are the possible solutions or What worked engagement well? strategies we can consider? • Formal engagement process/ • Provide cultural awareness meeting people where they are. training for staff. • Allocate funding and resources to • Find innovative and accessible community engagement efforts. ways to communicate that are tailored to specific communities. • Be proactive vs reactive and engage early. • Illustrate success beyond data (example- personal stories). • Ensure everyone has opportunity for their voice to be heard. Community Engagement Guide Outline 1. Letter from the City of Woodbury 2. Introduction 3. Definitions 4. City of Woodbury Commitments Community Engagement Guide Outline 5. Guiding Principles and Values 6. Success Indicators for Community Engagement 7. Framework for Inclusive Community Engagement 8. Practices and Purpose Areas for Community Engagement 9. Evaluations, Closing, and Next Steps Definitions Proposed Definition for Community What worked well? Engagement Community Engagement is: • A practice of prioritizing building relationships between residents, community partners*, and the city that creates a sense of belonging and connectedness; • An intentional, inclusive, and open two-way communication between the residents, community partners*, and the city; • A learning process that contributes to building community capacity for active participation, supporting transparent decision making. *Community Partners – groups and organizations that represent various interests in the community. DEI Working Definitions: Diversity What worked well? Diversity - The presence of people with a variety of experiences, identities, and perspectives which may include race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity, nationality, socioeconomic status, language, (dis)ability, age, or political perspective. DEI Working Definitions: Equity What worked well? Equity - The pursuit of fairness and justice within policies, programs and procedures. DEI Working Definitions: Inclusion What worked well? Inclusion - The outcome of an environment in which the needs, voice, and perspective of every individual is validated and affirmed in decision- making processes and development opportunities. (As adopted from South Washington County Schools) Commitments Community Engagement Commitment What worked well? Community Engagement Commitment The City of Woodbury is committed to creating a sense of belonging and connectedness, building relationships, communicating openly, and creating opportunities for active participation with everyone who lives, works, and visits Woodbury. Equity Commitment What worked well? Equity Commitment The City of Woodbury is committed to removing barriers, addressing disparities, and ensuring that everyone has access to the resources and opportunities they need in our community. Values & Principles  • Equity: does everyone have equal Values & access to participate? Principles • Trust: will it build a sense of belonging & trust with community? • Informed Community: do the participants have the information necessary to participate meaningfully? • Openness and Accessibility: do we have the communication plan in place that ensures openness and access to information? Success Indicators  What will be in place in 3-5 years from now as a What of result worked well?community engagement? successful • Collaboration • City Operations • Access • Belonging Collaboration Success Indicators • Increased participation in programs and services offered by the City and Community Partners. • Services offered reflect resident’s needs. • Coordinated efforts to identify and address community needs. As illustrated by: • Collaborative needs and strengths assessment. • Increased volunteerism. • Shared education about community needs City Operations Success Indicators • Increase in access, participation, and sense of belonging. • Increased number of interested parties submitting ideas. • Change management mindset. • Standardized templates for communication and project management. • Expectations for engagement process are met. As illustrated by: • Increased funding. • Number of new ideas received, and engagement plans implemented. • Increased residents' responses (community survey results) in areas of ‘connectedness’. • Clear understanding of the projects being proposed by community members. Access Success Indicators • Increased use of services and participation by underserved groups. • Increased involvement in public service from diverse groups. As illustrated by: • Removing barriers. • Expanding communication channels and ways we reach community in two-way dialogue. Belonging Success Indicators • Events – the diversity of events • Representation – having the City reflect the community • Accessibility – equitable access As illustrated by: • Events that celebrate diversity. • City staff that better reflects the community. • Accessibility – Take into consideration someone’s lifestyle and time (Example – those with children or working during the day). Community Engagement Framework Framework for Inclusive Engagement General Framework • Identify Purpose • Interested parties’ (stakeholders) definition and mapping • Communications planning • Engagement activities Discussion Considerations for Inclusive Community Engagement • Time • Location • Food • Childcare • Language (interpretation) • Method (virtual, in person, hybrid) • Proactive vs reactive engagement Practice and Purpose Areas for Community Engagement  Engagement Purpose Defined What worked well? Community Programs/Service/ Policy Decisions Connectedness Project Questions 1. What is this type of engagement about? 2. Why do we want to engage the community for this purpose? What results are we expecting from this type of engagement? Community Project Specific Service Specific Policy Decisions Connectedness (Example: road (Example: public (Example: zoning, (Example: Community project, park & rec safety, snow plowing) transportation) Events, Conversations) program) • Building authentic • We hope the •Sense of belonging to Community trust in city relationships with community feels a part community decision makers and residents, community of the process •Positive experience staff organizations, businesses, • Community is and sharing with other government informed friends and family organizations •People need to feel a • Increased participation sense of safety and awareness • Greater trust in city and among constituencies • Sense of belonging Who are the interested parties that need to be engaged and what are the levels of engagement? Community Project Specific Service Specific Policy Decisions Connectedness •Everybody (see diversity •Neighbors who are in •Everyone (can get •Stakeholder mapping definition) close proximity to the more specific •City commissions •Target the disenfranchised project depending on the •Residents at large •BIPOC, aging, disabilities, •People impacted by service or program we •Businesses LGBTQ the