S a i n t L o u i s Z o o

FRAMEWORK PLAN
Framework Plan 2013
S a i n t L o u i s Z o o
FRAMEWORK PLAN
S e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 3
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 7
Why a Framework Plan? 10
Goals 12
Team 14
PLANNING PROCESS 17
Project Timeline 18
Meetings 19
Public Engagement 20
Open House #1 21
Open House #2 24
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS 27
Project Kick-off 28
Analysis 30
Charrette 50
Programming / Icons 52
Market Analysis 58

FRAMEWORK 69
Plan Recommendations 72
Illustrative Plan 105
NEXT STEPS 107
Framework Plan Implementation 108
Phasing 108
Closing Comments 109
APPENDIX 111
Open House #1 Forms and Feedback 112
Open House #2 Forms and Feedback 116
Plan Evolution Sketches 119
Zoo Expansion Precedents 120
Financing Strategies 122
Fundraising 123


4
1
2
3
5

6
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Expansion Framework Plan refects the culmination of a nearly six month process to
establish the Saint Louis Zoo and community’s vision for the future.
SAINT LOUIS ZOO PLANNING COMMITTEE
Mary Campbell Immediate Past President, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Hon. James F. Conway Chairman, Saint Louis Zoo Commission
Terry Daugherty Neighborhood Representative
Lou Hamilton Government Affairs and Public Communications Consultant
Lesley Hoffarth President and Executive Director, Forest Park Forever
Bill Kennebeck Neighborhood Representative
Peggy Ritter President, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Winthrop B. Reed, III Commissioner, Saint Louis Zoo Commission
Don Roe Director of Planning and Urban Design, City of Saint Louis
James G. Sansone Saint Louis Zoo Commissioner
Mark J. Schnuck Saint Louis Zoo Commissioner
Dan Skillman Commissioner Parks Division, City of Saint Louis
Todd Waelterman Director, Streets Department, City of Saint Louis
SAINT LOUIS ZOO ADVISORY GROUP
Joseph T. Ambrose Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
JoAnn Arnold Saint Louis Zoo Commissioner
G. Andrew Franz former Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Jeffrey L. Fox Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Walter J. Galvin Past President, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Janis G. Goldstein former Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Karl Grice Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Fred F. Guyton Zoo Planning Strategist, PGAV Destinations
Jay G. Henges Vice Chairman, Saint Louis Zoo Commission
Bill Holekamp former Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Bruce B. Holland Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Joseph F. Imbs, III Executive Committee, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Todd J. Korte former Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Martin J. Lyons, Jr. Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
John McDonnell Saint Louis Zoo Advisor
Patrick J. Moore Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Andy Newman Saint Louis Zoo Advisor
Robert F. O’Loughlin Executive Committee, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Sally H. Roth Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Steve Schankman Chair Emeritus, Saint Louis Zoo Commission
John Schaperkotter Former Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
John Simmons Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Thad Simons Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Rex Sinquefeld Saint Louis Zoo Advisor
Robert B. Smith, III Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Michael H. Staenberg Board of Directors, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Lawrence E. Thomas Executive Committee, Saint Louis Zoo Association
Mahlon B. Wallace, III Emeritus Member, Saint Louis Zoo Association
SAINT LOUIS ZOO CONSULTANT TEAM
SWT Design
Jim Wolterman Co-Founder, Principal In Charge
Ted H. Spaid Co-Founder, Lead Designer
Bonnie C. Roy Principal, Project Manager
Derek Don
Uhlir Consulting
Edward K. Uhlir President, Urban Planner
HR&A Economic Advisors
Jamie Toress Springer Partner
Kate Wittels Director
Max Zarin Analyst
Vector Communications
Jessica Perkins Partner
Atia Thurman
Lawrence Group
Tim Rowbottom Principal
Dennis McGrath Senior Associate, Design Director
Crawford Bunte Brammeier
Carrie Falkenrath Senior Transportation Engineer
Horner and Shifrin
Gino Bernardez Vice President
Ramin Ashrafzadeh Transportation / Civil Project Manager
Cowell Engineering
Jean Cowell Principal
SAINT LOUIS ZOO EXECUTIVE STAFF
Jeffrey P. Bonner, Ph.D., Dana Brown President and CEO
Dr. Eric Miller, DVM Senior Vice President, Zoological Operations & Director,
WildCare Institute
Steve Barth Vice President, Business Operations & CFO
Jack Grisham Vice President, Animal Collections
Wyndell Hill Vice President, Internal Relations
Cynthia Holter, CFRE Vice President, External Relations
David McGuire, AIA Vice President, Architecture & Planning
GUEST CHARRETTE CONSULTANTS
Jumana Broderson The Jco
Greg Dykstra CLR Design
Fred Guyton PGAV Destinations
Ana Hernandez AFH Design
Keith McClintock The Portico Group
Craig Rhodes GLMV Architecture
INTRODUCTION
In 2012, the Saint Louis Zoo set an all-time
attendance record of over 3.5 million visitors.
IF THE COMPONENTS OF THE FRAMEWORK
PLAN ARE IMPLEMENTED OVER TIME, IT IS
LIKELY THAT THE ZOO COULD INCREASE
ITS YEARLY VISITATION BY 25%.
1
7
8 | INTRODUCTION
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
INTRODUCTION | 9
Conservation in Peru: The Zoo is working to protect Humboldt penguins by
establishing a breeding reserve for them, supporting biological studies and
raising awareness of marine conservation issues.

Native Pollinators: The Zoo is focusing on the importance and diversity of
native pollinators, especially native bees, for the maintenance and survival
of wildlife, ecosystems and agriculture.

Saharan Wildlife Recovery Center: The Zoo is working to bring attention
to the plight of Sahelo-Saharan wildlife and pursuing sustainable solutions
to address the decline of critically endangered addax and other species. The
Zoo and its partners recently realized a dream when the Republic of Niger
decreed the formal establishment of Africa’s largest nature reserve for these
animals.
Avian Health in the Galapagos Islands: The Zoo is studying the health of
the unique birds on these islands to prevent their extinction from diseases,
and training Ecuadorian scientists and rangers to recognize and test for
diseases.

Large Carnivores in Africa: The Zoo is helping survey the health and
numbers of wild cheetahs and other large carnivores and working to reduce
conficts with livestock by teaching ranchers how to co-exist with these
important predators.

Forest Park Conservation: The Zoo is studying native wildlife in its
“backyard” of Forest Park.

Hellbenders in Missouri: The Center and the Missouri Department of
Conservation are breeding Ozark hellbenders in captivity—a frst for either
of the two subspecies of hellbender. This decade-long collaboration has
yielded thousands of baby hellbenders.
INTRODUCTION
The Saint Louis Zoo is one of the greatest in the world. It is also one of only
three large, accredited free zoos in the United States. For more than 100
years, the Saint Louis Zoo has served its community, and its infuence has
extended across fve continents. Today zoos are critical in preserving the
Earth’s legacy with wildlife habitats dwindling and species vanishing at an
alarming rate. The following mission of the Saint Louis Zoo continues to
guide the institution into the future:
The mission of the Saint Louis Zoo is to conserve animals and their
habitats through animal management, research, recreation, and
educational programs that encourage the support and enrich the
experience of the public.
The Saint Louis Zoo, prior to the framework plan, also developed a vision
for the next 30 years that focuses on combining service to community and
conservation focused program as follows:
ANIMALS ALWAYS – our vision for the Saint Louis Zoo is of a seamlessly
integrated, world-class conservation organization linking an engaged local
audience and high-quality local programs to conservation efforts in the wild,
in our region, and internationally.
In 2008, the Saint Louis Zoo announced a Strategic Plan for the New
Millennium. That plan included seven goals that, if executed, will bring the
Zoo well into the 21st century. It is important to restate these goals because
the framework plan was developed to suggest ways in which these goals
could be advanced.
In 2012 the former 13.5-acre Forest Park Hospital site became available
and was purchased by the Saint Louis Zoo Association. The association
is a private, nonproft organization with a volunteer board of business and
community leaders providing leadership for fundraising and other activities
at the Zoo. The property was purchased from Medline Industries, Inc., with
funds from the association (and not from taxpayer revenue).
Although the former hospital site is across Interstate-64 from the Zoo, it
is close to Forest Park, is directly south of the Zoo and is physically not
far from the Zoo’s existing south entrance. Purchase of this site offered
a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to fulfll the Zoo’s stated mission and the
only opportunity for the Zoo to expand in its 100-year history. It would have
been extremely diffcult to accomplish the strategic plan goals without the
purchase of additional property because the Zoo is effectively landlocked
inside Forest Park and cannot expand within the park.
Immediately after the purchase of the hospital site, the Zoo Board and
leadership decided that they needed a comprehensive exploration of the
capabilities of the south expansion site and the modifcations, improvements
or additions to the existing Zoo within Forest Park. Through competitive
SAINT LOUIS ZOO CORE VALUES

Stewardship: The Zoo is motivated by respect and concern for its
surroundings. The Zoo is constantly improving its ability to sustain animals
in its care, serve a range of communities and conserve the world in which
we live.
Tradition: The Zoo embraces a unique history and maintains excellence,
innovation and community accessibility as hallmarks of its past.
Customer Focus: The Zoo provides guests with exciting, enriching and
welcoming experiences that make it a fun place to visit again and again.
Leadership: The Zoo is an international leader in animal management,
research, conservation, exhibits, education and guest experiences.
Knowledge: The Zoo is a place of science, learning and education,
encouraging everyone to use this knowledge to promote the conservation
of all species.
Integrity: The Zoo fosters an open exchange of ideas and information and
advocates for all members of its team to be leaders in pursuing excellence.
Diversity: The Zoo values the importance of diversity in nature—among
animals and people.
Accountability: The Zoo emphasizes effciency, quality and the optimal
use of resources in all aspects if its operations, ensuring that it remains a
responsible guardian of the trust the community places in it.
OPPORTUNITIES WITH EXPANSION
With the opportunity to expand, the Saint Louis Zoo has a unique chance to
amplify its conservation, research and educational outreach.
Conservation
The Saint Louis Zoo is a world leader in saving endangered species and
their habitats. Many of the animals you see at the Zoo are threatened in the
wild by shrinking habitats, disease and poaching. The need for conservation
is greater than ever, with one vertebrate species disappearing fromthe Earth
every day. Ultimately, there is a need to save the ecosystems on which
animals and humans depend.

The Saint Louis Zoo WildCare Institute, with the support of its Conservation
Fellows, takes a holistic approach to troubled ecosystems by addressing
three key ingredients in conservation success: wildlife management and
recovery, conservation science and support of the human populations that
coexist with wildlife.
Currently the Zoo has twelve centers actively conserving animals and their
habitats. The Zoo is dedicated to creating a sustainable future for wildlife and
for people around the world. These 12 centers include:

American Burying Beetles: this center and its partners reintroduced Zoo-
bred American burying beetles—for the frst time ever in Missouri—across
the 4,040-acre Wah’ Kon-Tah Prairie in Southwest Missouri.

process, the Zoo to selected a team of consultants who would be able to
create a physical and operational vision for the future – The Framework
Plan.
The Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan explores and evaluates
the potential of realizing the strategic plan goals as well as establishes new
goals and guidelines for future development.
THE STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
• Provide for the highest standards of animal care and welfare while creating
dynamic exhibits that are exciting to the public which link to the Zoo’s
conservation message.
• Build upon the Saint Louis Zoo’s reputation of the nation’s best visitor
experience among zoos and aquariums.
• Position the Saint Louis Zoo as a world leader in wildlife conservation,
research, development and advocacy.
• Propose developing a new21st century paradigmof conservation education
that connects people of all ages and backgrounds to nature and wildlife.
• Focus on the need to upgrade and further develop the physical infrastructure
of the Zoo, emphasizing innovative technology and environmentally sensitive
design.
• Support the employee and human resources necessary for the Zoo to
remain world-class and an innovative workplace of choice.
• Provide for generating suffcient fnancial resources and relationships to
build a sustainable institution into the 21st century.
SAINT LOUIS ZOO HELLBENDER KEEPER CHAWNA SCHUETTE, AND
NATURALIST INSTRUCTOR MICHAEL DAWSON, CO-LEADERS OF A BIOBLITZ
GROUP, TRY TO IDENTIFY TADPOLES FOUND DURING A BIOBLITZ TOUR
FRIDAY, SEPT. 7, 2012, IN FOREST PARK.

Horn of Africa Conservation: The Zoo is helping raise awareness
and support for the wildlife of the Horn of Africa—through cooperative
conservation, research and education programs for such species as the
Grevy’s zebra, mountain nyala, Speke’s gazelle, hirola, African elephant and
Ethiopian wolf.
Lemurs in Madagascar: The Zoo is studying the health and genetics of
endangered lemurs and teaching local students and rangers how to manage
and protect the remaining lemur populations.

Horned Guans in Mexico and Guatemala: The Zoo is studying the habits
of the horned guan in order to develop a recovery plan for this endangered
bird and teaching local communities how to farm in more habitat-friendly
ways.
PHOTO BY SAINT LOUIS ZOO.
Western Asian Wildlife: Covering a region that includes Cyprus, Turkey,
Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, TheArabian Peninsula, Iraq, Iran, Azerbaijan,
Armenia and Georgia, the Center for Conservation in Western Asia is
focused on conserving a number of species found nowhere else. These
include the Caucasian leopard and black grouse, Bezoar goat, Armenian
moufon, Kaiser’s spotted newt and multiple species of mountain and shield-
headed vipers.
FENNEC FOX IN NIGER. PHOTO BY JOHN NEWBY COURTESY SAINT LOUIS
ZOO.
10 | INTRODUCTION
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
INTRODUCTION | 11
WHY A FRAMEWORK PLAN?
The Saint Louis Zoo’s Expansion Framework Plan is intended to be a
dynamic, living document -- a starting point for long-termgrowth. It will guide
the Zoo in its development, providing a tool for making decisions now and
well into the future. The framework plan will allow the Zoo to make smarter
short-term decisions as it continues to realize the long-term vision.
The framework plan is necessary now because the Zoo’s mission has
changed over the past century to include research, conservation and
education—all to ensure that more of Earth’s species can be saved and
protected. Urban zoos have a more diffcult time fulflling that goal because
they fnd it very challenging to grow physically. Financing any expansion can
be cost-prohibitive, and continuous funding is unpredictable.
This plan will be particularly important in helping the Zoo satisfy multiple
goals and respond to a range of diverse needs and stakeholders, providing a
mechanism for the Zoo to move beyond its existing boundaries and to share
its resources and expertise with the broader community.
The Zoo staff, volunteer leadership, consultants and design team worked for
several months with the community to defne a common vision for the future
development of the Zoo.
Unlike the existing Zoo campus in Forest Park, the expansion site is next to
a residential neighborhood and retail corridor. This site will be developed in
partnership with that area’s resident and business communities. The goal is
to not only beneft the Zoo but to enhance the economic viability and quality
of life for these neighborhoods. Together, the planning team identifed the
Zoo’s needs and physical and operational challenges and developed a plan
that suggests a direction for the next 20 to 30 years.
FRAMEWORK PLAN PRECEDENTS
Framework plans are a fairly new approach used by governments and
organizations as a frst step in creating a vision for the future. Here are
several very successful examples:
The Lincoln Park Framework Plan - began in 1991 and published in 1995.
This document was developed by the Chicago Park District as a tool to make
decisions on the future of Lincoln Park, Chicago’s largest park at 1,200 acres
including the 36-acre Lincoln Park Zoo. This plan was a guide for the capital
improvement budget for the Park, a resource to educate existing and new
staff and a tool to provide public input. Many of the recommendations of
the plan have been implemented over the last 18 years, and the plan is
still considered a guideline for future improvements. The framework plan
provided an assessment of the impact of each proposed change before
any commitments were made, resulting in a more effective use of limited
resources.
The Bloomingdale Framework Plan - published in 2011 and managed
by the Chicago Park District with outside consultants. This plan involves
a comprehensive proposal to develop a 2.7-mile stretch of an elevated
abandoned railroad viaduct into a lineal park and bicycle trail connecting
a series of very diverse neighborhoods. The framework plan refects and
defnes the goals of earlier plans and efforts that would not have been possible
without the cooperation of fve city, state, and federal government agencies,
the trust for public land, and the community. This plan sets the stage for
achieving many goals and is anticipated to continue to be a meaningful guide
for the Bloomingdale Trail and Park over time.
The Northerly Island Framework Plan - published in 2011 by the Chicago
Park District and prepared by outside consultants. This plan developed a
vision for the 91-acre former site of the Meigs Field airport after analyzing
many plans and ideas that were created dating from 1990. With public input
the overwhelming response was that the new park should be an inspirational
outdoor experience strengthening Chicago’s position as a green city for the
21st century. A framework for future development includes an ecological
park experience, offshore islands, a new concert venue, an improved marina
and expanded beach with water recreational opportunities. Construction has
begun on shoreline improvements, and the other ideas will be fully developed
as separate master plans in the future.
Portland State University Framework Plan - published in 2010. The
University, in the heart of Downtown Portland, is a growing urban research
institution and one of the metropolitan area’s most valuable assets. Portland
State has developed a strategy that leverages these assets to guide its future
development. The University District Framework Plan provides a physical
framework for future growth that builds upon the university’s innovative
academic environment and partnership opportunities with a commitment to
sustainable neighborhood development, and world-class transit to realize its
vision as a sustainable, urban research university.
The Monumental Core Framework Plan - published in 2009. The plan
was a joint product of National Capital Planning Commission and the U.S
Commission of Fine Arts. It is intended to create vibrant and accessible
destinations in the federal precincts surrounding the National Mall. It includes
plans to reclaimWashington’s waterfront, especially theAnacostia waterfront.
The framework plan is a fexible tool to guide federal planning, development,
and investment decisions over the next thirty years. It prioritizes a series of
specifc initiatives, follow-up studies and next steps that are the frst practical
projects in achieving the long-term vision.
Research
When animals in the wild are threatened by loss of habitat, zoos can help
provide a “safety net” and breeding ground for endangered populations. But
providing shelter is just a small part of helping these species. With proper
care and management, Saint Louis Zoo curators, keepers, nutritionists and
veterinarians make sure the animals have healthy food, adequate space,
stimulating activities and the best health possible.
The Saint Louis Zoo’s experts conduct research that is used to protect
and manage animal populations both in captivity and in the wild. From
managing when and what animals breed to studying disease and behavior,
the Zoo hopes to gain an understanding of animals at the Zoo and apply
this information to the conservation of the species in the wild. By studying
the behavior, hormones, reproduction and nutrition of captive animals, Saint
Louis Zoo scientists can better help the animals being protected by Zoo
WildCare Institute centers.

The Zoo’s assisted reproduction studies help augment the populations of
endangered species. The Saint Louis Zoo is also one of only a few zoos
studying the important effects of animals’ hormones on their reproduction.

In addition, the Zoo’s behavior studies are invaluable tools for supplementing
data on similar animals in the wild.

The work Zoo scientists do to learn about the nutritional needs of diverse
animals can have a great impact on their survival. These scientists use the
latest developments in wildlife veterinary medicine to insure that the animals
in their care receive the very best health care available today. Much of what
they learn about Zoo animals can then be applied to animals in the wild.
Education
The Saint Louis Zoo’s educational services are an integral part of the
institution’s commitment to conservation. Since the 1960s, the Zoo has
offered engaging programs, exhibits and materials that educate the
community about wildlife, help visitors feel more connected to animals, and
motivate them to take action to preserve the natural world.

Tens of thousands of school children and adults attend classroom
presentations, Zoo tours, overnights and outreach programs. Summer and
weekend programs for all ages bring the excitement of learning about wildlife
to visitors. Loan materials, like hands-on kits, videos and activity books,
available through the Zoo’s Library and Teacher Resource Center, help area
educators integrate conservation education into the classroom curriculum.
Teacher workshops provide training in science and conservation education
in a variety of zoological topics and in the use of the Zoo as an educational
resource.

Zoo visitors will fnd opportunities to learn in every corner of the campus,
from educational signs and interactives, to encounters with interpreters
and naturalists. And of course, just watching the animals is an educational
experience unto itself.
PHOTO BY SAINT LOUIS ZOO. PHOTO BY SAINT LOUIS ZOO.
THE SAINT LOUIS ZOO | EXPANSION OPPORTUNITIES
TOP LOCAL ATTRACTIONS
Name Annual Visitation Admission
Saint Louis Zoo 3.5M Free
Saint Louis Cardinals 3.1M $15 and up
Gateway Arch 2.6M
Free
($10 for tram)
St. Louis Science Center 1.2M Free
Missouri Botanical Garden 900,000 $8
City Museum 700,000 $12
Saint Louis Art Museum 500,000 Free
Missouri History Museum 360,000 Free
World Aquarium N/A $18
Source: Organization websites
ZOO VISITATION GROWTH
The Saint Louis Zoo reported record attendance in 2012 of just over 3.5
million visitors. “We thank all the many people who came to the Zoo in
2012,” says Jeffrey P. Bonner, Ph.D., Dana Brown President & CEO of the
Saint Louis Zoo. “We had a terrifc year because the greater our attendance,
the more people we reach the greater opportunity we have to engage
everyone in conserving animals and their habitats. We are grateful that, with
both public and private support, we can continue to be America’s number
one zoo for years to come.”
The framework plan explores ways for the Saint Louis Zoo can build on
its success and continue to position itself as the region’s top visitor
destination.
The chart below shows how Saint Louis Zoo attendance ranks against other
St. Louis attractions and institutions.
12 | INTRODUCTION
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
INTRODUCTION | 13
FRAMEWORK PLAN GOALS
Create a 20- to 30-year vision
Support the Saint Louis Zoo’s Mission – Animals Always
Create a cohesive Zoo campus experience
Engage the community in a public participation process
Improve the visitor experience
Enhance adjacent neighborhoods and Forest Park
Increase visitor parking supply
Improve wayfnding and traffc congestion
Strengthen visibility and identity of the Zoo
Consider revenue generating concepts
Develop market-based and mission-based program
Consider funding and donor opportunities
Strengthen Zoo operations and employee retention
experience
SUPPORT: sustain, assist, reinforce CONNECT: join, link, bring together
iconic
bridge
greenway
transport
integrate
convenience
streetscape
educate
sustainable
outreach
research
transit
ecology
conservation
partnerships
unique
management
iconic
unique
excite
experience
world-class
destination
play
community
activate
open space
hotel
strengthen
activity
exhibit amenity
art
retail
ENHANCE: improve, enrich, develop ATTRACT: draw, entice, interest
FRAMEWORK PLAN PRINCIPLES
The design team, in consultation with the Zoo staff and board, developed
four major principles that would be the basis for building the framework
plan as follows:
ATTRACT – to bring new visitors, repeat visitors and further the Zoo’s
conservation mission, several prospects are considered, including new
indoor and year-round animal exhibits, existing exhibit expansion, Zoo-
themed visitor amenities, Zoo rides, expanded Emerson Children’s Zoo
experiences, event spaces and educational opportunities.
ENHANCE – to improve options for visitors and the community several
ideas are explored, including Zoo-themed retail, dining and overnight
opportunities, expanded and enhanced park and public space that could
include Zoo-themed adventure play, dog parks, farmers’ markets and outdoor
event spaces.
CONNECT – to link the expansion site to the existing Zoo campus several
ideas have been explored including an iconic bridge, a gondola and wheeled
trolleys or trams. This critical connection will be necessary for staff and
visitors who park on existing lots or in the new garage. Connections fromthe
expansion site and the Dogtown community would beneft from an improved
network of pedestrian and bicycle trails. One option that may be considered
is strategic road closures that would improve the streetscape and traffc
circulation, with minimal inconvenience to local residents.
SUPPORT – to fulfll and enhance the Zoo’s mission several Zoo
operations could be relocated to the expansion site, including administrative
offces, Zoo service and distribution operations, and an employee center.
The expansion site could also fulfll an important animal science and
conservation mission with an educational component. For the Zoo to
expand in Forest Park, the majority of the parking functions would need
to be relocated to the expansion site by renovating an existing parking
structure, building new parking structures and using surface lots, opening
up space on the existing campus for new animal exhibits.
14 | INTRODUCTION
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
INTRODUCTION | 15
PROJECT TEAM
The Saint Louis Zoo hired SWT Design to lead a teamof diverse consultants
and guide them through a rigorous six-month planning process. The
framework plan team included several local St. Louis frms; Lawrence
Group (Architecture), Crawford, Bunte, Brammeier (Traffc Engineering),
Horner&Shifrin(Civil Engineering), Cowell Engineering(Structural Engineering)
and Vector Communications (Public Communications). The team also
included Chicago-based architect Edward Uhlir, owner of Uhlir Consulting,
LLC. and Executive Director of Millennium Park, as well as New York City
based HR&AAdvisors (Economic Advisors).
“We have assembled a great team to move forward in developing
this site and believe with their guidance, this property will help the
Zoo further its mission of enhancing the visitor experience and will
signifcantly improve the site to the beneft of the city, region and
nearby communities,”
- Jeffrey P. Bonner, Ph.D., Dana Brown President & CEO, Saint Louis Zoo.
The Saint Louis Zoo organized both an Expansion Planning Committee as
well as an Expansion Advisory Group. These committees included Zoo
Commissioners, members of the Association, representatives from various
park and planning departments of the City of St. Louis and select members
of the community. Both committees met with the design teamthroughout the
planning process to provide feedback and direction on the framework plan
as it was developed.
At the heart of the process was the Saint Louis Zoo’s Strategic Operations
Committee. Consisting of the Zoo’s executive staff, these leaders challenged,
supported, and embraced the framework plan as an integral and critical step
towards to the future.
TEAM ORGANIZATION

