The whole thing is a total waste of tax payer dollars.

Set them up at a Tim Hortons, it'll save 40 million and all the gas and time they use driving to a tim hortons for coffee

So...what do you two suggetst they do? Keep that eyesore of a building and do nothing? It takes money to make a city look nice...lets evolve here. I for one am happy to have my tax $$$'s working to improve the appearance of downtown.

So...what do you two suggetst they do? Keep that eyesore of a building and do nothing? It takes money to make a city look nice...lets evolve here. I for one am happy to have my tax $$$'s working to improve the appearance of downtown.

So...what do you two suggetst they do? Keep that eyesore of a building and do nothing? It takes money to make a city look nice...lets evolve here. I for one am happy to have my tax $$$'s working to improve the appearance of downtown.

If we need a new station then build the damn station.

I am not seeing any surface parking anywhere on the renderings. Where will that be? Is the cost of that land and paving/fencing covered in the total cost? How about the cost of lost opportunity to use of the land for a higher economic use as well as the loss of property tax?

The surface parking for the district RCMP operations is relatively unobtrusive. I doubt that would be the case with this building.

Interesting to see that they are now breaking out the actual construction costs from all the other costs associated with this capital project.

Where is the emergency operations centre going? Built separately in the same location after this one is completed? Another new building at another location? Rental space somewhere else?

I think its a bit of smoke and mirror. I think it is going to still cost 45 million dollars.

Can I get the franchise rights to open up a Timmies kiosks in the new station.

One might suggest that they stay in the present building and add additional floors that the building was designed for.

It is beyond reason that we spend 44 million on a police building. It might look nice but ecologically it’s a disaster with all the windows for our cold climate. If we want the down town to look nice let the dollars come from the private sector . Why should the tax payer have to shore up the profit for private gain.

The court house is a prime example of wasting tax dollars on things that look nice. What’s the old cliche, “you cant make a silk purse out of a pigs ear.
Cheers

And how much has been spent already on the process of dithering?
Consultants, engineers, architects, quantity surveyors,etc. And, was there not already a competition held to determine which company would be building the grand new RCMP show place? More money spent and nothing to show for it.
The site at 4th and Victoria where they want to build the palace already has a large building on it, sure, it is 30 + years old, but it could be gutted and re-built, even expanded. That would address the main complaint; insufficient space at the Brunswick St. location. Are we such poor builders in Canada that buildings are not usable after 30 years? If I remember correctly, Canada Safeway built that building, and no later than the mid seventies, so maybe it is 35 yrs old. It is block construction and I believe steel roof structure, so what's to wear out? And even with an expansion, there would still be lots of room for parking, a lot more than they have now.
Also eliminating the EOC from the plans is probably false economy, sooner or later the EOC people will be clamoring for a new central location that consolidates those operations, and they will get it, in the name of public safety, so why not just get it done now? I won't go on about how the Brunswick St. location was designed to allow expansion upwards, that idea seems to be unpopular.
metalman.

What private sector? the store owners? no, the city is the cities responsibility...the shop owners can help but they don't have the renevue to make downtown what it could be...tax dollars can though. I really hope w/ the hosting of the 2015 winter canada games we will get a nice infusion of gov't money to improve PG so it can finally stop being made fun of by the likes of kamloops snobs etc...did anyone else hear the roasting PG took in the Kamloops paper and radio stations...disgusting...I wouldn't want to live in a city where that menatlity exists. I was so pissed off...

What private sector? the store owners? You guessed right. The City makes the by laws and the private sector builds the building. Is that so difficult to understand? Im think that’s how free enterprise works. Its supply and demand. Tell me why the tax payer should provide funds to enhance sale for private gain. Get out of town if you cant make it on your own.
Cheers

Sure hope that when this is finally decided by my city council with it's $111 million dollar debt can go to the bank to get that debt plus the new cop shop and inevitable PAC all put on one loan (consolidated, so to speak) and have it amortized until we all are dead. Keep the payments low. Maybe we will just pay the interest on that loan and fill a few potholes with the rest of our tax dollars. Anything to keep my taxes from rising every year until I die.

IMO There is a more suitable location. Across Queensway from the old Norgate Autobody.This location has better trafic access for all parts of the city. Not so conjested as Victoria St. Cheaper property and more room. There is even a half full parkade across the street. The Victoria St.location is a lot more valuable to the retail sector. It should be developed into Retail/Residential. If the RCMP building was located on Queensway it would do a lot for redevelopment of that area. I,ll stop now,this makes too much sense,SILLY ME. The decision makers know far more than I.

Gawd Harbinger you don't have to be a nasty man! Jeez, so I guess (cuz you clearly think I'm an idiot) that whoever the heck owns that piece of crap building is supposed to demolish and come up w/ the millions it's going to cost to build a police station...?? Or is the RCMP supposed to pay for it? Or is the Gov't kicking in some $$$...these are my questions...who paid for the other new police station on 5th? I'm sure taht wasn't cheap. oh and I don't think the privat sector builds the buildings as a rule. Did Homework build the building they are in? Did liquidation world build the building they are in? No.

The whole design looks to me as if someone dumped a bunch of building blocks on a table at random. I count 11 different roofs, several curved fronts and a whole lot of glass panels...

Doesn't a design such as this one cost way more than a building that is designed to be for a sober utilitarian function - namely that of a police station/office building?

It is not an opera house, an art gallery or a performing arts center.

Build it clean, build it symmetrical and functionality should be combined with a modern pleasing appearance.

It would cost a lot less.

