Something more for city residents to pay for

The building is already done. It is called the Prince George Playhouse. Corner of Highway 16 and 97. I know it doesn't suit the needs of everyone but it is all ready built. A few million in renovations would solve the problems versus another 30 million and another building to operate long term.

Now don't complain...just a few more per cent on taxes....
What happens when taxes are more than income....oh yes...more homeless to look after too....

I think the business case they are looking for is how to get the NDI funds to pay for it. IMO promoting a project like this should be done by a committee, a city councilor, a user group, or the mayor, but it should not be advocated by a civil servent that is suposed to be spending his resources generating more industry in town.

I guess IPG has run out of ideas? How come we never hear about them advocating infrastrucutre improvements that will draw industry and make this region more competitive? I guess the low hanging fruit is acceptable for the local tax payer as long as he stays loyal to the mayor and the mayors agenda.

The Gerry Offet legacy IMO will be one of a couple of call centers, some great trips around the world with the mayor, the sale of BC Rail, and now a performing arts center. At a million dollars a year his budget makes less sense then a performing arts center we don't need.

I agree with Lunarguy's comments above.

The Playhouse stage is not big enough to accommodate the Prince George Symphony Orchestra. It is just one of the many user groups which could use the Performing Arts Society for performances, as well as rehearsals.

The provincial government is always pushing the PPP's (public, private partnerships) and a performing arts centre here would certainly be a good project for that sort of financial backing. For instance, if Jimmy Pattison were to champion this as he did the Stanley Park campaign, it could be very successful.

Ya we need another tax payer built, and then operated building like a hole in the head!

All summer long you can use the Multiplex.
Plop a stage down , and rent it.
A hell of a lot cheaper than a new building, and its vacant 98% of the time anyways.
An occasional hockey game, or concert, is barely using any of the time up that the Multiplex sits there.

Or the Coliseum....or the Civic centre.
HMMMMMMM The play house....yup it to.
Or maybe rent some of the downtime in Parkhill from Theatre Northwest.
Its used less than half the year.

Yup we really need another drain on the system here in PG....idiots !!!

1. The 'Multiplex' was built for HOCKEY,as was the coliseum. the civic centre 'hall' is really a basketball court. vanier hall is a school gymnasium.
2. These were built for SPORT not for concerts. Yes. CN does a super job for acts such as Barenaked Ladies and Snoop Dogg.
3. NO, it is not suitable for the symphony, for the school district's speech and drama fest, for the annual dance festival, the annual music festival, etc etc etc

Would you suggest a hockey game in Vanier Hall???? You might as well!

I'm going to bet lunarguy has never produced a show, and has never seen the backstage of the playhouse or of Vanier Hall. (Marty is so clueless as to what needs to be in a facility, and what's available, I won't even address his points.)

The Coloseum was built; why did we need to build the Multiplex? Four Seasons was built; why did we need to build the Aquatic Centre?

And that reminds me, Chadermando; the Multiplex and the Aquatic Centre were projects driven by the city, as was the new baseball staduim to replace the one on the highway, and those softball diamonds in North Nechako - why do only arts and cultural projects (museum, art gallery, performing arts centre) require residents to lead the charge, but sports projects have high priced insiders working on their projects?

Chaderman says "How come we never hear about them advocating infrastrucutre improvements that will draw industry and make this region more competitive?" He doesn't understand that a PAC is an arts and cultural infrastructure investment that makes us more competitive at developing, supporting and recruiting the new drivers of industry: creative people. Today, industry (beyond natural resources) organizes itself around creative and skilled people. Today, talent attracts business, not the other way around like the good old days.

I challenge all the naysayers here to attend that meeting. I'll be brining my real-world examples of the business impact of creativity, experience and design, other research and contributions to a business case there, and outlining how this (if they don't blow it) can be an important and positive investment for a whole bunch of reasons beyond simply something to rent out to user groups.

If IPG and the group can't put together a great business case with solid numbers (based on REAL math) then they shouldn't do it.

Now if only we'd require the same thing from these other "investments" we've been making.

