[Surrey] RCMP E-Division Headquarters | U/C - Page 2

invisibleairwaves · #21 Posted **May 8, 2010, 8:18 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BCPhil

E division will probably be gone in less than 10 years anyway, replaced with metro police or more city police forces. Why Surrey, Burnaby, Richmond and others all still use RCMP is beyond me. The region needs to grow up and take care of itself.

If the RCMP is lucky they might still have E-division forces in the rest of the province if we don't go with a provincial police force.

This. Let's face it; the RCMP just aren't very well-suited to being an urban police force. If Surrey wants to get serious about cleaning up, forming a local force has to be a priority.

By the way, is that Fraser Highway running along the bottom of that rendering? Surely they aren't planning on keeping it at 2 lanes....

Whalleyboy · #22 Posted **May 8, 2010, 8:44 AM**

thats timberlane a new road being built
oh and as for RCMP i dont think Surrey will be getting rid of it any time soon for one this is being built in Surrey and also Surrey is proud to have the largest RCMP detachment in Canada

invisibleairwaves · #23 Posted **May 8, 2010, 8:54 AM**

How is that something to be proud of? Seems more like a point of shame..."Hey, look, we're the biggest city in Canada that hasn't bothered to get its own police force! We're dependent on the Feds and proud of it!"

We can get our own force and still keep the headquarters...after all, they're currently based out of Vancouver and have been for a long time.

LeftCoaster · #24 Posted **May 8, 2010, 5:06 PM**

As far as I undersntad the fees they pay the RCMP to police their jurisdiction are very similar to what they would pay to maintain their own police force.

delboy · #25 Posted **May 8, 2010, 10:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

As far as I undersntad the fees they pay the RCMP to police their jurisdiction are very similar to what they would pay to maintain their own police force.

wrong - the city only has to pay 80 percent of costs and nothing for hiring and training. There are also special funds for complex investigations that comes right from the Feds.

Further, there's no union and they can get away with less coppers. A regional force simply won't happen due to fiscal constraints.

the new policing contract goes through I think in 2012 for 20 years, i highly doubt there is enough political will or money to implement a regional force by then.

LeftCoaster · #26 Posted **May 8, 2010, 10:08 PM**

^ Well complex or major investegations are covered by the RCMP in any jusisdiction in Canada, so that doesnt really matter, but where did you hear about 80%... I've never heard that before.

If that is the case why would any area have their own force when they can download 20% of the costs onto the federal government? It doesn't make much sense to me.

Then again not much about public policy and governmental spending habits makes much sense at all so perhaps it is the case.

LeftCoaster · #27 Posted **May 8, 2010, 10:20 PM**

After some further investigation it seems the applicable number here (in Surrey's case) is 90%. So the government essentially provides a 10% subsidy to municipalities over 15,000 who chose to take advantage of using the RCMP as its municipal force.

Source:
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-225-...etech1-eng.htm

Also from the E division website it appears that only 11 jurisdictions in BC do not use the RCMP as their municipal police force. Interesting, but I guess given the size of many of the communitites in BC I shouldn't be surprised.

delboy · #28 Posted **May 8, 2010, 11:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

^ Well complex or major investegations are covered by the RCMP in any jusisdiction in Canada, so that doesnt really matter, but where did you hear about 80%... I've never heard that before.

If that is the case why would any area have their own force when they can download 20% of the costs onto the federal government? It doesn't make much sense to me.

Then again not much about public policy and governmental spending habits makes much sense at all so perhaps it is the case.

Don't underestimate the cost of hiring and training which is also covered by the feds - also uniforms, guns etc are not paid for by the city. Moreover, cop to pop ratios are lower in RCMP areas.

Not all major investigations are taken over by the RCMP as a matter of routine and when you consider a fairly involved murder investigation using wire tap etc, can run to a half a million in a space of half year, smaller forces simply don't do these types of investigations as there's no money, unless it was high profile. the rcmp routinely run complex investigations that simply wouldn't happen without federal funding, and I'm talking at the Municipal level not at the federal or provincial level.

there was a study done in surrey some years back when the last mayor was pushing for a city force - in the end they realized they couldn't afford it.

Whalleyboy · #29 Posted **May 11, 2010, 6:54 AM**

http://www.bcdailybuzz.com/media/5947/New_BC_RCMP_HQ/
video about and has images of the building

SFUVancouver · #30 Posted **May 11, 2010, 5:58 PM**

This building is already a dinosaur before the first shovel even breaks ground. It is surrounded by a lake of asphalt and considering the new outpatient hospital is adjacent there should at least be a shared parking structure to reduce the volume of surface parking. Moreover, it is set back from the road by a giant landscaped front lawn and does not engage at all with 96 Avenue and announces that everyone is expected to drive to work. This is what you would expect to have been built in the 70s in the middle of nowhere in a suburb, not 700 metres from a SkyTrain station and the heart of "downtown Surrey".

