CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PORT COQUITLAM
PARKS

A

RECREATION COMMITTEE

A meeting of tbe Parks
Recreation Committee was held in City
Hall on Tuesday, April 21st, 1987, at Nl45 p.m.
In attendance were Alderman George Laking and Alderman M1ike
Gates.
Also in at, tendance were K. Janna Taylor, Parks A
Director and Larry J. Wheeler, Recreation Manager.Recreation
A

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

That the minutes of the meeting of the Parks A Recreation
Committee held on Tuesday, April 10th, 1987, be taken as read and

IIIIIII

adopted.
No

I'lj'1l

IIIII'I'tem
I.RIIII,
jjjij jI

1

Fine Arts Feasibility StudY

attached reports from Larry Wheeler and Janna
Taylor were revi wed by the Committee. Committee
agreed unanimously that we should not get involved
in a joint project with either Port Moody or
Coqui.tlam. I co many questions were not answered
in the stuoy; cost implications alone to the City
of Port Coquitlam would be,"
million dollars
capital and 8 176, 000 operating2.2 annually.
Several
assumptions were made in the report and because of
them, other questions were not
particularly in regard to the issue of answered;
the audience based
model versus the oommunity group based model.
The

Recommendation:
1.

That we not participate in th
a regional

cultural centre.

development of

That the Parks A Recreation Department
develop a working document on arts and

culture for the City of Port Coquitlam.
CARRIED

/2.

APR 21 3987

Ijjij„',!!I,'=!Ilssllllm¹ie!I%urn
W. ':.:

=

lgmmlgllmsimm,VI1m 'lilll

mlDmmsmmmeii~~mAUIIN~~1NSMSINigNWi~m

lli%

@hajj

1.

Item No.

2

Ball Tournaments

—

Beer Gardens

Heoommendation:

That the attaohed list oi'eer garden

tournaments be approved.

for ball
CARRIED

ADJOVHNNENT

The meeting

adjourned at 5:15 p.m .

APR 21 1987

ll,Ill(l1 .

'( )Ill i

i

illl5II,
11lllamNN,

%%

I

I

I

8 am

lia
~

—
aa- =~=aalah =
—

—
~-~'-"

-=.-..

—.=.='e

— -—

~ =.l==;~=~= — ==.

55)l!IR5@gg~ wl"~== =~M —,30(gjjm~ll5lWI9mhsawil: Nasl ~~~5iiagimiIgg~~ +5lelii95gl/gmiilulRsmml
Ig
T
IMEEij ie=~~~mwm~l„, 4~JMs~asz~RWNgeeewess~
eeese%%IEEae~~ ~INM. ~msglNIIR~~less
.

~.i

H OF THE CITY OF PORT COOOITERM

21
NDUN TQ:

Alderman George Baking
Alderman mike Gates

NDUN FRON:

Janna Taylor. Parks
Recreation Director
Fine Arts Feasibility Study
K.

&

ound a Comments:

ports are attached; one from Larry Wheeler and one from
an Nichael Wright. Both reports outline
concerns
ard to the feasibility study on the fine ma~or
arts
for
1am and Area Fine Arts council. Zn Nr. Wheeler's the
he recommends that we develop our own policy in the
f. the arts in Port Coquitlam.
area of culture is
at we have not fully developed. TheNonies
have been put
he capital improvement program for the year
1995 for

tural facility". This facility is not identified as to
t would contain and who it would serve; however, the

on does need to be adoressed.

ndation:
t thebe recommendations as outlined in Nr. Wheeler's
ort
adopted by the Committee and that these be
ught forth to Council for adoption.
t toe Parks a Recreation Department develop a working
ument for Port Coquitlam in reoaro to arts and
culture.

Taylor,/

Recreation Director.

II

APR 21 887

I~III%

iiiiiii,i,
~m

II Remi

'-=-='-.K'1L!

'III

I

IIil

aiIIO~;=: RllK~.PWWI ~ I gyyII~I~'ll +
I

m.~ WilllSKmsmammwmiHOI III

S WWI WMH

&&g

1%~ aesmmsw

~

~IISsim IWiHIiseiiills'IN
%IWesig.'='.~ '

I

THE CORPORATION OF THE

CtUTT

OF PORT COOUITLAM

1987 04 21
MEMORANDUM

Janna Taylor, Parks X Recz cation Di.rector
Lar ry J. Whdeelez, Recreation Manager
Regional Cultural Centre Feasibility Report

TO:

K.

