Why does UVic need to spend money on a consultant that is essentially a PR function to justify its expansion? (A better neighbour Dec. 7).
The essential nature of NIMBYs is their desire to control others’ property at no cost to themselves. They are skilled at inventing fallacious arguments to support their agenda. Why listen to them?
The University of Victoria has been there for several decades, and will continue to grow as long as provincial taxpayers feed its incompetence. Older neighbours might even want to be happy with the increased property values resulting from expansion. If the university’s architects are competent the result should be fine.
The committee approach will never satisfy each commenter, thus some people will always be with Vic Derman in complaining they weren’t listened to. For example, when the proponent of replacing the motel at Gorge and Admirals with a residential building revised the styling in response to criticism of the first design, other NIMBYs didn’t like the new look. Public comment at best reflects the variety of personal tastes of complainers who aren’t paying for the result, at worst it is the free lunch mentality of NIMBYs. Why does Saanich council support that?
Elsewhere we see the ugliness of the Uptown shopping centre mess despite much meddling by Saanich council.
On Ashley Drive a monster house expansion blocked sun from neighbours. Why bother with Saanich’s emotion-based government activities when the results aren’t good? If there is a substantive problem aren’t the courts an objective path to remedy?