Cubberley master plan advances: phased design keeps theater and pavilion, adds recreation center, makerspace and public plaza

City staff presented a refined, phased master plan for Cubberley on Sept. 23 that preserves landmark buildings (the pavilion, the theater and the “I” building), creates a new Recreation and Wellness Center and stages additional arts, community services and outdoor amenities across three phases.

Amanda Demel, assistant director for community services, and consultant teams explained the campus‑wide vision and a phasing strategy intended to preserve continuity of services while large‑scale renovation and new construction proceeds. “With a campus of this size, it will be very important for us to phase the master plan for a variety of reasons,” Demel said, noting phasing protects ongoing programs and limits disruption.

What’s in phase 1

Phase 1 — the portion the city is prioritizing for initial funding and potential ballot consideration — would demolish a portion of the campus to make room for a new two‑story Recreation and Wellness Center with four multipurpose courts (configured for basketball/volleyball), fitness and wellness rooms, lockers and administrative space. The existing tennis courts would be rebuilt as an elevated deck above new surface parking. The plan keeps and renovates the pavilion, theater and I Building so those venues remain available during construction.

Phase 1 also anticipates an outdoor pool and campus promenade that links program areas. Staff said the design intentionally keeps program adjacency in mind so performing arts, visual arts and recreation spaces sit in complementary locations.

Phases 2–3: arts, makerspace, community hub

Phase 2 focuses on visual arts and technology: maker spaces, wood and metal workshops, studios and galleries. Phase 3 would add a community cafe, flexible rental spaces for classes and events, a partially buried parking structure with uses above it, an amphitheater and expanded native landscaping with “learning gardens” and pollinator habitat. Staff emphasized the flexibility of the design to adapt to changing program needs years from now.

Community input and concerns

About 150 community members attended the Sept. 17 community meeting. The city reported broad support for the phased approach and for preserving the pavilion and theater, and a common request for a campus cafe, improved circulation and outdoor performance space. Attendees also raised concerns about (a) how tenants are relocated during each phase of construction, (b) overall project cost and how phases will be funded, and (c) parking and pedestrian/bicycle circulation. Several tenant organizations requested more detail about relocation plans and how the city will maintain programming during construction.

Staff response and next steps

Staff said they will return to the commission in November with refined plans and will present the final master plan to City Council on Dec. 8. The project timeline includes additional architectural review, CEQA work and multiple public polls: staff plans to release several community polls during fall 2025–spring 2026 to gauge funding appetite and priorities before any bond measure would appear on the November 2026 ballot.

Design considerations raised by commissioners

Commissioners suggested stronger emphasis on (1) clear definitions for outdoor “green” space versus paved or rooftop recreational areas; (2) transit and protected bike‑lane connections at the site’s edges; (3) tree planting and how above‑grade planters will be engineered; (4) sound and vibration control between adjacent studio spaces; and (5) program adjacency and the cost/market implications for a swimming pool versus nearby private pools. Staff said they will incorporate those design clarifications and provide more detailed relocation plans and a refined phasing/procurement timeline.

What this means for the ballot and funding

Staff is planning multiple polls to collect voter priorities; the project team told the commission that phase 1 is designed to stand alone as a meaningful improvement if a single ballot measure funds only part of the campus. Final decisions on ballot placement and project funding will proceed after the commission and city council reviews and the CEQA process.