New center design, name, costs to be reviewed

By Grace Lovins

During the Monday, April 21, Birmingham City Commission meeting, commissioners continued their review of a schematic design for the new community and senior center, considering updated building designs and setting the stage for future discussions on the facility’s official name and long-term cost.

The revised designs for the project, called Options 1D.1 and 1E.1, were presented by Jim Stock, design director of Neumann/Smith Architecture. Both designs now feature reduced building footprints and revised layouts with different placements of the gym. Per feedback from the ad hoc senior/recreation center committee (SCC), Option 1D.1 was the favored design.

Option 1D.1 shows both the gym and pool at grade, a difference from the previous designs that sunk the building into the ground to shorten the building’s visible height. According to Stock, the option to sink the building into the ground would increase the cost of the overall project significantly. The design also proposes a four-lane pool, though several SCC members and commissioners said they support adding a fifth lane to meet the standards for competitive swimming.

Stock explained that the new design includes 131 on-site parking spaces and avoids expanding into St. James Park for additional spaces, which helps to reduce the overall expense. Key features for Next and the YMCA, both of which will occupy the building at 400 E. Lincoln, were still included in the design, such as the wellness rooms, walking track and multi-purpose rooms, but representatives from both organizations explained that the reduced square footage would make it difficult for them to operate.

Concerns over increased costs of the center project have dominated some discussions in recent weeks against the background of potential rising supply chain costs with recently imposed tariffs by the Trump administration.

Cris Braun, executive director of Next, and Parrish Underwood, president and CEO of the YMCA of Metropolitan Detroit, said they are pleased to see improvements in the design from the prior SCC meeting, but there still needs to be some work to ensure that each organization has the space they need to maintain their programming.

Overall, the commission said they were happy to see the progress being made and that there is consensus that they like the design of Option 1D.1. No formal motion was made for this item but the commission plans to revisit the design once they receive cost estimates.

In a separate discussion under items proposed for future agenda, commissioners also considered if they wanted to bring the center’s name and long-term costs to a future meeting as a formal agenda item. Commissioner Brad Host advocated for both items to be discussed fully.

The commission voted 7-0 to bring the discussion of project costs to date as a full agenda but voted 6-1 to move discussion of the center’s name to a full agenda item. 
 Anthony Long voted against bringing discussions on the name as a full agenda item, saying that the commission has come “full circle” since Host had previously requested the change to have the building called a community center.

The Community House in Birmingham has raised the issue of the name of the new city center because of potential infringement on its name and the likely confusion in the local area if the word “community” were part of the new Birmingham center’s name.