Update on the Proposed Senior Center

This letter is a follow up to our previous letter on the subject of the plans to construct a new senior center at the location of the existing center adjacent to the library. First, we would like to say that it is appropriate for a community to provide recreational facilities for all of its citizens within its means to do so. At the same time, before a commitment is made to provide additional facilities, it is important to make sure that existing facilities are not underutilized or are being used to achieve less important objectives. At its June 17 meeting, the City Council will be briefed on the conceptual plans and operational plan options for a new senior center that is almost three times the size of the existing facility. (The existing center is approximately 3,500 square feet in area. The space requirements program for a new center is either 9,057 gross square feet or 9,839 gross square feet depending on whether the building is one or two stories.) Based on the $2.5 million construction cost of the 3,400 square foot animal shelter, a 9,000 plus square foot senior center could cost in excess of $6 million to construct. Its programming and design costs are estimated to be $495,000. (Of this amount $330,000 has already been appropriated and the remaining $165,000 is included in the city's FY 2013-14 budget request. To date $119,900 has actually been awarded. ) A project of this potential magnitude warrants a rigorous assessment of whether the needs of a senior center can be met with existing facilities. At the City Council’s meeting on May 21, the city staff provided its assessment of the ability of the existing community center to meet the needs of a senior center. We do not believe that this assessment is complete in that it does not address the ability to repurpose existing space in the community center. At the same time it does suggest that with rigorous scheduling a program for senior citizens could be accommodated at the existing community center. First, the analysis provided by the city staff does not address whether dedicating a portion of the Nautilus Room to meet the needs of the city’s senior citizens by providing a lounge/activity space would be a better use of the room than providing a venue for private functions that is in competition with similar facilities provided by the city’s business community. (The Nautilus Room is a 5,000 square foot, sub divisible banquet space. It is presently used 33 percent of the time by non-residents who can rent it at subsidized rates. Twenty-one percent of the time it is used by the city staff for meetings and staff training. The remaining 46 percent of the time it is used by city residents for private functions including weddings, anniversaries, reunions and similar events and by community service organizations.) What is needed is an assessment of the policy, programmatic and financial impact of converting up to half of the sub-divisible Nautilus Room into a senior lounge/ activity space. The assessment should identify which activities presently scheduled at the existing senior center could be accommodated in this space in addition to providing a lounge area for those patrons not involved in the programmed activities. Issues such as available parking and providing greater access to residents of the Cays and Shores should be included in the analysis. Second, the staff analysis indicates that during the week one of the two activity rooms is available from 11 am to 5 pm three days a week. The other room is available from 6 am to 11 am most week days and from 5 to 9 pm three evenings during the week. However, these rooms are significantly more heavily subscribed during the summer. Even so, based on a review of the summer program for 2013, it appears that one of the rooms would be available on weekday mornings. Further, the rooms are available for rent on the weekends and instead could be programmed for senior activities on these days. Finally, the dance room is available during portions of weekday mornings and is actually scheduled for Senior Fitness from 8 to 9 am, three days a week. Similar to what was described above with respect to the Nautilus Room, an assessment should be made of the policy, programmatic and financial impact of accommodating any remaining activities presently scheduled at the existing senior center in the community center’s two activity rooms, dance room and other available spaces. Based on the construction durations of the animal shelter, which was 12 months, and the clubroom and boat house, which was 15 months, the construction of a 9,000 square foot senior center could range from 18 months to two years. Presumably, during this period the activities of the existing senior center will need to be accommodated elsewhere. An alternative to further study, that should be considered, is to move at this time the activities of the existing senior center to the community center using a portion of the Nautilus Room, as described above, and other available spaces. This would provide a "real world" assessment of the ability to accommodate a senior program in existing facilities. If it is successful, the need to construct a new senior center would be avoided. If not, it would only delay the design of a new senior center by the length of time required to assess the pros and cons of moving senior center activities to the community center. (It is noted that the City Council used a similar approach with the construction of the roundabout on Pomona Avenue. A temporary roundabout was installed and evaluated before a commitment was made to construct the $1 million permanent roundabout.) Finally, it needs to be kept in mind that the justification for a new, substantially expanded senior center is largely based on the expectation of an increase in demand. Presently, the membership of the Coronado Senior Association, the primary users of the senior center, is 394 or only 13 percent of the portion of the city’s population that is 65 years old or older. The expectation that the demand for the programs of a senior center will grow, if a new facility is built, is not supported by the experience in Chula Vista, as noted by Ms. Diaman MacKelsey. Ms. MacKelsey, the 1st Vice President of the Chula Vista Senior Citizens Club, Norman Park Center, has stated “Baby boomers are not being attracted to senior centers as being witnessed at the Norman Park Center in Chula Vista. This is one magnificent building with an excellent staff, offering every conceivable activity (even free bunco) and again… there is a loyal 80 & 90 yr. olds but no 60’s and very few 70’s & it is practically impossible to get new members.” It could turn out that accommodating the senior center within the community center could actually be attractive to even more seniors and increase its use. The community center's exercise room, gym, and pool offer recreational opportunities for more active seniors, which when coupled with a senior lounge, created by repurposing a portion of the Nautilus Room, may be an attractive combination for the older adult population of the city. John and Barbara Tato