project are addressing) •School district •Community leaders (formal •County and informal) •Better information about languages spoken in Woodbury •Community based organizations, faith based, non-profits Engagement Practices /Activities Community Connectedness Project/Program/Service Policy Decisions Specific • Cultural liaisons • Going to where community is & • Community Survey • Daily news highlights participating in informal • Neighborhood • Joint communications with other organizations conversations Meetings • Engage other cultural leaders in the hiring and • Open house • Council Workshops recruitment practices • Listening sessions • Intergovernmental • Hire to replicate the mix of cultures in the city. • Facilitated tables discussions conversations • Assure people hired feel welcomes, • Tabling (school district, connected – affinity groups • Focus groups county) • Be mindful (to not overburden those who are • Informal events (combo of an open representing new communities) house and family event) • “Residents Doing Great Things” • Possible informal meeting before • “One event” – spotlight multiple cultures in formal meeting Woodbury – our own Festival of Nations • Engage youth of multiple cultures to compete between communities (ex. soccer) • Cost of facilitates programs may be a barrier Communication Strategies Community Connectedness Project/Program/Service Policy Decisions Specific • QR codes on communications for those • Questionnaire (multi language) • Existing wanting more information • More information ahead of time relationships • Create Engagement focused committee (letter about project) • Newsletter, etc. • City App • Yard signs about project • Community survey • Social media developed by young • Website, InTouch, people cable • Storytelling, testimonials, anecdotes that humanizing the statistics • Multi –lingual • Increased utilization of InTouch • Encourage resident feedback /ideas • Focus groups • Task forces Roles (City Council, Community Partners, Departments) Community Connectedness Project/Program/Service Policy Decisions Specific • Regular meeting with • Evaluating that policies aren’t • Expertise (departments) “community leaders” - create a overly restrictive • Transparency on decision coalition • Helping to share information making & exploring the • Final vote (Council) – don’t “Why” always have to go to • Input & Attendance neighborhood meetings – let (Community Partners) process play out first Evaluations, Closing and Next Steps Implementation Defining Roles • City Council • City Administration • Directors • Staff Community Engagement Plan Approval Process International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum Upcoming Community Engagement Presentations and Trainings  Development Tour Presentation  Supervisor Presentation and Training  2-3 training workshops this fall with staff and a few community partners  Commission Kick-Off Training with City Council Discussion  2 City of Woodbury, Minnesota Office of City Administrator Council Workshop Letter 22-214 August 24, 2022 To: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Clinton P. Gridley, City Administrator Subject: Central Park Renovation Project: − Schematic design alternative selection − Authorization to move to design development stage − Engage professional services through bid award stage − Prepare participation agreements with project partners Summary The Central Park project has reached the conclusion of the schematic design phase of the project. The design options being considered are based on input from previous needs studies, a comprehensive public engagement plan, direction from City Council, and the needs of our project partners, Washington County, Independent School District 833 (ISD 833) the Woodbury YMCA and consideration for potential future partners such as the South Washington County Telecommunications Commission (SWCTC.) The financial planning for this project is running on two tracks: operating and capital financing. Finalization of the operating plan will be established as the project scope is more clearly defined. As was briefly discussed during the July workshop, the lodging tax is proposed to be used in- part for the Central Park operating pro forma. As allowed by law, there are specific destination marketing organization (DMO) areas that can support a visitor center at Central Park, such as staffing, space lease, marketing, advertising support, etc. The lodging tax would fund the DMO. Staff will present specifics related to the opportunity to utilize lodging tax at the October 19, 2022 workshop. Previously presented lodging tax information is included with this packet. The capital financial planning is more advanced and described further in the financial implication sections. Based on current cost estimates, there is an opportunity to leverage our balance sheet through use of fund balance, expiring debt levies and other revenue sources to forego tax levy increases for capital funding. The capital financing plan does assume the ISD 833 lease revenues in the pro-forma, like the past agreement. The utilization of TIF 13 proceeds is still part of our capital financing plan, as is Washington County’s full participation in the shared portions of the facility per our condominium agreement. State bonding participation is still hoped for, and will be continued to be engaged in 2023, but presently is not included in our capital assumptions due to funding uncertainty and timing. Achieving part or all of our legislative requests related to Central Park would reduce the financing burden on our balance sheets. Council Workshop Letter 22-214 August 24, 2022 Page 2 Recommendation 1. Council review and consider the schematic design alternatives, cost estimates, draft financial information, affirm and narrow the scope of the project to one alternative to provide clear direction to staff to engage our project partners and draft agreements for entering future phases of the project. 2. Authorization of staff to prepare professional service and partner participation agreements to complete the project development processes through bid award. Selection of a single alternative and contract authorizations does not obligate the City Council to build this project. Three specific project continuation decision points will still be available for the City Council at (1) end of the design development phase, (2) construction document/authorization to bid phase, and (3) award of construction contracts. 3. Option B2 remains staff’s recommended direction due to: a. Option A adds little to no additional programming space if South Washington County Telecommunications Commission (SWCTC) leases the majority to all of the second floor above the amphitheater mezzanine. b. Option B2 second story of the multi-purpose space, adds just five to seven percent to the project costs (approximately $2 million) and better positions the facility to serve the next 20 years to our expected 90,000-plus population. 