A
d
v
iso
ry G
roup
Saint Louis Zoo P
la
n
n
in
g
C
o
m
m
ittee/Stakeholders
Uhlir
Consulting
Edward Uhlir
Project Visionary
HR&A
Advisors
Jamie Springer
Economic
Market Analysis
Crawford
Bunte
Brammeier
Carrie Falkenrath
Transportation
Vector
Communications
Jessica Perkins
Public Engagement
Horner & Shifrin
Genovevo
Bernardez
Civil Engineering
Lawrence
Group
Tim Rowbottom
Planning &
Urban Design
Jim Wolterman
Principal in Charge
Bonnie Roy
Project Manager
T
e
d
S
p
a
id
- Lead Designer
SWT Design
Project Lead
Landscape Architecture /
Urban Design
Cowell
Engineering
Jean Cowell
Structural
Engineering
SWT DESIGN
SWT Design is comprised of a team of diverse
professionals, including landscape architects, planners,
and urban designers. SWT Design’s diverse project
portfolio and design professional team brings an
integrated, interdisciplinary approach to provide creative
and comprehensive solutions. SWT Design approaches
design challenges with the understanding that there is
a range of possible solutions that must be explored to
ensure the client receives the greatest value driven results.
The frm has earned a reputation for its environmentally-
responsible design solutions. SWT Design led the
framework plan consultant team bringing expertise in the
felds of urban design, landscape architecture, planning
and project management. Through inclusive public
engagement and design workshops, the design team
developed a framework plan that will serve as a living
document to guide the production of the Zoo’s revised
strategic plan.
UHLIR CONSULTING
Ed K. Uhlir is the President of Uhlir Consulting LLC, which
is an independent architectural and planning design
consultancy. Mr. Uhlir has over 35 years experience
designing and constructing parks. As the Project Design
Director for Chicago’s Millennium Park, he prepared the
master plan, coordinated the design teams and artists
and was the liaison between the philanthropic community
and the Mayor of Chicago. He is the Co-Chair of the
City Parks Alliance, a national organization that supports
urban parks. He is also a Professor in Architecture at
the Illinois Institute of Technology. His expertise in the
creative design and funding of major urban public spaces
is sought by cities around the world.
HR&AADVISORS
HR&A Advisors, Inc. is an industry leader in economic
development, real estate and public policy consulting.
HR&A brings extensive experience advising on some
of the most complicated real estate and economic
development projects in communities across the country.
Equipped with a unique understanding of the intersection
of the public and private sectors, HR&Aexcels in matching
the organizational goals of our clients to market-oriented
pragmatism. HR&A’s approach has allowed hundreds of
public and private clients to transformpublic infrastructure,
real estate and economic development concepts frst into
actionable plans, then into job-producing, community-
strengthening assets.
THE LAWRENCE GROUP
Lawrence Group, founded in 1983 in St. Louis, Missouri,
is an architectural, interior design and planning frm
organized into studios, with each studio specializing
in a particular market sector. The group’s expertise
balances the often opposing needs of program, design,
budget, and schedule for complex mixed-use commercial,
entertainment, and retail projects. LGA provided design
leadership on the complex mixed-use commercial,
entertainment and retail components of the framework
plan.
CRAWFORD, BUNTE, BRAMMEIER (CBB)
Established in 1973, CBB is a regional leader in the
highly specialized felds of traffc engineering and
transportation planning. CBB’s staff includes traffc
engineers, transportation planners, and designers with
extensive experience in a vast array of projects. For the
framework plan, CBB made recommendations related to
four signifcant areas of focus: access, circulation, parking
and connectivity.
HORNER & SHIFRIN
Horner & Shifrin, Inc. is a professional engineering frm
with offces in St. Louis, Poplar Bluff and Springfeld,
Missouri, and O’Fallon and Springfeld, Illinois. With
a staff of over 70 engineers, technicians and support
personnel, Horner & Shifrin, Inc., performed an analysis
of the existing utilities/infrastructure and provided input
regarding site infrastructure concepts.
COWELL ENGINEERING
Cowell Engineering is a structural engineering consulting
frm located in St. Louis, Missouri. Cowell Engineering
creates and implements solutions for commercial
construction. They use their knowledge and experience
to look past their discipline to understand their clients’
underlying needs. For this project they drew on their
knowledgeof engineering, sustainability andneighborhood
dynamics to assist the team in understanding the
challenges of the site and its physical and emotional
relationship to the Dogtown neighborhood and Forest
Park.
VECTOR COMMUNICATIONS
Vector Communications Corporation, whose motto is
“advancing learning, dialogue, and positive change,” is an
award-winning public engagement and communications
consulting frm. Vector involves citizens in public policy
dialogue, decision-making and community planning in
many issue areas, including transportation, education,
health and human services, economic development, the
environment and parks and recreation. Vector’s other core
competencies include strategic planning; event planning;
communications (planning, media relations and social
media); and video production. For the Saint Louis Zoo
framework plan, Vector helped the client and design team
build relationships with key community groups; provided
outreach and facilitation for two open house events; and
obtained and analyzed public input for the plan.

PLANNING PROCESS
17
2
The process for the framework plan lasted 6
months, included participation from over 500
individuals within the community and included
two public open houses.
THE FRAMEWORK PLAN WILL BE A
GUIDING TOOL FOR THE ZOO OVER THE
NEXT 30 YEARS.
18 | PLANNING PROCESS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
PLANNING PROCESS | 19
MEETINGS
The rigorous 6-month planning process engaged participants
and leaders of the Zoo on a regular basis. Through multiple
presentations, workshops and face-to-face discussions with
the planning committee, focus groups and the Zoo Advisory
Board, the design team received continuous feedback
throughout the process. The design team also met with the
Forest Park Advisory Board on an information-only basis
twice as a courtesy and partnership opportunity.
The project timeline presented on these pages illustrates the
number of meetings, presentations, and work sessions. It was
shared with the public at the May open house to illustrate the
wide-spread involvement.
S a i n t L o u i s Z o o
FRAMEWORK PLAN
EXPANSION FRAMEWORK PLANNING PROCESS
ACQUISITION OF EXPANSION PROPERTY
FALL 2012 - The Saint Louis Zoo Association closed on the
purchase of the 13.5-acre Forest park Hospital site at 6150
Oakland Avenue in the City of St. Louis. The association is
a private, nonproft organization with a volunteer board of
business and community leaders providing leadership for
fund-raising and other activities at the Zoo. The property was
purchased with funds from the association (and not from
taxpayer revenue).
SELECTION OF CONSULTANT TEAM
The Saint Louis Zoo selected SWT Design to lead a
team of diverse consultants, including Millennium Park
Executive Director Ed Uhlir. Project team professions
also include architects, economic advisors, civil
engineers, traffc engineers, structural engineers and
public relation specialists.
PLANNING COMMITTEE
Kick-Off Meeting and listening session
with Expansion Planning Committee.
PLANNING COMMITTEE
Meeting to review data collection,
defne project goals, and prepare
for research / analysis phase.
FOREST PARK ADVISORY BOARD
Review of planning process and framework plan goals.
PLANNING COMMITTEE
Project Meeting
PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE #1
The Zoo and its consultant team hosted an open house
to obtain public input on the expansion project.
STRATEGIC OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
Project Meeting
FOCUS GROUP - BUSINESS OPERATIONS
Brainstorming session with Zoo departments.
FOCUS GROUP - EDUCATION /
VETERINARY / RESEARCH
Brainstorming session with Zoo departments.
EXPANSION ADVISORY GROUP
Presentation and Workshop with Saint Louis Zoo
Expansion Advisory Group.
FOCUS GROUP - ANIMAL DIVISION
Brainstorming session with Zoo departments.
FOCUS GROUP - HUMAN RESOURCES
Brainstorming session with Zoo departments.
CHARRETTE
Zoostaff andvolunteers, communityrepresentatives,
regional leaders, consultants and experts in
zoological design participated in a design workshop/
visioningcharrette. Acharretteisanintenselyfocused
session that uses a collaborative approach to create
realistic and achievable designs that work. The Zoo’s
day-long charrette was a cooperative effort among
diverse participants and generated many unique
ideas and concepts.
STRATEGIC OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
Project Meeting
PLANNING COMMITTEE
Project Meeting
STRATEGIC OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
Project Meeting
PLANNING COMMITTEE
Project Meeting
SAINT LOUIS ZOO FACILITIES &
GROUNDS COMMITTEE
Project Meeting
SAINT LOUIS ZOO
IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE
Project Meeting
STRATEGIC OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
Project Meeting
PLANNING COMMITTEE
Project Meeting
EXPANSION ADVISORY GROUP
Presentation and Workshop with Saint Louis Zoo
Expansion Advisory Group.
PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE #2
The Zoo and its consultant team hosted an open
house to exhibit the framework plan and obtain
public input on the expansion project.
FOREST PARK ADVISORY BOARD
Review of planning process and framework plan goals.
LOCAL ALDERMEN PREVIEW
Meeting with Aldermen of Wards 17, 24, and 28.
MAy 2013
DATA COLLECTION RESEARCH / ANALYSIS / PRELIMINARY
FRAMEWORK
CHARETTE PLAN EVOLUTION / FINAL FRAMEWORK PLAN
STRATEGIC PLAN
UPDATE / FACILITIES
MASTER PLAN
PROJECT
INITIATION
PROJECT TIMELINE
20 | PLANNING PROCESS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
PLANNING PROCESS | 21
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
Open House #2 Comment Form Summary
3
Respondents
Although respondents came from more than 30 zip codes throughout the St.
Louis area, approximately half of those who answered this question reside in the
63139 zip code, which covers most of the Dogtown area. Similarly, about 50% of
those who completed a comment form indicated that they were residents in
neighborhoods near the Zoo.

Which best describes you? Please select one.


How did you hear about this open house? Please select all that apply.


Did you attend the first open house in December 2012?
No: 60 (59%) Yes: 42 (41%)