The Playhouse ... now there is a "abortion" of a building. A prime example of how not to spend taxpayer money.

It was a very nice "little theatre" before a shroud was put around it which extended the foyer and put a fly tower on it, plus brought down seats from the balcony to the floor. It did not, however, increase the size ofthe stage and work area required to put on even medium sized productions adequately as I understand.

It was way to many $ for what increased functionality was gotten from the building.

Now for the real sticking point. The original building was built with wood. The building code limits the seating capacity of wood buildings to 300. Since the structure is wood, it would obviously be impossible to expand.

End of that brainwave.

I will post further to this topic as time permits.

It is a topic dear to my heart mainly becuse something that should have been easy to accomplish at the time of the original library competition which included a CPA and gallery, has now landed at a time in the history of PG when money has been ill spent on other projects such as the little theatre, the civic centre, the multiplex, and, I venture to say, possibly even the art gallery.

The reason I say that is because they could have been located better designed better both from a functional and an econimic point of view, and they should have had the opportunity to include commercial components.

In fact, while other communities such as Nanaimo, Kelowna, and Kamloops have used such projects to improve their downtown, we have done exactly the opposite.

Now, IPG's involvement in this.

There was a small group of people some two years ago who were fed up with the City's inaction on building a CPA. They were goingto get very noisy about that. Then along comes this "City Centre Ventures" thing and the group was told to hold onto your hats, you are about to see a major push on the CPA because it is a key part to developing the downtown.

SO, here we are, two years later, when any reaoanlbe people would have thought that they would have come with a plan some time ago as to what, where, when, who, and how and bring that to the citizens of PG, as it has been doen at least 2, if nto 3 times before, and say here is our take on it based on some informaed input from a community committee struck to look at it.

Instead, we have had Zip. Nada. Nichts.

I am sorry, I have lost any faith I ever had in the IPG. It is time they were evaluated by an outside auditor.

Actually bohemian I have been involved in theater and the performing arts for over 25 years and have toured with both major shows and rock bands. I specialize in light, sound and electronics design. Been in enough buildings to know what works and what doesn't.

I do totally agree with you concerning the size of the Playhouse. Who ever did the initial design of that building really missed the mark. A city the size of PG, at the time of design, should have had a facility with 800-900 seats and the associated support features. Then we wouldn't be having this discussion right now.

What I would do is create another theater joined to the existing structure. Combine the heating, cooling and the technical support structures of both buildings into one. Then what ever event is being held, you have the option of a small or large venue available for them. The access road to the facility would have to be changed to have at least two ways in / out the highway. You save a small fortune in construction costs and especially on-going maintenance costs.

My only reason why I haven't thrown my support and attendance to these meetings is the strong desire to locate the center in the downtown core. There is no parking available, there is a un-desirable night element ( sorry just calling it as I see it. I am a big man and can look after myself and don't worry about the street life but others do not share my tolerance to them)and worst yet there is no technical or beneficial reason to having it downtown other than to hope it will cause some sort of revival of downtown. It will not. Been in enough cities with a performance center downtown and once the show is over, it is a ghost town.

It would be nice though to take in a meal at a downtown restaurant and then walk to the theater or better yet park there first and walk for supper and back again. Again need parking !!! If there is not parking next to the centre, then you might as well locate it somewhere else as people will come downtown for supper and then drive to the centre, where they can park right next to it. Like I said, been to enough cities to see which centres work, and the biggest factor seems to be parking right there ! Not two blocks away or in the case of downtown like around the Civic Centre, where there is no parking !

"Who ever did the initial design of that building really missed the mark. A city the size of PG, at the time of design, should have had a facility with 800-900 seats and the associated support features."

How long have you been in PG? That building was originally designed when the city population was in the 40,000 range. Not one single community in BC had a theatre of the size you refer to other than GVRD. The people of the day improved on that by going for the Vanier Hall solution for the larger venue.

Things change. Lifestyle improves. We now have microwaves and cell phones. Many communities this size now have PAC. In fact, Prince Rupert's was likely one of the first, sized right for the community.