4. Council’s feedback on the draft capital and operational finance plan. Next Steps Below is an updated timeline for the project: Date Item Date 2022 End Schematic Design Phase 8/24 Workshop Meeting Finalize Design Development Scope of the Project Preliminary Approval of Operations Plan Preliminary Approval of Capital Financing Plan Design and Documentation Phase Q3 2022 Further Project Cost Estimating Seeking Funding Agreements with Facility Partners 2023 Review Design Development Plan Q1 - Q2 2023 Authorize Commencement to Construction Documents and Public bidding Bid Award Q4 2023 2024 Construction Commences Q1 2024 Bond Issuance 2025 Grand Re-opening Q3-Q4 2025 Governance Mode Generative - Identifying key questions, anticipating future challenges, framing issues, and developing of options. Problem framing. What to pay attention to, what it means, and what to do about it. How does it fit with our mission, vision, and values? Council Workshop Letter 22-214 August 24, 2022 Page 3 Fiscal Implications Capital: A variety of combined capital funding options are being presented for consideration by the Council. At the conclusion of the schematic design, the variables being considered require both cost estimating and funding to be shown in a range during a period of extreme market volatility and continued negotiation with our project partners. The preliminary total Central Park cost estimates range currently from $23 million to $37 million, as shown below: Description Low Range High Range City Share Estimate 1 Debt Amount Option A $23 Million $25 Million $14 - $15 Million $2 – $4 Million Option B1 $33 Million $34 Million $24 - $25 Million $15 - $17 Million Option B2 $35 Million $37 Million $26 – $28 Million $16 - $18 Million It is important to remember that these cost estimates are subject to further refinement, effects from inflation and supply chain issues, and design decisions. The ISD 833 participation will be converted to a lease and included in the capital debt service pro forma. Washington County participation levels continue to be under negotiation. These funding questions and commitments by our local partners will need to be resolved by the end of the year, and the state participation levels will be extended to the next legislative season. Funding Sources Anticipated Contribution Range Partner Contributions $7,000,00 - $9,500,000 Community Investment Fund $5,000,000 - $6,000,000 Capital Improvement Fund $2,000,000 - $4,000,000 Stormwater Fund $100,000 Parks and Trails Replacement Fund $1,000,000 - $1,500,000 City Bonding funded by expiring debt and $4,000,000 - $17,000,000 Tax Abatement levies 2 TIF Special Legislation $1,500,000 - $2,000,000 Additional funding sources will be evaluated to include State bonding, grants, and sales tax waiver. Operations: As Council Members are aware, Central Park’s operations are supported in the General Fund. While the facility does create revenues from facility rentals, recreation programming and the fees associated with Lookout Ridge, annually expenses exceed revenues. The property tax subsidy has grown year-over-year as the facility has aged and fee collections have fallen – a similar situation as the sports center before its improvement. With an improved facility, we can expect operating revenue collections to grow – particularly with a renewed Lookout Ridge playground and new SWCTC lease revenues. The variables within the options being considered will be further refined once the project scope is defined. 1 Excludes state bonding 2 By "leveraging the balance sheet," tax increases within the capital options can be avoided Council Workshop Letter 22-214 August 24, 2022 Page 4 Preliminary Revenue Range 3,4 Option A Option B1-B2 $720,000 $795,000 to $845,000 Preliminary Expense Range Option A Option B1-B2 $650,000 $810,000-$845,000 Policy Critical Success Factor, Quality of Life Welcoming and Inclusive Community Public Process This project has had an opportunity to engage the public over the last several years with multiple touchpoints with the Council, the community, and a Lookout Ridge Indoor Playground survey in early 2020, as shown below. Staff anticipates additional engagement as the scope and cost estimates of the project are better defined and as we move into design development and construction documents. November 2014 Council directed staff to complete an analysis of Central Park 2015 - 2016 Public Process, Facility Partnerships, Central Park User Surveys 2017 Contracted former Eagan City Manager, Tom Hedges, and RSP Dreambox – Identify opportunities for collaboration and shared partnership vision Fall of 2019 Authorized cooperative funding agreement and consulting design services for scope and needs study Fall of 2020 Market Survey – Lookout Ridge Indoor Playground November 2020 City Council Workshop May 2021 City Council Workshop December 8, 2021 Authorized professional consulting services for design and construction administration April 2-22, 2022 Schematic design public engagement included: (2) stakeholder meetings, (4) pop-up events, online survey and Social Pinpoint April 2, 2022 Community Expo at East Ridge High School April 12, 2022 Public Open House May 18, 2022 City Council Workshop July 20, 2022 City Council Workshop August 24, 2022 City Council Workshop 3 This does not include anticipated revenue for the SWCTC-TV lease. The specifics of that space and lease are yet to be negotiated. 4 This includes revenues from pending Lodging Tax contributions. Council Workshop Letter 22-214 August 24, 2022 Page 5 Background Central Park and Lookout Ridge is significant and unique because it holds one of the busiest libraries in the state, regional school programing, and hosts the only YMCA in central and southern Washington County. Staff has identified that the “regional overburden” Woodbury is bearing to support the existing and improved facility. Central Park is a multi-use indoor park constructed in 2002 and provides a focal point that establishes the City Centre area as the heart of Woodbury. The park links to the Washington County R.H. Stafford Branch Library, Lookout Ridge Indoor Playground, the YMCA, ISD 833 Early Childhood Family Education, and the Great Rivers Adult Education Consortium. Additionally, there is a well-used skyway link to the Stonecrest Community Living facility. Over 20 years for Central Park have passed without any significant facility updates. During that timeframe, the population has increased significantly, and the City, its residents, and its area needs continue to grow and change. Frequently, there are conflicting needs for gathering space, programming, and rental opportunities. In 2019, the City partnered with Washington County, the Woodbury YMCA, and South Washington County School District to conduct a scoping and needs study for the Central Park facility. In December 2021, the City and County engaged the consulting firm Hammel, Green, and Abrahamson, Inc. (HGA) and