Politics & Government

Priorities for Roxbury Park Community Center Discussed at Latest Liaison Committee Session

In an effort to scale down the project, city staff reviewed the facility's proposed features.

The future of the new remains undecided as city representatives and residents continue to weigh the options of either refurbishing the existing facility or tearing it down to be rebuilt.

“We didn’t define anything in terms of what we’re going to do yet because we really don’t know,” Vice Mayor William Brien said at Wednesday’s City Council/Recreation and Parks Liaison Committee meeting. “There are going to be a lot of break points where we will go back to the council and get input from them because it’s not our job here to design the project. It’s our job to continue to move it forward and get input from stakeholders as well as input from the council members.”

Brien is a member of the liaison committee along with Councilman Julian Gold and Recreation and Parks commissioners Alan Block and Simone Friedman. The city has been working on plans for the new community center since 2006. About 20 residents attended Wednesday’s meeting as city staff discussed options for scaling down the project, which has an approved budget of $14.7 million.

Find out what's happening in Beverly Hillswith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Gold reminded attendees that after many years of planning, the project needed to move forward.

“There’s been an awful lot of energy around this project now for a while,” he said. “The time is now to move ahead and that’s the purpose of these meetings.”

Find out what's happening in Beverly Hillswith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Assistant Director of Community Services Nancy Hunt-Coffey went over the proposals for the new community center based on feedback from the previous liaison committee session held Feb. 14.

“What we tried to do is define what we felt was a staff priority, what we felt was a priority of the public, and then try to make a recommendation on whether to keep the space or replace the space, whether the space could be reduced, or whether it could be removed,” Hunt-Coffey said.

Features of the latest proposal that were considered to be high priorities for both staff and residents include but are not limited to:

  • Senior activity room that can accommodate 150 people for programs and entertainment
  • Small meeting rooms for senior and youth programs
  • Fitness room for exercise classes such as stretch and tone, Zumba, Pilates and yoga
  • Library room
  • Lobby
  • Small kitchen
  • Senior services office
  • Gymnasium/multipurpose room
  • Multiple activity rooms for meetings, city programs
  • Computer/study/training lab
  • Updated restrooms with improved handicapped access
  • Café plaza with outdoor seating area

Commissioner Friedman reiterated her support for a gymnasium at the facility.

“I know there is a lot of opposition to that, but I would like to see the smallest possible gymnasium still included in this plan,” she said. “I cannot see that we would ever have a surplus of gymnasiums in the city because we are so short on gyms.”

Friedman added that a gymnasium “would give us a lot more options to use that space,” which would help to downsize the project by designating areas for multiple uses.

“Both in terms of the use of space and in terms of the projected use of space, we really have to design [the community center] to be flexible,” Gold said.

Those in attendance at the meeting voiced their concerns with regards to the project, including whether the facility would be one story or two, if there would be enough handicapped access throughout the building, how much parking would be available and how large of a footprint the facility would make.

Resident Marilyn Gallup spoke out in support of keeping a courtyard at the new center, noting that mothers with children attending community classes at the facility would gather there. Gallup also said that many seniors play cards in the outdoor space.

“Not everybody wants to be inside,” she said. “I think that open courtyard is very valuable.”

A priority that was considered high for staff and residents was using the community center as an emergency shelter, but the committee distanced itself from that prospect. Though the facility is considered one of Beverly Hills primary shelters, in the event of a disaster it can only house 65 residents who have been displaced from their homes. To be used as an emergency shelter going forward, the facility would need more space to take in a larger number of people and would also require a backup generator. Hunt-Coffey said the cost of a backup generator would be in the six-figure range.

Though city staff made many recommendations at the meeting, Brien was sure to remind those in attendance that no plans have been finalized for the facility and that everything discussed is still a part of the planning stages.

“Anything that you’re hearing today doesn’t mean that this is going to be the final design project that we’re going to recommend going forward,” he said. “Nothing is being decided today. Nothing is going forward, but you got to start somewhere.”

What do you want to be included in the new community center? Should it be renovated or rebuilt? Let us know in the comments section below. 

Be sure to follow Beverly Hills Patch on Twitter and "Like" us on Facebook.


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here