LETTER: Central Saanich municipal building design not finalized
Published 1:30 pm Sunday, March 8, 2026
I’m a homeowner in Saanichton Village, just a few blocks from the current Mount Newton municipal building, and I’ve been following this discussion and planning process quite closely.
It’s clear from the reports I’ve read and meetings I’ve listened to that the current 1970s civic facilities are aging, have documented seismic deficiencies (like many buildings of that era), and don’t meet space requirements for a growing municipality’s civic services. Relocating these civic services creates an opportunity for us to reimagine the 1903 Mount Newton site. Council has started the rezoning process, which includes several readings and a public hearing. We know that rezoning decides what kinds of uses are allowed on the land; it does not lock in a final building design, exact height, layout, or specific amenities.
I admit I’m confused by some of the letters and social media posts that make it sound as though every design decision has already been finalized. That is not the case, as is made clear in the many reports and communications from the municipality. The final look and feel of any development would still be preceded by additional design steps/iterations and further public input.
It’s worth remembering that local facilities we now love faced opposition when they were proposed. For example, the development plans for Panorama Recreation Centre and Saanich Peninsula Hospital were both controversial at the time. And it’s reasonable to assume that some of us live in houses that were once the subject of protest. Communities change, and what feels unsettling at first can later become something we are proud of.
I’ve been impressed by the municipality’s public engagement process that has taken place through open houses, surveys, committee discussions, and public hearings (past and future). Not everyone will agree with every outcome, but I am excited about continuing to participate in future engagement opportunities to provide feedback and input.
What concerns me most in recent letters and online comments is not disagreement and debate, which is a vital part of civic engagement; it’s the aggressive tone. Strong opinions are part of civic life, but personal attacks, exaggerated claims, and suggestions of bad faith do not strengthen our community.
We can disagree while still treating each other, and our elected officials, with basic respect. Decorum matters if we want people to continue participating in public life.
Sharon McIntyre
Saanichton