Kraus-Anderson Construction Company (Kraus-Anderson), to guide the project through schematic design and further define the final overall scope of the project and preliminary costs estimates. As directed by Council on May 19, 2021, the schematic design includes both Option A and Option B. Based on the direction provided at the May 18, 2022, Workshop meeting, the proposed schematic design alternatives for Council’s consideration includes an option to renovate the space with an enclosed amphitheater (Option A) and an option to both renovate the space, enclose the amphitheater, and add a multi-purpose space (Option B) as further detailed below: Description Includes Option A • Deferred maintenance • ADA updates • Enclose the amphitheater and add 3,000 square-foot space above the amphitheater • East and west parking lot replacement/enhancements • Replace Lookout Ridge Indoor Playground, and add party room(s) in the playground space • Expanded park area for additional seating/gathering, and update water feature • Update west entry/enhanced wayfinding, update south entry/outdoor patio space • Remodeled ISD 833 lease space • Implementation of B3 Guidelines to meet sustainability goals for site, water, energy usage, indoor environment, materials, and waste in accordance with adopted Resolution No. 09-233 Council Workshop Letter 22-214 August 24, 2022 Page 6 Option B1 • All of Option A • An addition of a single story 12,000 square-foot multi-purpose space • Optional Green roof (added expense, and only with B1) • Infrastructure to accommodate additional space with additional parking in the east parking lot Option B2 • All of Option A and B1 • 6,000 square-foot program/lease space constructed above the multi- purpose space • Infrastructure to accommodate additional space Written By: Michelle Okada, Parks and Recreation Director Chris Hartzell, Engineering Director Approved By: Clinton P. Gridley, City Administrator Attachments: 1. Council Workshop Letter No. 17-221 August 16, 2017 Re. Lodging Tax 2. Convention and Visitors Bureau 2017 Map of Communities with Local Option Lodging Tax 3. DRAFT PowerPoint Presentation  2 CITY OF WOODBURY, MINNESOTA Office of City Administrator Council Workshop Letter No. 17-221 August 16, 2017 TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Clinton P. Gridley, City Administrator SUBJECT: Updated Analysis on Formation of a Woodbury Convention and Visitors Bureau SUMMARY As part of the City Council’s 2013-2015 Strategic Initiative related to marketing, branding and promotion of the City, staff evaluated creating a Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB). This process began in 2013 with a feasibility study conducted by Zeitgeist Consulting. The study concluded in 2014 with the City Council determining that they did not wish to proceed with the establishment of a lodging tax to create and fund a CVB at that time. The City began re-examining the possible establishment of a CVB for two primary reasons. First, the Twin Cities continues to attract major events that drive business to the lodging industry, including the Ryder Cup golf event in 2016; the Super Bowl in 2018; the Final Four in 2019; and possibly the World’s Fair in 2023. Hosting these events in the Twin Cities creates rare opportunities to market Woodbury as a place to visit. Any potential Woodbury CVB would likely offer a sports destination marketing emphasis (HealthEast Sports Center tournaments, opportunities at Eagle Valley Golf Course and Central Park and other events) to ensure both daily and long-term sustained success. Second, the recent addition of three new hotels in Woodbury (Residence Inn by Marriot, LaQuinta Inn, and Courtyard by Marriott) has resulted in an additional 344 rooms, bringing the total hotel room capacity in Woodbury to 1,026 rooms. There is also a development application for a third hotel at CityPlace. The additional rooms make the creation of a CVB more economically feasible as more funding is now available to more effectively market the community as a place to visit. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends: 1. Creation of an action plan anticipating the establishment of a lodging tax of three percent to be used to fund a local CVB for the purpose of marketing and promoting the City. The proposed action plan is anticipated to be ready for Council review at its January 2018 workshop. Council Workshop Letter 17-221 August 16, 2017 Page 2 of 9 2. The action plan to be based on a stand-alone Woodbury CVB as opposed to a regional – east metro – CVB. While a few Woodbury-based hoteliers said they would be more supportive of a regional model so as to not put them at a competitive disadvantage with the hotels outside of Woodbury on the north side of I-94 who would not have to charge the three percent tax, there are added significant complexities in setting up a CVB involving other jurisdictions. 3. Maximize the marketing impact of the lodging tax revenue by: a. Controlling the administrative costs in operating the CVB. For example, the Twin Cities Gateway CVB hired two contractors to run CVB operations in lieu of employees. In particular, the hoteliers indicated the CVB staff must have extensive experience in tourism promotion, which requires a unique skill set to be effective. This may be best found externally or contractually. b. Consider a virtual CVB, which emphasizes its marketing efforts on digital/online formats instead of the traditional printed flyers, guides and physical office space. With 76 percent of leisure travelers now making travel plans online, this has become an increasingly effective marketing strategy. For example, the Twin Cities Gateway CVB limits administrative costs to 23 percent of annual revenue, which was the least among the CVBs staff talked to for this report. The remaining 77 percent goes to marketing and promotion. c. Utilize current City staff capabilities to support the CVB (e.g. IT, finance, administrative support and communications) on a reimbursable basis. d. Locate any CVB staff and office within City facilities (e.g. Central Park) and pay associated market rental rate. 4. As part of developing the action plan, develop an organizational structure and governance of the CVB to ensure that it closely aligns with the overall vision and direction of the City. Options include: a. Independent 501(c)(6): The by-laws could be written such that the City Council will appoint the full board, have significant direct City representation on the CVB Board and have review/approval authority of the CVB’s annual budget. b. Internal to the City: This model would run and operate the CVB like our other City enterprises with an advisory commission oversight appointed by the City Council. Depending on which option(s) the Council prefers, staff would commence with the next steps of developing a plan of action for implementation. Third-party legal and technical assistance may be required with setting up