Mayor Pro Tem Raymond Gregory convened a study-session update Monday evening on the Cathedral City community center feasibility study, where consultant Group 4 presented needs-assessment findings, candidate sites and high-level cost models and city staff outlined funding options tied to Measure W.

The study matters because it will shape where and how the city invests Measure W proceeds and other funds to provide indoor cooling, recreation, cultural and resiliency services for residents, including youth and seniors.

Don Murkus, a representative of Group 4 Architecture, told the City Council the consulting team began community outreach in August and plans two engagement rounds; he said the consultants expect to return to council with final recommendations in December (with potential presentation in January). “We’re looking at trying to get back to you with our final recommendations in December, potentially the presentation of that information in January,” Murkus said.

Group 4 summarized national planning norms (about one community center per roughly 31,600 residents) and a range of facility sizes—20,000 to 35,000 square feet for a full-service community and senior center, plus an additional 8,000–12,000 square feet for a gymnasium if active recreation is included. The firm suggested Cathedral City’s preliminary target range of roughly 0.4 to 0.9 square foot per capita for community-center space, recognizing those needs could be met through one building or multiple smaller, shared facilities.

Community outreach to date has included online surveys, kiosks at the senior center and library, school visits (including James Workman Middle School), a Hispanic Heritage Month event and other on-site efforts. Group 4 said adult residents have made up the bulk of responses so far and that the project team will continue targeted outreach to teens and other groups.

Participants and council members pressed staff and the consultant on candidate locations and feasibility. Sites identified by the project team include: the former Walmart building; the Burlington building; a city-owned site near the amphitheater (with an adjacent parcel the city previously discussed acquiring); two city-owned parcels across from the Salvation Army (about 3.5 and 2.3 acres); a site across from City Hall (roughly 4.5 acres); the Uptown Village site (non-city-owned); and the Cathedral City Library campus, among others. Council members also asked staff to investigate an offer from Northgate Church to provide space and raised Desert Kiddie Soccer Park as a potential city-owned site to study.

Group 4 provided relative evaluations for availability, capacity, zoning, infrastructure and expansion potential. The former Walmart and Burlington adaptive-reuse options carry lower initial construction costs but can present land-availability or outdoor-amenity limitations; vacant city-owned parcels reduce land cost but could require higher infrastructure investment. The presentation noted that an earlier leasing prospect for the Walmart space had fallen through, leaving available leasable area estimated at 24,000 square feet at the time of the consultant’s site review.

On costs, Group 4 presented broad ranges: moderate renovation for non-city-owned buildings roughly $1,400–$1,800 per square foot over a 30-year lease-equivalent analysis; major renovation $1,700–$2,300 per square foot; and new construction on non-city-owned land $3,500–$4,000 per square foot. For city-owned sites the consultant listed new-construction estimates of about $1,300–$1,500 per square foot and renovation $680–$1,000 per square foot. The firm also used a land-purchase example of about $3.5–$4.0 million for a roughly 2.5-acre parcel as a planning-level benchmark.

Kevin (finance staff) summarized Measure W funding assumptions the city has modeled: setting aside $1 million per year in Measure W for community-center debt service could support roughly $13 million in bonded financing on a 20-year repayment schedule (the city’s team said 30-year debt produces only modestly more capacity in current markets). City staff also flagged potential supplemental sources including grants (resiliency and environmental funds), impact fees, public–private partnerships and philanthropy; staff said the city could evaluate phased facilities if full funding is not available at once.

Council members asked staff to narrow the candidate list to two or three leading sites for more detailed study, to continue community outreach (including sports fields and veterans-related transit access), and to investigate parking impacts and partnerships—particularly at the library/Big League Dreams campus, where tournament activity complicates peak parking availability. Representatives associated with Big League Dreams acknowledged unresolved lease and parking issues and said future expansions or additional event dates would require separate approvals.

No formal action was taken. Staff said they will pursue the additional site investigations and stakeholder discussions requested by council, refine cost and funding estimates, and return with focused recommendations in December or January.

The council also approved a separate procedural motion at the meeting start: Mayor Pro Tem Raymond Gregory moved to excuse Mayor Kathleen Ross; the motion was seconded by Council member Gutierrez and carried unanimously.

Less-critical details: Group 4 recommended the city consider co-locating program components (for example, gyms with school facilities) and planning adaptable spaces that can change over a 40–50 year life cycle; the consultant emphasized needs for indoor cooling, shaded outdoor areas and bilingual programming.