48%
20%
11%
8%
5%
3%
5%
Resident near the Zoo
Interested citizen
Zoo member
Owner/employee of nearby business
Zoo employee
Zoo volunteer
Other
2 2 3
6 7 7 8
10 11
16 17
29
36
PUBLIC OUTREACH METHODS
ENGAGEMENT PROCESS / PUBLIC OUTREACH
The Saint Louis Zoo and its design team sought to maximize attendance at
the public open houses by using the following outreach methods:
• Postcard mailed to approximately 1,400 residents and businesses
within a ½ mile radius of the expansion site
• Open house announcement posted on the Zoo’s website
• Email broadcast distributed to attendees fromthe frst open house
(who provided their email information)
• Email announcements and phone calls to Dogtown neighborhood
association representatives
• Email messages with event fyer sent to the Dogtown Business
Association, the Dogtown Historical Society and local schools
• Printed announcements hand-delivered to Cheltenham and Hi-
Pointe neighborhood associations for distribution to their residents
• Email notice sent to Zoo board members and donors
• Announcement circulated to Zoo employees
• Press releases distributed to media contacts
OPEN HOUSE #1, DECEMBER 2012
ADVISORY GROUP MEETING, JANUARY 2013
CHARRETTE, JANUARY 2013
The graph below illustrates the frequency of outreach methods noted on
open house participants comment forms:
PARTICIPANTS RESIDING NEAR THE ZOO
The majority of open house participants live near the Zoo and the expansion
site. The project has attracted the interest fromcitizens living throughout the
metropolitan region and beyond.
NEIGHBORHOOD
Ninety-nine (99) people, or almost half of the respondents, reported living in
Dogtown, which includes the neighborhoods of Cheltenham, Clayton/Tamm,
Franz Park, Hi-Pointe and Ellendale. Approximately 20 people attended
from other nearby neighborhoods, including the Central West End, Clifton
Heights, Skinker-Debaliviere, South Hampton, The Hill, Kings Oak, Wydown/
Skinker and Richmond Heights.
84%
Dogtown
66%
Yes
34%
No
PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE #1 PARTICIPATION
22 | PLANNING PROCESS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
PLANNING PROCESS | 23
OPEN HOUSE #1 CONCLUSION
According to the 200-plus people who completed a comment form, there is a
general feeling of support and excitement for the Saint Louis Zoo Expansion
Project. Many attendees remarked on the potential for exciting, new exhibits
and landmark facilities that could support the Zoo’s mission, attract more
visitors, improve the visitor experience and elevate the Zoo’s profle. Citizens
recognize that this is an opportunity for the Zoo to growand add greater value
to the St. Louis region. Residents of nearby neighborhoods expressed their
desire for the expansion to also add value to their community – aesthetic
value (complementary building design, landscaping, lighting, signage and
public art), economic value (new business opportunities, such as cafes and
restaurants) and community value (a dog park, community garden, bike and
pedestrian trails). As the Zoo continues to develop the framework plan and
eventually a master plan, the public will continue to be engaged and have
the opportunity to share their ideas, suggestions and feedback.
transport
experience
convenience
streetscape
integrate
traffc
iconic
Peace Bridge Calgary, Canada
Olympic Sculpture Park Seattle, Washington Streetcar Portland, Oregon
Trolley Disney
Aerial Tram Portland, Oregon
Tram Disney
Swirling Art Bridge Des Moines, Iowa Swirling Art Bridge Des Moines, Iowa
Green Street Project Portland, Oregon
join
link
bridge
greenway
experience
iconic
Helix Bridge Marina Bay, Singapore
Helix Bridge Marina Bay, Singapore
BP Bridge - Millenium Park Chicago, Illinois
BP Bridge - Millenium Park Chicago, Illinois
Zub Zuri Footbridge Bilbao, Spain
Tianjin Eye Tianjin, China
Criagieburn Bypass Bridge Melbourne, Australia
Criagieburn Bypass Bridge Melbourne, Australia
Cultural Trail Indianapolis, Indiana
I-70 Landbridge Competition
assist
educate conservation
partnership
ecology
employ sustainable
Existing MOB Building Saint Louis Zoo
Kansas City Public Library Parking Garage Kansas City, Missouri
Novus International St. Charles, Missouri
Saint Louis Zoo
Oakland Zoo Oakland, California
Research Building University of Washington
sustainable
research
management
preserve
improve
outreach
transit
Orthwein Animal Nutrition Center Saint Louis Zoo
Novus International St. Charles, Missouri
Hellbender
Solar Parking Shade Cincinnati Zoo
Solar Parking Shade Cincinnati Zoo
Saint Louis Zoo
Novus International St. Charles, Missouri
Greenway Self Park Chicago, Illinois
Beckman Center San Diego Zoo
Transit Station Portugal
Transit Station Croatia
18 Kowloon East Garage Kowloon, Hong Kong
PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE #1
As part of the framework plan’s public engagement process, the Saint Louis
Zoo and its consultant team hosted an open house on Tuesday, December
11, 2012, at the Zoo’s Living World from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 pm. The purpose
of the open house was to introduce the framework study and to obtain input
and ideas for expansion. More than 180 people participated, including
local elected offcials, residents of nearby neighborhoods, Zoo volunteer
leadership and staff, and interested citizens. This frst public engagement
opportunity allowed the project team to gain community input on the variety
of plan components being considered.
At the open house, attendees viewed a slideshow, visited informational
displays at multiple stations, and interacted with Zoo leadership and
consultant team members. Image boards were created to generate ideas
and discussion at stations specifcally focused on the four design principles:
attract, enhance, connect and support. Participants were able to provide
input and feedback by completing comment forms (shown in the Appendix),
drawing on maps and/or placing post-it notes on a board. Following the
event, the open house presentation and display boards were placed on the
Zoo’s website. Citizens had about a month to complete the online comment
form, also accessible on the website.
More than 200 comment forms were submitted to the project team, either at
the open house or on the website form. Additional information was collected
from the open house post-it note activity, and several attendees provided
suggestions on aerial maps that were provided.
excite
destination
iconic
world-class experience
aquarium
animals
unique
London Eye London England
The National Aquarium Baltimore, Maryland Philadelphia Zoo Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Bali Zoo Indonesia
London Eye London England
Georgia Aquarium Atlanta, Georgia
Atlanta Botanical Garden Tree Walk Atlanta, Georgia
Atlanta Botanical Garden Tree Walk Atlanta, Georgia
Philadelphia Zoo Animal Trail Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Philadelphia Zoo Animal Trail Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
California Academy of Sciences San Francisco, California
California Academy of Sciences San Francisco, CA
California Academy of Sciences San Francisco, California
California Academy of Sciences San Francisco, California
London Zoo Aviary London, England Tree Top Walk Bavarian National Forest, Germany
Tree Top Walk Bavarian National Forest, Germany
exhibit
biodome
activity
unique
feature
expand
entice
Monterey Bay Aquarium Monterey, California
Genova Aquarium Italy
Adelaide Zoo Australia
New St. Petersburg Zoo (proposed) St. Petersburg, Russia
Montreal Biodome Montreal, Canada
Montreal Biodome Montreal, Canada
Morris Arboretum Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Morris Arboretum Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Gardens By the Bay Marina Bay, Signapore Gardens By the Bay Marina Bay, Signapore
Gardens By the Bay Marina Bay, Signapore
Gardens By the Bay Marina Bay, Signapore
Gardens By the Bay Marina Bay, Signapore
connect activate
strengthen
services
retail play
open space amenity
hotel
Farm-in-the-Zoo Lincoln Park Zoo
Eastern Market Washington DC
Cumberland Park Nasvhille, Tennessee
Cumberland Park Nasvhille, Tennessee
Brooklyn Botanic Garden Visitors Center Brooklyn, NY
Jamison Square Portland, Oregon
Animal Kingdom Lodge Orlando, Florida
community recreation
attract
amenity
hotel
enrich
art
Opryland Hotel Nashville, Tennessee Opryland Hotel Nashville, Tennessee
Music Experience Project Seattle, Washington
Wolf Pen Amphitheater College Station, Texas
24 | PLANNING PROCESS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
PLANNING PROCESS | 25
PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE #2
In keeping with the goal to create a transparent public engagement process
for the framework plan, the Saint Louis Zoo and its consultant team hosted
a second open house on May 1, 2013, approximately fve months after its
frst open house event. More than 170 people attended this open house to
tour displays, view a presentation by the design team and provide input on
the plan.
The open house was held from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. in The Living World
at the Saint Louis Zoo. After registering, attendees entered the lower rotunda
of The Living World where they could view display boards, two slideshows
(playing continuously) and a large table model of the framework plan.
Facilitated presentations in the auditoriumwere offered at 4:30 p.m. and 6:00
p.m. Attendees were encouraged to provide feedback via comment forms.
The visual graphics and formal presentation showed the planning process
and framework plan recommendations. The framework plan, which refects
months of data collection, analysis, visioning and stakeholder engagement,
broadly outlines goals and guidelines for future development. Its completion
is the launching point for the Zoo’s strategic and master planning initiatives.
Did you attend the frst Open House in
December 2012?
59%
no
41%
yes
PROVIDING FEEDBACK VIA THE COMMENT FORM JIM WOLTERMAN, SWT DESIGN, EXPLAINS THE MODEL TO ATTENDEES REVIEWING THE DISPLAY BOARDS
DR. BONNER GIVING AN INTERVIEW WITH A LOCAL RADIO STATION OPEN HOUSE ATTENDEE COMPLETING A COMMENT FORM
OPEN HOUSE ATTENDEES VIEWING THE MODEL
PRESENTATION INSIDE THE ANHEUSER BUSCH THEATER
REVIEWING THE PROJECT TIMELINE
FRAMEWORK EXPANSION MODEL ON DISPLAY
OPEN HOUSE #2 CONCLUSION
Based on the comment form data, there is a general sense that people favor
the framework plan and have a strong interest in remaining involved in Zoo
expansion planning.
The topics of greatest interest, importance, and concern, among both
residents (of nearby neighborhoods) and non-residents, were:
• Connections
• Access to the Zoo and arrival experience
• Vehicular circulation and parking distribution
These represent key topics the Zoo may want to address and engage the
public around, as it moves forward with site development.
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION &
MARKET ANALYSIS
3
27
For the frst time in the history of the Zoo, the
boundary of the Zoo will extend outside of Forest
Park.
THE FRAMEWORK PLAN WILL HELP
ESTABLISH A PHYSICAL AND ECONOMIC
CONNECTION WITH DOGTOWN AND SERVE
AS A CATALYST FOR NEIGHBORHOOD
IMPROVEMENT AND JOB CREATION.
28 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 29
WHICH ZOOS DO YOU ADMIRE AND WHY?
A simple yet thought provoking question was posed to the leadership group
of the Saint Louis Zoo. This question was asked during the brain-storming
session to gain a better understanding of what others zoos are doing to
distinguish themselves around the world. This activity allowed the design
team to compare the various zoos in size, admission fees, and exhibit types,
while identifying admirable qualities.
The zoos mentioned most often were Bronx Zoo (Bronx, New York), Lincoln
Park Zoo (Chicago, Illinois), San Diego Zoo (San Diego, California),
Woodland Park Zoo (Seattle, Washington) and Leipzig Zoo (Leipzig,
Germany). The main reason these zoos are admired is for the overall visitor
experience. Other reasons varied from the types of exhibits, programs
offered, cost of admission and educational components.
Reference the Appendix for zoo expansion precedent studies.
SAINT LOUIS ZOO
St. Louis, Missouri
106.5 Acres
Free Admission
BRONX ZOO
Bronx, New York
265 Acres
$17 Admission
SAN DIEGO ZOO
San Diego, California
100 Acres
$42 Admission
WOODLAND PARK ZOO
Seattle, Washington
92 Acres
$18 Admission
LEIPZIG ZOO
Leipzig, Germany
56 Acres
$24 Admission
LINCOLN PARK ZOO
Chicago, Illinois
35 Acres
Free Admission
PROJECT KICK-OFF
At the beginning of the process, a kick-off meeting was held to familiarize the
planning committee with the scope of the project, introduce the design team,
discuss project goals, and allow for an open discussion regarding thoughts
and ideas for the expansion site.
The opportunity to acquire 13.5 acres adjacent to the current Zoo’s campus
is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. The importance of creating a visionary
yet fexible plan for future development was discussed during the kick-off
meeting.
At the conclusion of the preliminary discussions, members of the Planning
Committee and design team collectively visited the former Forest Park
Hospital site for a site tour / observation.
After the site tour, the design team met with the Saint Louis Zoo leadership
teamand asked a series of questions during a brain-storming session to steer
project thinking. The responses to questions were documented and initiated
dialogue among the leadership group and design team. The questions and
associated answers are on this page and the following pages.
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE A
WORLD CLASS ZOO?
Attracting people from around the world to St. Louis
Engaging and interactive
Excellent visitor experience
Innovative
Known internationally
“World Class” zoos inspire
Leader in conservation and medicine
WHAT DOES THIS PROJECT MEAN TO THE
NEIGHBORHOOD / REGION?
A new start for Dogtown
It will make a great Zoo even better
Will promote St. Louis as a city
Economic growth
Positive publicity for St. Louis
As the neighborhood and Forest Park go, so goes the Zoo
Educational opportunity for families
A revival to the neighborhood
Increased property values
KICK-OFF MEETING SITE TOUR
KICK-OFF MEETING KICK-OFF MEETING
30 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 31
DISTRICT
The image to the left illustrates institutions and districts that are close to
Forest Park and the Saint Louis Zoo. Both the park and Zoo are positioned
for success with nearby institutions like Washington University in St. Louis,
BJC Washington University Medical Center and St. Louis Community
College at Forest Park and the established neighborhoods of the Central
West End and Dogtown, along with the urban entertainment areas of The
Grove and The Loop in University City. The public infrastructure serves the
park well, with direct access to Interstate 64, proximity to Interstate 44 and
the MetroLink light rail system.
WASHINGTON
UNIVERSITY IN
ST. LOUIS
THE
SAINT LOUIS
ZOO
DOGTOWN
THE HIGHLANDS
ST. LOUIS
COMMUNITY COLLEGE
THE GROVE
BJC / WASH U
MEDICAL CENTER
THE CENTRAL
WEST END
Warren
St. Charles
St. Louis
County
Jefferson
Franklin
Monroe
St. Clair
Madison
St. Louis
City
regional
0 1/8mi 1/4mi 1/2mi 40' 80' 0' 20'
300 m
iles
FOREST PARK
SAINT LOUIS ZOO
METROPOLITAN MAP
REGIONAL MAP
Oakland Ave
Clayton Ave
Manchester Ave
H
a
m
p
to
n
A
ve
K
in
g
sh
ig
h
w
a
y B
lvd
Lindell Blvd
Forest Park Parkway
D
e
B
a
livie
re
A
ve
Delmar Blvd
I_64 / 40
I-44
THE LOOP
44
m
i s
s
i s
s
i p
p
i r i v
e
r
64
170
55
70
ANALYSIS
A REGIONAL ATTRACTION
The Saint Louis Zoo is located within Forest Park, a 1,293-acre park, in
the heart of the City of St. Louis. Forest Park is centrally located and
positioned along Interstate 64. The image below illustrates a 300-mile radius
(approximately, a fve-hour drive) capture area that positions the Saint Louis
Zoo as a regional attraction.
HI-POINTE
CLAYTON-TAMM
FRANZ PARK
ELLENDALE
CHELTENHAM
KINGS OAK
THE HILL
FOREST PARK
SOUTHEAST
CENTRAL WEST END
SKINKER DEBALIVIERE
DEBALIVIERE PLACE
ACADEMY
WEST END VISITATION
PARK
W
Y
D
O
W
N
S
K
IN
K
E
R
Met roLi nk
M
i s
s
i s
s
i p
p
i R
i v
e
r
Mi ssouri Ri ver
Meramec Ri ver
32 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 33
PROJECT AREA | SAINT LOUIS ZOO EXPANSION
GOVERNMENT HILL
ST. LOUIS
SCIENCE CENTER
DUAL PATH
THE MUNY
MISSOURI HISTORY
MUSEUM
THE BOATHOUSE
GRAND BASIN
THE SAINT LOUIS
ART MUSEUM
THE
SAINT LOUIS
ZOO
Oakland Ave
Clayton Ave
Manchester Ave
H
a
m
p
to
n
A
ve
K
in
g
sh
ig
h
w
a
y B
lvd
Lindell Blvd
Forest Park Parkway
D
e
B
a
livie
re
A
ve
Delmar Blvd
I-64 / 40
I-44
DISTRICT CONNECTIVITY
There are multiple existing transit options for Zoo visitors. There are
several MetroBus stops nearby on Skinker Boulevard (Route 16), Oakland
and Clayton Avenues (Route 59) and Fine Arts/Concourse/Government
Drives within Forest Park (Route 90). There are two area MetroLink
stations: “Skinker” located at the Forest Park Parkway / Skinker Boulevard
intersection and “Forest Park” at the Forest Park Parkway / DeBaliviere
Avenue intersection; however, they are both over a mile walk to the Zoo.
From the Forest Park-DeBaliviere Avenue station, patrons can access the
Forest Park Trolley (Route 3) which runs every 20 minutes from 9 AM to 7
PM Memorial Day weekend through Labor Day and with limited service in
April, May, September and October. The trolley includes stops near most
major park attractions, including the Zoo; a one-day ticket costs $2 for adults
and $1 for children, seniors, and people with disabilities. The potential for
an additional transit connection exists with the development of the proposed
Loop Trolley, which would connect the Delmar Boulevard and the Loop
to Forest Park via a station at the Lindell Boulevard / DeBaliviere Avenue
intersection.
There is also a signifcant network of pathways within Forest Park, providing
pedestrian and bicycle access to both existing Zoo entrances. These trails
within the park connect in all directions to an urban trail network that is
continuously being strengthened. From either MetroLink station, it is an
approximately 1.2-mile walk along sidewalks and pathways to the north
entrance of the Zoo. Although Interstate 64 creates more of a pedestrian
and bicycle barrier at the south edge of the park, there are sidewalks on both
the Tamm and Hampton Avenue interstate overpasses. The framework plan
addresses these concerns.
HI-POINTE
CLAYTON-TAMM
FRANZ PARK
ELLENDALE
CHELTENHAM
KINGS OAK
THE HILL
FOREST PARK
SOUTHEAST
CENTRAL WEST END
SKINKER DEBALIVIERE
DEBALIVIERE PLACE
ACADEMY
WEST END VISITATION
PARK
W
Y
D
O
W
N
S
K
IN
K
E
R
Neighborhood Boundaries
MetroLink
Bus Routes
Bus Stops
Great Rivers Greenway Trails
Great Rivers Greenway Proposed Trails
Bike STL
Proposed Loop Trolley
Forest Park Trolley
Forest Park Dual Path System
Oakland Ave
Clayton Ave
Manchester Ave
H
a
m
p
to
n
A
ve
K
in
g
sh
ig
h
w
a
y B
lvd
Lindell Blvd
Forest Park Parkway
D
e
B
a
livie
re
A
ve
Delmar Blvd
I-64 / 40
I-44
LEGEND
FOREST PARK
Forest Park is home to fve of the region’s major institutions: the Saint
Louis Art Museum, the Saint Louis Zoo, the St. Louis Science Center, the
Missouri History Museum and The Muny outdoor theater. The Metropolitan
Zoological Park and MuseumDistrict – the Zoo MuseumDistrict – was formed
in 1972. Through the District, the taxpayers of St. Louis City and County
make possible the extraordinary quality of these fve civic institutions that
are essential to life in St. Louis. Forest Park also has several recreational
facilities, including Dwight Davis Tennis Center, Steinberg Skating Rink,
the Boathouse Restaurant and dozens of ball felds and trails. The park
attracts more than 12 million visitors a year and serves as an active core of
community activities.
Forest Park is ownedandoperatedby theCity of St. Louisunder thejurisdiction
of the Department of Parks, Recreation and Forestry. In preparation for the
1904 World’s Fair Centennial celebration, the park underwent a $100 million
face-lift detailed by the Forest Park Master Plan and continues to thrive and
improve with dedicated funding sources for improvements.
Behind the restored Forest Park is a uniquely successful public-private
partnership, Forest Park Forever, dedicated to restoration, preservation
and education. Forest Park Forever assists with the park’s maintenance,
fnancial sustainability and visitor experiences.
34 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 35
.95 sq mi
land area of Dogtown
6,000+
residents of Dogtown
3,200
households
40%
of Dogtown residents are between
the ages of 20-34
NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT
Unlike the existing Zoo property within Forest park, the south expansion
site is directly adjacent to an urban residential neighborhood and arterial
corridor. The development of the expansion site requires that the Zoo
consider its edges with the adjacent residential and business community.
To that end the community has been invited to participate in, and comment
on, the development of the framework plan. It is the intent of the Saint Louis
Zoo to strengthen its relationship with Dogtown and adjacent communities.
The expansion site should become an asset for the community, Forest Park
and the Zoo. Important considerations for implementation include reduced
traffc and parking impact, improved access to Forest Park, increased retail
opportunities for the community, enhanced park spaces and activities,
improved streets and streetscapes and expanded bicycle and pedestrian
amenities. The framework plan proposes concepts that could enhance the
infrastructure of Dogtown and beneft its residents and businesses. Specifc
improvements to the expansion site and the surrounding community will
be defned as a part of the future strategic planning and master planning
process. What will be included is dependent upon building a consensus and
identifying funding sources. It is important to the Zoo that the development of
the expansion site beneft the Zoo, expand upon its mission and strengthen
the community.
HI-POINTE
CLAYTON-TAMM
FRANZ PARK
ELLENDALE
CHELTENHAM
THE HILL
W
Y
D
O
W
N
S
K
IN
K
E
R
Oakland Ave
Clayton Ave
Manchester Ave
H
a
m
p
to
n
A
ve
I-64 / 40
I-44
TAMMAVENUE LOOKING SOUTH
INTERSECTION OF CLAYTON AVENUE AND TAMMAVENUE
TURTLE PLAYGROUND
DOGTOWN DEMOGRAPHICS
For the purposes of the framework plan, Dogtown is defned as including the
neighborhoods of Hi-Pointe, Clayton-Tamm and Franz Park.
36 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 37
10%
3%
4%
60%
7%
4%
4%
4%
4%
VEHICULAR ACCESS
Existing Zoo access is provided through both multi-modal and vehicular
facilities. The existing Zoo campus is located within the greater entity of
Forest Park and located centrally within the St. Louis region. Forest Park is
generally bounded by Interstate 64 to the south and major arterial roadways
on the remaining sides. I-64 is the main east-west highway for Missouri and
Illinois drivers in the metropolitan region. There are four principal arterials
that surround and offer access to Forest Park as well: Hampton Avenue,
Skinker Boulevard, Kingshighway Boulevard and Forest Park Parkway.
The most prominent vehicular entrance to Forest Park is Hampton Avenue,
which intersects I-64 at an interchange within Forest Park and adjacent to
the Zoo; sixty percent of the park’s vehicular traffc utilizes this entrance.
Efforts have been made in the past to de-emphasize the Hampton Avenue
entrance and encourage patrons to use Kingshighway Boulevard and
Skinker Boulevard, but the location and contiguity of Hampton Avenue to the
park attractions is convenient. This is especially pertinent to the Zoo, whose
main (south) entrance is located roughly 1,500-feet to the west of where
Hampton enters the park.
Two other principal arterials intersect I-64 in proximity to Forest Park. Skinker
Boulevard, the western border of Forest Park, becomes McCauslandAvenue
at the park’s southwest corner and intersects I-64 west of its interchange
with Hampton Avenue. There is a Forest Park entrance at this corner of
the park via Wells Drive, which is just north of the congested Skinker and
Clayton Road intersection. Wells Drive, between Skinker and the Zoo’s
south parking lot, has on-street parking that serves the adjacent park picnic
areas and is heavily used by Zoo patrons who wish to avoid parking fees
at Zoo lots. East of the park entrance, Wells Drive intersects Government
Drive, another park road that feeds the Zoo’s north parking lot and offers an
abundance of on-street parking utilized by Zoo visitors.
The third adjacent I-64 interchange with a principal arterial bordering the
park is with Kingshighway Boulevard, east of Hampton Avenue. There is a
Forest Park gateway at Kingshighway Boulevard and Clayton Avenue, just
north of I-64, although the path to the Zoo is much less intuitive than from
the other I-64 interchanges. The Zoo can be reached via Clayton Avenue
to Wells Drive (crossing the connection to Hampton Avenue mid-route).
Kingshighway Boulevard is also hampered during peak hours with traffc
accessing the Central West End and BJC/Washington University Medical
Center.
The fourth principal arterial bordering Forest Park is Forest Park Parkway,
which parallels the northwestern boundary and crosses the northeast corner
of the park. Forest Park Parkway provides quality arterial access to the
north side of the park. However, the park road network between Forest
Park Parkway and the Zoo is circuitous and not easy to maneuver due to
wayfnding inadequacies.
There are additionally four minor arterials that offer access to Forest Park.
Two are east-west routes: Lindell Bouelvard along the north perimeter
and Oakland Avenue along the south perimeter. Two others offer north-
south access to the north side of the park: DeBaliviere Avenue and Union
Boulevard. Of these, Oakland Boulevard is the only roadway offering direct
access to the Zoo via Tamm Drive, which connects Oakland Boulevard and
Wells Drive via a bridge over I-64. Tamm Drive is also a prime pedestrian
gateway to Forest Park and the Zoo due to the abundance of parking on
Oakland Avenue and at Turtle Playground (adjacent to Tamm Drive) and the
proximity to the Dogtown neighborhood.
In total, there are nine Forest Park gateways from the surrounding arterial
network with a web of local two-lane roads connecting them to park
destinations. Forest Park’s road network is governed by a Master Plan
(formally adopted in 1995) and proposed changes to the network are
reviewed by the Forest Park Advisory Board as well as the City of St. Louis
Parks Department.
Oakland Ave
Clayton Ave
Manchester Ave
H
a
m
p
to
n
A
ve
K
in
g
sh
ig
h
w
a
y B
lvd
Lindell Blvd
Forest Park Parkway
D
e
B
a
livie
re
A
ve
Delmar Blvd
I-64 / 40
I-44
Interstate 64 / Hampton Avenue
LEGEND
Wells Drive / TammAvenue
Clayton Avenue / Kingshighway Boulevard
Wells Drive / Skinker Boulevard
Forsyth Boulevard / Skinker Boulevard
Lindell Boulevard / DeBaliviere Avenue
Lindell Boulevard / Cricket Drive
Lindell Boulevard / Union Boulevard
Grand Drive / West Pine Drive
1
9
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
3
4 5
6
7
8
9
38 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 39
EXISTING CIRCULATION
Although there is good interstate connectivity and a strong network of
arterials surrounding Forest Park, the varying traffc demands on the network
have the potential to greatly impact access to the Zoo. Due to their central
location, Interstate-64 and the major arterials are heavily congested during
most commuter peak periods and on weekends – especially those periods
of high Forest Park visitation. Within the park, there is a large volume of
pedestrian and bicycle traffc as well as parking maneuvers that create
conficts to effcient vehicular movements.
Hampton Avenue and the I-64 Interchange1
The most intuitive point of access for the Zoo parking lots is the Hampton
Avenue entrance to Forest Park; Hampton Avenue directly connects to
both Interstate 64 and Interstate 44, which is one mile south of Forest Park
via Hampton Avenue. Hampton Avenue’s interchange with I-64 currently
operates at or near capacity during peak travel times (morning and afternoon
commuter periods and weekend afternoons). Likewise, the segment of
Hampton south of I-64 has multiple, closely-spaced signalized intersections:
Oakland, Clayton, and Berthold Avenues all intersect Hampton within 800
feet of the I-64 interchange. A fourth signalized intersection at West Park
Avenue is roughly 1000 feet south of the Berthold Avenue intersection.
These intersections are also near capacity in the peak periods and create
additional congestion on Hampton, resulting in slow-moving queues.
Forest Park Road Network
Due to congestion on I-64 and its connecting routes, many commuters elect
to utilize the local roads within Forest Park. These peak hour volumes are
especially apparent at the roundabout intersection of HamptonAvenue, Wells
and Concourse Drives where queues stemming from the I-64 interchange
back traffc up through the roundabout and for signifcant distances upstream
on Concourse and Wells. These queues have become a daily occurrence at
the roundabout. In addition, internal vehicular circulation within Forest Park
can become very congested and overwhelming on weekends. On weekends,
congestion is caused by internal vehicular circulation within Forest Park. With
large numbers of visitors coming to the Zoo and other park attractions, traffc
can slow to a crawl due to both the volume of vehicles and their on-street
parking maneuvers. Specifcally, queues often build during the morning on
Wells, Government, Fine Arts, and Washington Drives approaching the Zoo.
There have been recent efforts to relieve congestion in the park, including
implementation of the Forest Park Trolley (discussed on page 33) and a
traffc relief plan that is employed during large events. When in operation,
both efforts have lessened park congestion somewhat; however, weekend
traffc can still be overwhelming.
The traffc relief plan is a joint effort between Zoo Rangers, Forest Park
Rangers, the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department (SLMPD) and the
Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT). When the Zoo lots reach
capacity, the Zoo Rangers notify the remaining partners that the relief plan is
warranted. The Forest Park Rangers monitor the Hampton roundabout and
close its approaches as traffc queues on them (typically between 10:00 and
11:00 am on busy park days). When the roundabout fully closes, traffc is
diverted to eastbound Wells toward alternate parking areas. MoDOTmonitors
the Hampton interchange and ramps and posts congestion warnings on
the interstate information boards as needed. Although a rare occurrence,
MoDOT will also contact the SLMPD to close exit ramps at Hampton if the
traffc queues on the ramps reach I-64. Forest Park Rangers continue to
monitor traffc and coordinate with Zoo Rangers, removing road closures as
park congestion tapers off (typically between 2:00 and 4:00 pm).
Oakland Avenue at TammAvenue Overpass
The Tamm Avenue overpass, from a pedestrian perspective, is an ideal
place to cross the highway as both adjacent alternatives, Skinker Boulevard
and Hampton Avenue, are far less approachable. Due to available parking
on Oakland Avenue and at Turtle Playground as well as the proximity of the
Dogtown neighborhood, Tamm is indeed a signifcant pedestrian gateway to
Forest Park. However, there are no sidewalks on the north side of Oakland
Avenue west of the Tammoverpass, or east of Turtle Playground. There are
also no pedestrian crosswalks across Oakland near the overpass, the only
crosswalks are east of that connection at the entrance to Turtle Playground.
In addition, many pedestrians destined for the Tamm overpass enjoy a walk
through Turtle Playground along the way despite the fact there is no path or
sidewalk connection from the park to the overpass.
Wells Drive at Skinker Boulevard
Wells Drive intersects Skinker Boulevard approximately 325 feet north of the
congested Skinker and Clayton Road intersection. At its intersection with
Oakland Ave
Clayton Ave
Manchester Ave
H
a
m
p
to
n
A
ve
I-64 / I-40
I-44
Wells Drive at Skinker Boulevard
Hampton Avenue and the I-64 Interchange
Forest Park Road Network
Oakland Avenue at TammAvenue Overpass
4
1
2
3
LEGEND
1
2
3
4
Wells Drive, Skinker can be between fve and six lanes wide due to turning
lanes. Due to these conditions, the westbound to southbound left-turn from
Wells Drive to Skinker is prohibited. Therefore, although Zoo visitors may be
able to utilize Skinker to enter the park from I-64, they cannot exit the area
and go south on Skinker. They must turn right and go north on Skinker from
Wells Drive.
1 Forest Park Access, Circulation, and Parking Study; February 2008

40 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 41
ROAD NETWORK OPPORTUNITIES
The local arterial and road network adjacent to, and within, the Zoo expansion
site is robust. Because of the quantity and type of roads and their multiple
connections to each other, the network could be modifed to better serve the
needs of the Zoo and existing users. These concepts could be combined or
phased. The following pages illustrate the possibilities.
PARKING
Vehicular parking for the Zoo is formally provided in two lots. First, a
476-space lot serves The Living World entrance on the north side of the
Zoo, accessed via Government Drive. Second, a 953-space lot for the south
entrance, adjacent to Wells Drive on the south side of the Zoo. Parking in
both lots is free for Zoo members with some limitations; parking a vehicle
costs $15 during the peak season for non-members. The off-season charge
drops to $10 per vehicle. Parking for oversized vehicles (buses, motor
homes, RVs) is available on the south lot only at higher fees.
Additional parking opportunities within a 5-minute walk of the Zoo’s north
entrance are afforded through free parking lots at the Art Museum less than
a quarter-mile walk via Fine Arts Drive and on-street parking on Fine Arts
and Government Drives north, west and east of the North Entrance. A new
300-space parking garage has been constructed at the Art Museum and
opened June, 2013. The fee at this location is $5 for museum members
and $15 for non-members. Near the south entrance of the Zoo, parking
within a 5-minute walk includes on-street parking is available to the west on
Wells Drive and to the south on Oakland Avenue. An inventory performed
to support the Forest Park Access, Circulation and Parking Study (St. Louis
Board of Public Service, February 2008) identifed roughly 900 spaces within
½-mile of a Zoo entrance.
The Forest Park Access, Circulation, and Parking Study also evaluated the
parking utilized during a typical Saturday for Forest Park visitation and found
that the Zoo and Art Museum parking lots as well as all on-street parking
surrounding these facilities was fully occupied during peak visitation. On-
street parking further north and east in Forest Park was partially occupied
during the same time period.
2008 Forest Park Access, Circulation and Parking Study Findings
• There is inadequate parking near the Zoo to meet the Zoo’s parking
demands.
• The north and south lots fll or approach capacity on average seventy days
out of the year according to the Parking & Circulation Analysis Final Report
by L.E. Haefner (2007).
• The Zoo estimates that they need approximately 600 additional parking
spaces according to the Parking & Circulation Analysis Final Report by L. E.
Haefner (2007).
• Traffc congestion is heightened due to searching for available parking, and
patrons become frustrated once the free on-street parking is full.
• Pedestrian conficts occur along Government Drive due to the lack of
sidewalks along the roadway; therefore, pedestrians either walk in the grass
or in the roadway which adds to the already congested area and impacts
parking effciency around the Zoo.
• Picnic areas along Wells Drive and Government Drive compete for parking
with Zoo’s patrons due to the fact the picnic areas do not have designated
parking areas or drop- off zones near the pavilions.
• Parking in the neighborhoods near the TammBridge is heavily used by Zoo
patrons.
• Approximately 300 to 400 daily employees park in the western portion of
the Zoo’s north parking lot during week days and off-season times.

Oakland Ave
Clayton Ave
Manchester Ave
H
a
m
p
to
n
A
ve
I-64 / I-40
I-44
Hampton Avenue
Wells Drive
Graham Street
Berthold Avenue
Clayton Avenue
Oakland Avenue
LEGEND
42 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 43
WELLS DRIVE
Wells Drive is a two-lane road located in Forest Park primarily serving park
circulation. Wells connects three park entrances (the main gateway entrance
at Hampton, the Tamm Drive entrance and the south Skinker Boulevard
entrance) with a number of other park roadways, the south entrance of the
Zoo and the Jewel Box. On busy park weekends, Wells is often overwhelmed
by the volume of traffc. The roundabout intersection of Wells, Hampton, and
Concourse is especially problematic due to its function as the main park
gateway and its proximity to I-64 and the Zoo’s south parking lot.
For much of its length, Wells has sidewalk on only one side with the exception
of the east end where there are no sidewalks, and a segment west of Tamm
Drive where there are sidewalks on both sides. Parking is allowed along
both sides of Wells for most of its length, except for the segment between
the roundabout at Hampton/Concourse and Tamm. This segment is also
signifcant because it is sandwiched between the Zoo exhibit grounds and
the Zoo south parking lot, creating signifcant potential for pedestrian and
vehicle conficts. Although there is a pedestrian bridge between the south
parking lot and the Zoo entrance, pedestrians still cross at the street level.
The concept of relocating all parking from the south parking lot to the
Zoo expansion site provides some opportunities to reconfgure Wells and
eliminate the potential for pedestrian/vehicular conficts. One possibility
could be to relocate Wells south of the existing Zoo south parking lot (to
the southern boundary of the Zoo property). This relocation would require
careful consideration of the Tamm intersection and the interaction with
the existing Forest Park dual path system (“heels” and “wheels”), which is
currently located in that area. Other than these concerns, Wells would likely
function much as it does today.
There is also the potential to close Wells drive between Tammand Hampton/
Concourse as this segment of Wells primarily provides access to the south
Zoo parking lot. This concept would offer more green space to the Zoo
property and the Forest Park dual path system. It would also have the
potential to improve the operations at the problematic Hampton/Concourse/
Wells roundabout by removing one leg of the roundabout. This concept
would require special attention be given to Forest Park circulation patterns
and vehicular and pedestrian wayfnding.
HAMPTON AVENUE
Hampton Avenue is a major north-south arterial bordering the expansion site
on the east side. Hampton connects Forest Park, Interstate 64, Interstate 44,
and, eventually, Interstate 55 further south. Although Hampton has fve to six
travel lanes within the study area, the combination of high signal densities
and signifcant peak period traffc volumes result in congested conditions and
long queues (sometimes reaching the full distance between signals). The
interchange of Hampton and I-64 serves as the primary gateway to Forest
Park; the interchange accommodates a signifcant volume of traffc and is
highly congested during peak periods, primarily due to spillover congestion
adjacent to the interchange (on I-64, at the park entrance, or at signals to the
south). There are three adjacent signalized intersections within roughly 500
feet of the I-64 interchange at Oakland, Clayton and Berthold. Due to the
nature of the streets and the congestion on Hampton, various movements are
prohibited at these signalized intersections, which can be confusing for local
drivers and present diffculties for planning modifcations and improvements
to the corridor. During peak periods these signals add tremendous delay
to the through movements on Hampton. On weekends, similar queuing
and congestion on northbound Hampton at the I-64 interchange and on
northbound Hampton is caused by traffc queues extending out of Forest
Park.
Congestion on Hampton is especially apparent during peak visitor weekends
for the Zoo and for Forest Park. On these days, congestion into the park is
so great that queues spill out to Hampton creating congestion and queuing
on northbound Hampton and on the I-64 exit ramps. Vehicular queues on the
interchange ramps often reach the I-64 mainline lanes.
Planning for the road network surrounding the Zoo expansion should consider
any potential to improve the operations of Hampton Avenue. Consideration
should be given to signalization changes, lane widths and turning bays, for
example.
Because the traffc operations on Hampton are so dependent on the signals,
any planning should include a thorough investigation of the signalization
opportunities and impacts. Modifcations to Hampton will require close
coordination with the City of St. Louis and the Missouri Department of
Transportation (MoDOT). Modifcations to the I-64 interchange would also
require formal documentation and approval from the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA).
CIRCULATION CONSIDERATIONS
The Zoo expansion will not only provide new parking volume and a new
entrance for the Zoo, but could potentially provide a new point of access
and parking facilities for Forest Park if visitors elect to utilize the Zoo parking
and/or pedestrian crossing to enter the park. Access to and from proposed
parking on the site would be provided via the Hampton Avenue arterial
corridor, which connects to both Interstates 64 and 44. Shifting parking from
the existing Zoo lots to the expansion will reduce the volume of traffc utilizing
the northbound Hampton Avenue interchange with I-64, reducing congestion
and queuing and improving operations at those intersections. This shift
of Zoo patron vehicular and parking traffc is likely to provide a beneft to
the internal circulation of Forest Park, most signifcantly on Concourse,
Washington, Government and Wells Drives.
TRAFFIC
In addition, expansion-related site improvements could modify traffc patterns
within the network surrounding the expansion site, resulting in improved
traffc operations for neighborhood residents and visitors. Ultimately the
Zoo expansion has the potential to beneft Zoo patrons, by offering faster
access to parking; Forest Park visitors, by reducing the volume of traffc on
the park’s road network; and local residents, by modifying and enhancing the
local road network.
TRANSIT
Generally, any improvement in vehicular circulation will also enhance transit
circulation. In addition, the reduction of traffc volumes within the park,
improvements to local intersections, and new or improved access stations
will translate to faster bus and trolley service as well. MetroLink service will
not be impacted.
I-64 / 40
Oakland Ave
Berthold Ave
Clayton Ave
H
am
pton A
ve
G
ra
h
a
m
S
t
Ta
m
m
A
ve
Wells Dr
I-64 / 40
Oakland Ave
Berthold Ave
Clayton Ave
H
am
pton A
ve
G
ra
h
a
m
S
t
Ta
m
m
A
ve
Wells Dr
WELLS DRIVE LOOKING WEST HAMPTON AVENUE LOOKING NORTH AT BERTHOLD AVENUE
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS
Pedestrian access and circulation will be enhanced by the proposed
pedestrian bridge connection between the expansion site and the existing
Zoo campus. This link and its connections to local paths and trails will
additionally improve community and residential pedestrian access.
Any modifcations to the road network provide the opportunity to enhance
both vehicular and pedestrian wayfnding for both the Zoo and Forest Park.
Wayfnding should be incorporated at all levels, from a regional perspective
(paths to and from the interstates) to specifc paths (I’ve parked my car,
which direction do I walk?).
The following pages explore various circulation considerations, impacts and
suggested changes.
44 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 45
CLAYTON AVENUE
Clayton Avenue roughly forms the south and east border of the expansion
site. Clayton is also a signifcant minor arterial within the study area due
to its connections – Clayton is a continuous arterial to far west St. Louis
County. Within the study area, Clayton intersects both Berthold Avenue and
Hampton Avenue in skewed intersections. Unpopular with local users due
to the diffcult sight distance, these present diffculties with traffc operations
(e.g., signalization and pedestrian accommodations.) Clayton merges at
Oakland, east of Hampton.
Because of its skewed nature to the surrounding roadway and termination
at Oakland, Clayton is a natural candidate when considering opportunities
to consolidate the local road network. There are two potential segments
for closure of Clayton Avenue: Clayton east of Hampton to Oakland, and
Clayton west of Hampton to Berthold. Closing either of these segments
could be benefcial for the operations on Hampton due to a reduced need for
signalized side-street movements. Closing the intersection completely would
remove a signalized intersection from Hampton, increasing the capacity of
that segment and, ultimately, beneftting the entire network, including the
I-64 interchange and access to and from Forest Park. Closure of the west
segment would improve the skewed intersection at Berthold.