MEMORANDUM FROM:

SUBJECT:

Purpose/Problemi
The purpose of this report i to
review the feasibility report
and identify recommendations that
the direction the City
of Fort Coquitlam should take with outline
regards
to effectively
developing the Arts in oui community.
B'

/~kk

d:

In March, 1985, the Coquitlam Area Fine Arts
Council in
cooperation with the three municipalities (Port
Coquitlam,
Port Coquitlam) commissioned
feasibility report,Moody,
to be completed
regarding a Regional Cultural a Centre.
This study was undertaken
in recognition of the increasing needs of
the cultur
ura 1 community
inn thee area.
are
In theory, three study obdectives
were reviewed in
the feasiblity z.eport;
1)

2)
3)

To examine the current cultural
To define the needs for cultural situation;
services and
To address the requirements for the

facilities„and

proposed Cultural Centre.

The completed feasibility
has been submitted to the three
municipalities for comment report
and approval.

Alternatives:
Basically, there are three alternatives available for
consideration:
eAdopt the recommendations included in the
feasib
eas i
outlined.
eAdopt the recommendations indentified in

lit y report, as

the feasibility report,
but with some
changes.
eRefuse to adoptsuggested
or all of the recommendations outlined
in
the feasibility any
report.

../2
APR J". i 1987

IIIIII

jLI

IIS'W

%II tg
B&hlI

II
IIII

~

~™~,
I
mkama~, ~aldmssk\malgfllal~imdk
UU4

&I

&RRI

&jjjjII ~I)EEeBm Wllllf

--'-~,II

~,.„-";asiiii I
NISI&!SKISREAW~e„,

.

~ '
~~ "~.

=-ll R(U

~II~USSIBBBazms~ddiU558IWii~IN'

Financial Imulications:
At the current time, the financial implications of the various
recommendations are close to impossible to analyze. Eowever, it
is safe to assume that should the three municipalites adopt the
various recommendations, the capital investment will be large and
the annual operating grant, substantial.

Citizen/Public Relations Involvement/Imnlications:
Although community organizations were involved in the initial
needs analysis, I do not believe that the community or interest
groups have been invited to comment on this feasibility report.
Interdepartmental Involvement/Imnlications:
The City of Port Coquitlam Planning Director has reviewed this
feasibility report and has forwarded his comments. In summary,
he liked the report, but did have some problem with the Audience
Development Based 7iodel.

Other:
Upon reviewing this document, many questions, concerns, or
comments have come to mind. An incomplete list of these have
been outlined below with no reference to priority.
eThe City of Port Coquitlam does not have a policy or plan
related to the development of the Arts. Therefore, evaluation
of this proposal is difficult without the benefit of established
community objectives related to this development area.
eThe "Arts" are a very personal thing and in many ways are one of
the major factors considered when evaluating the "quality of.
life" in a community. The "Arts" provide a community wi'th i'ts
individuality and assist in building community character.
aThe report fails to identify what the various municipalities and
other institutions (ie DOUGLAS COLLEGE EXPANSION) are doing or
are planning to do with regards to the development of the Arts.
~ The "Arts" are known to have a financial 'multiplier'ffect.
The report fails to dwell on this aspect and does not identify
potential economic gains relat d to this project.

arA 21 $ 87

Illicit

Rjiy

~,

',

~~

II
Aj

'— — — =
~ISA~~~ ~E msml
s
m~5~'M~'~~~&~~ ~IRK!1
S~~iihm em=;y . »sam..==a'--";.=.=i'~=:—Sll~lll'-=sl~lllg-SIE~WISiqÃ~
= =
== :—
'"~Ws =.=.=
— ~~~ai! ii~~sss=
==="'" A
8'~ISm.",malRSA..'"=: -=''-'=-====-'=

R~'=='

W

.

= ~::.;;

.i

eg Tri-Municipal Agreement related to funding tbe construction
and operation of the pr oposed facilities will likely be very

difficult, ii'ot impossible to establish.
eghould these facilities be built as outlined in the repor t, an
individual

municipality will have
little contr ol over the
quality and type of services being very
offered, despite the
substantial investment.
elnf ormation in the report was not convincing relative to the
Audience Development Based Model. As a result
a decision to
conceutr ate on this approach early in the study ofprocess,
remainder of the results and there related recommendationstheare
biased.
elnf orsation 1n the report wss not convincing with regards to
the need for a regional centre. Each
has its own
character and its own set of community municipality
prior ities.
Conclusion
The Coquitlam Fine Arts Council commissioned a feasibility report
regard1ng the development of a Regional Cultural Centre. Each
municipality has been asked to review the document,
and adopt the
recommendations outlined. The repor t does not identif
y and
discuss the direction of cultural services in each of the
three
municipalities. This report also does not discuss the benefit
the development of the "Arts" in community relative to equality of
of life", economic 'muliplier', community identity, etc. The
document is also not convincing with regards
to the need for an
Aud'nce Development Based Model.
In add1tion, the City of'ort Coquitlam does not have a policy or
plan related to the development of the Arts. Therefore, 1t
becomes very difficult to evaluate this report in the context
its ability to fulfill community objectives and prior ities. of