Sorry lunarguy, but with the experience you claim, the statement "The building is already done" didn't make sense. Thanks for clarifying your position.

But please consider this: We've lost at least $1,000,000 per year in tax revenue from the C-1 district (downtown) as a result of decreased assessment because of lack of development.

If we had put major infrastructure downtown where it belonged, like the multiplex, the casino, the museum, (maybe even the University) we'd have property values, comercial development, residential development, and the social element, in a much better situation than now.

At some point we have to make strategic investments downtown. A Performing Arts Centre belongs downtown.

As for parking, there is piles of on street parking within any three block radius in most of downtown. The need for more parking is a myth - the streets are empty after 6:00 pm when most high volume uses (if 1,000 is really that high of a volume). We should look to the MTS centre in Winnipeg as an example - they didn't add ONE parking spot because their studies indicated that there was lots of parking, and in the case of concurrent events at the Winnipeg Convention Centre, still lots of parking with a little longer walk.

That said, the Civic Centre does have crappy parking, and it's because the city didn't follow its own bylaws. But there are lots of places to build a PAC that would work with a "cultural corridor" concept such as the Brick Building.

The Civic Centre is a good example of how not to build a "multi-use" facility. That stage is the biggest waste of time and space ever.

The parking in the original downtown proposal of some 25+ years ago was to be taken care of by two storeys of "underground" parking under the complex. That is why the library is on "stilts". The columns are resdy to take another level of parking.

That is the major design flaw I refer to in the case of both the civic centre and the art gallery. They removed parking from that area and did not replace it, nor add for its own use.

On top of that, the Civic Centre is sitting a foot or so below the 200 year flood plane, contraveninng the city's own standards. That was known at the time it was built.

That site has no opportunity for boutique type shopping, bookstores, coffee shops, small restaurants, etc. normally found around such facilities. In fact, the surrounding streets really do not lend themselves to such activities.

The Inn sits at the higher level. It would have been the perfect opportunity for that location ot meld in with a complex there by building a portion of it to face towards that centre. A coffe shop and restaurant associated with the hotel outboard with otudoor seating oppportunities would do a lot to increase use of such places as teh coffee garden which is a dingy hole which few people even know exists.

Anyway ... many opportunities lost due to prima donna architects involved and no one at City Hall undertanding that. Nice looking buildings, but low functionality when it comes to working with the downtown rather than against the downtown.

And please do not get me started on that piece of work called the Civic Plaza or whatever. A wasteland and a waste of land.

I have volunteered many many hours to Theatre northwest and others.
And while a new building might be what some want, here are some problems as I see them.
Bigger...means less cozy and up close to the stage and performers...I prefer small and cozy myself.
Parking has been mentioned already, but yes, its a HUGE problem.
Cost....do we really need to pay for more crap?
Just clean out the art gallery, and renovate the inside for the theatre then, as its not used now anyways.

Or possibly sign a contract to use the canfor theatre up at the univeersity...its pretty damn cool.
Whatever the hell they do, I really don't give a crap...as long as it does not involve wasting more of my tax $$$ and creating an even bigger parking problem downtown.
If you "want to be actors" need a building, have one built at your own expense as a private venture and lease it out.....since you all are rich and have so dang much cash to waste!

Dont understand why if the cost of a PAC in the 1990's was prohibitive that the situation would be any better to-day. What would make it less *prohibitive*.

The City in their wisdom will build this building probably on the site of the present police station, and I would suspect at some point they will close down the Swimming Pool, or the Coliseum, or both, and **Walla** you have parking space. Plus they save huge dollars in heating, maintenance, and staff, by getting rid of this duplication.

If there is a 'strong business' case for this new facility, then it would make sense for private business money to build and maintain... any takers

IF WE TOOK THE IPG / GERRY 0FFET BUDGET AND GAVE IT TO THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER IT WOULD MAKE A LOT OF SENSE.WE COULD CALL IT "THE THANK GOD GERRY IS GONE CENTER".

That's not a bad idea Palopu tearing down the pool for parking. As I recall, one of the reasons the Aquatic Centre was built was because many of the young swimming students' parents were extremely concerned about the mold and bad air situation at Four Season's. Maybe ITS time has come.

