NIMBYism strikes on Painter Road

Reader thinks neighbours should be considerate of development

Re: Neighbours in established neighbourhood leery of new Colwood development

Complaints about the building of needed housing on Painter Road are strange.

What’s the point about a few more house driveways in a neighbourhood of more than 200? The way Katheryn Robertson talks, many cars will be moving in and out of house driveways at the time children are walking to and from school – that doesn’t make sense.

Slurs at apartment occupants as being “transient” are fallacious – many stay put for decades, including those who would be able to stay in the neighbourhood as they age out of their houses. On the other hand, some house owners move after a few years and some rent to a revolving door of noisy persons – how is that better than having apartments?

Claims that all the present residents Ms. Robertson says she talked to will want to move sound like cheap talk without their own money behind it.

As for traffic safety, isn’t that a policing matter, as is curbing drunk house owners and their delinquent teenagers who already live in the area?

The nature of NIMBYism is making fallacious claims to control others’ property at no cost to themselves. That’s initiation of force, via the collective.

Keith Sketchley, Saanich