the proposed CVB articles of incorporation, by-laws, etc. BUDGET IMPACT An initial annual lodging tax revenue projection, based on the current number of hotel rooms, is provided below. Council Workshop Letter 17-221 August 16, 2017 Page 3 of 9 • 1,026 hotel rooms 1 x 350 nights = 359,100 available rooms • At 60 percent occupancy = 215,460 rooms sold • At $100 per night = $21,546,000 in room revenue • Three percent hotel tax = $646,380 in potential annual revenue from the room tax • 95 percent of the room tax collected must go to the CVB = $614,061 • Up to five percent of the room tax collected can be retained by the City for administrative costs = $32,319 BACKGROUND Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.190, authorizes municipalities by ordinance to impose a local lodging tax of up to three percent, which would be used to fund a “local convention or tourism bureau for the purpose of marketing and promoting the City as a tourist or convention center.” Ninety-five percent of the proceeds from this lodging tax must be used to fund the local CVB for the purpose of marketing the City as a tourist or convention center. The remaining five percent of the lodging tax revenues could be used by the City for administration costs related to collecting the tax, etc. Benefits of a CVB According to the 2014 Zeitgeist Consulting CVB feasibility study, CVBs have emerged as business and government leaders began to realize that marketing their communities increased business starts, job creation and nonresident tax generation. While still referred to as CVBs in Minnesota State Statutes, these agencies are, today, more often called Destination Marketing Organizations (DMOs) to more accurately describe the role these entities play. CVBs serve as the tourism marketing arm for a community in a way that is not currently being done. They facilitate large events that individual hotels or attractions would never pursue, yet produce positive visibility and visitor spending for the destination. They also can serve as another way to communicate with stakeholders on local policy issues. CVBs are a valuable asset for communities that understand the importance of standing out in a competitive marketplace. There are also advantages that are more difficult to measure but still important to the community, such as name and brand awareness, positive community relations and social media engagement and image building. While CVBs were once only judged on their generation of hotel room nights, today’s CVBs operate in a much broader environment. A CVB could help Woodbury market its facilities, destinations and programs to a broader audience than is currently being reached. According to the Twin Cities Gateway CVB, 80 percent of visits to the Metro area is for leisure travel, of which recreation and sports tournaments are a part. Woodbury is well-situated for sports destination marketing, given the success of our recreational programs and facilities, specifically the HealthEast Sports Center, Eagle Valley Golf Course and Central Park. Woodbury’s venues are already attracting visitors, some, but not all, of which result in 1 Current hotels include: Country Inn, Courtyard by Marriott, Extended Stay America, Hampton Inn, Holiday Inn Express, Key Inn, LaQuinta Inn, Residence Inn by Marriott, and the Sheraton. Council Workshop Letter 17-221 August 16, 2017 Page 4 of 9 overnight hotel stays. The target audience for most CVBs is between 120 and 300 miles outside of their community. By contrast, Woodbury’s current communications/marketing efforts are focused on residents and businesses within the City limits. In addition to marketing Woodbury as a sports destination, Woodbury is also known for its variety of shopping destinations and restaurants, which draw a large number of visitors each year. The community also hosts the Woodbury Lions Club Garage Sale, which definitely draws people from outside of the community, and generates hotel stays for many of them. In regard to large meetings and weddings, Woodbury is limited in its ability to attract these types of events due to its lack of large meeting/banquet space. The new Courtyard by Marriott will help, as it will have a meeting/ banquet room that seats 200 people. A CVB could also promote community events hosted by Woodbury businesses and organizations, improving community engagement levels. The City does not use its communications channels or economic development efforts to promote private events or individual businesses, as it is important that the City remain neutral and not endorse any particular business or organization. Nonetheless, the City receives requests for this type of promotional support on a regular basis. An established CVB could help in promoting events hosted by community organizations and businesses, possibly through a community calendar. The CVB could also help market City entertainment, sports and recreation assets, along with broader programming of recreation for schools, community education, arts functions and large community events such as Woodbury Days and the Chamber of Commerce’s Community Expo. From an economic development perspective, the CVB’s marketing activities are limited by State Statutes to promoting the City as a tourist or convention center, and as such cannot be used for general economic development marketing activities. However, a CVB can indirectly assist in the City’s ability to attract new businesses by helping create a stronger and more vibrant business climate, which in turn attracts even more businesses to the City. Economic development staff would work closely with the CVB to identify and leverage those opportunities where marketing efforts could benefit both existing and prospective businesses. Finally, there are visitor destinations outside of our community, but close enough to Woodbury that they draw patrons to Woodbury hotels. Examples include the Mall of America, the future Vikings training camp in Eagan, Afton Alps, Historic Downtown Stillwater and the St. Croix River Valley. With Woodbury’s convenient location close to Minneapolis and St. Paul, and the availability of free parking, Woodbury’s hotels attract guests who are attending events in Downtown St. Paul (i.e. Xcel Center, etc.). Staff research Over the past several months, staff conducted interviews with a number of community stakeholders including the hotel managers in Woodbury. Mayor Stephens also participated in the meetings with the hotels. Other groups interviewed include the Woodbury Area Chamber of Commerce, metro area CVBs, metro cities that have CVBs and Woodbury recreation staff and managers of City Council Workshop Letter 17-221 August 16, 2017 Page 5 of 9 recreational facilities. Staff informed the hotels and other stakeholders of the August 16 workshop discussion and encouraged them to attend. The following paragraphs describe the feedback from stakeholder interviews, and outline the opportunities and challenges of different structures for CVBs. Meetings with Hotels: One of the first steps that was taken was to again meet individually with the hotel management to gather feedback regarding the creation of a CVB. At the time of the meetings, early in 2017, the City was proposing special legislation which would have allowed some of the proceeds from the lodging tax to be used for capital expenditures to create a Welcome Center at Central Park, a large banquet room and additional parking. This special legislation did not get adopted, and as such the City is limited to using the three percent lodging tax for the purposes spelled out in the existing State Statutes. Below is a summary of the findings from the meetings with the hotels. 