At this point, after all these years, I really don't care where they locate it - if it is downtown or on the Hart, or College Heights. The really frightening part about this entire exercise is that it is being led by IPG - a total DO NOTHING organization! Under their "leadership" I have little confidence this project will move forward in a constructive way, if it moves forward at all!

It's not just for "young want to be actors", Marty. Dancers, (highland, Ukrainian, etc etc) music (PGSO, local and national artist concerts, maybe a ballet, teaching, performing, rehearsing, recitals, theatre competitions, PG Theatrer Workshop, the Prince George Conservatory of Music, the Prince George Symphony Orchestra, open your mind and your eyes!

There are thousands of children and youths in this community who do not play hockey. The sing, dance, act, debate, and pursue the arts. How can this town give so much to sports and a pitance to the arts? It's shameful.

Marty, perhaps all the "want-to-be" hockey players and swimmers and baseball players should have to build their own buildings, too. Get real.

And that reminds me, many of those "want-to-be" actors, dancers and musicians grow up to have careers, many of them here. Where's all the professional hockey players? Turner Stevenson and Tony Twist and who else?

Also, all the performing artists pay their own way to private ventures; the sports groups do not. Dancers and musicians and actors take lessons at private schools, those schools create employment, pay rent and overhead and municipal taxes. The sports pay fees, but they only cover half the operating cost and none of the capital cost of those projects. They are run by dedicated heros called volunteers, but few, if any, involved in sport development pay their mortgage (and municipal taxes) with that involvement.

For the creative economy as a whole you must understand that hundreds make their living primarily creating art and creative content, and artistic and cultural infrastructure is important to the growth and diversity of this economic segment. No one, to my knowledge, makes their living as a professional player of a sport.

Marty says "Just clean out the art gallery." Please offer something intellegent or nothing at all. I can unserstand people having issues with an investment, but most people will only pay attention to smart, worthy opposition (and there should be a lot of this because it IS a big investment with benefits that are difficult to measure).

Zoom,

"If there is a 'strong business' case for this new facility, then it would make sense for private business money to build and maintain... any takers"

Leads to:

"If there is a 'strong business' case for fixing the roads, then it would make sense for private business money to build and maintain... any takers"

Just substitute "this new facility" with just about anything (like multiplex, aquatic centre, university, sports centre, baseball stadim, etc.) and you'll see how ridiculous your arguement is.

HAND IN YOUR POCKET,HAND IN YOUR POCKET...ALL THOSE TIRED OF THIS STATEMENT SAY I.

Zoom,

"If there is a 'strong business' case for this new facility, then it would make sense for private business money to build and maintain... any takers"

Leads to:

"If there is a 'strong business' case for fixing the roads, then it would make sense for private business money to build and maintain... any takers"

Just substitute "this new facility" with just about anything (like multiplex, aquatic centre, university, sports centre, baseball stadim, etc.) and you'll see how ridiculous your arguement is.

Zoom,

"If there is a 'strong business' case for this new facility, then it would make sense for private business money to build and maintain... any takers"

Leads to:

"If there is a 'strong business' case for fixing the roads, then it would make sense for private business money to build and maintain... any takers"

Just substitute "this new facility" with just about anything (like multiplex, aquatic centre, university, sports centre, baseball stadim, etc.) and you'll see how ridiculous your arguement is.

Zoom,

"If there is a 'strong business' case for this new facility, then it would make sense for private business money to build and maintain... any takers"

Leads to:

"If there is a 'strong business' case for fixing the roads, then it would make sense for private business money to build and maintain... any takers"

Just substitute "this new facility" with just about anything (like multiplex, aquatic centre, university, sports centre, baseball stadim, etc.) and you'll see how ridiculous your arguement is.

Zoom,

"If there is a 'strong business' case for this new facility, then it would make sense for private business money to build and maintain... any takers"

Leads to:

"If there is a 'strong business' case for fixing the roads, then it would make sense for private business money to build and maintain... any takers"

Just substitute "this new facility" with just about anything (like multiplex, aquatic centre, university, sports centre, baseball stadim, etc.) and you'll see how ridiculous your arguement is.

