At last night’s meeting of the Regent Square Civic Association, the Parks Conservancy presented ideas for one of thirteen proposed outdoor learning sites in Frick Park. About 130 people attended the meeting, and more than 30 graciously spoke or asked questions. We were so pleased to have such a great turnout and hear such respectful, thoughtful comments about the project.
The vision for the outdoor learning sites was crafted several years ago as part of the Regional Parks Master Plan update. Thirteen sites were identified by a team of landscape architects as subtle ways for families to learn from the existing landscape. Frick Park’s incredible ecological diversity offers a variety of landscapes, from forest to meadow to wetland to edges where woods give way to an urban area. Each of these sites, as envisioned, would offer a subtle enhancement to educate children about these natural features. The outdoor learning spaces are envisioned as part of the eventual rebuilding of the Environmental Center.
Partial funding for the first of these proposed spaces was provided by the Ambrusko Trust, which requested that the Parks Conservancy explore the Turtle Park site as a possible location. The other 12 spaces will be created as funding becomes available. At this time, none of the spaces has even a preliminary design, including the treehouse concept discussed at the meeting.
Some of the topics discussed last night included concerns about the existing World War II Memorial site, integration of outdoor learning spaces and the educational opportunities for children, environmental impact issues, encroachment into the neighborhood via traffic and parking, preservation of the existing parks and more. The general consensus was support for the learning spaces in Frick Park but concern about parking and safety in the neighborhood, specifically the area surrounding Turtle Park.
The Parks Conservancy’s slideshow is below.
The goal of the meeting was to provide additional information to the community about the proposed learning spaces. As intended, no decisions were made at the meeting. Instead, the Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy will continue to work with the city and will use the feedback to continue the planning and public engagement process. Please continue to check the Parks Conservancy and Regent Square Civic Association websites for continuing updates.
EDITED TO ADD: For a transcript of the meeting’s comments, click here.
We’d love to hear YOUR questions and comments about this project. Please submit them via blog comment (or using our contact form) by June 17, and we’ll post all the answers here on June 21.
You can also read Amy Ambrusko’s recap of the meeting here.
I believe, in paragraph # 3, it should read “Partial funding …. has been provided by the Ambrusko Trust.” Additional funding is needed to complete this project.
Also, at the end of paragraph # 4, I believe it would be more accurate if it said “The general consensus was support for the learning spaces — especially the Treehouse — in Frick Park, but concern about parking and safety was expressed if the Treehouse is placed in “Turtle Park.”
Thanks for an excellent presentation.
Good points, Lee. Thank you.
I appreciate the effort that was made to clarify the PPC’s vision for Frick Park, and especially the proposed Turtle Park Project. It was stated at the meeting that at this time the PPC has not determined the designation site for the “Treehouse” project. I am confident that the concerns expressed at the meeting will be taken into consideration by the PPC when deciding on the best place to share The Ambrusco family’s vision with the residents of the City of Pittsburgh and beyond. Thank you to Meg Cheever, Marijke Hecht and Fred Bonci for conducting an informative meeting. I felt the views on both sides of the issue were shown due respect and that those who chose to express their concerns were passionate in their beliefs. It is wonderful to live in a city where the people feel so connected to their surroundings.
I attended the entire meeting. In my estimation, there is no way that the speakers’ comments can be interpreted as providing a “general consensus” in favor of the so-called “learning spaces”. A couple of speakers went so far as to urge no “man made” development in the park. Others expressed sharp skepticism about the process used to choose the 13 learning space sites. Furthermore, a PPC representative repeatedly emphasized that the proposed learning space sites are “just ideas”.
This strikes me as another instance of a “done deal” being presented to the public just so the deal doers can check-off the “public input” box, claim an open process, declare victory, and proceed full steam ahead.
If you would please, provide online the raw, unedited transcript of all the comments offered at the meeting. The two people who typed them up worked very hard to gather as much information as possible. Sharing all of that information will be a great benefit to the general public’s understanding of the issues at hand, and will be a much-needed first step in ensuring full transparency of the approval process.
In addition, the Regional Parks Master Plan available on the City of Pittsburgh website makes no mention of learning sites in Frick Park. Please direct us to the draft of the plan that does include the learning sites “vision”. As well, please provide a list of names of the landscape architects and any other people who “crafted” the learning sites vision. While this matter was touched upon at the public meeting, a full explanation of the learning sites selection process, and those accountable for that process, was not provided.
Thanks very much for a great meeting, and for all of PPC’s wonderful improvements to the city’s parks.
Thanks for the comment, Bill (and for attending). We’ve edited the post to add a PDF of the meeting comments. Please excuse our typos–neither of us is a trained stenographer!
The Regional Parks Master Plan was drafted in 2000, before the Environmental Center had burned. We are currently in the process of drafting a new plan, which Fred Bonci alluded to at the meeting, and the update will address the proposed learning sites. We’ll have an online and a phone feedback tool for people to offer comment and help shape the plan, and representatives from LaQuatra Bonci will be leading our July Walks in the Woods and discussing potential plans for each park. Those who are interested in talking more with the planning team about the learning sites can attend the Frick Park walk on July 21. (We’re still working out the main topics for these walks, and we’ll post info about them here, the website, and elsewhere once we have that info!)
Preliminary location scouting for the learning sites was explored by a team from LaQuatra Bonci Associates, Heritage Landscapes, the City, and the Parks Conservancy.
Hope that clarifies some things!
Quite so. This was the first that the public has heard about the 13 proposed learning stations, and no details beyond proposed locations were provided. So how could anyone say yea or nay about the learning stations with such scant information on which to base a decision?
Thanks very much for the update/clarifications pittsburghparks, especially in acknowledging that the learning stations are not part of the current Regional Parks Master Plan.
At the risk of slicing things too thin, or pressing my luck, I’m still wondering who, exactly, expressed a need or desire for these learning stations. It’s unlikely that the general public and park users were clamoring for them. Was it someone at the Environmental Charter School? What it someone at PPC? Was it someone in city government? Who (names please) got this ball rolling and pushed it so far along that the word is now going out from PPC that there is “general consensus” supporting the placement of 13 “learning stations” throughout Frick Park?
Thanks again and looking forward to the July 21 walk.
Bill, we appreciate your continuing to raise important questions about the learning sites. We’re getting lots of comments here and through other avenues, so we’ve decided to address them all in a thorough response on June 21 that we’ll publish here on the blog. This way we can give visibility to your comments as well as everyone else’s. It will also provide a comprehensive picture of our ideas about the learning sites, which are truly just ideas at this point.
Thanks for pointing me to the transcipt of the dialog from the meeting. This transcript appears to be edited. Is there a complete version also available?
At the bottom of page 3 there are a series of questions that were answered at the meeting. Those answers are missing.
Unfortunately, that’s the most complete version of the transcript we have. As one of the two gals up there typing, I can assure you we did the best we could! But no, that has not been edited in any way, so the gaps are just a result of us missing some things at the meeting.
The answers on page 3 weren’t recorded at the meeting but we can address them in our June 21 FAQ post.
thans for great sharing
Its a good point anyway.Building tree house with your family is such a great family bonding.Reading books up on the tree house is an awesome experience.