Closure of any portion of Clayton would need to consider the adjacent
intersections on Hampton as well as the I-64 interchange. Modifcations
could be required on Oakland and/or Berthold to accommodate additional
movements. Closure of the east segment would need to consider access
to the adjacent development; closure of the west segment should not create
access issues.

BERTHOLD AVENUE
Berthold Avenue is a local street that traverses the Zoo expansion site,
connecting GrahamStreet on the west side with HamptonAvenue on the east
side. In between, Berthold crosses Clayton Avenue in a skewed intersection
that is unpopular with local drivers due to the diffcult sight distance and
safety concerns it creates. West of Graham, Berthold enters a residential
neighborhood ending at an intersection with Clayton roughly seven blocks to
the south. Due to its residential nature, Berthold carries low traffc volumes
west of Hampton. One block east of Hampton, Berthold ends at a connection
to the Highlands development, providing one of the main access points for
both residents and employees to the site and its parking garages. Therefore,
Berthold at Hampton operates near capacity in the evening peak commuter
time due to its signalized connection that provides the only opportunity for
drivers headed south on Hampton to make a protected left turn. The potential
for any modifcations to the intersection at Hampton are minimal due to the
signifcance of and lack of alternatives for the Highlands connection.
Berthold currently provides access to the existing parking garage, but also
divides that facility from the majority of the expansion site. Zoo patrons
utilizing the existing garage will need to cross Berthold en-route to the main
Zoo campus, requiring pedestrian accommodations. Currently there are
sidewalks on both sides of Berthold throughout the study area.
Because of its multiple connections, there are many opportunities for altering
Berthold east of Clayton. The concept is that Berthold would become an
access road to the expansion site or to the existing garage only. This road
could originate at either Hampton or Clayton and could terminate within the
site or maintain its connection with Graham. It could also be considered to
close this portion of Berthold completely.
More than any other study route, modifcations to Berthold are dependent
on the plans for the other roads in the network. However, consideration
should be given to the access and operations of the parking garage and
accommodations for both pedestrian access to and circulation within
the expansion site. Plans should additionally address, in some way, the
troublesome skewed intersection of Berthold and Clayton.
I-64 / 40
Oakland Ave
Berthold Ave
Clayton Ave
H
am
pton A
ve
G
ra
h
a
m
S
t
Ta
m
m
A
ve
Wells Dr
I-64 / 40
Oakland Ave
Berthold Ave
Clayton Ave
H
am
pton A
ve
G
ra
h
a
m
S
t
Ta
m
m
A
ve
Wells Dr
BERTHOLD AVENUE LOOKING EAST CLAYTON AVENUE LOOKING NORTHEAST
GRAHAM STREET
Graham Street forms the majority of the western boundary of the Zoo
expansion site, and is currently a one-way local road utilized for residential
access and on-street parking. The street width accommodates parking on
both sides of a wide driving lane. There are sidewalks on both sides the full
length of Graham.
One concept is to convert Graham Street to a two-way boulevard with
enhanced landscaping, parking and pedestrian facilities and a smoother
alignment (by realigning the intersections at Berthold). This modifcation
provides multiple opportunities to defne and soften the site boundaries,
enhance external circulation, parking and pedestrian accommodations for
nearby residents, and improve safety by calming speeds and improving the
intersection at Berthold.
Local residents voiced concern that attractive and available parking and a
strong pedestrian connection to the street may encourage Zoo visitors to park
in their neighborhood outside of the expansion site. Careful consideration
would need to be given to those aspects of any modifcations.
I-64 / 40
Oakland Ave
Berthold Ave
Clayton Ave
H
am
pton A
ve
G
ra
h
a
m
S
t
Ta
m
m
A
ve
Wells Dr
GRAHAM STREET LOOKING SOUTH
46 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 47
WALKING DISTANCES
The Zoo currently has two fee-based parking lots on its campus, the north
lot and the south lot. It is no secret that there are many other free parking
options for visitors. Many park within Forest Park or just beyond to visit the
Zoo. With the Zoo’s footprint now extending south of Interstate 64 and the
potential to relocate parking to the expansion site, a study was completed
to better understand average walking distances associated with common
visitor parking alternatives. The two dashed circles, centered on the two
existing Zoo entrances, represent a typical fve-minute walk at a moderate
pace. Each is a 1/4-mile (1,250 feet) long, which is an established planning
standard for an acceptable walking distance.
The diagrams on the right graphically compare those walking distances,
ranging from a 2.5-minute walk if a visitor would park in the existing South
Lot to a 9-minute walk when parking along Government Drive, west of The
Living World.
A TYPICAL 5 MINUTE WALKING DISTANCE
EXISTING SOUTH LOT - 2.5 MINUTE WALK / 730’
ART MUSEUM - 6 MINUTE WALK / 1,685
EXISTING NORTH LOT - 3 MINUTE WALK / 855’
OAKLAND AVENUE - 6 MINUTE WALK / 1,700’
GOVERNMENT DRIVE - 9 MINUTE WALK / 2,375’
OAKLAND AVENUE
Oakland Avenue is a minor arterial of local signifcance because it parallels
I-64 and connects three major north-south arterials: Skinker/McCausland,
Hampton and Kingshighway. It should be noted that the functional use
of Oakland has modifed since the reconstruction of I-64 removed ramp
connections to Oakland east of Skinker/McCausland. Oakland currently has
four lanes of traffc between Skinker/McCausland and Hampton. However,
the City of St. Louis is considering narrowing the roadway in this section so
that a sidewalk can be constructed on the north side and bike lanes added in
both directions. Even with a reduction to two lanes, Oakland is not expected
to operate near capacity as the current traffc volumes on the road are low.
Although volumes on Oakland are low, its intersection with Hampton is
somewhat problematic because it is so close to the I-64 interchange. The
proximity impacts traffc fow at the interchange and creates diffcult weaving
movements for drivers attempting to access Oakland. In an attempt to
alleviate this situation, a number of turning movements are prohibited at the
intersection of Oakland and Hampton.
Although Oakland is the formal northern boundary of the Zoo expansion site,
the land between Oakland and I-64 is Forest Park property for its entire length
west of Hampton. West of the expansion site, this green space incorporates
Turtle Playground.
The concept of closing Oakland between Hampton and TammAvenues has
been discussed in the past. Development of the Zoo expansion site could
support this idea through careful design and enhanced connections, and the
closure could potentially increase the parkland north of the site. However,
such a closure would disrupt the continuity of this street—a concern for both
local residents and regional visitors.
Redevelopment of the Zoo expansion site could also offer the opportunity
to modify Oakland to retain its continuity yet provide access to the site by
re-routing Oakland through the site. This concept could offer benefts to
Hampton by consolidating signalized movements if Oakland were to connect
to a route with an existing signal on Hampton, such as Clayton. This
alternative may also beneft the Zoo and the surrounding residential street
network by routing Zoo vehicular traffc to the currently most under-utilized
roadway.
I-64 / 40
Oakland Ave
Berthold Ave
Clayton Ave
H
am
pton A
ve
G
ra
h
a
m
S
t
Ta
m
m
A
ve
Wells Dr
OAKLAND AVENUE LOOKING EAST
GOVERNMENT HILL - 8 MINUTE WALK / 2,160’
48 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 49
OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS
After studying components of the expansion site—neighbors, connections,
walking distances and vehicular traffc patterns—this opportunity and
constraints plan was created to categorize and defne areas and how best to
utilize them. The diagramon the right illustrates most desirable development
areas development and potential conficts based on current conditions. A
summarized list can be found below.
OPPORTUNITIES
• Interstate 64 as a “front door” for the Zoo
• Take advantage of the topography for various types of parking, including
structured parking
• High point to high point connection
• Seamlessly blend the components of the expansion site into the well-
established urban fabric of the neighborhood
• Connections to the existing “downtown” Dogtown retail core at Tamm
Avenue and Clayton
• Utilize Oakland Avenue for access points to the expansion site
development
• High visibility at the southwest corner of Hampton Avenue and Oakland,
ideal for a hotel or other market-based use
CONSTRAINTS
• Traffc congestion along Hampton Avenue
• Interstate 64 is a physical barrier from the Zoo’s current campus to the
expansion site
Oakland Ave
Clayton Ave
H
a
m
p
to
n
A
ve
64 / 40
Berthold Ave
G
ra
h
a
m
S
tre
e
t
Ta
m
m
A
ve
n
u
e
A
rt H
ill P
la
ce
C
h
ild
re
ss A
ve
n
u
e
S
a
n
fo
rd
A
ve
n
u
e
CONFLICT
INTERSECTIONS
TAKE ADVANTAGE
OF VIEWS
EXISTING
RESIDENTIAL
HIGH VISIBILITY
CORNER
URBAN EDGE
PRIME
DEVELOPABLE
AREA
EXISTING DOGTOWN
RETAIL DISTRICT
POTENTIAL
RETAIL NODE
UTILIZE OAKLAND AVENUE FOR SITE ACCESS
ZOO “PUBLIC FACE”
ALONG INTERSTATE
WALKING DISTANCES AND PROXIMITY TO SITE
The diagram on the right illustrates the potential walking distance from the
expansion site to the current south parking lot, which, based on the framework
plan, could serve as a location for an animal habitat along with a new entry
for the Zoo. The walk from the expansion site, via a connection over the
interstate, would be shorter than any other existing routes within the study.
50 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 51
COMMON THEMES AND SUMMARY
• Central Hub of Activity & Circulation
• Holistic Experience / One Zoo / One Campus
• Verticality / Importance of Layering Program Elements
• Maximizing Topographic Conditions (Connections / Panoramic Views)
• Mission – Centric Attractions Focused on Research & Conservation
• Revenue Driver Events (Gondola, Exhibits / Indoor Exhibits, Rides)
• Maintain North Entry Primarily for Educational / Group Entrance
• Expansion of Emerson Children’s Zoo in Existing Location
• Minimal Indoor Animal Exhibits South of Highway
• Retail Focus along Clayton Avenue
• Concern for Third Party Partnership / Protecting the Zoo Brand
WE PRODUCED
WE STUDIED
WE EVALUATED
WE REFINED
CHARRETTE
A charrette was held on January 31, 2013, when the design team gathered
at the Zoo with Zoo stakeholders, representatives of the neighborhood, and
a group of invited consultants who specialize in designing zoo exhibits and
animal habitats around the world. Acharrette is an intensely focused session
that uses a collaborative approach to create realistic and achievable designs
that work. The team divided into three sub-groups and produced layer upon
layer of scaled drawings overlaid on large format aerial photographs of
unlimited opportunities. Each sub-group then presented its work to the full
group as a way of quickly generating three independent design proposals
that integrate creative ideas with the pragmatic interests of this diverse group
of people. This was the launching point for the conceptual land use planning
and design phase of the Zoo’s expansion project. Outcomes of this charrette
became the baseline for the Expansion Framework Plan.
WE PRODUCED
WE STUDIED
WE EVALUATED
WE REFINED
CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
The Charrette involved both focused and sustained efforts over the course of
the day. The sub-groups produced designs that centered on the four principles
that have become the vision for the framework plan: attract, enhance, connect
and support. The designs were developed along these four principles to
create programs embracing existing buildings and grounds while adding
new, iconic features intended to inspire dialogue. All three options dealt
with Forest Park, Zoo parking strategies, site circulation, expanding exhibit
spaces, adding research facilities, offce space and employee amenities,
and of course, confronting Interstate 64 which divides the two Zoo properties
suggesting the need for an intuitive connection. Other consistent themes
are listed below and illustrated in the plan graphics produced during the
charrette (shown on the next page).
PROGRAMMING ICONS
The concept development drawings illustrated the value of a system of
“icons” identifying amenities that were suggested in each of the graphic
proposals. Teams developed strategies for moving cars, people and services
in and out of the Zoo while preserving habitats, relieving Forest Park’s critical
circulation at peak use, and improving the contextual relationship between
the Zoo and the surrounding neighborhood(s).
Guest Consultant Participants
Jco
St. Louis, MO
CLR Design
Philadelphia, PA
PGAV
St. Louis, MO
AFH Design
St. Louis, MO
The Portico Group
Seattle, WA
GLMV
Wichita, KS
52 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 53
FOOD / BEVERAGE
Dining Opportunities
Zoo Café Expansion
Fine Dining
Themed Dining
Event Rental
OVERNIGHT EXPERIENCE
Themed Hotel
Tent Camp / Farmhouse Experience
CONSERVATION
Off-Exhibit Expansion
Breeding Area
Wild Care Institute
Public Outreach
EDUCATION
Educational Outreach Expansion
POINT OF ENTRY
Point of Public Access
MAJOR ATTRACTION
New Major Attraction
Bio-Dome / Layered Exhibit
Research / Orientation Exhibit
Revenue Generating
EXHIBIT EXPANSION
Increased Area for Animal Care
On-Exhibit Expansion
New Species / Habitat Display
CHILD FOCUS
Children’s Zoo Expansion
Nature Play
Education / Field Trip Focused
Expansion
OPEN SPACE
Park Land
Play Areas
Land Bridge
Dog Park
STREETSCAPE
Streetscape Improvements
Urban Edge Development
RETAIL
Compatible Shopping Venues
CONNECTION
Bridge
Gondola
Wheeled Tram / Trolley
*
TRAILS / GREENWAY
Pedestrian & Bicycle Connections
ROAD NETWORK
Changes to Urban Fabric & Traffc Circulation
Road Closure
OPERATIONS
Administration / Offces
Service / Distribution Center
Employee Center
P
%
PARKING
Surface Parking
Garage Parking

RESEARCH
Veterinary Medicine
Research Laboratories
Public Outreach
54 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 55
CONCEPT 3
TheunderlyingthemewithinConcept 3was toplacethefocus onconservation
and research while expanding animal exhibits. Concept 3 repurposed the
south parking lot to make way for a new, wide open exhibit, similar to an
African Safari, while renovating the existing lakes in the center of the Zoo’s
campus. Similar to the other concepts, a land bridge would connect the two
sides of the interstate; however, the expansion site is organized around a
public open space. The team behind this concept was intrigued with the
idea of closing adjacent roads to maximize developable areas with effcient
building layouts. The idea of conservation and research was again reinforced
by locating a Zoo “headquarters,” which would house administration with
conservation efforts and the Zoo arrival experience.
WE PRODUCED
WE STUDIED
WE EVALUATED
WE REFINED
SYNTHESIS OF CONCEPTS
Using the programming icons, each charrette team’s plan was redrawn
to equalize them graphically and compare them uniformly to one another.
The program opportunities were quantifed and tallied and categorized with
respect to the framework principles. The tally charts are illustrated on the
next page. The following plan diagrams illustrate the concepts as they were
redrawn using the icons for easy comparison.

CONCEPT 1
Concept 1proposes tomoveall parkingfromthesouthlot andamajority of the
north lot to a parking ramp located on the expansion site. This parking facility
can be thought of as an in-ground multi-level, mixed use parking structure
that may house civic related amenities (maybe a transit hub and police sub-
station) while integrating everyday services that support the development.
Parking would be designed to work with the sloping grade, accommodate
peak demand for visitor parking, employee/staff parking needs as well as
parking counts required for any offce, hotel or retail development on site.
At the core of the parking would be an orientation center that brings visitors
to the top level of parking, a green rooftop. Visitors would be welcomed
by a new iconic exhibit space centered on world renowned research and
leadership in zoological advancement. This could be seen as a different kind
of exhibit than currently exists at any zoo, a vertical experience of fora and
fauna and a feature to draw researchers from around the world for annual
conference events.
Visitors could choose between an aerial gondola ride to the north lot and
The Living World entrance, or a planted walking bridge that leads them over
the highway to a Zoo-themed restaurant. These are the distinctive elements
that shaped Concept 1.
CONCEPT 2
A major exhibit, atrium, bridge and iconic architecture were explored in
Concept 2 with a one-of-a-kind, multi-functional building proposed to cross
the interstate. This feature would be an attraction within itself. The concept
seamlessly connects the two Zoo parcels allowing visitors to meander through
an immersionary exhibit while crossing the highway. Limited modifcations
to the existing campus allow for parking to be maintained on both sides of
the interstate. Sections drawn during the charrette explored the idea of a
new water feature element within the bridged architecture, highlighting the
transition in elevation and supporting an opportunity to enhance the central
lake features of the existing Zoo.
This proposal had a signifcant focus on enhancement of surrounding
neighborhoods. The expansion site was reinforced by retail, hotel and dining
experiences that would potentially strengthen the Clayton Avenue corridor
and build upon the commercial district in Dogtown.
Strong connections to Forest Park’s pathway system and potentially the
addition of paths through the Zoo were suggested.
CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 2 CONCEPT 3
56 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 57
EVALUATION OF CONCEPTS
The team evaluated all three individual charrette designs. Utilizing the four
guiding principles, and using the programming icons developed earlier, the
evaluation process scored the design options using three categories positive
(+), neutral (-), and not relevant (o). The design team reviewed the program
relationships and using their respective expertise assisted in the rating
exercise. Concepts were rated based on community impact, ease of phased
implementation, traffc impacts, visitor experience, revenue opportunities,
parking proximity and the cost or anticipated investment. The results are
published graphically with a chart on the next page. Concept 1 had the
strongest program relationships for attraction and connection of the two
properties. Concept 2 had a signifcant focus on enhancing the surrounding
neighborhood and Concept 3 had signifcant weight on the integration of
support and Zoo mission.
WE PRODUCED
WE STUDIED
WE EVALUATED
WE REFINED
CONCEPT REFINEMENT
Evaluation of the three charrette concepts led the teamto create one overlay
of a condensed site plan proposal… a graphic solution that captures the
best of the concepts in one plan. The design team went back to the drawing
board to coordinate the principle strengths of each charrette concept into one
cohesive design plan. This plan became the basis for framework planning
and economic analysis.
Additional graphics in theAppendix represent organizational studies explored
as the expansion site elements were further studied and the concept of
layering program was frst considered.
58 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 59
In comparison to other competitive markets as shown in Figure 2, St. Louis
has a sizable leisure visitor population who are more likely to travel with
children and stay in hotels.
To maintain its status as a leading cultural destination, it is critical that
the Zoo offer new experiences that attract new visitors, compel existing
visitors to come more often and provide more opportunities to generate
earned income from those visitors.
The Zoo is the most visited attraction in the region, followed by Busch
Stadium (home of the St. Louis Cardinals) and the Gateway Arch. Like
many of St. Louis’ cultural institutions, admission is free of charge and
expenses are partially subsidized by the Museum District Tax of 28 cents
per $100 of assessed value on properties in St. Louis City and St. Louis
The Zoo’s business operation is stable, but relies heavily on tax and private
contributions. Development on the site needs to be fnancially viable so
that it does not become a burden that would affect the Zoo’s current strong
fnancial position. In 2012, the Zoo received $65.8 million in total revenue.
As shown in Figure 4, of that revenue, approximately 32% (nearly $21
million) was from the Zoo Museum District Tax; 36% ($23.9 million) came
fromvisitor spending. Contributions represented approximately 22% ($14.2
million), and investments represented 10% ($6.8 million).
As shown in Figure 5, expenses for the Zoo in 2012 totaled $56.9 million.
Salaries and fringes accounted for 50 percent ($28.4 million); depreciation
was 16% (nearly $9 million); and other expenses accounted for 31% ($17.6
million). Animal food and purchases accounted for 2% ($1.3 million),
while conservation and research expenses represented 1% of the total
($792,000).
The Zoo has been highly successful in mobilizing its donor base, enabling
meaningful capital investments on the campus. The phasing of the new
development should leverage the Zoo’s impressive fundraising capabilities,
while taking into account potential donor fatigue.
The Zoo is currently in the process of completing The Living Promise
Campaign, a $120-million effort to support development of new animal
exhibits, enhance visitors’ experience, upgrade physical infrastructure and
strengthen the endowment. As of the end of 2012, the Zoo had successfully
reached 90% of its Campaign goal. This was driven by substantial family
donations, along with signifcant corporate and individual contributions. The
Zoo’s largest capital investment recently is the Sea Lion Sound, which was
completed in June 2012 and cost approximately $18 million. In addition,
as a result of its loyal and dedicated donor base the Zoo has been able
to develop a $2.8 million facilities and maintenance building, a $5.6 million
South Arrival Experience, an Andean/Sun Bear/Painted Dog Preserve and a
reconfguration of the The Living World.
County. In 2012, the Zoo attracted approximately 3.5 million visitors, its
highest annual attendance. As show in Figure 3, this represents a signifcant
increase over average annual visitation for the prior 10-year period which
was approximately 3.0 million visitors per year.
The split between local visitors and out-of-town visitors has historically been
roughly 60-40 in favor of local visitors, who visit on average over 7 times per
year. In 2012, approximately 57% of visitors were local and 43% were from
out of town. The large increase in visitors is partially attributable to the new
14,000-square-foot, $18-million Sea Lion Sound and the relocation of the
employee parking to the newly acquired Berthold Garage.
FIGURE 3: SAINT LOUIS ZOO VISITORS, 2001 TO 2012
FIGURE 4: SAINT LOUIS ZOO REVENUE, 2011
FIGURE 5: SAINT LOUIS ZOO EXPENSES, 2011
MARKET ANALYSIS
MARKET CONTEXT & OBJECTIVES
The following section illustrates the market analysis and economic
development considerations underlying the framework plan’s
recommendations. The market analysis was prepared within this context—
that the framework plan is a base and an outline, that specifcs will be defned
later, that the timeline is broad and that the present day market analysis is
rooted in a snapshot of a struggling economy and formulated around a site
that has been a blight and a detriment to the neighborhood.
The Saint Louis Zoo ranks among the top zoological attractions in the world
and is the most frequently visited attraction in St. Louis. The Zoo’s decision
to acquire and expand to the former Forest Park Hospital campus marks a
pivotal moment in the organization’s history. The expansion will offer the
Zoo an opportunity to improve the visitor experience through new attractions
and market-based amenities, while expanding its conservation and animal-
science programs and signifcant contributions to the zoological community.
Any development on the expansion site could potentially include both Zoo-
oriented uses, such as a connection over the highway and linking with Forest
Park bike paths, a new indoor attraction or increased parking; and market-
based uses, including an animal-themed hotel, Zoo and neighborhood retail
and offce or residential uses. To fully understand the development potential
of the site and the operating impacts of any development, it is crucial to
explore the market conditions and fnancial feasibility of the potential market-
based uses of retail, hotel, residential and offce and the operating, fnancing
and pricing considerations for any Zoo-oriented use. Together these
considerations will provide the Zoo with the tools and knowledge it needs
to make the important decisions that will shape the future of the Zoo as an
organization and a destination for generations to come.
In evaluating any future expansion, the Zoo’s current visitation, fnancial
condition and ability to raise funds should be considered as any new
development must help maintain the Zoo’s position as a world class Zoo,
improve the Zoo’s visitor experience, enhance the Dogtown neighborhood
and be independently fnancially solvent.
Expansion of zoo-oriented and market-based uses on the site can
build upon the Zoo’s popularity with key markets: local and regional
residents, area workers and visitors to the region.
The Saint Louis Zoo is situated in the Dogtown neighborhood of the City
of St. Louis, in the center of the St. Louis MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical
Area (St. Louis MSA). The current Zoo campus is contained within Forest
Park, which attracts over 12 million visitors annually. Within a 5-minute
driving radius of the site, there are approximately 21,300 residents, of which
approximately 8,100 reside in Dogtown and two-thirds of the St. Louis MSA
population reside within a 30-minute driving radius of the site. The average
household size in this area is 1.9, which is smaller than the St. Louis MSA,
which has an average household size of 2.5. The median household income
of residents within a 5-minute driving radius of the site is $40,800, compared
to $53,000 in the St. Louis MSA. As the local and regional demographic data
shown in Figure 1 suggests, Dogtown is home to a greater portion of singles
or couples without children than the rest of the region and its residents have
slightly lower earning than the region. While the demographic profle of
Dogtown may be helpful, the Zoo’s potential market includes residents from
the entire 2.8-million St. Louis MSA population.
FIGURE 1: SUMMARY OF LOCAL AND REGIONAL DEMOGRAPHICS
In addition to its residents, Dogtown businesses employ approximately 2,700
individuals. This includes about 500 full- and part-time Zoo employees plus
2,200 employees of other businesses. This compares to roughly 215,000
jobs in the City of St. Louis and 1.2 million jobs in the St. Louis MSA. Of the
employment base in Dogtown, 30% work in construction or manufacturing,
27% in retail and dining, 15% in health care and social services and 28%
in other industries. The relatively small employment base in Dogtown
confrms that it is a primarily residential neighborhood, as has been the case
historically.