WTF?

Why did all those duplicates show up? Hopefully sys admin can fix it.

Sorry about that.

Bohemian: I believe the duplicates come up because you submit one comment, and then on your browser hit refresh to see if someone has commented, it goes and resubmits your comment. So after commenting I always browse to a different page and then come back to see if there are any comments posted. At least that is working for me.

So besides the issue of where the building should go, I truly believe that the city does not support the arts as they do sports. This is a trend though in most of the world it would seem. On a provincial basis look at what the government did to the BC Festival of Arts vs lets spends billions on the Olympics.

Yup, that's what happened. And I should know better. Won't happen again.

Bohemian: The Winnipeg Convention Centre was built with internal parking for about 550 vehicles. You can even drive a semi right into the building and get it off the street for loading / unloading. ( Actually you can get 5 or so easily ! ). So the impact on street level parking when there is an event is slight. In that case yes the MTC then can easily have the street parking.

So in PG terms there should have been a parking centre built as part of the Civic Centre and then when there is a function on the entire downtown core doesn't suffer. Good thing seldom there is something going on there and say at the hockey rink at the same time.

lunarguy, I know the WCC well. Trust me, that it alone is not enough parking for large events there. Conventions also use surrounding ground-level lots, on-street parking and other parkades in the area.

And then MTS centre came along and added no parking; but it wasn't a problem because through studies they found out there was much more parking available than people realized.

I suggest there is much more parking within a few blocks than most people realize because all the lots and the on-street is empty at 6:00 pm onward.

However, who's to say that lots of that will be taken up by Bingo and slot users now.

I've never been to any successful, exciting downtown where parking is not a problem. Success means parking headaches.

I for one would like to see some parking issues downtown after 6:00 pm for a change.

Finally, perhaps that monstrosity on 2nd avenue, currently only available to monthy, daytime parkers, could be put to good use.

There is LOTS of parking downtown; we just don't use it well.

Can *pothole avoidance* be designated a sport and thereby receive better/ proper funding?

Failing that, could it be declared to be an art, or an art form?

Or is it perhaps a form of gambling, like gambling with one's life?

There's gotta be a way to get more funding for potholes - under some obscure regulations that might be amendable.

As just *ordinary run-of-the-road* craters they don't seem to be able to command any respect and attention from those who are getting paid to notice them.

By the way: Still waiting for the Mayor's report on the success(failure) of the latest expedition to the oriental hosts.

"Dont understand why if the cost of a PAC in the 1990's was prohibitive that the situation would be any better to-day. What would make it less *prohibitive*."

Easy ... other venues have been built which in someways duplicate the service starting right back from the days of Vanier Hall ... multiplex ... civic centre ...

second .. we have gone into dept with one or two too many of such facilties that there is nothing left for a PAC ....

Conditions have made it more prohibitive. Plus now there is the big question of how much will the construction cost since the provincial contruction scene is taking people hostage due to some mega projects in the south.

This whole process will take a while since we are just starting from ground zero once more. So, by the time we are ready to commit and have a semblance of a plan together, we may be able to get more value for our money than we would if it was going out for tender this year. But we need to be ready to go to tender and have any partnerships in place by the end of 2009.

The building is already done. It is called the Prince George Playhouse. Corner of Highway 16 and 97. I know it doesn't suit the needs of everyone but it is all ready built. A few million in renovations would solve the problems versus another 30 million and another building to operate long term.

Lunar guy .... read my previous note about that building .. it is wood construction and cannot be added to... end of story ...

As for other non building code matters ...

It would be the same as creating a sawmill from a chop stick factory.

Why not create a new gaming centre from the existing bingo hall. Plenty of building there. No need to tear it down. A complete waste.

How about Duchess Park school. The existing school is plenty good enough. Spend a few million and up grade it. Why $30 million for that. .. How about the police station? same thing ..

