At the heart of the meeting’s discussions was the debate over the community center’s primary function and design. The council weighed two design options: an event-centric space and a multipurpose facility. The event-centric option would replace a previous facility demolished for a fire station, featuring a substantial event space accommodating up to 400 people across 15,000 square feet, with smaller meeting rooms and support areas. In contrast, the multipurpose design spanned 18,000 square feet, including a gymnasium-like space with a walking track, addressing community desires for fitness facilities.

A recurrent theme was the community’s preference for a facility that serves as a gathering place rather than primarily an athletic venue. Council members discussed the balance between offering event space and active areas, with one member noting the importance of replacing the previous event space while addressing the community’s request for an indoor walking track, particularly during winter.

Questions arose about storage space, commercial kitchen size, and meeting room flexibility. The architectural team was tasked with further refining the designs based on council feedback, with a focus on aligning the project with community needs and expectations.

The meeting also touched on the proposed inclusion of a walking track, with some council members skeptical of its feasibility given limited space. Traditional walking tracks typically require more space, and the proposed design would necessitate approximately 30 laps to equal a mile, a less than ideal solution for users. The council considered the potential for a larger design to accommodate wellness components and future expansion.

A pre-function entry was proposed to enhance community interaction before events, offering amenities like restrooms and display areas. The importance of this space was likened to church or school commons, enabling gatherings prior to events. Concerns were raised about the previous community center’s demolition without a clear replacement plan.

The council faced a fundamental decision about the center’s role in the community. Members debated whether the facility should compete with private venues for rentals or focus on serving community functions. Some expressed reluctance to position the city as a competitor against local businesses. The consensus leaned towards ensuring that rental opportunities do not overshadow the center’s primary purpose of serving local needs.

The meeting also addressed the design’s adaptability for various events, emphasizing the need for a flexible space that accommodates different community groups. Discussions included potential storage solutions for regular facility users and the necessity of preparing the center for future needs.

Cost estimates for the project were presented, indicating construction costs of $3.75 to $4.25 per square foot, with overall project costs ranging from $7.5 million to $9.5 million. The council considered factors affecting costs, such as building construction type and finishes, alongside significant site development expenses due to the greenfield location.

The architectural firm discussed construction methods, including conventional versus pre-engineered approaches, with considerations for future expansion. Ensuring the structure’s design allowed for growth in one direction was deemed important should future needs arise.

Further into the meeting, the council discussed the need for a second public meeting to gather community feedback on the preliminary designs. The goal is to balance event space with activity areas to meet varied community needs. Participants emphasized obtaining community input to align the project with expectations, expressing a desire to get the designs right.