1. The hotels said that a CVB needs to prove its success. In other words, there need to be measurable benefits and added value to the hotels. Metrics will be very important in terms of reporting to the stakeholders the work that the CVB is doing and how it is adding value to them. Success will be measured through documented revenue brought in from events that the CVB generates or hosts. 2. The hotels would like a CVB that is a lean organization from a staffing perspective with a robust budget that allows them to focus on marketing and advertising to bring in events that will add room nights to the market. We would need to invest money on the marketing component, and even then, it may take several years to truly see the impact. 3. A CVB is less about a physical space and more about the activity that it generates. Several hotels said that people don’t actually go to CVBs or Welcome Centers, and a “store front” location is a thing of the past. 4. A CVB needs to incorporate the latest technology, including social media, mobile-friendly apps and top-notch video and photos. The director of the CVB should be very comfortable with technology and on the cutting edge in terms of incorporating the newest trends. 5. Significant attention and focus should be spent on the initial set-up of the CVB and the hiring of an experienced staff and/or contractors whose primary focus is marketing and generating leads. A professional and experienced team can be costly, and the CVB needs to be competitive to attract the right type of talent to this position. 6. The City needs to be intentional and deliberate in setting up the by-laws, articles of incorporation and establishing the board of directors. Quality is more important than expediency. 7. Woodbury hotels were also concerned about having a level playing field with the hotels on the other side of I-94 (Oakdale and Lake Elmo) in terms of the lodging tax being applied to their Council Workshop Letter 17-221 August 16, 2017 Page 6 of 9 hotels but not to the others. This is particularly important to the hotels that get a lot of corporate business from 3M, Anytime Fitness and Andersen Windows. The hotels bid for these rooms on an annual basis and the tax line item is scrutinized by the corporate users. The Woodbury hotels felt that they would need to reduce their corporate rates to compete with the other hotels without a tax. Some hotels mentioned that they use the fact that they don’t have a lodging tax as part of their marketing. 8. Some hotels suggested a regional (east metro) CVB or a Woodbury CVB that allows hotels outside our community to join for a fee. 9. The hotels cited several examples of successful CVBs. The common thread amongst these successful CVBs, was that the community they were marketing was a visitor/tourist destination and had an identifiable brand. Some hotels wondered what Woodbury’s brand is and whether Woodbury is a visitor/tourist destination. What and to whom would a Woodbury CVB market? They agreed that the HealthEast Sports Center should be part of that brand and marketing strategy, but wondered if that was enough of a draw to be a successful CVB. Business Community Meeting On July 27, staff held two community meetings with the business community to gather feedback about the benefits of bringing a CVB to Woodbury. Below are a few questions and themes that emerged from these meetings: • What are the unique amenities or assets of Woodbury that the CVB would promote? o Sports destination, health care, shopping. o Lack of large meeting space with break-out rooms in Woodbury. • How would we measure the success of a CVB? • Importance of utilizing the latest technology and social media in marketing. • Hotel competition has resulted in rate compression. • Explore regional CVB model. • Engage outside experts in CVB field if we proceed with developing action plan. Discussions with other CVBs and Cities: Staff conducted interviews with five area CVB organizations. These interviews were with CVB staff or, in one case, a City staff member who sits on their CVB board. Each CVB has its own unique structure – one was a large, regional CVB that represents a number of communities while others represent just one community. The CVBs varied in size in terms of the number of hotel rooms that support their operations financially. The sizes of the CVB board of directors vary. Most have representatives from the City (staff and elected officials), hotels and other community organizations. Some CVBs indicated they had a difficult time filling vacancies on the board with the “right people.” Most of the CVBs indicate their annual budgets are approved by their City Council every year. This provides some level of City oversight. Council Workshop Letter 17-221 August 16, 2017 Page 7 of 9 CVB strategies in using the lodging tax funds vary. Annual administrative costs for the CVBs ranged between 23 percent on the low end up to 40 percent of annual revenues. Most of the administrative costs were associated with the number of personnel. Most of the CVBs are set up as a separate non-profit organization, while one we spoke with was part of their community’s Chamber of Commerce (Lakeville). Another appears to operate as part of the City organization (Roseau). The Fergus Falls CVB once operated as a City function about 15 years ago, but moved to a more traditional CVB structure so that more dollars could be used for marketing purposes. One common theme from speaking with the CVBs is that tourism marketing is unique work that - to be done well - needs to be supported by a talented leader and significant marketing dollars. This person’s most important task will be developing a marketing plan to drive sustained CVB success. ANALYSIS OF OPTIONS 1. Woodbury CVB (independent) An independent CVB would allow the marketing dollars to be directly focused on Woodbury opportunities or events that would benefit the businesses of Woodbury. The Woodbury City Council would need to adopt an ordinance establishing the lodging tax and would be responsible for setting up the processes for collecting and distributing the lodging tax dollars, and would not need to rely on other communities’ support or joint powers agreements with adjacent communities. This is a very clean model and easier to implement than a multi-jurisdictional CVB model. 