"I have volunteered many many hours to Theatre northwest and others.
And while a new building might be what some want, here are some problems as I see them.
Bigger...means less cozy and up close to the stage and performers...I prefer small and cozy myself."

I went there for one play and left during the intermission. That is a warehouse and has been inadequately improved. If you sit in the top rows, the ventillation system cannot handle all the people and it gets awfully sweaty the higher up one sits. On top of that, plastic lawn chairs are not exactly my cup of tea. Seating is a big issue from my point of view.

I used to frequent some of the small theatres in Toronto during my U days. Every single one of them was built in found space. Every single one of them was a gem of simplicity and funtionality. Saw some of my best plays there.

But, they are no replacement for a PAC. They are an adjunct to them. I miss them very much. They knew the audience was the customer. There was too much competition there for those who did not excell at both venue and production would be broke fairly quickly.

I am sure the palyhouse has grest productions and several who are intimately involved with the volunteer group are friends of ours. My only complaint is the quality of the venue, not the productions.

Some pictures .. worth a thousand words

Prince Rupert (the one which puts larger cities to shame!!!! openied in 1987 .. 700 seats ...
http://www.lestercentre.ca
[url]http://www.seevirtual360.com/themes/2/theme02.aspx?listingID=10825[url]

Vernon
http://www.ticketseller.ca/performing_arts_centre_page.htm

Nanaimo http://www.porttheatre.com/virtual_tour.html

Kelowna Community Theatre http://www.kelownacommunitytheatre.com/stage.htm

Then there are modern facilities built with the local SD similar to the Vanier Hall situation, except to better technical standards and joint user agreements. These are second best from my point of view, but if this is the only way a poor, deprived town like PG can afford such a facility then so be it.

Abbotsford http://www.sd34.bc.ca/schools/abbeyarts

Kamloops Sagebrush theatre
http://www.sd73.bc.ca/international-education.php/page/about-south-kamloops-secondary Still an opportunity to do that here as well with Duchess Park.

I say we build the Prince Rupert Facility around the PG Playhouse and put Mr. PG in front of it...!!!!!

A better link to Sagebrush is
http://www.sagebrushtheatre.ca/

Avoiding potholes while walking on the streets or sidewalks could be construed as "interpretive dancing" by those who have the distinction of appreciating stuff like that.

Below is the invite from IPG...my question, why is the economic development arm of our city government asking taxpayers to make the business case? What have they been doing with this for the past two years? For that matter, show me anything this organization hs delivered.






City Centre Ventures invites you to attend a special meeting to discuss the development of a performing arts centre for Prince George. Representatives from the Prince George Arts and Cultural community are invited to come together to share ideas about the development of a multi-use performing arts centre in Prince George.

Discussion points will include:
· What would user groups require from a performing arts centre
· What steps need to be taken to build the business case for the performing arts centre
· What kind of organizational structure can be developed to move this forward

The meeting takes place Thursday, February 15 at 7:00 pm in the Ramada Hotel Downtown Prince George.


For more information, please contact:

Gerry Offet Kathy Lachman
President, Initiatives Prince George Manager, City Centre Ventures
564-0282 649-3204

OMG! It's hard to take anyone seriously who thinks there is a lack of parking downtown. There are hundreds, yes hundreds, of spots within easy walking distance of the Civic Centre area. Hundreds! (Days Inn pay lot, across 6th from Days Inn, Parkade across from Ramada, parkade across from Speedees) What's that you say??!! You have to pay 50 cents or a dollar to park?? You have to walk across a street or two and a few blocks?!?! Have we really gotten that bad that if the spot is not right at the front door AND free there's no parking?? Ridiculous!
It's time to get over this small town mentality and start realizing you might have to park a few blocks away, pay a tiny amount and walk a bit.

It seems to me the argument I hear from the pro PAC side is that it must be located downtown, because it will save the downtown property values and the resulting increase in property assessments will hypothetically bring in to the city another $1 million dollars a year in tax revenue. Long winded but that about sums it up IMO.

I think Lunarguy made the most sense in saying if built it should be built alongside the current Playhouse to take advantage of synergies that compliment both facilities and reduce operating costs. I support the Playhouse location because I feel it is closer to PG's current social heart as well as where future development of that sort should be located.