The St. Louis MSA attracted approximately 21.5 million total visitors in 2010.
Of these visitors, approximately 75% came to the region for leisure, while
25%came for business. The average length of stay in St. Louis was 3.1 days
and the average party size was 3.4 visitors; 40% of these visitors reported
that they traveled to St. Louis with children. Visitors spent an estimated
$4.3 billion in St. Louis, or approximately $200 per visitor per visit, and 85%
reported that they stayed in hotels during their stay. With 40%of the visitors
traveling with children, a typical family of 4 will likely spend on average $800
during their stay and the Zoo could more than likely be on their itinerary.
FIGURE 2: VISITATION INFORMATION FOR ST. LOUIS AND COMPETITIVE

MARKETS
5-minute
drive
15-minute
drive
30-minute
drive
STL MSA
Population 35,700 643,000 1,861,200 2,835,900
Family households 7,300 147,000 467,600 731,400
Average household size 1.9 2.3 2.4 2.5
Median HH income $40,000 $38,900 $49,200 $53,000
Entertainment spending $2,600 $2,800 $3,100 $3,200
Figure 1: Summary of Local and Regional Demographics
Source: ESRI Business Analyst Online, US Census Bureau
City
Annual
Visitation
Visitor
Spending
Length
of Stay
Party
Size
% with
Children
% in
Hotels
Saint Louis, MO
21.5M
74% leisure
26% business
$4.3B 3.1 days 3.2 40% 85%
Memphis, TN
10M
95% leisure
5% business
$2.9B 2.9 days 2.4 N/A N/A
Nashville, TN
11M
65% leisure
35% business
$4.3B 3.8 days 3.0 11% 84%
Chicago, IL
39.3M
74% leisure
26% business
$11.0B 3.4 days N/A 29% N/A
Kansas City, MO
21.6M
86% leisure
14% business
$2.6B 2.8 days 2.8 30% 50%
Figure 2: Visitation Information for Saint Louis and Competitive Markets
Source: Local Tourism Bureaus
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
Saint Louis Zoo Visitors (M)
Residents Non-residents
Figure 3: Saint Louis Zoo Visitors, 2001 to 2012
Source: Saint Louis Zoo
32%
36%
22%
10%
Saint Louis Zoo 2012 Revenue: $66M
Zoo Museum District Visitor Spending
Contributions Investmetns
Figure 4: Saint Louis Zoo Revenue, 2012
Source: Saint Louis Zoo Figure 5: Saint Louis Zoo Expenses, 2012
Source: Saint Louis Zoo
50%
16%
2%
1%
31%
Saint Louis Zoo 2012 Expenses: $57M
Labor Depreciation
Animal Food & Purchases Conservation & Research
Other Expenses
Source: ESRI Business Analyst Online, US Census Bureau Source: Local Tourism Bureau
Source: Saint Louis Zoo
Source: Saint Louis Zoo
Source: Saint Louis Zoo
60 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 61
FIGURE 8: RETAIL DEMAND ANALYSIS
a built-to-suit space that meets the needs of such a tenant. Neighborhood
retail, on the other hand, should be positioned along Berthold and Clayton.
This retail development would beneft fromproximity to the dense residential
population in Dogtown, as well as fromthe more intimate, pedestrian-friendly
scale, proposed in the preferred plan.
At this scale, private retail development is fnancially feasible for this site.
While fnancial performance for retail will be contingent upon the fnal plan,
this analysis is based on market-based assumptions drawn from other
comparable projects. This projection is based on a high-level fnancial
feasibility model showing that retail will be able to return some net income
after debt service, assuming capital costs of roughly $12 million and annual
net operating revenue of $650,000.
FIGURE 6: MARKET-BASED USES PROGRAMAND FEASIBILITY SUMMARY
MARKET-BASED USES
The framework plan includes private non-zoo uses that align the Zoo’s
organizational objectives with market-based opportunities. Building upon
the demographic profle of the Zoo’s visitors and the local and regional
markets, the market analysis evaluates the feasibility of market-based uses
and sets forth a set of recommendations for size and characteristics of the
program. This analysis, summarized in Figure 6, takes into account existing
supply, market demand, supportable program and the fnancial feasibility for
each use.
RETAIL
In addition to the nodes of existing retail, based on a retail gap analysis,
there is supportable demand for 45,000 to 55,000 square feet (SF) of retail
space at the expansion site. This retail should take the form of Zoo-oriented
retail and dining, neighborhood services and a grocery. At this scale, private
retail development can yield a positive return. The regional recognition of the
high profle location of this site may be a draw for small footprint retail.
There are many nodes of retail activity near to the expansion site that can lend
valuable insights into the market for retail development in the area (Figure
7 on page 60). Hampton Avenue, an arterial street itself, is populated with
suburban format retail—mainly food and beverage units. In Dogtown, retail
has clustered along Clayton and TammAvenues as the neighborhood center.
East of Hampton, the Highlands Development has also introduced new retail
product to the area. Slightly farther west, there is a 100,000-square-foot
shopping center along Clayton Road that is anchored by a Schnucks grocery
store. Within the Dogtown neighborhood, there is an estimated 260,000 SF
of retail space. First quarter 2013 rents in the area averaged approximately
$13 per square foot triple net, and vacancy was approximately 3%. The
retail in the neighborhood is a mix of food and beverage, auto care and other
miscellaneous tenants. The retail fronting on Oakland at the Highlands has
struggled, with much of space remaining vacant.
Demand analysis shows support fromlocal residents, regional residents and
area workers for 15,000 to 20,000 SF of neighborhood-oriented retail, plus
a grocery store as large as 20,000 SF. For Zoo patron spending, analysis
assumes a 16% increase in per-visitor spending from roughly $6.30 to
$7.30, based on the anticipated improvements to the Zoo visitor experience.
Assuming stable Zoo visitation of 3.5 million, the increased Zoo visitor
spending could support 6,000 to 10,000 SF of additional food and beverage
(full and limited service) and 3,000 to 5,000 SF of gift-oriented retail. A
summary of supportable retail square footage is shown in Figure 8.
Retail space will perform best if frontage along Hampton and Clayton is
maximized. This is particularly true for destination retail and dining targeting
Zoo patrons, which should also take into account proximity to the entrance
of the new attraction space. Should the Zoo target a unique, destination
restaurant or national brandfor theexpansionsite, it may benecessary tooffer
FIGURE 7: NEARBY RETAIL NODES
Figure 6: Market-Based Uses Programand Feasibility Summary
Use Program Design Opportunity
Retail 45,000 to 55,000 SF
Visitor-oriented retail & dining near
Hampton; entrance to paid attraction.
Neighborhood-oriented retail along
Berthold & clayton.
Capitalize on the Zoo visitor
and grow as the residential
and office markets continue
to improve.
Hotel 100 to 150 rooms
National flag hotel cobranded with the
Zoo. Placed to maximize visibility from
Hampton and Interstate 64.
Cater to traditional Zoo
visitor and potential to
include unique hotel-condos
on upper floors.
Residential 45 to 90 units
Mixed-use apartments and/or
townhouses. Apartments tailored to
young professionals and couples;
townhouses to families.
As project evolves, additional
residential opportunities
may occur on more internal
streets.
Office 4,000 to 8,000
Small office co-located with Zoo space.
Preferably built-to-suit.
Additional office users will
occur as new Zoo uses
emerge
Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc.
Hampton Ave. retail
Highlands retail
Clayton Rd. Schnucks
Zoo expansion site
Clayton-Tamm
Figure 7: Nearby Retail Nodes
Source: CoStar, Inc.

City residents
& workers
Zoo
patrons
Total
Food & Beverage 0 SF 6,000 to 10,000 SF 6,000 to 10,000 SF
Grocery 20,000 SF 0 SF 20,000 SF
Visitor-oriented 0 SF 3,000 to 5,000 SF 3,000 to 5,000 SF
Neighborhood-oriented 15,000 to 20,000 SF 0 SF 15,000 to 20,000 SF
Total supportable space 35,000 to 40,000 SF 9,000 to 15,000 SF 44,000 to 55,000 SF
Figure 8: Retail Demand Analysis
Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., ESRI Business Analyst Online
Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc.
Source: CoStar, Inc. Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., ESRI Business Analyst Online
62 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 63
FIGURE 10: HOTEL PERFORMANCE, 2007-2012
with frontage along Hampton and visibility from Interstate 64 will also help to
capture visitors other than those visiting the Zoo.
High-level feasibility analysis shows that a 100- to 150-room hotel at this
location would be a fnancially feasible project. The analysis projects that a
hotel development would cost roughly $26 million and return a net operating
income of $2 million, which would yield positive net cash fows after debt
service.
FIGURE 11: HOTEL DEMAND ANALYSIS
RESIDENTIAL
Dogtownis astrongresidential community andcouldsupport thedevelopment
of 45 to 90 units.
The residential market in Dogtown is dominated by single family housing,
though only approximately 55% of housing is owner-occupied. This is
signifcantly lower than the rate of ownership in the St. Louis MSA, which is
71%. The Dogtown area has experienced limited activity for new residential
development in recent years, with two notable exceptions, shown in Figure
12. This may be due to the lack of available sites for scalable development.
The Lofts at the Highlands project includes 200 existing rental residential
units with an additional 278 units in the pipeline. Multifamily units that are
comparable to what may be built on the expansion site have performed well,
achieving rents of $1.20 to $1.30 per square foot per month with an average
vacancy rate of 5%. This data suggests that there is pent-up demand for
residential and that multifamily product could perform well at the expansion
site.
In the St. Louis MSA there are currently approximately 13,000 multifamily
residential units, and the forecasted annual demand for new multifamily units
is approximately 1,300. The projected annual inventory growth is 130 units,
leaving net demand of 1,170 units. Applying a reasonable capture rate to net
demand of 4% to 8%, the expansion site could support approximately 45 to
90 residential units. This assumes that a developer would seek a lease-up
period of no more than 1 year. See Figure 13 for a summary of the demand
analysis.
Multifamily apartments or attached townhomes could perform well in this
location. Multifamily apartments should have 2-3 stories of residential with
1- and 2- bedroom apartments (roughly 700 to 1,200 SF per unit). This
type of development is also suitable to ground foor retail space. Attached
townhouse should offer 2- or 3-story units with 2 to 4 bedrooms, targeting
families. These units should be approximately 1,500 to 2,000 SF each.
FIGURE 12: RECENT MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
HOTEL
Given the demand generated by out-of-town Zoo patrons and the proximity
to Forest Park, a hotel with 100 to 150 rooms could perform well at the
expansion site. In addition to the Hampton Forest Park located next door to
the Highlands, there are several additional nearby hotels and in the region
that are good precedents for a potential hotel on the expansion site. As
shown in Figure 9, there are 4 hotels near the expansion site – the Cheshire,
Hampton Forest Park, Drury Inn Forest Park and Red Roof Inn. Among 10
comparable evaluated properties, the Average Daily Rate (ADR) for 2012
was approximately $120 and the Revenue per Available Room(RevPAR) was
approximately $75. Occupancy for the competitive set was approximately
65%. This is lower than the St. Louis MSA, which has an occupancy
rate of approximately 75%, but the Hampton Forest Park, the best direct
comparable for the Zoo’s property, also has an occupancy rate of 75%. This
suggests that immediate proximity to the park can likely boost occupancy to
the higher range of the comparable set. Since 2007, occupancy and ADR
have remained fairly constant, with ADR increasing from $114 to $119 and
occupancy remaining steady at 65% (Figure 10).
The Zoo estimates that roughly 40% of patrons are from out of town, equal
to 1.4 million visitors annually or 117,000 per month. Given that the average
party size that visits the Zoo is 3.2, approximately 33,000 out-of-town parties
visit the Zoo each month. Assuming a conservative capture rate of 7% to
10%, a hotel on the expansion site could support 100 to 150 rooms with
an occupancy rate of 75%. This approach does not take into account any
other types of guests, such as visitors to other Forest Park institutions, which
would boost the occupancy rate. There is a likelihood that this hotel could
capture visitors to the St. Louis Science Center, Art Museum and History
Museum, as well as people in town for events such as shows at the Muny
or the Great Forest Park Balloon Race. See Figure 11 on page 63 for a
summary of the demand analysis.
The Zoo should seek to develop a hotel on the site that is co-branded with
the Saint Louis Zoo, a model that has been successful at other animal-
based attractions including SeaWorld in Orlando, Florida and Chessington
World of Adventure in London, England, and is in the planning stages for
the Columbus and Miami Zoos. To maximize the potential of this model,
the Zoo should partner with a major national or international hotel operator
with experience partnering with cultural institutions. Positioning the hotel
FIGURE 9: NEARBY RETAIL NODES Residential development with approximately 50 units will likely yield a
funding gap. This conclusion is based on a high-level feasibility analysis for
a conceptual development program and assumes roughly $11.5 million in
capital costs and net operating income of roughly $650,000. At this scale,
gross income cannot cover operating expenses and debt service on capital
investment.
FIGURE 13: RESIDENTIAL DEMAND ANALYSIS
Hampton Forest Park
The Cheshire
Red Roof Inn
Drury Inn
Forest Park
Zoo expansion site
Figure 9: Nearby Competitive Hotels
Source: STR Global
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
$106
$108
$110
$112
$114
$116
$118
$120
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Hotel Performance, 2007-2012
ADR ($) Occupancy (%)
Source: STR Global
Figure 10: Historical Hotel Market Performance, 2007-2012
Metric Value
Non-resident Zoo visitation 1.4 million
Average party size 3.4
Average number of non-resident Zoo parties/month 33,000
Capture of Zoo parties 7% to 10%
Supportable room nights/month 2,300 to 3,500
Occupancy 75%
Total supportable rooms 100 to 150
Figure 11: Hotel Demand Analysis
Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., Saint Louis Zoo, STR Global
Lofts at the
Highlands
Zoo expansion site
Source: REIS, Inc.
Figure 12: Recent Multifamily Residential Development in Dogtown
Metric Value
Current multifamily inventory 13,100 units
Forecasted annual demand for new multifamily 1,300 units/year
Projected annual inventory growth ~1% (130 units)
Net demand 1,170 units
Capture 4% to 8%
Total supportable units 45 to 70 units
Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., REIS, Inc.
Figure 13: Residential Demand Analysis
Source: STR Global
Source: STR Global
Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., Saint Louis Zoo, STR Global Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., REIS, Inc.
64 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 65
OFFICE
Dogtown is not seen as a leading offce market in the St. Louis region. The
expansion site can only support 4,000 to 8,000 SF of market-based offce
space. If the Zoo were to create a substantial presence on the expansion site
in the formof administrative or research space, it might be possible to attract
more offce users to the area.
The area surrounding the expansion site has not traditionally been a
destination for commercial offces in St. Louis, though the development of
the Highlands has somewhat changed the landscape. In Dogtown, excluding
the Highlands, there is approximately 90,000 SF of commercial offce space.
That offce space commands an average of $10 per square foot in rents.
There was no net absorption in the area in 2012. The Highlands development
is comprised of approximately 300,000 SF of offce space, including 80,000
SF of medical offce space. It is 100% leased, and rents are in the low- to
mid-twenties, similar to downtown Clayton.
The annual average net absorption for the St. Louis MSA, based on historical
data, is approximately 200,000 SF. Of the total labor market, Dogtown
represents approximately 1% to 2%. Based on that portion, the expansion
site could capture approximately 1% to 2% or annual net absorption, or
2,000 to 4,000 workers per year. Assuming a two-year lease-up period, the
expansion site could support a total of 4,000 to 8,000 SF. See Figure 14 for
a summary of the demand analysis.
This development could take the form of traditional offce space; however,
offces would likely need to be built-to-suit, as there is virtually no demand
in the market to support speculative offce space development. To be
competitive, new traditional offces need to offer Class A amenities and
should be developed with open and fexible foor plans. As an alternative to
traditional offce, theexpansionsitecouldoffer R&Doffces withwet labspace.
This type of space requires advanced ventilation, telecommunications, and
other building systems, but offers a unique opportunity to create synergies
with the Zoo’s research functions.
High-level fnancial feasibility analysis shows that offce development at this
location and of the scale proposed will yield a signifcant funding gap. The
analysis assumes a conceptual program of 100,000 SF, to refect the Zoo’s
desire to build out substantial offce space for their own use on the expansion
site. To develop this space, the analysis projects that capital expenses will
be roughly $30 million, and annual net operating income will be $1.1 million,
which is insuffcient to cover the debt service on the capital investment.
FIGURE 14: OFFICE DEMAND ANALYSIS
Pedestrian Bridge
The pedestrian bridge represents a large capital investment with no direct
revenue potential as it is intended to be a free attraction open to all. At the
same time, it is also a critical link to the existing campus if all of the parking
is relocated to the expansion site; therefore, the bridge could positively affect
spending at the revenue-generating operations of the Zoo.
The analysis assumes that a 15,000-square-foot bridge would cost $15
million to $25 million, depending on the design. This is based on a per-
square-foot all-in cost of $1,000 to $1,500. This is equivalent to an annual
capital cost of $1.5 million if the total investment is amortized at 7% across
a 50-year term.
The analysis assumes that the bridge has no revenue potential and an
annual operating cost of roughly $100,000, so for each of the 50 years after
the bridge is built the Zoo will incur total costs of roughly $1.6 million per
year.
While the bridge represents a substantial capital commitment, it is critical to
unlocking the potential of the expansion site. A reliable, effcient physical
connection between the existing campus and the site is essential to the
successful development of the new site since it will create a viable link
between the two. This will both advance the Zoo’s organizational mission
and help to increase the revenue potential of Zoo uses and market-based
uses on the site.
FIGURE 15: ZOO-ORIENTED USE OPERATING ASSUMPTION
FIGURE 17: TOTAL P&L IMPACT FOR ZOO-RELATED USES
ZOO-ORIENTED USES
In addition to the market-based uses, the framework plan includes a number
of new Zoo-related elements that will expand the Zoo’s offerings and improve
the visitor experience. This market analysis does not consider broader
improvements or large-scale reconfgurations of the existing Zoo property
but rather focuses on specifc improvements proposed for the expansion
site. These include a pedestrian bridge, a gondola, a paid attraction on
the new site and parking. Additional other revenue-generating uses, such
as giraffe feeding, riverboat rides and restaurants, have been considered
but are not included in this analysis. To determine the development of Zoo-
oriented uses on the site, one needs to consider operations, pricing and
fnancing opportunities for the Zoo uses.
Operating assumptions for the pedestrian bridge, paid attraction and gondola
appear in Figure 15 and capital assumptions for the same elements appear
in Figure 16 on page 65. A chart showing stabilized year feasibility is shown
in Figure 17, also on page 65.
Use Operating assumptions
Pedestrian Bridge 15,000 SF. No revenue potential.
Gondola 45-6 person cars, 30 trips/day, capture rate varies, 8-12 FTE staff
Paid attraction 120,000 SF. Target 500,000 annual visitors.
Parking 2,414 stalls (1,772 for Zoo patrons) 15% capture rate of visitors
Figure 15: Zoo-Oriented Uses Operating Assumptions
Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., SWT Design, Doppelmayr, Saint Louis Zoo
Use Operating assumptions
Pedestrian Bridge 15,000 SF. No revenue potential.
Gondola 45-6 person cars, 30 trips/day, capture rate varies, 8-12 FTE staff
Paid attraction 120,000 SF. Target 500,000 annual visitors.
Parking 2,414 stalls (1,772 for Zoo patrons) 15% capture rate of visitors
Figure 15: Zoo-Oriented Uses Operating Assumptions
Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., SWT Design, Doppelmayr, Saint Louis Zoo
$-
$2
$4
$6
$8
$10
$12
$14
$16
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
s

Total P&L Impact for Zoo-Oriented Uses
Revenue Amortized CapEx Expenses
Bridge Gondola* Paid attraction** Parking***
*Assumes 40% occupancy scenario
**Revenue shown in break-even scenario
***Parking revenue is only incremental revenue generated from new parking, based on 15% capture of visitors, $15/car
Figure 17: Zoo-Oriented Uses Stabilized Year Financial Feasibility
Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., SWT Design, Saint Louis Zoo Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., CoStar, Inc. Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., SWT Design, Doppelmayr, Saint Louis Zoo Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., SWT Design, Saint Louis Zoo
FIGURE 16: ZOO-ORIENTED USE OPERATING ASSUMPTION
Component Size Cost per SF Capital Cost
Low High Low High
Bridge
15,000 SF $800 $1,000 $12 M $15 M
Gondola
N/A N/A N/A $6 M $7 M
Paid attraction
120,000 SF $400 $500 $48M $60M
Parking
2,414 stalls $11,800* $14,900* $28M $36M
Total

$90M $132M
*Avg cost per stall
Figure 16: Zoo-Oriented Uses Capital Cost Assumptions
Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., SWT Design, Saint Louis Zoo Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., SWT Design, Saint Louis Zoo
Component Size Cost per SF Capital Cost
Low High Low High
Bridge
15,000 SF $1,000 $1,500 $15 M $25 M
Gondola
N/A N/A N/A $5.9 M $7.0 M
Paid attraction
120,000 SF $200 $400 $24.0 M $48.0 M
Parking
2,414 stalls $11,800* $14,900* $28.4 M $36.0 M
Total