2. Regional CVB (east metro) A regional CVB would generate more revenue by virtue of the fact that it would have additional hotel rooms generating the lodging tax. But it would also have additional responsibilities in terms of marketing all of the member communities, and the other communities would be greater beneficiaries of the regional CVB than Woodbury. There would be added time and coordination needed while working with other municipalities, which may or may not be interested in partnering with the City of Woodbury in this endeavor. A regional CVB would also level the playing field for the hotels in Woodbury and those along the I-94 corridor, as they would all be subject to the same three percent lodging tax. A regional CVB, by virtue of being multi- jurisdictional, could not be operated internally by the City of Woodbury nor have City Council budget approval. Representation would be shared amongst participating cities. 3. Traditional ‘bricks-and-mortar’ or virtual CVB The CVB/DMO industry is changing in response to how people travel. As noted above, the vast majority (76 percent) of travelers (for business or leisure) utilize technology when planning and booking their travel plans. Considering that the primary market for CVBs is 120-300 miles Council Workshop Letter 17-221 August 16, 2017 Page 8 of 9 outside of Woodbury, the use of mobile apps and other technology should usurp the traditional hard-copy of marketing collateral (brochures, maps, guide books, etc.). The virtual CVB also allows more dollars to be dedicated to the actual marketing functions of the CVB, and less dollars on administrative overhead. It is also a more flexible and responsive way to market; if things change you can easily update a website or app, instead of updating brochures, guides, maps, etc. that cost a lot of money and take a lot of time to produce. Hoteliers were more supportive of a virtual model that utilizes the latest technology to attract visitors to Woodbury. Of course, even with a virtual CVB, there is a need for staff to run the day-to-day operations and provide the technical support. There are options as to how that staff is employed (consultant/ contractor, City employee or CVB employee). Depending on the staffing structure there may be the need for some office space, but the virtual CVB model does not envision an actual “store front” location. 4. Independent not-for-profit organization or part of City organizational structure As noted above in our limited research, staff has identified an example in Minnesota where the CVB functions are currently housed within the City organizational structure (Roseau). Incorporating the CVB functions into City operations would potentially save administrative costs associated with finance, payroll, IT, administrative support, human resources, office rental costs, etc. If the CVB was structured as a part of the City, there would added expenses in these areas related to the CVB functions, but it would be likely be more cost effective than the CVB securing these services independently. As noted above, there are some marketing activities that the City does – or could do more of – that the CVB could participate in. These activities would be limited to the purposes identified under State Law (“marketing and promoting the City as a tourist or convention center”) and potentially could be funded by the CVB under either the stand-alone or City model. Most CVBs are set up as a not-for-profit organization. If a stand-alone CVB model is chosen, the City would want to ensure that it has oversight of the CVB budget and how the marketing dollars are spent. The City also wants to ensure that there is sustained collaboration, coordination and communication between the City and the CVB. Staff found several CVBs and cities that work closely together with systems in place to ensure sustained collaboration and communication (i.e., City representation on the board of directors and review authority over the CVB budget). There may be some challenges in regard to how CVBs traditionally do marketing compared to the more regulated way in which local government operates. For example, CVBs are not bound by some of the same laws, policies and procedures that cities are (i.e., data practices, etc.). One of the key takeaways that we heard from all of our stakeholders was that the success of a CVB is dependent upon hiring experienced CVB marketing professional(s). Whatever model is preferred, it is important to hire the right person(s) to successfully launch and operate the CVB. Council Workshop Letter 17-221 August 16, 2017 Page 9 of 9 GOVERNANCE OPTIONS As noted in the recommendation at the top of this letter, the City would like to further evaluate the following options related to the organizational structure and governance of the CVB. All options would require ongoing collaboration and alignment with vision and direction of the City. Structure options: a. Independent 501(c)(6): operated as an independent, non-profit agency. • Council selects all the board members • Select Council and staff representation on the board • Council approves budget b. Internal to the City: operated as an enterprise of the City. • Council selects advisory commission members with a council liaison. • Council approves budget • Council approves personnel selections Under any of the structure or board design options, it will be important that the City secures the ability to review and/or approve the CVB’s annual budget. This will ensure there is ongoing collaboration and alignment with the vision and direction of the City. PUBLIC PROCESS • October 16, 2013, Council workshop to discuss CVB feasibility study • October 23, 2013, Council workshop to discuss CVB feasibility study • November 20, 2013, Council workshop to discuss CVB feasibility study • December 11, 2013, Council approval to conduct CVB feasibility study • April 16, 2014, Council workshop to present Zeitgeist Consulting findings • Early 2017, meetings with hoteliers, Woodbury Area Chamber of Commerce, and other CVBs • July 27, 2017, Business Community Meeting Written By: Janelle Schmitz, Assistant Community Development Director Jason Egerstrom, Communications Coordinator Approved Through: Clinton P. Gridley, City Administrator Attachments: 1. Map of Communities with Local Option Lodging Tax 2. 2016 MN Local Option Lodging Tax Communities and Rates by Region  Anoka Coon Rapids Blaine Maple Grove Brooklyn Shoreview Park Mounds Fridley View Brooklyn 55 Center 694 Plymouth Roseville 94 Golden Valley 35W Saint Saint Louis Paul Minneapolis Park 169 Richfield Edina 494 Bloomington 35E Eagan Inver Grove Heights Jackson Shakopee Burnsville Communities with Apple Valley Local Option 52 Lodging Tax 35 Lakeville Tax Rate Municipal Legislative Commission Communities December, 2016 Less than 3% Communities with Lodging Tax 3% More than 3% Data provided by Explore Minnesota Page 5 THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD VERIFIED AND COMPARED WITH ORIGINAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS. Central Park Renovation Project Update Council Workshop August 24, 2022 Objectives 1. Review the schematic designs and select one alternative to move forward to the design development stage. 