Who can argue that Pine Center, the Casino, Strike Zone, new Liquor Store, and the curling club are not good neighbours for such a development representing the top social outing places respectively for their type of entertainment in this city. When the golf course is developed into hotels and mixed residential retail this whole area could overtake the downtown in importance as PG's new social town center.

I don't support the downtown location simply because it is too close to the pulp mills and thus I like to avoid the downtown. I really don't see any future where PG has pulp mills and a vibrant downtown that attracts people after normal commercial working hours. If located in the downtown it would be a huge waste of investment, and probably simply to subsidize some downtown land owners who are hell bent on bringing the whole city down with them. The types you usually find at the Chamber of Commerce.

If a building gets built, it will have about a 30 year lifecycle before it may succumb to some sort of technical obsolescence, depending of how well it is built and the change in technology. With some luck, and good care (which is difficult to come by in this community) it may last as long as 50 years. In most communities, such facilities will eventually be overshadowed by newer facilities as a community grows.

Similar to a pulp mill, it is a building built for a very specific purpose and will need upgrading after 2 to 3 decades.

The pulp mills, on the other hand, have existed for 40 or so years. Event though they are continually renewed over time and only remotely resemble the original installations from the technical point of view, they will shortly succumb to new feedstock, lack of feedstock, new pulping standards, etc. I keep saying 10 years at the most because that is what engineers at the mill tell me and it can be seen from following the pulp and paper tech business.

So, this building will not see the light of day prior to 2010, if that. Location is the last thing to discuss at this time. From my point of view ANY location at this time is a preconceived idea.

First comes the physical needs of a building. Then the determination of specs that will allow certain productions to occur in them. Then we look at how to go about making it a reality.

A building such as that can be used for leverage to get developers to assist. If the existing golf club gets sold and developed (we have not heard anything about that lately so I would not build a building in a middle of a field of dreams), then the developers may see a building can be a drawing card for what they have in mind. If so, we could get some financial participation form them. So, in a fashion, that would be a PPP.

On the other hand, if the City feels it should be downtown, then they would have to find a developer fro parts of downtown that could do the same. If not, then they would have to consider that portion of the development as another investment and cross their fingers that developers will come in after the fact.

Then there are the school partnerships, the University partnerships, the corporate legacies with multi million dollar donations.

You got that right realitycheck. People want to be able to drive into the door and right up to their seats in this town.

Ever wonder why we are one of the few places in Canada left with a drive in theatre? .... and that in a place where it gets dark at 11 pm at the height of summer!

1. What would user groups require from a performing arts centre? - hold performing arts performances to a large enough group, in an acoustical and visual proficient envelope, that a touring group would be able to come to this community so that both the user groups and the facility are economically viable within the first 5 years of operation.

2. What steps need to be taken to build the business case for the performing arts centre? – Hire a consultant who has a good track record of making a business case for such facilities. I understand the city may already be using such a consultant for some of its work.

3. What kind of organizational structure can be developed to move this forward? That is the easiest part – PAC society which can move on its own in partnership with the city rather than being led by the city.

Here is a first step analysis from Rochester, New York as an example. A group should be able to accomplish such a general statement within a 3 to 4 month period, including its own incorporation as a Society.

http://www.artsrochester.org/PACcommitteereport.pdf

What I find interesting is that IPG does not have a discussion paper ready for this meeting. One would think that two years of telling this community that it is in the works would have generated something more than a simple empty handed meeting. I know I have been sold a bill of goods by people working at IPG because they told several of us that something was in the work so hold your horses. Well, those horses have died from neglect in the meantime.

The time to be nice and politically correct about this is over.

In the movies there is always a parking space for your car right in front of the airport terminal. And all ya have to do is get out of your car and walk into said terminal. Always!!

Thanks for the link bohemian ... much better!! For some reason google failed me. :-(

W.C. is still talking about doing something with the SD at Duchess Park. I know you think that is not downtown, but I think that it is a good compromise.