Mayor Watts needs to send this back to the drawing board if she is serious about remaking Surrey. It is just terrible.

GMasterAres · #31 Posted **May 11, 2010, 11:20 PM**

I am fairly sure there had to be design considerations made for security purposes. Remember this is all the RCMP divisions in essence in 1 basket. So the building can't be designed like you would a standard tower. Large open parking lots add a level of security buffer zone in addition to not having the building directly next to roads.

Take a look through the majority of major policing headquarters around teh world and you'll find similar design considerations.

I think it looks pretty good and imposing for the size.

But like I said, you have to take into consideration the massive security implications they have to take into account when building a facility of this type. Barriers even if they are natural ones are still a very effective tool in securing a building.

Spork · #32 Posted **May 12, 2010, 12:30 AM**

Well then the guy who designed this building has watched far too much "Assault on Precinct 13".

GMasterAres · #33 Posted **May 12, 2010, 7:06 PM**

Quite possibly.

brown_supahero · #34 Posted **Aug 16, 2010, 9:26 PM**

Has anybody heard of Bouygues Building Canada Inc.? I might sign on with these guys for the construction.

Whalleyboy · #35 Posted **Mar 6, 2011, 2:56 AM**

Well i just found out i got family who toured the building and got some pics from them to put up here.

Photos taken by my family member and post through my photobucket

invisibleairwaves · #36 Posted **Mar 6, 2011, 4:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhausner

I am fairly sure there had to be design considerations made for security purposes. Remember this is all the RCMP divisions in essence in 1 basket. So the building can't be designed like you would a standard tower. Large open parking lots add a level of security buffer zone in addition to not having the building directly next to roads.

Take a look through the majority of major policing headquarters around teh world and you'll find similar design considerations.

I think it looks pretty good and imposing for the size.

But like I said, you have to take into consideration the massive security implications they have to take into account when building a facility of this type. Barriers even if they are natural ones are still a very effective tool in securing a building.

If the Law Courts can exist safely in the heart of downtown Vancouver, there's no reason the RCMP headquarters couldn't be built in a far more urban, street-friendly fashion. It's a tremendous missed opportunity to put a big, busy office building in the heart of the city centre.

And besides, what sort of message does it send to the populace when the RCMP hides themselves away in a secluded complex in a forest?

This has to be by far the biggest mistake Watts has made in the city centre.

Plus it just gives the RCMP a billion-dollar reason to stick around when they should have been replaced by a municipal police force a long time ago.

paradigm4 · #37 Posted **Mar 6, 2011, 4:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

If the Law Courts can exist safely in the heart of downtown Vancouver, there's no reason the RCMP headquarters couldn't be built in a far more urban, street-friendly fashion. It's a tremendous missed opportunity to put a big, busy office building in the heart of the city centre.

And besides, what sort of message does it send to the populace when the RCMP hides themselves away in a secluded complex in a forest?

This has to be by far the biggest mistake Watts has made in the city centre.

Plus it just gives the RCMP a billion-dollar reason to stick around when they should have been replaced by a municipal police force a long time ago.

The main reason they located here was because the province owned the land. Same with the Outpatient Centre, same with the new School District HQ (district land in this case). Only reason the City has such a sweet deal in terms of location is because it owns the land around the Rec Centre.

It's all real estate.

Whalleyboy · #38 Posted **Mar 6, 2011, 4:25 AM**

It should be noted the RCMP need it alot more land then what they had. The area they are moving to was already there and in use for other stuff before. The land was given up and instead of paying out the butt for land in side the city centre boundry. They where smart and used the cheaper land and still remain almost right by the city centre. may as well be in it since its right on the border

delboy · #39 Posted **Mar 6, 2011, 4:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

If the Law Courts can exist safely in the heart of downtown Vancouver, there's no reason the RCMP headquarters couldn't be built in a far more urban, street-friendly fashion. It's a tremendous missed opportunity to put a big, busy office building in the heart of the city centre.

And besides, what sort of message does it send to the populace when the RCMP hides themselves away in a secluded complex in a forest?

This has to be by far the biggest mistake Watts has made in the city centre.

Plus it just gives the RCMP a billion-dollar reason to stick around when they should have been replaced by a municipal police force a long time ago.

you simply have zero understanding of the issues and complexties ivolved. HQ is not meant to be 'approachable' it's not where you go to make a complaint, it's where major files (at the provincial and federal level), and admin are run out of. If you want to speak with a commuity officer or make a complaint ...go to a store front or the main detachment, not HQ.

Plus tranist was one consideration that went into this location...fairly close to skytrain and the hwy. Many members have to commute to work just like eveyone else.

wrenegade · #40 Posted **Mar 6, 2011, 7:05 PM**

Wow, thanks for the pics Whalleyboy, I had no idea this project was so far along!