.../4

@O'. R

APR 311987

I em Iw I

III
5%If 5

iN II'0

IMI earn erne

~', ~w~ ~

'~Ra'::
--kiM~
~ i~~

Eweiil llggl!Ill)lglll!III'
- -=::-

@:
.%W@lllll%4RIUUNN

8%

+

-:--'-,lillllll¹-"--"„Ri
- 'lL ""'ll-."
Iwse
'l'"]EN~
ENEEI&(g
'llanmlappll
jg
Slit/$
~
"—
-;=4«amii!I@IN.
sam asaiwe
~ ~aeiS~W~NII lklhLRIII
—

',

is

~

Recommendations I

It is recommended
that the recommendations contained within the
Cultural Centre Feasibility Report not be adopted at
Regional
this time, and that the City of Port Coquitlam worL towards'he
long term goal of establishing a policy, plan, strategy or plan
of action relative to the development of the Arts in this

community.

Report {)1riter

Co

rurrence

Janna Taylor
Parks & Recreation Director

Larry J'3 Wheeler
Recreation Manager
L JW/ jm

&DR 2

~
M

mm
:

e

I

11S8't

:

r8
's

9

— -=I IIRQS

~Lsd

- W~smms{AI!Ilallaf.m-= — = -

'I~~me{'

-I —

- — =)Ki
—

—

me~-==ms - "~

---'-~a&~+
~ ~Wi~ ~ill'II
- —

g

I

+1115

m

ml!II 1 samg~~~~!!ma '«5~m.

—

PORT COQUITLAM TOURNAHENT REQUESTS

1987

Date
PoCo Rec

League

Park

April 25

Minor Softball

PoCo

Hay

~mug

&

HcLean

26

1,2,3

Cedar

Evergreen

HoLean

Minor Softball

PoCo

Hay

8,9,10

McLean

Cedar

Evergreen
Poco Minor
PoCo

Baseball

to 18

Hay 15

Minor Softball

Thompson

Hay 22, 23, 28 Cedar

Evergreen
Viscount

Port Coquitlam Firefighters
(2 day beer garden)
PoCo

Hay 23

Hinor Sof'tball

Hay

2r!

HcLean

29,30,31

McLean

&

Cedar

Evergreen
PoCo

Minor Baseball

June 5,6,7

Thompson

PoCo

Hinor Softball

JurIe

HcLean

Sr. Women's Fastball
(2 day beer garden)
PoCo Reo

Slowpitch

6

&

7

June 12,13,111

HcLesn

June

Viscount
(2 disInonds)

13 I

14

Cedar'rive

PoCo

Minor Softball

June 19,20,21

Evergreen
All School Fields

McLesn

Cedar

PoCo Minor

Baseball

Dewdney Women's
1

Playoffs

Evergreen

June 20 only

Aggie

June 26,27,28

Visoount

June

HcLean

27

&

28

PoCo Reo League

July 3, 11,5

PoCo Reo League

(2 dsy beer garden)

July 10, 11, 12 HcLean

Maple Ridge Senior Hen'
(2 dsy beer garden)

July 17,!8 19 HcLean

Dewdney Trunk Women'
(2 day beer garden)

July 28r25I26

McLean

(2 day beer garden)

McLean

PoCo Slowpitch

Aug

7rg 9

HoLean

Haple Ridge Senior Men'
(3 day beer garden)

Sept 5,6,7

McLesn

PK6 1987
k ii! i

APR 2'.

J,illlt l~
m I I!.&!II

eel

)

miss'i

gglb

===+ INI
~

ma%IN«c

-." — gsasmlli

—

I

Msl'9!

.= 'S NIS

mm

~l ~ ISS+g m ar ~ «
I

1

I

I

I«I

~,

sssIIIIIWlli«g1~ g )P

11
!EI .''.':..:

iIllg)!~Num
««EYII

I

"

"'Ill
~ii gm!E!mIaa
~

smm mammrI
~ I

«