I am unsure how the partnerships work. I think it would be great to have a school based performing arts programme associated with a theatre. As long as all the problems found at Vanier hall can be overcome, I think this would be a workable compromise.

Problem is that the SD is still having problems with getting the larger school built there. Perhaps building a PAC there in a similat fashion to Abbotsford and Kamloops would actually make the larger school more viable rather than less viable.

How do you know you are in PG?

There is no valet parking.

;-)

Owl

It's not downtown, and it doesn't allow for proximate commercial development and spin-off and synergies (conventions using Civic Centre and PAC, etc).

But most importantly, a partnership with the School District is a bad idea. We've had to deal with too much crap over the years with Vanier Hall. They can have Vanier Hall all to themselves with a new PAC downtown - they don't need one at Dutchess, too.

And I don't think the city should run it, either.

As for a school based performing arts program, the school that need to run that is UNBC. And despite the recent minor pullback, UNBC needs a fine arts program because our economy needs more creative talent.

An MFA (Master of Fine Arts) is the new MBA:

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=MFA+new+MBA&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

Owl says:

"One would think that two years of telling this community that it is in the works would have generated something more than a simple empty handed meeting."

Well, it was probably because they had that "marketing implementation plan" on their mind, and in my view, Harris and SmashLab did nothing but deliver a black and white brochure. There are no physical plans. The arts community was barely consulted; the opportunity to get the community, and the arts, excited about getting something downtown was lost.

And you're right; we should be able to download a discussion paper to prepare for the meeting. I guess we'll have to bring our own.

I'll post it at my Prince George Performing Arts Centre Initiative blog:

http://pgpac.blogspot.com

The discussion around the value of the knowledge and skills taught in an MFA versus MBA program is an interesting one. Strengths in conceptualizing and creative thinking are certainly a must from my point of view when it comes to developing value added products and services.

However, I would disagree with the comment by the blogger that "teachable skills (even some skills MBAs learn and posses) can always be outsourced to places like India"

Two points.

1. It makes an assumption that creativity is not teachable. I feel that is a grave mistake. As with everything, some people will be naturally more skilled than others at whatever one does. That includes creativity. Also, with whatever one does well, one has to keep practicing it to stay on the edge. Creative solutions are no different from my point of view.

Simple case in point. If creativity was not teachable, there would be no need for a fine arts degree or any type of training in the arts other than for professional automatons who need to see some paper in order to determine whether someone has the skills to do a job. Howevever, like anything else, if you have the right "material", it is much easier to teach it.

2. Teachable skills can not all be outsourced to places like India. Until we have remote robotics which can be handled by joysticks in front of a computer in India to weld piplelines, drill wells, cut hay, cook hamburgers, harvest trees, build buildings, guide kayakers from China, insert an IV, stock grocery shelves, etc. etc. there will be plenty of teachable skills which can not be outsourced until other systems are created by the creative minds in India and installed by investors from all over the world.

The thing I lament is that typically creativity has not been rewarded anywhere near as much, with a few exceptions, as those who take the risk of believing in a product or service with excellent creative thinking behind it. The personal reward is more often self satisfaction more than monetary gain.

Of course, society gains most from ensuring that there are enough creative thinkers in the system to ensure survival.

Bohemian, The Harris report, which IPG loves to show off as their work on the performing arts cente, has one, maybe two paragraphs concerning a performing arts centre.

TWO PARAGRAPHS!!!!
It is only mentioned as a point to rally a revitalize the downtown. They have done nothing at IPG to move this forward. I would have thought by now they would have had a least a list of potential corporate donors identified, they would have at least a few possible sites for this building (they have NO idea).

One thing is very certain..IPG is not in this to build a performing arts centre. The only reason they have latched on to this is because they want it downtown ...NOT because this community NEEDS one.

trueblue2:


The Haris report is a $145,000 waste of money,for so many reasons I don't have time to list them now.

They didn't even sit down and talk to the arts community. And where are the physical plans?

No, the produced a nice little brochure with Kathy Lachman's name all over it so that if she leaves the organization they will have to have a new printing.