2. Provide feedback on the draft capital and operational finance plans. 3. Authorize securing consultant agreements and partner agreements to move from schematic design to design development phase through construction Council will have more opportunities to amend project as needed Design Phases-Needs Assessment • Scoping and Needs Study: • Gather information • Conduct research and analysis • Define the general scope and schedule Design Phases-Schematic Design • Schematic Design: • Create basic design • Generally WHAT-Generally WHERE • Preliminary drawings and rough sketches • How will the building function-high level • Preliminary cost estimates Design Phases-Design Development • Design Development (7 months): • Refine schematic design and capture more detail • Preliminary engineering • Begin material and product selection • Drawings and specifications • Construction phasing decisions • Updated cost estimate Design Phases-Construction Documents • Construction Documents (8 months): • Greater detail and comprehensive drawings, documents, specifications • Secure permits and other approvals • Final engineering and cost estimates • Ready bid package(s) Option A • $23-$25 Million Total Project Cost • $14-$15 Million City Contribution • Deferred maintenance • ADA updates • Enclose the amphitheater and add 3,000 square-foot space • Replace Lookout Ridge Indoor Playground • Update water feature • Update entries and enhance patio • Implementation of B3 Guidelines to meet sustainability goals for site • Expand gathering areas (per direction on 7.20.22) CONCEPTUAL Will be further defined in Design Development Phase Site Scope Review West Parking Lot East Parking Lot • Site Lighting Updates • Site Lighting Updates • Traffic Calming Measures • Traffic Calming • Pedestrian Crossings Measures • New Paving at Entry • Book Drop Canopy Area Improvements • Pedestrian Crossings South Plaza • New Paving at Entry • Terraced Seating Area Canopy Area • Pond Removal • Canopy • Site Seating Updates • Option B includes tiered Main Level patio paired with MP Addition Improve access to lower level and visibility through space Lookout Ridge Increase clarity of Playground wayfinding between • Replace play structure lower level spaces • Add play for 0-3 • Add party space(s) • Improved ADA • Single use restrooms • Improve current water • Child toilets feature-reduce size to • Changing stations add platform for seating • Expand gathering opportunities in park • Welcoming entries • Visible welcome desk • Clear wayfinding • Update and add single use restrooms • Enhance outdoor space with stronger connection to • Enclose existing interior amphitheater • Add gathering • Add occupiable /seating outside space above amphitheater Option B1 • $33-$34 Million Total Project Cost • $24-$25 Million City Contribution • All of Option A • An addition of a single story 12,000 square-foot multi-purpose space • Update water feature • Infrastructure to accommodate additional space Option B2 • $35-$37 Million Total Project Cost • $26-$28 Million City Contribution • All of Option A and B1 • 6,000 square-foot program/lease space constructed above the multi- purpose space • Infrastructure to accommodate additional space CONCEPTUAL Will be further defined in Design Development Phase CONCEPTUAL Will be further defined in Design Development Phase  Proposed Capital Funding Sources Funding Sources Anticipated Contribution Range Partner Contributions $7,000,000-$9,500,000 Community Investment Fund $5,000,000-$6,000,000 Capital Improvement Fund $2,000,000-$4,000,000 Stormwater Fund $100,000 Parks and Trails Replacement Fund $1,000,000-$1,500,000 City Bonding funded by expiring debt and $4,000,000-$17,000,000 Tax Abatement levies 1 TIF Special Legislation $1,500,000-$2,000,000 Total $20,600,000-$40,100,000 Additional funding sources will be evaluated to include; State bonding, grants, sales tax waiver. 1. By "leveraging the balance sheet," tax increases within the capital options can be avoided Potential Additional Capital Funding Sources Grants-NEA, Watershed State Bonding TIF-13 Sales Tax waiver  Preliminary Preliminary Revenue Ranges OPERATIONAL Option A Option B1-2 Revenues and Expenses $795,000 to $720,000 $845,000 Preliminary Expense Ranges Option A Option B1-2 $810,000 to $650,000 $845,000  Historic Revenues and Expenses Note: Last fully operational years prior to project planning and reduced marketing and scheduling 2014 2015 2016 2017 Revenues • $388,36 • $371,14 • $391,60 • $432,71 4 3 9 7 Expenses • ($539,65 • ($594,01 • ($616,97 • ($583,90 General Fund Subsidy 2) 2) 8) 3) • ($151,28 • ($222,86 • ($225,36 • ($151,18 8) 9) 9) 6) Community Engagement Continued • Share April-2022 feedback themes and how they will be applied to the project • Share updated Schematic Design plans • Share updated Council project direction • Share updated project timeline • Engage our adults/seniors for additional program enhancement Next steps July City Council Workshop Draft Cost Estimating Draft Operations Plan July Draft Capital Funding Plan August City Council Workshop Council Direction Provided Community Engagement Continued September-October Partner and Consultant Agreements Subject to change Objectives 1. Review the schematic designs and select one alternative to move forward to the design development stage. 2. Provide feedback on the draft capital and operational finance plans. 3. Authorize securing consultant agreements and partner agreements to move from schematic design to design development phase through construction Council will have more opportunities to amend project as needed Questions? Main Entry • Replace with glass walls on existing foundation • New roof/canopy over Lookout Ridge and Entry • Create hub for welcoming and way finding Main Entry • Replace with glass walls on existing foundation • New roof/canopy over Lookout Ridge and Entry Tenant • Create hub for welcoming and wayfinding LIBRARY Space Office Lookout Ridge ELEV. Elevator Below Lookout Ridge ELE V. CENTRAL PARK AMPHITHEATER Main Level Plan Lower Level Plan  Baseline – Enclose Existing Amphitheater Options: Structured lid with occupiable space and stairs/elevator access Multi-purpose Addition Option B Option B Upper Level  Lower Level Lookout Small Group Room Ridge VP PLAY AREA Secured Access VP TLT TLT LAC. TLT JAN Small Group Play Area | 2,500 SF Room Small Group Room | 750 SF MECH. Circulation & Support | 1,300 SF Total | 4,550 SF BASELINE Option B1- Alternates: • Remove green roof above the multi-purpose space ($100K) • Remove enhanced park area ($235K) • Remove new water feature ($50K)