The Coral Gables Parks and Recreation Advisory Board got its first detailed look Sept. 10 at plans for a proposed $60 million replacement of the War Memorial Youth Center, a sweeping project that would add a swimming pool, larger gymnasium, underground parking, a running track and expanded recreation space.
But the presentation itself carried an older date: April 10, 2025, 17 months before it reached the Parks Board. The 47-page presentation is stamped “WORK IN PROGRESS 04/10/2025” throughout. Questions sent to Community Recreation Director Fred Couceyro asking why the plans were not brought before the board earlier had not been answered as of press time.
The presentation outlined a new multi-level facility designed to replace the existing Youth Center, which opened in 1997. The proposal includes a ground floor, second floor, third-level outdoor space and underground parking, with a linear elevated park forming part of the roof design.
But while board members expressed enthusiasm about the plans, the project remains far from construction. City officials say it would take at least five years for the new center to become reality if the Coral Gables City Commission approves the project.
And there is no indication that approval is imminent. The city is still dealing with a dispute over a reverter clause affecting the Youth Center property, an issue that commissioners have made a condition of moving forward with major capital improvements that would require temporarily shutting down the existing facility.
A more open, functional center
Couceyro led board members through the presentation, explaining that the design evolved through meetings with the architectural team and was intended to address shortcomings he said have become apparent in the existing building. The April 2025 presentation shows four site and massing alternatives considered as the concept developed.
Couceyro, who began working at the city in 1997, said the existing building was attractive when it opened but was not always designed with its day-to-day users in mind.
“I would walk this building and think, did anyone think about using it?” he said.
Board member and former commissioner Kirk Menendez said staff had not been sufficiently involved in the original development and design, leaving out an important perspective on how the facility would actually operate.
Couceyro said recreation staff at the time were primarily focused on working with children rather than planning, reporting and security issues. He recalled seemingly simple problems with the existing gymnasium, including electrical connections around the free-throw line that staff could not easily determine how to use.
The proposed building would extend toward the playing fields and enlarge the gymnasium, adding more courts and parking beneath the structure. An outdoor viewing area would allow families to watch activities taking place on the fields.
Nearly twice the size
The April 2025 plans would nearly double the size of the Youth Center, from 38,154 square feet in the existing building to 72,437 square feet in the proposed replacement.
The design would retain an outdoor playground while exploring additional play areas within the building. A controlled lobby entrance would lead into the center, with administrative offices located upstairs and separated from the main activity areas. A toddler room would be located near the security desk.
Other proposed features include a swimming pool, cabana and locker rooms; expanded basketball, volleyball and pickleball courts; a theater and multipurpose stage; dance and activity studios; a substantially larger fitness center; a climbing wall; a running track; and flexible spaces for activities including senior programs, cooking and arts and crafts.
The concept also calls for the building to be hardened against natural disasters and capable of serving secondary functions for emergency management or relief distribution. The plans contemplate relocating the existing War Memorial plaque and flag court as part of the redesign.
The third level is envisioned as an outdoor walking and flexible-use area, including the linear elevated park, while an underground level would add 68 parking spaces. The plans show 175 existing spaces and 243 total spaces after the addition.
Couceyro said community input resulted in changes to the proposal, including the addition of a running track. He said eliminating the track from an earlier concept would have limited the facility’s usefulness to families.
“If you have a track, a lot more family members” can use the facility, he said, describing the goal of creating a place where multiple generations could exercise and participate in activities together.
Blending old and new
The architectural concept presented to the board is described in the plans as a “celebration” of community, tradition and generations. The design team at Bermello, Ajamil & Partners said the building is intended to combine traditional materials such as stone with modern glass and metal, creating an architectural style that respects Coral Gables’ past while looking toward its future.
Banyan trees also serve as a design inspiration, reflected in some of the proposed structural forms.
Reverter clause remains obstacle
The biggest obstacle to turning the design into a construction project is not architectural.
The replacement also is not funded in the city’s current five-year capital plan. The FY2026-2030 Capital Improvement Plan says the recommended new Youth Center master plan “was not approved for funding” and instead calls for renovations to the existing facility to address deferred maintenance.
In June, the City Commission adopted a resolution directing the city manager not to proceed with major capital improvements at the Youth Center that would require temporarily ceasing operations until the reverter clause in the property deed is modified to address the commission’s concerns about its potential interpretation. The resolution also directed the city attorney to pause litigation efforts involving the issue.
The reverter dispute has complicated the city’s plans for the property and leaves the timetable for any replacement facility uncertain.
For now, the existing Youth Center remains open and operating, while the $60 million replacement remains a work-in-progress design — one without construction approval, identified funding or a resolution to the property dispute standing in its way.