$73.3 M $116 M
*Avg cost per stall
Figure 16: Zoo-Oriented Uses Capital Cost Assumptions
Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., SWT Design, Saint Louis Zoo
66 | RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
RESEARCH, PLAN EVOLUTION & MARKET ANALYSIS | 67
FIGURE 18: GONDOLA FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY SENSITIVITY TESTING This paid attraction has substantial revenue potential but could also
potentially be extremely capital intensive, likely resulting in a sizable funding
gap if earned income is expected to cover both operating and capital costs.
The estimated capital cost for constructing an indoor paid Zoo attraction
is $200 to $400 per square foot, all-in. Since the framework plan includes
only a very preliminary concept for the attraction, the analysis uses 120,000
SF as the estimated attraction size. The attraction would likely not be this
large, but to take a conservative position on the total capital cost exposure
to the Zoo, the analysis assumes a large-as-possible paid attraction. Based
on these assumptions, the total capital cost for the attraction is estimated to
be $24 million to $48 million, or $2.6 million per year on an amortized basis.
Unlike the other zoo-oriented uses evaluated, the fnancial analysis for this
paid attraction presents a break-event analysis, rather than simply projecting
fnancial performance based on market assumptions. Therefore, this
analysis is more indicative of the operating metrics the Zoo would need to
achieve to cover costs, rather than the estimated fnancial performance of the
attraction. The analysis assumes that the new paid attraction could attract
500,000 visitors per year, with an adult-child split consistent with the Zoo’s
current visitation. Based on analysis of comparable indoor animal-based
attractions, such an attraction could cost approximately $80 per square foot
per year to operate, or $9.6 million per year. Combining operating costs
with amortized capital costs, the Zoo would need to cover $12.2 million per
year through earned income to break even. To generate that volume of
revenue, the Zoo would need to price tickets at $26 for adults and $21.50
for children.
Development of new parking on the site is imperative to the success of the
plan. If existing parking revenue needs to be allocated to its existing uses an
alternative pricing strategy may be required to cover the cost of relocating
the parking to the site.
Gondola
The gondola could represent a more fnancially advantageous way to move
visitors across the highway, due to the large revenue potential and relatively
straightforward construction process. Doppelmayr USA, Inc. has assessed
the potential to construct a gondola spanning Interstate 64 and estimated the
total capital costs at approximately $6 million. The feasibility analysis applies
a 15% contingency for a total capital cost of roughly $7 million. Amortizing
this cost at 7%across 25 years (the useful life of the system), the investment
is equivalent to $430,000 per year. Doppelmayr has suggested that this is a
very suitable opportunity to install a gondola system, with a reasonably fast
and straightforward construction process.
On the operating side, analysis of fnancial data from comparable gondolas
suggests that the Zoo could incur annual operating expenses of roughly
$420,000 to $580,000 per year. This is based on an 8- to 12-person staff
at an average cost (labor and fringe) of $40,000 per staff member plus
$100,000 per year for non-labor expenses.
The range of achievable annual revenue is broad, and could be as low at
$2.8 million and as high as $11.3 million. This is dependent on the price per
ride, the number of cars, the frequency of trips and the occupancy of the
system. Doppelmayr has proposed a systemwith 45, 6-person cars that can
make roughly 30 trips per day. This analysis assumes $5 per rider, and tests
the sensitivity of occupancy and operating costs on net revenue. Results of
the analysis are shown in Figure 18.
As the analysis shows, the performance of the gondola is highly dependent
on the fnal plan for the system and the expectations for performance
on both the revenue side and operating side. It is important to note that
this analysis uses capital cost estimates that are based on an extremely
preliminary concept for the Saint Louis Zoo gondola. Without advancing the
design for the system, and therefore the capital cost estimate, this high-level
framework analysis provides only a directional suggestion of the project’s
fnancial feasibility. Changing the type of system (different number of cars,
different size of cars, different speed capacities) will have both capital and
operating implications on fnancial feasibility. Therefore, this analysis should
be further refned to create a better estimate of fnancial performance as the
Zoo develops its vision for the system.
Figure 18: Gondola Financial Feasibility Sensitivity Testing
O
p
E
x
C
a
p
ita
l
R
e
ve
n
u
e

O
ccu
p
a
n
cy
High Low
Worst-case
scenario
50%
$9.5M
$430,000
$420,000
40%
$7.7M
$430,000
$580,000
30%
$5.7M
$430,000
$580,000
Best-case
scenario
60%
$11.3M
$430,000
$420,000
S
u
rp
lu
s
$8.6M $6.6M $4.7M $10.5M
Based on SWT Design’s analysis, the projected cost for developing new
parking will be $28.4 million to $36 million. The range is dependent on how
much parking is built sub-grade, which is the largest driver of cost. The
analysis of parking assumes a mix of surface, above grade, and sub-grade
parking. The estimated costs are $5,000 per surface stall, $15,000 per above-
grade stall, and $23,000 per below-grade stall. In addition, the analysis
also includes renovation of the Berthold Garage, which Alberici Constructors
estimated at $6.2 million. Amortized across 20 years, the analysis projects
an annual capital cost for parking of $3 million per year.
On the revenue side, the analysis only includes incremental revenue
generated from new parking spaces—all numbers presented are net of any
existing revenue or expenses the Zoo gets from parking. It is assumed that
15% of Zoo patrons will use Zoo parking and that the Zoo can charge $15
per space. The 15% capture rate is derived from the approximate portion of
Zoo patrons who report that they would use the new parking. Assuming that
visitation stabilizes at 3.5 million, this translates to annual revenue of $2.5
million. Net of 25%operating expenses, annual net operating revenue would
be $1.9 million. This revenue is insuffcient to cover amortized capital costs,
leaving a $1.1 million annual funding gap.
FRAMEWORK PLAN
4
69
With the purchase of the expansion site, the
Saint Louis Zoo consists of 106 acres.
THE FRAMEWORK PLAN PROVIDES AN
ADDITIONAL 19 ACRES OF SPACE NEWLY
DEDICATED TO ANIMAL CARE, RESEARCH,
EDUCATION AND THE OVERALL VISITOR
EXPERIENCE WHILE CREATING A COHESIVE
CAMPUS.
70 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 71
*
P
%
INTRODUCTION TO THE FRAMEWORK PLAN
The following pages illustrate the framework plan recommendations
developed through rigorous study, consideration and evaluation. The
framework plan graphics are used to depict general concepts, and are not
meant to specify particular dimensions or materials. Instead, the framework
planillustrates layers of potential programrelationships andspatial orientation
as they relate to the plan components in the context of the Zoo’s existing
campus and expansion site.
COMPONENTS OF THE PLAN
On the margin of each of the following pages are the programming icons
aligned and categorized with the four core principles of the framework plan:
attract, enhance, connect, support. As areas of focus vary throughout this
chapter, the relevant icons will be highlighted. Due to the complex nature of
the framework plan, many icons may be highlighted at one time illustrating
the multi-functional aspects of proposed components.
Reference the programming/icon section of Chapter 3: Research and Plan
Evolution for a more detailed description of each component icon.
FRAMEWORK PLAN COMPONENTS
Components of the plan include:
Parking •
Connections •
Major Attraction •
Market-Based Uses •
Support •
Public Realm •
Exhibits •
FRAMEWORK PLAN PROGRAMMING DIAGRAM
72 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 73
P
%
PARKING
CONTIGUOUS EXPANSION
One of the most profound concepts revealed throughout the planning
process is the consideration of reuse for the existing south parking lot just
north of the interstate. Both of the current parking lots within the Zoo campus
present areas with the highest potential for animal exhibit expansion. Due
to the divide the interstate presents, it is necessary to capitalize on the
proximity to existing infrastructure for animal care, veterinary services and
other Zoo support services. It would be diffcult and costly to adhere to the
necessary Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) and U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA) regulations and barrier requirements for major animal
exhibits on the expansion site.
The current south parking lot provides approximately 7.5 acres of contiguous
expansion opportunity directly adjacent to the existing campus and with high
visibility from the interstate. Though Forest Park’s Wells Drive currently
divides these parcels, there are many design strategies that could overcome
this separation. These strategies would need to be coordinated with the
Forest Park Master Plan, maintain a zero net loss in Forest Park property
or pervious open space and include opportunities to improve the existing
pedestrian/bicycle path system experience.
If the existing south parking lot were to be converted to animal habitat and
exhibit space, parking demands would need to be redistributed with the
expansion site offering a substantial amount of parking.
1:1
no net loss of Forest Park space
8.6
acres of surface parking removed from
the Saint Louis Zoo and Forest Park
40%
of peak traffc removed from
Forest Park road network and Hampton
Avenue roundabout
70%
reduction of localized carbon emissions in
Forest Park given the reduction in overall
traffc volumes and relocation of parking
CONTIGUOUS EXPANSION DIAGRAM
74 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 75
P
%
PARKING TYPOLOGY
The framework plan recommends relocating the majority of visitor parking to
the expansion site. Existing Zoo parking spaces number 1,439. Parking to
support other proposed uses (market-based, Zoo-support, or other potential
drivers) would require approximately another 975 spaces. The 13.5-acre
expansion site cannot support this quantity of parking solely with on-grade
surface lots. The existing, multi-level Berthold parking garage can park
approximately 500 cars. The framework plan recommends maintaining
this structure for immediate re-use. Analysis of remaining parking demand
suggests the need for a new parking structure. The framework plan
recommends this structure be partially below-grade, utilizing the site’s
topography as an advantage and allowing for underground parking should
that become a viable option in the future. Leveraging the site’s topography
would allow for on-grade Oakland Avenue street access, while maintaining
on-grade pedestrian access along Berthold Avenue. With structured parking
the Zoo can layer program uses.
SUSTAINABLE PRACTICES
Low-Impact Development
Vegetated Roof
Solar Array
71%
Parking
29%
Open Space
131%
Site Designated
Parking
CAR CHARGING STATIONS INSIDE A PARKING GARAGE
SOLAR PANELS ON A PARKING GARAGE
INTEGRATION OF OPEN SPACE
PARKING DIAGRAM
NORTH SURFACE
PARKING
STRUCTURED
PARKING BELOW
GRADE
SURFACE
PARKING
SURFACE
PARKING
SURFACE
PARKING
EXISTING
PARKING
STRUCTURE
76 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 77
PARKING OPERATIONS
Currently Zoo parking lots are managed with attendants at each point of
entry. Though this personal interaction creates a welcoming experience, this
signifcantly increases the queuing time which may ultimately frustrate and
deter visitors. With the proposal to move parking and the arrival sequence
to the expansion site, traffc fows will have a signifcant impact on the
surrounding neighborhoods. Consideration of pay-upon-departure methods
are encouraged to maintain an unimpeded fow of arriving vehicles. By
allowing guests to immediately enter the lot after pulling a ticket, long lines
that sometimes extend south on HamptonAvenue for a considerate distance,
or clog the interstate ramps will be reduced or eliminated. These traffc back-
ups present a serious safety hazard for motorists. Various locations will
be identifed for convenient visitor pay-stations which may simultaneously
increase traffc in gift shops, restaurants or other revenue-generating venues
within the Zoo.
There are also many passive environmental strategies that can be used
to reduce the operational costs and impact of parking structures. These
may include, but are not limited to, sky lights, open air ventilation systems,
solar panels, wind turbines, recycling rainwater, green roofs and electric car
charging stations.
ARRIVAL / WELCOME
By moving the majority of Zoo parking to the expansion site, the arrival
experience would signifcantly change and would rely on improved
wayfnding.
Whether visitors arrive by foot, bicycle, vehicle or transit, all modes of
arrival must be comfortable, accessible and enjoyable. There are many
ways to create pleasant public spaces for people with direct connections to
underground parking. The images to the right illustrate various ways that
access to parking can be located within public spaces and use landscape
and architecture to create welcoming spaces.
COMMUNITY IMPACT
Underground parking also minimizes potential effects on the surrounding
neighborhood community. Layering the parking structure while reducing
the visual impact of parking lots, environmental heat-island effects and
impermeability responds to the Zoo’s needs and offers a neighborhood
amenity.
INTEGRATED BUILDING ENTRANCE PARKING GARAGE ACCESS WITHIN A PUBLIC PLAZA
PARKING GARAGE ACCESS WITHIN A PUBLIC PLAZA PARKING GARAGE ACCESS WITHIN A PUBLIC PLAZA
SUSTAINABLE PRACTICES AND SOLAR COLLECTION GREEN ROOF
PAY STATIONS
PAY STATIONS
78 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 79
*
CONNECTIONS
If the majority of Zoo visitors arrive at the expansion site south of the
interstate, strategies must be implemented to provide adequate connections
to support a cohesive Zoo campus. Methods of connection should offer
variety, be an experience within themselves and support visitors and park-
users of all ages and abilities.
The framework plan recommends two types of primary connection: an aerial
experience gondola and a pedestrian bridge crossing or land bridge. These
two means of connection would be redundant in the sense that their primary
purpose is to connect Zoo visitors and immerse them as quickly as possible
into the Zoo experience. However, this redundancy would also provide a
variety of options and an alternative route if one were overloaded or out of
service. Redundancy would also support growing populations of Zoo visitors.
Both major modes of connection have the potential to serve non-Zoo users
traveling to or from Forest Park and the surrounding neighborhoods.
CONNECTING NEIGHBORHOODS
Secondary modes of connection would include expanded connectivity to
the neighborhood and region through trail networks (Forest Park’s Dual
Path System, Great Rivers Greenway District, Bike St. Louis), improved
streetscape environments, and larger modes of transit (Metro, Forest Park
Trolley.) Though not necessarily connecting the proverbial point Ato B, these
connections are critical to the success and growth for a regional amenity like
the Saint Louis Zoo.
ALL IMAGES ON THIS PAGE ARE OF THE PORTLAND AERIAL TRAM
CONNECTIONS DIAGRAM
10 m
inute
5 m
inute
80 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 81
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
Apedestrian bridge offers an opportunity to provide a barrier-free connection
to Forest Park and the Saint Louis Zoo. Proposed to connect from the
highest points of elevation on either side of the interstate, the bridge also
would serve as an iconic gateway for the Zoo. This connection would likely
be the shortest journey available for arriving visitors with only a 2 1/2-minute
walk for the average patron. In contrast, today many Zoo visitors park and
walk almost 10 minutes prior to entering the Zoo gates. The pedestrian
bridge would offer a fuid connection for cyclists and Forest Park dual path
users, while providing a direct linkage from proposed new development of
a themed restaurant or major attraction. On the bridge itself, visitors might
fnd interesting vegetation or interpretive exhibits. The bridge could be such
an enriching experience that visitors would not be aware they are crossing
the interstate.
GONDOLA
The gondola experience is an attraction within itself. Gondola passengers
would be treated to views spanning Forest Park, Downtown St. Louis and the
Gateway Arch, while traveling approximately 80 feet above ground. Visitors
could also see the Zoo and outside animal exhibits as never before. The
gondola cars would likely hold 8 passengers and carry approximately 2,400
passengers per hour.
The gondola is a quick, about 5-minute, energy-effcient, pollution-free ride
from south of I-64 across the Zoo to the main entrance at The Living World.
While available for travel in both directions, the gondola could be used for
one-way travel; it is expected that many will use the pedestrian bridge in one
direction and the gondola in the other.
ARTIST RENDERING OF THE GONDOLA ARTIST RENDERING OF THE GONDOLA
ARTIST RENDERING OF THE GONDOLA
POTENTIAL VIEW FROM GONDOLA OVERLOOKING THE ZOO
BP BRIDGE - MILLENNIUM PARK, CHICAGO
BP BRIDGE - MILLENNIUM PARK, CHICAGO
INTERSTATE 70 LAND BRIDGE COMPETITION
ZUB ZURI FOOTBRIDGE - BILBAO, SPAIN
82 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 83
REGIONAL AND ALTERNATIVE USES
Regional transit alternatives allow the Saint Louis Zoo to extend connections
for visitors and employees offering environmentally friendly transportation
while expanding commuting options. These may include MetroBus,
MetroLink, Bus Rapid Transit, and the Forest Park and Loop Trolleys.
Metro Transit operates the public transportation system for the St. Louis
metropolitan region. The Forest Park Trolley is a shuttle service that connects
visitors from the Metro Transit system to various venues throughout Forest
Park. The shuttle was launched to increase connectivity within the park,
while relieving traffc congestion. The Loop Trolley is a proposed street car
traveling between St. Louis and the adjacent municipality of University City.
It would to connect to two MetroLink stations, making it easy for passengers
to access destinations throughout the region without using a car. Engaging
with these regional transportation systems will not only strengthen regional
connectivity, ridership and commuting alternatives, but will also support
economic development.
Future expansion site development may support the opportunity to create
a transportation hub, or multi-modal transit station, to provide additional
alternative transportation modes.
Short-term or temporary transportation systems may also play a role in the
development of the long-term vision. These may include wheeled trams,
trolleys, or shuttle buses to transport visitors from one side of the interstate
to the other.
TRAILS AND GREENWAYS
The St. Louis region is continuously expanding its trail corridors and greenway
networks. Embracing the surrounding trail systems in the neighborhood and
within Forest Park will only enhance the user experience and mend the gap
the interstate presents between the parcels of Zoo property. Well-designed
and complete trail systems provide alternative transportation options for Zoo
visitors and employees and increase the number of pedestrians/cyclists to
support new development.
STREETSCAPES
Streets play an important role in defning the character of neighborhoods
and commercial areas. Asuccessful streetscape can create a greener, more
friendly environment in which residents and visitors live, work and play.
CULTURAL TRAIL - INDIANAPOLIS, IN
CULTURAL TRAIL - INDIANAPOLIS, IN FOREST PARK DUAL PATH SYSTEM
FOREST PARK DUAL PATH SYSTEM FOREST PARK TROLLEY EXAMPLE OF THE PROPOSED DELMAR LOOP TROLLEY
METROLINK
84 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 85
MAJOR ATTRACTION
The framework plan vision incorporates an opportunity to expand the visitor
experience with a major attraction. The expansion site could offer a new
destination facility that would lengthen visitor stay and potentially capture
additional annual visits from Zoo-going families. It is critical that this major
attraction provide a unique experience; something radically different fromthe
Zoo’s current exhibits. The new attraction could serve as a hub for planned
development. Captivating and iconic architecture, like the images on this
page, could strengthen the site’s appeal and offer unique experiences to
visitors. The following pages describe this in further detail.
CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES - SAN FRANCISCO, CA
THE DALI MUSEUM - ST. PETERSBURG, FL
CONCEPTUAL ZOO BIODOME
MAJOR ATTRACTION DIAGRAM
86 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 87
RESEARCH AND CONSERVATION
Signifcant components of the Saint Louis Zoo’s mission, such as research
and conservation programs, could be incorporated into the major attraction.
Including these, usually hidden programs, would increase their exposure and
offer educational opportunities to visitors. The facility may also incorporate
laboratory and offce space. Inclusion of multiple, key programs would also
underscore the Zoo’s commitment to the site and could lead to development
of its headquarters there.
“CROSS SECTION EARTH”
The design concept for this major attraction has been described as “Cross
Section Earth.” This indoor, immersionary exhibit, open 12 months a year,
would feature arboreal species from within the tree canopies, terrestrial
animals, and subterranean and aquatic species. This major attraction could
exhibit animals that are not only specifc to an eco-region, but also that
cohabitate with species just as they do in nature.
Verticality is critical to achieve success and would strengthen the opportunity
for iconic architecture. Also as the hub of activity on the expansion site,
this facility could serve as a welcome center and orientation point allowing
visitors to see the attraction upon arrival and departure.
Another option might be an aquarium; usually a vertical structure with a small
footprint. It, too, could represent iconic architecture.
CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES - SAN FRANCISCO, CA
MORRIS ARBORETUM - PHILADELPHIA, PA
CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES - SAN FRANCISCO, CA GARDENS BY THE BAY - SINGAPORE
CROSS SECTION EARTH CONCEPTUAL DIAGRAM
AVIAN SPECIES
TERRESTRIAL SPECIES
SUBTERRANEAN AND
AQUATIC SPECIES
88 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 89
MARKET-BASED USES
The framework plan market study explored four different areas of potential
development: retail, hotel, offce and residential. A combination of these
uses could provide added visitor amenities and beneft the surrounding
neighborhood. Supportable market-based uses recommended in the
framework plan include neighborhood-based retail units, a boutique hotel,
limited residential development, a Zoo-oriented offce building and a themed
restaurant.
LAND USE - INTEGRATION INTO DOGTOWN
Unlike the Zoo campus in Forest Park, it is critical to consider the edges of
the expansion site property. Future development should be outward-facing
and accessible to residents. A wall of bamboo or fenced perimeter is not an
appropriate solution within this context.
MIXED-USE CONCEPT
The effciency and sustainability of layering market uses points to the need
for mixed-use development. Successful mixed-use developments provide
opportunities for casual social interaction. The sharing of resources, such as
parking and utilities, allow for more compact development, a smaller footprint
and more green space and public amenities.
residential parking
retail
MARKET-BASED USES DIAGRAM
90 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 91
HOTEL
A market study of the expansion site (see Chapter 3) suggests that the site
could support a 150-bed boutique hotel. Near the major attraction and Zoo
headquarters, a hotel could supply additional conference opportunities,
entertainment venues and extend the stay of Zoo visitors. A Zoo theme and
proximity to the Zoo and Forest Park would distinguish this hotel fromothers.
The hotel could be located strategically at the intersection of the interstate
and Hampton Avenue corridor to increase its visibility and ease of guest
access. In 2012, the Zoo hosted 273 events and meetings ranging in size
from 25 to 4,000 guests. A hotel would expand rental opportunities for the
Zoo and allow the institution to host industry conferences.