You are right PrinceGeorge,it looks like someones drug induced dream. Very costly to build,very costly to heat and very very costly to maintain. Just look at the jail on the hill. An architect looking for recognition. At the taxpayers expense.

What a complete disgusting waste of opportunity going ahead with this will be for this city.

No parkade underground on the most viable property in the downtown to move parking underground and off the street level? I thought this was the primary reason they choose this location?

Simply put we are a city with a declining population and yet we have hired more police officers at a huge cost to city land owners and now we want to add another $45 million in debt to build some architects dream. The people at city hall with their 6-figure incomes have no idea about fiscal responsibility.

Giterdun makes far more sense in the idea that it should be located downtown at the old Norgate building site utilizing swamp land if it is to be built at all... better location for both access to the rest of the city.. access to the troubled spots in the city.. and a presence in the downtown core where it is needed the most. To say nothing of the cheaper land and parkade availability. If it was to be built at all, which I'm not convinced is needed in light of a dwindling population.

This whole project makes me mad as a tax payer to see this is where our priorities are. We should have a vote on this at election time as a major capital project or it shouldn't even be discussed at city hall.

The property in question is a prime lot for commercial and residential development of the downtown with its capacity first and foremost for underground parking... in addition to the central location for commercial and potential residential activity in the downtown. Who ever thinks this is good zoning policy putting a police station there should be fired immediately is what I think.

City council will continue down the path of a new RCMP building whether required or not. Eventually they will wear down the population like they did with the community energy system. 10 years and counting for the community energy system plus the 14 million dollars. At the end of the day it sure will be interesting to see what the saving is to taxpayers for the energy system. My bet is the numbers will be well hidden. Let's see who else signs on for heat from this money losing project.

Over and over we elect good solid responsible people to politics. After a short period they turn goofy and go totally against the people. WHY is this? There is one common denominator to all consecutive governments. The Bureaucrates. They are not elected and they are entrenched into the system so deep that they are almost impossible to get rid of. These people have the power and are the problem. We need politicians that can deal with bureaucrates. The house should be swept clean.

I got the following sentence from an article I read a while ago on the internet. I think it is something we should all be asking ourselves.

Should one generation consume beyond its means and either expect or hope that the next generations will somehow pick up the tab?

"In order to borrow that money, there will have to be an alternate approval process. That means the borrowing will go ahead, unless 10% of the eligible voters register their opposition to the plan with the City within a certain time frame."

So why hasn't the city put that in the paper and on TV and why haven't I seen this from Bens writings. We have a chance to stop this and we don't even know that? Surely someone in the media can get on it and tell the voters what the options are. Where do we register and what the hell is a certain time frame?? This stinks.

City politics has become as clouded as Gordon Campbells politics.

shesmiles ... "Did Homework build the building they are in? Did liquidation world build the building they are in? No."

Neither of those built those built those buildings.

The Royal Bank built the first one and the Hudson Bay built the second one.

Both moved their operations out of the Central Business District to follow other who did the same.

HBC moved when Woodwards closed all its stores.

RBC built several branches where the new shopping is - initially Pine Centre and then Box Store Heaven (BSH).

Even the City pulled its own Library from downtown and built it on Patricia.

The death of downtown is a joint venture of the citizens who want shopping malls, businesses who want the citizens to have what they want, and the City that agreed with that.

So, now we are seeing the result. We have only us to blame and the various Councils along the way, against the OCP which was supposed to be the guide but no one ever took it seriously.

So now we are going through the exercise one more time ..... I am not sure why.

Giterdun .... you hit the nail on the head .... The legislatures and councils can turn the ship slightly, but in reality the bureaucrats are the resisting force that prevents it from going too far off the direction it is heading in.

If the bureaucrats do not have good ideas, and present them well, then the ship goes round and round in circles with a ton of energy lost.

For those who watch China wondering how they manage to do what they do, it is in a big part because their system allows for much more unified direction setting and implementation.

Supertech, that has been known for some time. In the recent past it is the way of being relatively certain that a project will go ahead.

If there are too many of these, and people are already organized to do this, as they were with the HST, then it may not be a piece of cake for much longer.

Things change. The alternate approval process is relatively new. The way to beat it is still evolving and may develop into a much stronger movement as time goes by. Of course, government can change the goalpost from 10% to 20% almost with the stroke of a pen. :-) .... not fair, eh?

Resident ..... "At the end of the day it sure will be interesting to see what the saving is to taxpayers for the energy system. My bet is the numbers will be well hidden."

They do not have to be hidden. They will just be presented in such a way that the measurements are arbitrary and point to a positive outcome.

Not much different than the fact that the implementation of low density urban sprawl policies has many uncounted costs to it, such as transportation costs, environmental costs, and costs of declining property values and the loss of a City's heart in the downtown.

Supertech ... "So why hasn't the city put that in the paper and on TV and why haven't I seen this from Bens writings."

Because you do not read all of Ben's writings? Or you do not listen to Ben's radio show? Or you have short term memory loss... :-)

http://www.opinion250.com/blog/view/12875/1/mayor+fields+calls+about+rcmp+building+and+road+repairs?id=&st=3076

May 2009 ... "Mayor Rogers ..... says ultimately the decision abaout borrowing the money to build the facility will be the taxpayers, as there will have to be an alternate approval process before the City could borrow the money needed for that project."

History of alternate approval processes in PG

Terasen Gas deal – went to referendum – 5 % needed at that time
Cameron Street bridge – failed to go to referendum
DBIA special levy bylaw - failed to go to referendum
District energy system – failed to go to referendum
George street canopies – failed to go to referendum

Maybe Palopu could help with adding any I missed.