Say “no” to the Crystal Pool

I support the idea of refurbishing/repairing the Crystal Pool instead of building another facility from scratch.  If we opted for a new structure, would the contractors guarantee the final cost of the project and the time of completion?  To know the answer we have only to remember the debacle of the Jonhson Street bridge, which was completed neither on time nor within budget. In fact, the cost overruns were huge, and we would run the same risks with a new pool. 

Then there is the environmental aspect: The process of making cement releases significant amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere, and therefore it makes sense to avoid new concrete construction whenever possible.  Furthermore, the new development options would take out 11 or 28 trees (depending on the chosen site), adding to the loss of precious wildlife habitat in our community.

Most of all, I question the very need for a new pool. Consider that the Oak Bay Pool and the Crystal Pool were built just three years apart. The Oak Bay pool is well maintained and is regularly enjoyed by a high number of people. It stands to reason that the same must be possible for the Crystal Pool. Instead, Council is discussing the purchase of land next to the existing pool as a possible site for its replacement. That land is green space, of which we need more in Victoria, not less.

I have also been hearing stories about people who have been making signs saying no to the Crystal Pool, and those signs were being taken down. This bothers me, as people should be allowed to voice their opinions on this issue, especially with the referendum coming up soon.

In summary, I strongly believe in maintaining what we have, otherwise it would be like replacing our car whenever a red warning light comes on. We are smart enough not to do that with our vehicles, and the same logic must apply in deciding about the Crystal Pool. The solution of maintaining it is obvious and workable.