Jump to content



Endangered buildings list

  • Please log in to reply
324 replies to this topic

#321 aastra

  • Member
  • 13,287 posts

Posted 16 May 2018 - 12:56 PM

For opening day it does look a bit rough, I don't disagree.

#322 VicHockeyFan

  • Member
  • 52,099 posts

Posted Yesterday, 05:04 PM

May 22, 2018

A brand spanking new Vic High 
will save tens of millions of dollars ! 
Why be frugal when you can be extravagant?

Victoria School Board trustees will need political courage at the May 28 board meeting to reject outright the expensive recommendations of its planning committee.
It must tell them to go back to the drawing board. 
After consulting mostly parents of future students, alumni and school district staff, the committee thinks two costly seismic upgrade options are the way to go on Vic High. Either option will cost local and provincial taxpayers tens of millions of dollars more than building a higher capacity, new state-of-the-art facility for students and the community.
The committee points to the heritage aspect of Vic High, which is difficult to understand because the Victoria Heritage Foundation has not even moved to fully protect the property and deems it unworthy of its funding. It's an old building of little architectural merit and that's about it.
The committee failed to properly weigh the importance of school security, unfortunately a major concern for students and parents following dreadful disturbances and shootings in recent years.
Did they consider the lifespan of an upgraded facility versus a modern building? Is there an added environmental impact to running a renovated school? Are escalating construction costs allowed for? What are the incremental operating costs in energy usage and maintenance for the next several generations of taxpayers?
The committee failed to completely address the problem of about 200 students in the catchment area now on a waiting list. While some capacity will be added, it will be insufficient for a growing population.
The district projects a total shortfall of 688 spaces across the three high schools within 15 years. By then, Vic High is projected to be 580 over current capacity.
At election time this fall, taxpayers will thank trustees for setting sentimentality aside, to make a frugal decision to build a modern Vic High School and help delay building an additional school.

If those advocating for a more costly seismic upgrade option were prepared to pay the difference, we wouldn't have a problem. They are not, so we are all paying for a dream we don't share.




That's from Grumpy Taxpayers.

"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" - zoomer, April 17, 2018

#323 Nparker

  • Member
  • 18,431 posts

Posted Yesterday, 05:26 PM

aastra just had a coronary.

#324 aastra

  • Member
  • 13,287 posts

Posted Yesterday, 06:49 PM

Nope, I could have written that myself because it's straight out of the script. Again, I hate to be the one to try to squeeze some logic and consistency out of people, but how could it possibly make sense to do expensive reno work on every other school in BC except Vic High? The Kitsilano project alone refutes the premise. All of the other projects just blow the notion to bits.


But aastra, the taxpayers are stretched! Every penny they save by not doing an expensive reno on Vic High can go toward an expensive reno of some lesser school building in some other BC community!


Seriously, that's the logic. It's idiocy.


I know I've been a skipping record about this over the years, but "Victoria sucks" is not an actual principle. It's self-deprecation, nothing more. It should never (again) be allowed to guide any decisions or actions, and whenever that card gets played it should be called out, regardless of the guise.

  • VicHockeyFan, Baro and Bingo like this

#325 G-Man


    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 12,068 posts

Posted Yesterday, 09:37 PM

No one is going to be swayed by that at least.

Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 


It has a whole new look!



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users