RESTAURANT / WELCOME CENTER
A new portal to the Zoo campus could be through a themed restaurant
and/or welcome center. Located at the northern terminus of the pedestrian
bridge, this entry point would offer alternative dining options to those already
established within the Zoo and Forest Park and would also provide a gateway
to expanded exhibit space on the north side of the interstate. The themed
restaurant, estimated at 40,000 SF, could be similar to a Rainforest Cafe or
it could be an entirely new and unique dining experience, possibly with live
animal encounters. This unique dining venue could also provide additional
rental opportunities for group sales revenue.
ZOO HEADQUARTERS
EMPLOYEE CENTER / RESEARCH
Though market-based offce space is not in high-demand, exhibit expansion
opportunities on the existing campus may require relocation of administrative
and employee facilities to the expansion site. A Zoo headquarters of sorts
could be located in a separate offce building and/or within a major attraction.
The headquarters facility could provide much needed offces, conference
rooms, employee dining and a ftness center. This facility would also create
a more secure Zoo with employees arriving and departing through one
controlled point of entry.
EMPLOYEE CENTER EXAMPLE
EMPLOYEE CONFERENCE ROOM EXAMPLE
THEMED RESTAURANT EXAMPLE
THEMED RESTAURANT EXAMPLE
EMPLOYEE DINING EXAMPLE
EVENT / RENTAL OPPORTUNITY EXAMPLE
BOUTIQUE HOTEL EXAMPLE
BOUTIQUE HOTEL EXAMPLE
CONFERENCE SPACE EXAMPLE
92 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 93
RESIDENTIAL
The expansion site’s proposed mixed-use development could offer integrated
residential development. It is critical that the new development blend in
scale and character with existing housing stock, while being competitively
priced. Apartment style units above retail or other uses (offce buildings,
parking, etc.) and townhouse style units would be most appropriate. The
market study supports approximately 45-70 residential units. Incorporating
residential development into the long-term vision illustrates the Zoo’s
dedication to being fully integrated within the neighborhood while enhancing
the vitality of public spaces and shared uses before and after traditional Zoo
hours.
TOWNHOUSE STYLE RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSE STYLE RESIDENTIAL
TOWNHOUSE STYLE RESIDENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOOD GROCERY EXAMPLE
NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL EXAMPLE
NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL EXAMPLE
NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL
Retail development is obviously the most sought after amenity for neighbors
and Zoo employees. The market analysis suggests approximately 50,000
SF of retail units could be supported, but the scale and type is critical.
Neighborhood-based food and beverage, grocery, hardware, laundry and
automotive services would be useful additions to the area.
OUTDOOR DINING
94 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 95
SUPPORT
With primary goals of the framework plan focused on animal care, education,
research, conservation and enhancing the visitor’s experience, support
services become even more critical. The Zoo currently can support 24,000
visitors each day. Often in peak season and ideal weather conditions, the
Zoo entertains over 30,000 visitors daily stretching its capacity and risking
visitor discomfort. With the desire for attendance growth and the expansion
of available visitor experiences, support services will be in high demand.
These services include all Zoo operations, such as catering, food/beverage
operations, retail units, gift shops, rest-room facilities, facility management
and expanded animal care.
ADMINISTRATION DISTRIBUTION CENTER
Currently the Zoo’s administration building and distribution center occupy
approximately 50,000 SF of potential animal habitat. The 1969 administration
building houses departmental offces for Zoo operations. The over-crowded
facility is long overdue for renovation and does not have the capacity to fulfll
all operational needs of the Zoo. As previously mentioned, the framework
plan suggests relocating this facility to the expansion site and broadening
its operational services. Refer to Zoo Headquarters / Employee Center /
Research discussed in Market-Based Uses (Chapter 3).
DISTRIBUTION CENTER
The distribution center receives, stores and distributes all of the Zoo’s
physical resources, including offce supplies, mail, animal care products, etc.
The framework plan proposes relocating this facility to the expansion site.
Housed within the parking facility, a relocated distribution center would make
additional land available for expanded exhibit space as well as limit delivery
truck traffc within Forest Park. The suggested new location would be more
closely situated with proposed Zoo administration operations.
VETERINARY HOSPITAL EXPANSION
The Zoo’s 17,000-squre-foot veterinary hospital complex provides the Zoo
with a central treatment area, research laboratories, an animal quarantine
wing and administrative space. The framework plan proposes a physical
expansion of this facility to support growing animal populations and additional
species. Improvements to this facility could include newer technology and
equipment, expanded laboratories and renovated quarters for quality animal
care.
EXISTING SAINT LOUIS ZOO VETERINARY HOSPITAL
EXISTING SAINT LOUIS ZOO VETERINARY HOSPITAL
EXISTING SAINT LOUIS ZOO VETERINARY HOSPITAL
SUPPORT DIAGRAM
96 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 97
*
PUBLIC REALM
The public realmis the fabric that holds all the components of the framework
plan together. Green space can be used to successfully integrate the site
with the surrounding community. These multifunctional spaces are designed
to welcome the infux of Zoo visitors, employees, Forest Park visitors and
residential neighbors. If well-designed, executed and maintained, the public
realm will provide the welcoming, intimate spaces that will encourage public
use and a sense of pride. These spaces may support farmers’ markets, play
areas, plazas, dog parks, sculpture and gathering/event spaces.
PAVILION EXAMPLE - MYRIAD BOTANICAL GARDENS - OKLAHOMA CITY, OK
PUBLIC ART - INDIANAPOLIS ART MUSEUM
DOG PARK EXAMPLE - CHICAGO, IL
FARMERS MARKET EXAMPLE
MOVIE NIGHT - OLD POST OFFICE PLAZA - ST. LOUIS, MO
COMMUNITY SPACE - JAMISON SQUARE - PORTLAND, OR
ADVENTURE PLAY EXAMPLE
COMMUNITY SPACE - DIRECTORS PARK - PORTLAND, OR
PUBLIC REALM DIAGRAM
10 m
inute
5 m
inute
98 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 99
EXHIBITS
If support functions, administration offces and, most critically, parking are
relocated to the expansion site, nearly 15 acres of property would be made
available for attractions and animal exhibits. With the Zoo’s historically
landlocked condition, animal habitat and exhibits are a high priority. These
enhancements would allow the Zoo to continue its international leadership in
animal management, research, conservation, exhibits, education and guest
experiences.
NEW EXHIBIT OPPORTUNITY
With property available with the use of expansion site parking areas to
replace the Zoo’s south parking lot, options open up for potential exhibit
opportunities. Currently the Zoo has a number of exhibits displaying similar
taxa or same animal species (i.e., all cats together). The River’s Edge
exhibit demonstrates a variety of species known to cohabit the same eco-
zone shown in more realistic natural habitats. The Zoo is most interested in
creating more experiences with a blend of species demonstrating eco-zones.
Many of the existing Zoo exhibits are quite segregated and sub-divided as
a result of maximizing use of limited space. A relatively fat, open and large
parcel, the south parking lot, could become an expansive exhibit illustrating
an open African savannah. It could offer open vistas and roaming animals
unlike any exhibit now at the Saint Louis Zoo. This large exhibit could offer
opportunities for animal encounters like giraffe-feeding or safari rides. This
exhibit could be visible from the interstate adding excitement for potential
visitors.
SAVANNA EXHIBIT EXAMPLE - SAN DIEGO ZOO
SAVANA EXHIBIT EXAMPLE - SAN DIEGO ZOO
SAVANA EXHIBIT EXAMPLE - SAN DIEGO ZOO
EXHIBIT EXPANSION DIAGRAM
100 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 101
RIVER’S EDGE EXPANSION
Relocation of the Zoo’s distribution center would make additional land
available adjacent to River’s Edge—home to a growing Asian elephant herd.
The additional square footage may support additional animal care spaces.
Off-exhibit space is incredibly important to the animals’ health and well-
being.
THE WILD EXPANSION
Relocation of the administration building allows for potential expansion of
The Wild zone, with current exhibits ranging from penguins to bears to great
apes. This area’s close proximity to The Living World and the Zoo’s main
entrance ensures a high visitor traffc.
CHILDREN’S ZOO EXPANSION
Relocation of parking and reconfguration of the Zoo’s north parking lot allows
for the direct expansion of the Emerson Children’s Zoo. One of the most
popular Zoo exhibits and strongest educational opportunities, the Children’s
Zoo provides child-focused experiences and opportunities. Expansion ideas
include nature play areas, additional animal encounters, overnight events
and a Zoo farm with domestic animals and homestead experiences.
EMERSON CHILDREN’S ZOO - SAINT LOUIS ZOO
EMERSON CHILDREN’S ZOO - SAINT LOUIS EXPLORING NATURE EXAMPLE
NATURE PLAY EXAMPLE
OVERNIGHT EXPERIENCE EXAMPLE
RED ROCKS RENOVATION
Red Rock Territory is one of the largest exhibit zones within the Zoo and
home to some of the world’s most powerful predators living near some of
the world’s most graceful prey. Big Cat Country tigers, jaguars, lions and
leopards are near the antelope habitat, home to zebra, camel, giraffe, okapi,
takin and more. These species are signifcant to the Zoo experience, but
the facilities are somewhat dated and need repair and renovation. These
exhibits are sheltered by some of the densest tree canopy within the Zoo,
providing relief during St. Louis’ hot summer days. As one of the oldest areas
of the Zoo, the framework plan proposes the Red Rocks area be updated.
102 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 103
*
P
%
48%
Other
34%
Surface Parking
11%
Major Attraction
8%
Mixed Use / Retail
SUMMARY
The design team studied the spatial relationships of the program
components through cross-section and modeling. Mixed-use development
and layering of development and parking indicate the scale and complexity
of the framework recommendations. Layering of support services and
amenities allows the site to maintain a good percentage for public realm
and neighborhood enhancements. The sections illustrated below illustrate
the advantage of structured and below-grade parking that capitalizes on the
existing topography.
S a i n t L o u i s Z o o
FRAMEWORK PLAN
A
NORTH / SOUTH SECTION
SCALE: 1” = 40’
0’ 20’ 40’ 80’
EAST / WEST SECTION
SCALE: 1” = 40’
0’ 20’ 40’ 80’
KEY PLAN
MAY 2013
OAKLAND
AVENUE I-64/40 WELLS
DRIVE
DUAL
PATH
BERTHOLD
AVENUE
CLAYTON
AVENUE
CRESCENT
AVENUE
M
A
JO
R
AT
T
R
A
C
T
IO
N
G
O
N
D
O
LA
M
IX
E
D
U
S
E
M
IX
E
D
U
S
E
R
E
S
ID
E
N
T
IA
L
E
X
IS
T
IN
G
R
E
S
ID
E
N
T
IA
L
T
H
E
M
E
D
R
E
S
TA
U
R
A
N
T
GONDOLA
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
PARKING
HAMPTON
AVENUE
M
A
JO
R
AT
T
R
A
C
T
IO
N
O
F
F
IC
E
M
IX
E
D
U
S
E
G
O
N
D
O
LA
GRAHAM
STREET
P
U
B
LIC
S
PA
C
E
P
U
B
LIC
S
PA
C
E
PA
R
K
IN
G
PARKING
PARKING
P
U
B
LIC
S
PA
C
E
P
U
B
LIC
S
PA
C
E
B
A
B
S a i n t L o u i s Z o o
FRAMEWORK PLAN
A
NORTH / SOUTH SECTION
SCALE: 1” = 40’
0’ 20’ 40’ 80’
EAST / WEST SECTION
SCALE: 1” = 40’
0’ 20’ 40’ 80’
KEY PLAN
MAY 2013
OAKLAND
AVENUE I-64/40 WELLS
DRIVE
DUAL
PATH
BERTHOLD
AVENUE
CLAYTON
AVENUE
CRESCENT
AVENUE
M
A
JO
R
AT
T
R
A
C
T
IO
N
G
O
N
D
O
LA
M
IX
E
D
U
S
E
M
IX
E
D
U
S
E
R
E
S
ID
E
N
T
IA
L
E
X
IS
T
IN
G
R
E
S
ID
E
N
T
IA
L
T
H
E
M
E
D
R
E
S
TA
U
R
A
N
T
GONDOLA
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
PARKING
HAMPTON
AVENUE
M
A
JO
R
AT
T
R
A
C
T
IO
N
O
F
F
IC
E
M
IX
E
D
U
S
E
G
O
N
D
O
LA
GRAHAM
STREET
P
U
B
LIC
S
PA
C
E
P
U
B
LIC
S
PA
C
E
PA
R
K
IN
G
PARKING
PARKING
P
U
B
LIC
S
PA
C
E
P
U
B
LIC
S
PA
C
E
B
A
B
NORTH / SOUTH B NORTH / SOUTH B
EAST / WEST A
S a i n t L o u i s Z o o
FRAMEWORK PLAN
A NORTH / SOUTH SECTION
SCALE: 1” = 40’ 0’ 20’ 40’ 80’
EAST / WEST SECTION
SCALE: 1” = 40’ 0’ 20’ 40’ 80’
KEY PLAN
MAY 2013
OAKLAND
AVENUE I-64/40 WELLS
DRIVE
DUAL
PATH
BERTHOLD
AVENUE
CLAYTON
AVENUE
CRESCENT
AVENUE
MAJOR ATTRACTION
GONDOLA
MIXED USE
MIXED USE
RESIDENTIAL
EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
THEMED RESTAURANT
GONDOLA
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
PARKING
HAMPTON
AVENUE
MAJOR ATTRACTION
OFFICE
MIXED USE
GONDOLA
GRAHAM
STREET
PUBLIC SPACE
PUBLIC SPACE
PARKING
PARKING
PARKING
PUBLIC SPACE
PUBLIC SPACE
B
A
B
B
A
104 | FRAMEWORK PLAN
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
FRAMEWORK PLAN | 105
MAJOR ATTRACTION
ANIMAL EXHIBIT OPPORTUNITY
EXISTING TURTLE PLAYGROUND
MIXED USE
OFFICE BUILDING
HOTEL
GONDOLA
THEMED RESTAURANT
EXISTING PARKING GARAGE
RESIDENTIAL
DISTRIBUTION CENTER
VETERINARY HOSPITAL EXPANSION
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
PUBLIC SPACE
PARKING
THE LIVING WORLD
EXISTING FOREST PARK DUAL PATH
P%
P%
*
*
1
2
17
15
16
13
14
7
5
6
3
4
12
10
11
8
9
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
5
6
6
6
7
8
9
10
11
11
11
11
12 12
12
12
13
14
14
15
15
16
17
NORTH / SOUTH B
FRAMEWORK PLAN MODEL
The design team produced a physical model to help stakeholders visualize
the recommendations of the framework plan. The model was on display at
the second public open house and helped stimulate discussion and provide
a glimpse of what the future of the expansion site could be. The model has
been used occasionally for other framework planning discussions, such as
at Clayton-Tamm neighborhood and Forest Park Advisory Board meetings,
and will continue to serve the Zoo as a working tool to aid expansion
discussion.
The architectural massing of the various buildings and components of the
framework plan are representational only.
MODEL CREDIT: SILVER WING STUDIOS
NEXT STEPS
5
107
The Saint Louis Zoo has been in existence for
over a century.
THE EXPANSION FRAMEWORK PLAN WILL
BE A CATALYST FOR FUTURE GROWTH
OVER MANY DECADES TO COME.
108 | NEXT STEPS
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
NEXT STEPS | 109
FRAMEWORK PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
The Saint Louis Zoo plans to move seamlessly into a strategic plan update.
The planning team will also revisit the facilities master plan. This next step
in the planning process will allow the Zoo to more accurately defne priorities,
determine critical path components and identify fnancial feasibility.
The Zoo’s 2011 Strategic Master Plan involved literally hundreds of advisors
to redefne the historic tension between the need to serve the area and
conserve species across the globe. The Saint Louis Zoo is a strong, highly
effective organization, a treasured local visitor attraction and an important
player in conservation..
The framework plan includes the initial thoughts and ideas. Future planning
efforts will build upon existing strategic goals and objectives with a focus on
the Zoo’s enlarged footprint.
Critical to the success of all planning will be the continued involvement of
the community and Saint Louis Zoo stakeholders. The Saint Louis Zoo
will continue to engage the public, maintaining an appropriate level of
transparency as decisions are being made. The framework plan open houses
prompted participants to identify their top three preferences for involvement
in future Zoo planning initiatives. The top three choices were open house
meetings, email announcements and website updates.
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
Open House #2 Comment Form Summary
7
Public Involvement

When presented with three statements about public involvement throughout the
framework planning process, attendees who completed the comment form
responded as follows:

Public Involvement
Statements
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Neutral/
Neither
Disagree
or Agree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Weighted
Average
Overall, I was satisfied with
public involvement
opportunities throughout the
framework planning process.
2 6 26 57 21 3.79
I was adequately informed of
the open house meetings.
5 12 11 57 26 3.78
I would like to be informed of
future public involvement
opportunities related to Zoo
expansion planning.
1 0 2 48 62 4.50

The weighted average for these statements was slightly higher among
respondents who attended both open house meetings (3.88, 4.15, and 4.76
respectively).
The final comment form question prompted respondents to choose their top three
preferences for involvement in future Zoo planning initiatives. The top three
choices were: open house meetings; email announcements; and website
updates.

