I was visiting family in Rockland the other day and found the huge ugly modern house on the corner of Moss and Rockland had the "STOP OVER DEVELOPMENT! RESPECT OUR NEIGHBOURHOOD!" sign up on it. I had to stop and laugh out loud as I remember when that house was proposed/built. It was incredibly controversial in the neighbourhood, people said it's angular modern design was an attack on the neighbourhood and allowing it to be built would destroy rockland. People also said it was too big, it was a monster house, the massing was oppressing the intersection. For years after it was built people complained about it.
To see it having a sign against development that might change the character of the neighbourhood was just perfectly poetic. The only good neighbourhood character destroying monster house is my neighbourhood character destroying monster house.
It's FYGM all the way down. Cities grow and densify organically over time, when you try to stop that you seriously damage the city. Large chunks of rockland along transit corridors should absolutely should be replaced with townhouses and multi-family. Keep the grand historic mansions and character homes and add natural incremental density where it best fits. Once you pour the formaldehyde over the neighbourhood or try to encase it in amber you've killed it.
In case anyone doesn't know the context, here's the area and I've highlighted the truth centre.
Look at the density/massing of the area. Along fort it's all condos and apartments already, as is Linden. Along moss you have a transition of apartments, the art gallery, and finally single family houses. On the site in question having condos along fort with low-rise townhouses along penterlew 100% matches the general "gradient" of forms in the existing neighbourhood. If the residents want open space they can bid in the lot, or maybe buy a farm out in north saanich because this is a city lot along a major transit route, get over it.