.jpg;w=800)
City of Powell River councillors have adopted the Powell River Recreation Complex rehabilitation plan, which outlines a phased approach to renovating and restoring the facility.
At the March 4 city council meeting, council approved a plan that outlines seven phases, reaching 2025. The plan came out of a study commissioned and carried out by an architectural firm called Architecture 49, as well as several other studies.
In introducing the motion to council, councillor Jim Palm, the portfolio holder for recreation, said this is a big item that council had to tackle. He said the recreation complex is one of the hubs of the community.
“It’s well used and it serves us very well,” said Palm. “It’s still standing after 46 years. Luckily, we’ve been able to do some mechanical work on it lately during COVID-19. We revamped the swimming pool, but there’s still a lot of work to bring that building up to code and move it forward for the next 20, 30 or 40 years, or 50 years, perhaps, if we do it right.”
Palm said council had previously heard a good presentation by director of parks, recreation and culture Ray Boogaards in terms of the rehabilitation plan. Palm said he wanted to thank Boogaards for doing a fine review, covering architectural, mechanical, structural, electrical and accessibility issues.
“He’s put together some numbers in that regard with Architecture 49,” said Palm. “They’ve laid out a number of items and I just want to outline for the public that we have applied for more than $6 million for phase one for 2021, which includes building envelope improvements, pool and rink roof replacement, and seismic upgrades to the pool area. Total cost of that is $6,624,000 and we also have contributions to cover additional costs from the Powell River Community Forest if we are successful in obtaining that grant.”
Council unanimously carried the recommendation to adopt the rehabilitation plan.
In Boogaards’ report to council, he stated given the age of the recreation complex, it was important to determine if upgrading the facility would be more cost-effective than replacement. He stated it was determined that with suggested upgrades to the facility to suit changing demands, demographics, accessibility and building code requirements, the facility can be used for another 20 to 25 years.