Additional Comments
There was not a section on the comment form for additional comments, however
several attendees added statements throughout their forms. There was a wide-
range of remarks that included requests, suggestions, and concerns. Verbatim
comments are listed in Appendix C.
19
26
37
49
68
81
Online surveys
Focus groups
Neighborhood association meetings/
presentations
Website updates
Email announcements
Open house meetings
Preferences for future public involvement
CLOSING COMMENTS
The expansion framework plan offers a 30-year vision that will help guide
decision-making for years to come. Developed with the help of dozens
of community leaders and experts, the framework plan sets the stage for
organizational and physical changes in the Zoo’s existing structure and
campus and for the expansion site.
These plan recommendations will also serve as a baseline for analysis,
discussion and consideration as the Zoo develops its next strategic plan.
Eventually, full development of the 13.5-acre expansion site will spur
economic development in neighborhoods near the site and provide enriching
recreation and retail opportunities. Expansion of the Zoo’s footprint will
enhance the Zoo visitor’s experience and signifcantly improve the site to the
beneft of nearby communities, the city and region.
STRATEGIC / MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK PLAN
It will also help the Zoo continue to advance its mission to conserve animals
and their habitats through animal management, research, recreation and
educational programs that encourage the support and enrich the experience
of the public.
“The Saint Louis Zoo cares about animals and their future. We also care
about the people who connect with them. Connecting visitors with the
animals they see right in front of them is the best service zoos can provide.
In the end, that’s what this expansion is all about.”
Jeffrey P. Bonner, the Dana Brown President and
CEO of the Saint Louis Zoo.
PHASING
How the many options proposed in the framework plan will be phased in
as the site is developed depends on the Zoo’s Strategic Plan update and a
review of the Facilities Master Plan. The planning team must explore each
option in greater detail and consider the feasibility of each approach. Here
are some questions that should be answered to determine phasing:
• Why this project?
• Is it feasible?
• What is the cost?
• What is the funding source?
• Is there a donor opportunity?
• Will it provide revenue?
• Who are possible partners in this project?
• What should the results be?
• Will it be the catalyst for other development?
• Will it enhance the Zoo’s attendance?
• How will it impact the neighborhood?
• What are the boundaries of this project?
• What is its priority as it relates to the Zoo’s mission?
• How quickly can it be implemented?
Projects should be selected that will both affect the greatest change on
the site and build momentum for implementing the framework plan in its
entirety. Separate master plan efforts can be implemented independently as
funding and opportunities arise. The choice for a particular project should be
determined by its anticipated results. The planning team must also consider
matters of maintenance and operational management. It is also critical to
consider strategies that reinforce previously implemented projects and to
limit duplication or waste of resources.
APPENDIX
6
123
112 | APPENDIX
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
APPENDIX | 113
Community: neighborhood, group, shared space and values
What do you value most about the neighborhoods surrounding the Zoo and its new
property located at the site of the former Forest Park Hospital? This includes the Dogtown
area, Clayton-Tamm, Cheltenham, Franz Park, Hi-Pointe, and other nearby communities.
What, if anything, would you improve or change about the neighborhoods surrounding the
Zoo?
When Forest Park Hospital (previously Deaconess Hospital) operated at this site, what type
of infuence or impact did it have on the surrounding neighborhoods?
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Project
Open House Comment Form
Your zip code: __________________
Do you live in one of the neighborhoods near the Saint Louis Zoo? qYes qNo
If yes, in which neighborhood do you live? _____________________________________
Do you own or rent a home in this neighborhood? qOwn qRent qOther: ___________
Which of the following best describes you:
qResident of a neighborhood near the Zoo qOwner/manager of a business near the Zoo
qEmployee of a business located near the Zoo qEmployee of the Zoo
qMember of the Zoo qInterested citizen qOther (please explain): ________________
How did you fnd out about the open house? Please check all that apply.
qFlyer qPostcard qNeighborhood Association announcement
qOther (please explain): _____________________________________
Attract: draw, entice, interest
What attractions, activities, and/or exhibits could draw more visitors, provide a unique
experience, and/or help contribute to the Zoo’s status as a world-class zoo?
Please turn over to complete
Welcome and thank you for taking the time to share your ideas, thoughts, and information with us.
Connect: join, link, bring together
Please indicate your top three choices for the type of connection between the new
expansion site and the main Zoo campus. Put an “x” next to your three selections.
Support: sustain, assist, reinforce
Science, research, education and conservation are important functions of the Zoo, as much
as the exhibits and visitor experiences. If facilities for these services were located on the
new property, how might they ft in with the surrounding neighborhoods?
Comments: ideas, concerns, suggestions
Do you have any additional comments that you would like to share with the project team?
___ Boulevard
___ Enclosed walkway
___ Gondola
___ Greenway/park/trail
___ Land bridge
___ Streetcar/Trolley
___ Tram
___ Other (please explain):
________________________
Thank you for your input. Please turn in your form to a project team member or comment form box.
What would make the connection between the two sites a unique and memorable
experience?
Enhance: improve, enrich, develop
What types of amenities do you think would enhance the new site and/or beneft the
surrounding neighborhoods?
How might the Zoo expansion site connect with the surrounding neighborhoods?
What are the potential benefts or impacts of locating Zoo parking facilities on the expansion
site?
The Saint Louis Zoo invites you to
join us as we explore options for the
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Project.
This project and the opportunity to
expand is a result of the Saint Louis
Zoo Association’s recent purchase of
a 13.5-acre site (formerly Forest Park
Hospital) at 6150 Oakland Avenue in
the City of St. Louis. The open house
is part of a six- to eight-month process
that represents the frst steps in
creating a vision and framework for the
Zoo expansion.
Please join us at an Open House on
Tuesday, December 11, 2012. See
the other side of this postcard for more
information.
Come hel p the Zoo pl an for growth
You’re Invited . . .
*
%
*
Pl ease jo i n us for an open house . . .
Saint Louis Zoo
Expansion Project
Open House
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
The Living World
SAINT LOUIS ZOO EXPANSION WEBSITE
The Saint Louis Zoo and its planning team are
hosting an open house to share information about
its expansion project and to get your input on how
the Zoo can transform the former Forest Park
Hospital site.
When: Tuesday, December 11, 2012, anytime
between 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m.
Where: The Living World at the North Entrance of
the Zoo, One Government Drive in Forest Park.
Parking: Free parking beginning at 3:30 p.m.
in the north parking lot next to The Living World.
Please inform parking attendants that you are
attending the public meeting.
For more information, please visit our website:
www.stlzoo.org/expansion.
We look forward to seeing you on
December 11th!
POSTCARD FROM OPEN HOUSE #1
When: Wednesday, May 1, 2013, anytime
between 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. Formal
presentations at 4:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.
Where: The Living World in the Saint Louis Zoo
(at the North Entrance, One Government Drive in
Forest Park)
Parking: Free parking beginning at 3:30 p.m.
in the north parking lot next to The Living World.
Please inform parking attendants that you are
attending the public meeting.
Website: www.stlzoo.org/expansion
The Saint Louis Zoo
invites you to provide
feedback on the expansion
framework plan for the
13.5-acre Forest Park
Hospital site.
POSTCARD FROM OPEN HOUSE #2
PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE OUTREACH PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE #1
COMMENT FORMS AND FEEDBACK
114 | APPENDIX
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
APPENDIX | 115
POST-IT NOTE ACTIVITY
The four main expansion areas for the Zoo – attract, enhance, connect and
support – were represented at the open house as station areas. After touring
these stations, attendees could share their thoughts and ideas on yellow
post-it notes, in addition to completing comment forms. There were about 25
to 30 comments per category, and they tended to refect the general trend of
ideas, suggestions and remarks summarized from the comment forms.
Science, research, education and conservation are important
functions of the Zoo, as much as the exhibits and visitor
experiences. If facilities for these services were located on the
new property, how might they ft in with the surrounding
neighborhoods?
Major Themes: Comments were generally positive with regard to
research/education/conservation facilities being located at the
expansion site – about 1/5 of the respondents provided general
remarks that support services and activities would be a good ft for the new
site.
• Support uses should include interactive and educational activities for the
public, such as exhibits and public tours (of the respondents who answered
this question, more than a third mentioned this)
• Research, education and conservation activities can help attract jobs and
new residents (Zoo employees) to the area, generate support for local
businesses and connect the public to Zoo conservation initiatives
• Physical structures should blend/ft with/complement the surrounding
neighborhoods
• Support functions create the potential for partnerships with local schools,
universities and/or medical institutions, including on-site classrooms and
courses
• Facilities should be sustainable and include green features, such as
renewable energy sources, green roof, solar panels and a composting site
What are the potential benefts or impacts of locating Zoo parking
facilities on the expansion site?
Major Themes: Concerns about increased parking and traffc throughout
nearby residential communities was mentioned in response to this question
and throughout the comment forms.
Potential positive impacts and benefts:
• Opportunity for expanding animal exhibits on the main/existing campus
• Decreased traffc congestion to the Zoo and in Forest Park
Potential negative impacts and concerns:
• Increased traffc to and through the neighborhood and reduced parking for
residents and business patrons
• Additional foot traffc, crime and littering in neighborhoods
What would make the connection between the two sites a unique and
memorable experience?
Major Themes: Respondents often named several features or
characteristics that would make the connection unique or memorable.
Others expressed certain functions of the connection.
• Green theme: build a land bridge, walkway or greenway; include green
space, parks, trails and landscaping; refect nature
• Experiential: connection should be an experience with attractions,
activities, exhibits and/or interactive features
• Design and structure: be iconic, striking, beautiful, artistic/grand
architecture
• Informative and educational: inform and educate visitors on Zoo-related
themes and/or include information regarding Forest Park and/or St. Louis
• Artistic: integrate art, sculpture art, animal art, and/or art that is refective of
the Zoo, Forest Park, and/or the City of St. Louis
• The “wow” factor: be new, dynamic, different, unique
How might the Zoo expansion site connect with the surrounding
neighborhoods?
Major Themes: Respondents suggested physical structures and facilities
that could connect to the neighborhood, as well as uses and programs
that could foster relationships with the nearby communities. Top themes
include the following:
• Green space/parks; streetscape improvements; landscaping and
gardens; art; and facilities that not only connect to the surrounding
neighborhoods, but add aesthetic value and beautify them
• Pedestrian/bike trails and bike racks; sidewalks, greenways and
walkways
• Opportunities and facilities that would help attract new businesses to
the area such as street-level spaces leased to retailers and restaurants
Other ideas, issues, or topics:
• Well-coordinated and adequate traffc fow, access, and parking;
minimal traffc through and parking in neighborhoods; parking
accommodations for Zoo visitors, but more than just parking facilities
at expansion site
• Signage, wayfnding and communication tools (e.g., phone apps,
neighborhood maps) that attract and direct visitors to Dogtown
restaurants and retailers and promote local business districts
What do you value most about the neighborhoods surrounding
the Zoo and its new property located at the site of the former
Forest Park Hospital? This includes the Dogtown area,
Clayton-Tamm, Cheltenham, Franz Park, Hi-Pointe and other
nearby communities.
• Sense of community – close-knit, family-oriented, small-town feel,
and charming, friendly, welcoming atmosphere
• Location – central location, proximity to Forest Park, and convenient
access to highways, recreational opportunities, amenities and other areas
of St. Louis
• Walkability – pedestrian and bike friendly streetscapes and neighborhoods
being able to walk to Forest Park and area businesses
• Stable business community and access to neighborhood businesses –
especially restaurants
• Historic value – community history, historical buildings/architecture
• Safe, low-crime neighborhoods
What, if anything, would you improve or change about the
neighborhoods surrounding the Zoo?
• Economic development – respondents would like to see new businesses
and restaurants established; vacant spaces leased; and overall revitalization
and vitality for the neighborhoods increased
• Pedestrian and cyclist accommodations and connectivity to Forest Park –
pedestrian trails, bike lanes, streetscape improvements, safer access and
more options for connecting to Forest Park
• Traffc fow improvements – better traffc management to reduce
congestion on and at major intersections (e.g., Hampton and Oakland), and
to reduce the quantity and speed of cars on residential streets
• Neighborhood beautifcation – more landscaping, cleaner streets, improved
signage and lighting, additions such as public art, fountains and benches
• Safety and security – more police patrols, speed enforcement, improved
pedestrian safety
• Parking – better parking arrangements, additional parking
• More green space, park improvements, and a dog park
When Forest Park Hospital (previously Deaconess Hospital) operated at
this site, what type of infuence or impact did it have on the surrounding
neighborhoods?
Positive Impacts:
• Contributed to the general economic development of the area (mostly due
to visitors and employees patronizing local businesses) and provided jobs
• Provided convenient access to health care and medical services (including
emergency room services and a pharmacy)
• Helped to support property values, create stability and serve as an
“anchor” in the neighborhood (before the hospital complex began to
decline)
Negative impacts:
• Maintained poorly, unattractive building, occupied too much space,
“wasted space” or an “eye sore”
• Added traffc through neighborhoods, particularly vehicular traffc
• Integrated poorly into the community’s fabric, did not feel like a part of the
neighborhood
• Increased noise and crime due to its presence
What attractions, activities, and/or exhibits could draw more
visitors, provide a unique experience, and/or help contribute
to the Zoo’s status as a world-class zoo?
Major Themes: Respondents favor the following attractions either
on the Zoo’s current property or on the newly acquired property
(attractions are listed from those most frequently mentioned to
those less-often cited)
• Aquarium
• Boutique or Zoo-themed hotel
• Updated and expanded Zoo exhibits
• Animal conservation research exhibit
• Panda or enhanced bear exhibit
• Zoo-themed restaurant, similar to Rainforest Café
• Elevated views of Zoo exhibits, including Ferris wheel, gondola or elevated
walks
• Sustainable ecological research, similar to EPCOT
• Tree top/canopy walk
What types of amenities do you think would enhance the new
site and/or beneft the surrounding neighborhoods?
Major Themes:
• Restaurant, Zoo-themed or roof top
• Parking, that is permeable, controlled, safe and secure
(and does not contribute to increased parking on residential
streets)
• Dog park
• Green space, streetscapes, trails
• Neighborhood services, such as pharmacy, cleaners, veterinarian
• Café or coffee shop
• Community or urban garden
• Boutique hotel
• Farmers’ market
• Traffc congestion mitigation
Please indicate your top three choices for the type of
connection between the new expansion site and the main Zoo
campus.
G
R
E
E
N
W
A
Y
/ T
R
A
IL
E
N
C
L
O
S
E
D
W
A
L
K
W
A
Y
L
A
N
D
B
R
ID
G
E
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
A
R
/ T
R
O
L
L
E
Y
T
R
A
M
G
O
N
D
O
L
A
BOULEVARD
PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE #1 FEEDBACK
The follow represents feedback received via submitted comment forms.
116 | APPENDIX
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
APPENDIX | 117
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
IO
N
S
R
E
S
ID
E
N
T
IA
L
/ H
O
U
S
IN
G
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
A
C
C
E
S
S
&
A
R
R
IV
A
L
E
X
P
E
R
IE
N
C
E
V
E
H
IC
U
L
A
R
C
IR
C
U
L
A
T
IO
N
&
P
A
R
K
IN
G
D
IS
T
R
IB
U
T
IO
N
P
U
B
L
IC
IM
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
E
X
H
IB
IT
E
X
P
A
N
S
IO
N
R
E
S
E
A
R
C
H
, C
O
N
S
E
R
V
A
T
IO
N
, &
E
D
U
C
A
T
IO
N
N
E
W
A
T
T
R
A
C
T
IO
N
O
P
E
R
A
T
IO
N
A
L
F
A
C
IL
IT
IE
S
R
E
T
A
IL
&
R
E
S
T
A
U
R
A
N
T
O
P
P
O
R
T
U
N
IT
IE
S
O
V
E
R
N
IG
H
T
E
X
P
E
R
IE
N
C
E
most important least important
QUESTION #1 - FRAMEWORK COMPONENTS
The frst question listed 11 key concepts of the framework plan and asked
respondents to rate each one according to how important they think it is to
Zoo expansion, from Not Important (1) to Very Important (5). The following
chart demonstrates how many responses each component received in the
fve categories of importance. The concepts and results are listed frommost
important to least important, according to their rating average.
The top three components rated most important were:
• Connections
• Overall access to the Zoo and arrival experience
• Vehicular circulation and parking distribution
Components most often rated least important included:
• Residential/Multi-family housing
• Overnight experience
• Retail and restaurant opportunities
PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE #2 -
COMMENT FORMS AND FEEDBACK
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
Open House #2 Comment Form
Welcome and thank you for taking the time to share your ideas, thoughts, and information with us.
1. The framework plan broadly outlines goals and guidelines for future expansion and development. The
plan presented today includes several key components. Please rate each component according to how
important you think it is to Zoo expansion by placing an “X” in the appropriate box.
Framework Plan Concepts 1
Not
important
2
Slightly
Important
3
Important
4
Fairly
Important
5
Very
Important
a. Exhibit expansion (Savannah, Children’s Zoo
expansion)
b. New attraction (Earth Experience)
c. Connections (Bridge, gondola, trails, multi-
modal transit)
d. Public improvements (Parks, plazas,
streetscapes)
e. Operational facilities (Administration,
employee center, distribution center)
f. Research, conservation, and educational
facilities
g. Overnight experience (Hotel or other)
h. Residential/Multi-family housing
i. Retail and restaurant opportunities
j. Vehicular circulation and parking distribution
(Road network)
k. Overall access to the Zoo and arrival
experience (Entry points, proximity to parking)
2. The chart below includes several statements about the framework plan. Please respond to each by
placing an “X” in the appropriate box.
Framework Plan Statements 1
Strongly
disagree
2
Disagree
3
Neutral/
Neither
Disagree
or Agree
4
Agree
5
Strongly
agree
6
Don’t
know
a. The framework plan incorporates
recommendations for enhancing the visitor
experience.
b. The framework plan identifes various ways for
integrating with the neighborhood and providing
neighborhood amenities.
c. The framework plan includes multiple options
for connections (between the main campus
and expansion site, to Forest Park, to local
neighborhoods).
Page 1 St. Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan Open House #2, May 1, 2013
Question 2 continued from page 1:
Framework Plan Statements 1
Strongly
disagree
2
Disagree
3
Neutral/
Neither
Disagree
or Agree
4
Agree
5
Strongly
agree
6
Don’t
know
d. The framework plan explores methods for
improving traffc fow and congestion.
e. The framework plan highlights opportunities
for improving animal conservation and research
initiatives.
f. The framework plan addresses the Zoo’s need
for additional space in order to improve operations.
g. The framework plan refects input from various
stakeholder groups.
h. The framework plan provides an excellent
foundation on which to base future strategic and
master planning initiatives.
3. If you could add or change one thing about the framework plan, what would it be and why?
4. Your zip code: ______________________
oResident in neighborhood near the Zoo
oInterested citizen
oZoo member
oZoo employee
oOwner or employee of a business near
the Zoo
oOther: _________________________
5. Which best describes you? Please select one.
Page 2
6. How did you hear about this open house? Please select all that apply.
oDirect mail postcard
oOpen house fyer via MarketVolt email
oNeighborhood association email
oMedia (Newspaper, radio, TV)
oFacebook post
oEmail announcement from Zoo personnel
oZoo employee Sharepoint announcement
oNeighborhood association meeting
oOther: ____________________________
St. Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan Open House #2, May 1, 2013
7. Did you attend the frst open house in December 2012
oYes oNo
8. Please respond to the following statements by placing an “X” in the appropriate box.
Public Involvement
Statements
1
Strongly
disagree
2
Disagree
3
Neutral/
Neither
disagree or
agree
4
Agree
5
Strongly
agree
a. Overall, I was satisfed with public
involvement opportunities throughout the
framework planning process.
b. I was adequately informed of the open
house meetings.
c. I would like to be informed of future
public involvement opportunities related to
Zoo expansion planning.
9. How would you like to be informed and/or involved in future planning initiatives? Please choose your
top three preferences.
oWebsite updates
oEmail announcements
oOnline surveys
oFocus groups
oOpen house meetings
oNeighborhood association presentations
oNeighborhood association meeting
oOther: ______________________________
Page 3 St. Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan Open House #2, May 1, 2013
Thank you for your input. Please turn in your form to a
project team member or comment form box.
118 | APPENDIX
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
APPENDIX | 119
QUESTION #3 - FRAMEWORK PLAN ADDITIONS
The third question of the form asked, “If you could add or change one thing
about the framework plan, what would it be and why?” Out of 73 responses,
people most often remarked on three topics – vehicular circulation, parking
distribution and connections.
Some comments included:
Vehicular circulation and parking distribution:
• Providing greater detail on traffc circulation and management plans
• Minimizing and mitigating adverse traffc impacts on Dogtown
• Addressing possible road closures and vehicle entry points
• Providing underground parking; minimizing surface lots; designating
employee parking (possibly the existing garage); adding parking to the
north lot for large group drop off
Connections:
• Integrating multi-modal options, including a connection to MetroLink
• Building facilities that encourage cycling and walking
• Developing accommodations for the elderly, visitors with disabilities,
families with small children and strollers
• Suggesting connection types such as a gondola, monorail, moving
sidewalk, footbridge, walkway or land bridge
Additional topics that were mentioned include the following:
• Preserving the historic character and value of the Dogtown neighborhood;
the Zoo expansion should not be in stark contrast to existing buildings
• Integrating with the neighborhoods in a way that supports and improves
them
• Providing opportunities for existing local businesses to expand on Zoo
property and/or planning for new businesses that will not compete with
existing retail/restaurant operations
• Incorporating community enhancements and/or employee services, such
as a dog park, community garden, day care center and farmer’s market
• Advocating for animal conservation, exhibit expansion and research and
education
• Questioning the need or value of a hotel and/or residential housing
• Expressing both preferences for, or skepticism to, the gondola
• Suggesting new attractions or exhibits (aquarium, American prairie, farm
animals)
• Indicating general support and enthusiasm for the Zoo, its expansion, and
the framework plan
QUESTION #2 - FRAMEWORK PLAN STATEMENTS
The second question instructed respondents to indicate, on a fve-point
scale, the degree to which they agreed or disagreed with eight statements
about the framework plan. The weighted average results are displayed in
the chart below.
The majority of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed with each
statement. The statement that received the most responses in the categories
of “Strongly Disagree” or “Disagree” was The framework plan explores
methods for improving traffc fow and congestion.
E
N
H
A
N
C
E
D
V
IS
IT
O
R
E
X
P
E
R
IE
N
C
E
A
D
D
R
E
S
S
E
S
T
H
E
Z
O
O
’S
N
E
E
D
S
F
O
R
S
P
A
C
E

M
U
L
T
IP
L
E
O
P
T
IO
N
S
F
O
R
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
IO
N
S
F
O
U
N
D
A
T
IO
N
F
O
R
F
U
T
U
R
E
P
L
A
N
N
IN
G
N
E
IG
H
B
O
R
H
O
O
D
IN
T
E
G
R
A
T
IO
N
S
T
A
K
E
H
O
L
D
E
R
G
R
O
U
P
IN
V
O
L
V
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
S
E
R
V
A
T
IO
N
&
R
E
S
E
A
R
C
H
IN
IT
IA
T
IV
E
S
IM
P
R
O
V
E
D
T
R
A
F
F
IC
&
C
O
N
G
E
S
T
IO
N
agree disagree
PLAN EVOLUTION SKETCHES
120 | APPENDIX
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
APPENDIX | 121
Cincinnati Zoo and Botanical Garden – Cincinnati, OH
The Cincinnati Zoo and Botanical Garden recently opened a new $19.6
million entrance, which was designed in an effort to make the zoo more
welcoming to visitors. With increased attendance the zoo also needed a
better parking solution and more exhibit space so it purchased a 12-acre
urban parcel outside of its boundaries to build a new 1,000-car parking
lot. With the relocation of the parking area, 11 new acres of green space
opened up to make room for the expansion of the zoo’s Africa exhibit. The
ME Company designed a 25,000-square-foot segmental retaining wall
which raised the site and created enough space to expand the entry plaza. A
pedestrian bridge was also designed to usher visitors from the new parking
lot, across a busy street and into the zoo. Construction of the new parking
area has already helped increase zoo attendance and provided space for
future facilities and exhibits.
Columbus Zoo and Aquarium – Columbus, OH
The Columbus Zoo and Aquarium is currently pursuing plans to build an
“animal adventure” attraction in Downtown Columbus which would either be
a stand-alone attraction or become part of the redevelopment plan for Scioto
Peninsula, a 56-acre site owned by the city and county. In 2010 the city
released its strategic plan for the downtown area, which suggested science
and nature attractions be incorporated into the downtown landscape. A 10-
year Strategic Land Use Plan for the Scioto Peninsula will be released soon
and will provide more details about the project, including the location for
the zoo’s new expansion. Financing for the project will most likely involve
private-public partnerships. The new downtown facility will provide a way for
the zoo to connect and engage with more people.
Philadelphia Zoo – Philadelphia, PA
The Philadelphia Zoo is one of America’s frst zoos, and it is also among
the smallest at 42 acres. Because the zoo can’t expand outwardly, in 2011
it developed a more creative use of space—by installing overhead trails and
by relocating the children’s zoo to a more centrally located site—to grow,
both literally and fguratively. The enclosed trails are made of fexible steel
mesh and provide a suspended path that wind for 700 feet through the zoo’s
treetops, allowing primates and other species to roam far from their indoor
habitats. The trails and KidZooUare the most dramatic aspects of an ongoing
master plan priced at roughly $106 million—which includes previous projects
like Big Cat Falls in 2006—that aims to vault America’s frst zoo into the
21st century. At $32 million, KidZooU is the most expensive improvement.
The development of the animal trail network continued with the opening of a
200-foot section for orangutans, and that will expand to connect to the gorilla
habitat, while another path is slated for big cats. By 2015, the zoo promises
a ground-based trail for animals like hippos, rhinos, giraffes and zebras.
ZOO EXPANSION PRECEDENTS
As the planet’s animal species are becoming more threatened by diminishing
habitat, poaching and pollution, the role of the nation’s zoos is continuously
expanding. The conservation of animals and their habitats through animal
management, research, recreation, and educational programs has become
a part of the mission of most zoos. Many of the urban zoos in the United
States are limited in their ability to expand this mission because of a restricted
physical plant. These zoos may be constrained fromexpanding by a number
of issues including government restrictions, the cost and availability of land,
community opposition or physical barriers. The Saint Louis Zoo’s Framework
Plan has examined a number of creative ideas that zoos have used to expand
their missions and boundaries both internally and externally. As one of only
three free major zoos in the country, the Saint Louis Zoo cannot depend on
general admission fees to fnance major expansion. The Zoo has made a
strategic acquisition of the former hospital site and is planning to continue to
distinguish itself as a world class facility. The following examples of existing
zoo expansion precedents were examined as a part of the framework
planning process.
Henry Doorly Zoo – Omaha, NE
Released in 2010, Omaha’s Henry Doorly Zoo’s Master Plan details an
ambitious 10-20 year improvement effort that focuses on underdeveloped
areas of the Zoo’s 162-acre campus as well as both older exhibit areas
and existing spaces in need of redevelopment. With the acquisition of the
Rosenblatt Stadium site, once a College World Series and Omaha Royals
minor league baseball stadium, the zoo will be able to expand its parking
options and enhance its visitor arrival experience with a new entry complex.
The plan includes the demolition of the Stadium for $2.5 million and $2
million to build 3,000 parking spaces in its place; $13.5 million is being
spent to create the new entry. Other key initiatives include a 30-acre African
grasslands exhibit (Phase 1 - $34 million, Phase 2 - $23 million), an exhibit
featuring animals from the South American Andean Mountain range ($14
million) and another exhibit showcasing animals from the Asian forests and
upper highlands ($18 million). These three exhibit zones will bring state-of-
the-art outdoor immersive experiences to the zoo. Many of these projects
are already underway with the stadium being demolished piece by piece
over a six-month period to lessen the impact to zoo operations.
Zoo Miami – Miami-Dade County, FL
In 2002, Miami-Dade County started the groundwork to do something new
with the Miami Zoo, which included rezoning the area and commissioning
a 2002 Master Plan. In 2009 the county issued a request for proposals for
the development of vacant land that runs along the sides of the zoo’s main
entrance, that would include a water park, hotel and family entertainment
center. They only received two responses, neither of which county offcials
felt would be possible. Now with zoo attendance at an all-time high, another
request for proposals has been issued that is less restrictive and includes
goals to construct a water-oriented resort and entertainment destination that
is integrated with the zoo. The proposal includes approximately 120 acres
of zoo property and parking lots and a 39-acre parcel that was once part
of the adjacent U.S. Coast Guard base. There is potential to purchase the
entire Coast Guard property which includes 250 acres of vacant land, but
the developer will need to provide a plan to acquire this property as part of
the proposal. Another major element of the proposal is the requirement for
private fnancing from one or more developers.
SAINT LOUIS ZOO AND EXPANSION SITE
122 | APPENDIX
Saint Louis Zoo Expansion Framework Plan
APPENDIX | 123
The analysis shows that bundling tickets to the major attraction and parking
could be an advantageous approach for the Zoo. The most fnancially
benefcial pricing strategy, as shown by the analysis, is to price parking
below the $15 that the Zoo has been charging, but charge a higher price of
admission for the major attraction. As demonstrated in the third scenario,
if the Zoo can sell a $40 package for 3 tickets to the attraction and parking
for 1 car to 10% of Zoo patrons, the revenue will cover all costs associated
with parking and can offset $1 million of annual operating costs for the major
attraction and pedestrian bridge. This does not take into account additional
revenue that can be generated from selling unbundled tickets to the major
attraction and parking; unbundled tickets could likely be sold at a premium
over the price used in the bundles.
The Zoo’s tax-exempt status needs to be considered when selecting an
approach.
FINANCING STRATEGIES
The Zoo can leverage pricing strategies, private development partnerships,
public fnancing strategies and fund-raising campaigns to cover funding gaps
for the market-based and Zoo-oriented uses.
The three most challenging elements of the framework plan, from a fnancial
feasibility standpoint, are the pedestrian bridge, major attraction and parking,
all of which are extremely capital-intensive. In addition, implementation of the
residential and offce components, in the short term, will likely not produce
a positive return based on current market conditions. In order to cover the
cost of expanding to the new site, including relocating the parking and
creating the pedestrian bridge, the Zoo should leverage an array of fnancing
strategies to ensure success. In weighing these opportunities, the Zoo will
need to consider a range of factors, such as timeframe, site control, revenue
potential, risk and impact on its tax status.
A careful pricing strategy of bundling tickets to the major attraction and
parking could be an advantageous approach for the Zoo to generate suffcient
incremental revenue to cover the cost of relocating the parking. The most
fnancially benefcial pricing strategy is to price parking below the $15 that
the Zoo has been charging, but to charge a higher price of admission for the
major attraction. Other uses on the site, such as the hotel and potential offce
space, might produce some parking synergies and revenue opportunities.
The Zoo currently generates approximately $2.3 million in parking revenue.
The pricing strategy is predicated upon the idea that the Zoo must generate
enough incremental parking revenue above this $2.3 million to cover both
construction and operations costs for the new parking strategy. The goal
of the analysis is to fnd the best price point and bundle both a parking fee
and major attraction fee into a single revenue source to generate as much
additional revenue as possible. This could offset the parking construction
and operating costs and possibly offset the operating costs of the major
attraction and the pedestrian bridge.
Since the Zoo is free of admission charges, and since the St. Louis market
is very sensitive to parking costs, the analysis examines the possibility to
create “bundles” that group the cost of parking and the attraction into one
item. The analysis lays out four bundles, each of which represents a different
approach to pricing parking and the major attraction.
Each of the four bundles includes one parking pass and three tickets to the
major attraction. This is based on the average party size for the Zoo, which
is 3.2 visitors. As the bundles increase in price, the estimated percentage
of visitors willing to purchase them decreases. The four bundles are as
follows:
• Bundle 1 - $15: $15 parking, free admission (3 tickets); 15% capture
• Bundle 2 - $30: $15 parking, $5 admission (3 tickets); 12% capture
• Bundle 3 - $40: $10 parking, $10 admission (3 tickets); 10% capture
• Bundle 4 - $45: Free parking, $15 admission (3 tickets); 7.5% capture
FIGURE 19: RESIDENTIAL DEMAND ANALYSIS
Metric Assumption
Program
Parking spaces 2,414
Parking spaces for Zoo patrons 1,772
Construction Assumptions
Parking construction costs
$32.2 million (midpoint cost of
the 2 parking scenarios)
Amortization terms 20 years, 7%
Amortized annual costs $3.0 million
Operating and Revenue Assumptions
Annual Zoo visitors 3.5 million
Visitors/party 3.2
Attraction tickets/bundle 3
Bundle capture base 15%
Parking operating expenses 25%
Figure 19: Pricing Strategy Assumptions
Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., SWT Design, Saint Louis Zoo Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., SWT Design, Saint Louis Zoo
There are a number of key assumptions that underpin the analysis in Figure
19. The analysis conservatively assumes that the Zoo must fnance the
entire cost of parking construction but will only use 1,772 of the 2,414 total
spaces as the balance are dedicated to market-based uses and employee
parking. The 15% base capture for the least expensive bundle scenario is
based on the portion of visitors who reported that they were “very likely” to
park in a new parking lot or garage assuming the parking fee is less than
the amount charged to park in the existing lots . The revenue generated by
the parking must frst cover the $2.3 million currently generated annually by
parking and produce surplus revenue to cover construction and operations
of the new parking plan.
The four scenarios summarized in Figure 20 showjust a subset of the different
pricing strategies that the Zoo could implement. While not exhaustive, this
illustrative analysis helps to establish a framework for pricing.
FIGURE 20: SUMMARY PARKING PRICING SCENARIOS ASSUMPTIONS AND
ANALYSIS
Figure 20: Summary Parking Pricing Scenarios Assumptions and Analysis

Bundle 1 Bundle 2 Bundle 3 Bundle 4
Capture 15% 12% 10% 7.5%
Parking price $15 $15/car $10/car $0/car
Parking revenue $2.5M $2.0M $1.1M $0.0M
Attraction price $0 $15/car $30/car $45/car
Attraction revenue $0 $2.0M $3.3M $3.7M
Total bundle price $15 $30 $40 $45
Total P&L Impact Analysis
Total bundle revenue $2.5M $4.0M $4.4M $3.7M
Operating expenses ($0.6M) ($0.6M) ($0.4M) ($0.0M)
Capital expenses ($3.0M) ($3.0M) ($3.0M) ($3.0M)
Net revenue ($1.1M) $0.4M $1.0M $0.7M
Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., SWT Design, Saint Louis Zoo
Source: HR&A Advisors, Inc., SWT Design, Saint Louis Zoo
FUNDRAISING
The Zoo’s impressive fundraising abilities should be leveraged to help fund
the gap where pricing, public fnancing and development strategies cannot
be implemented. This will be particularly useful for Zoo-oriented components,
such as for covering capital costs for the major attraction and gondola.
The Zoo has a history of a broad and loyal base of supporters in the St.
Louis community. The $120 million The Living Promise Campaign, now
nearing completion, is a testament to this fact. As the Zoo considers the
capital investment that will be necessary to expand to the new site, the Zoo’s
development staff must consider the timing and scale of this next round
of major fundraising. The Zoo’s donor base is likely to experience some
donor fatigue after the current campaign, so if the Zoo wishes to raise a
large portion of the capital from this base, it may delay the timeframe for
expansion. However, if the Zoo wants to tap this base for smaller, discreet
improvements, it may be able to fund these improvements fromcontributions
on a shorter timeframe.
In addition to the Zoo’s traditional donor base, there is the potential to secure
a single or a small set of large donations from major individual benefactors.
While it is diffcult to anticipate when such a donation may become available,
the Zoo can assume that the more visionary the expansion approach to the
expansion, the more likely a donor will appear.
124 | APPENDIX
S a i n t L o u i s Z o o
FRAMEWORK PLAN

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.