Belmont revives Barrett Community Center master-plan refresh; options include pool, gym, resiliency features

Group 4 Architects and Belmont Parks and Recreation staff presented an updated master-plan refresh for the Barrett Community Center at the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting on July 16, proposing a range of building options and renewed public engagement ahead of design and cost-estimating work.

Jonathan Hartman, principal at Group 4 Architects, told commissioners the firm is updating the 2019 conceptual plan to reflect recent community input, current construction costs and changing recreation trends. “We’re not starting over from 2019,” Hartman said. “We’re building upon that, and working through those design and architectural updates.”

What the refresh covers: Group 4 outlined a “menu” of building permutations: a base community‑center building (roughly a 20,000‑square‑foot small center), a 31,000‑square‑foot plan reflecting the 2019 program, and a larger recreation center that would include a gymnasium and/or aquatics facility (the larger composite options raise square‑foot totals and parking needs). The team described the master plan as a phased effort: programming validation, updated cost estimating, schematic design and then construction documents and bidding.

Core design goals: Hartman summarized six guiding practices for the refresh — community-driven engagement, holistic wellness, accessibility, adaptable/multifunctional spaces, sustainable design and efficient operations. Staff emphasized resiliency planning for the facility: the plan includes a possible “resiliency hub” function (charging, information, short-term sheltering and distribution points) without the full structural and code requirements of a long‑term mass shelter.

Options under consideration: The master plan retains flexibility around an aquatics area, showing two 25‑yard pool concepts and a more recreational zero‑entry “family” pool with splash features. The gym option would add structural and supporting spaces and increase staffing and parking demand. Hartman noted that elements such as a two‑story massing, rooftop photovoltaics and battery storage are being explored for sustainability and resilience, and that site orientation (placing the building nearer Ralston Avenue) was chosen to provide visibility and street frontage.

Programming details and trade‑offs: The proposal shows dedicated childcare/preschool space, seven multigenerational program rooms, a multipurpose banquet/party room with movable partitions, arts and crafts and fitness/dance studios. Staff said preschool counts could change (staff are now considering two preschool classrooms rather than three because of transitional kindergarten changes). Hartman and staff stressed storage and operational details: “You can never have enough storage space,” Hartman said, noting the importance of adjacent, easily accessed storage for tables, props and third‑party providers.

Phasing and site logistics: The 2019 concept allowed phased construction so the new center could be built while the existing center remained in operation; parking and drop‑off were reconfigured to reduce impacts on adjacent homes. Commissioners discussed transit access, bike and e‑bike parking, a bypass lane for quick drop‑off and options for overflow parking that could double as programmable open space.

Community engagement and next steps: Staff announced an Aug. 9 community open‑house at Barrett — including tours, a presentation from Group 4 and family activities — to gather further public feedback. Hartman said the next technical steps are to reconcile program quantities with updated cost estimates and to refine funding strategies in coordination with the city’s polling and finance work.

Unresolved items: No final decisions were made at the July 16 meeting. The commission and attendees raised recurring choices that hinge on funding and staffing: whether to include a full‑time heated pool, whether to build for year‑round aquatics or seasonal operation (seasonal pools reduce annual heating/staff costs but leave the space unused in winter), what level of resiliency engineering to include (which raises construction costs), and how much parking to provide versus encouraging non‑auto access.

Public comments: Two residents praised Barrett as a community gathering place and asked the commission to consider continuing off‑leash dog hours and to preserve popular open‑space uses. Staff said site details, including the dog‑run location and surfacing, remain under review and that some site work will be shared for public comment during the Aug. 9 event.

Bottom line: The refresh keeps multiple options on the table, tying design decisions to funding strategy and community input. Staff and Group 4 will return with refined program totals, cost estimates and recommended phasing to enable Council and community decisions in later steps of the process.