This is a strange one.
Two weeks ago, when Gibsons council approved the George Hotel and Residences, we informed our readers that the allowed heights of the buildings, at their highest elevations, were 31.44 metres for the hotel and 25.05 metres for the condos. As well, I penned an editorial pointing out that the approved maximum heights represented about a 15-foot drop on the waterfront side from the previous design.
The numbers were reported by Jacob Roberts, who had them confirmed by Gibsons director of planning Andre Boel as being the George’s “highest elevation.”
Well, apparently there was some confusion. The quoted heights were not based on the waterfront-side elevations after all, but were instead based on “average natural grade.”
Andre informed me of this by email last Wednesday. After he and I exchanged notes over a couple of days, I phoned chief administrative officer Emanuel Machado early this week. Always a classy guy, Mani apologized “for the confusion this has caused” and provided me with a statement from the Town:
“The topic of height for the George Hotel and Residences project has been confusing at times because two different reference points have been used. Measured from the mean sea level (also known as geodetic) the hotel building is proposed to be 37.8 m (124’4’’) and the residential building 31.41 m (103’4’’). A second type of reference point is used in the zoning bylaw where building height is not measured to sea level but instead measured to average natural grade on the site. Thus, in the zoning bylaw the George hotel building maximum height is 31.44 m (103.42 ft.) and the residential building 25.05 m (82.4 ft.).”
The statement goes on to explain: “The height of the buildings increased in response to the geotechnical studies. The building foundation was moved up in order to better protect the aquifer … Overall, the hotel building increased 1.22 m (4’) in height compared to the December 2013 design and the residential building height increased 2.15 m (7’1’’).”
So, in fact, the hotel is four feet taller and the condo block is seven feet taller than they were envisioned last year, when the candidates who now sit on council all pledged to negotiate the George’s height downward. Well, things change.
I never did get a satisfactory answer as to why Andre confirmed the average natural grade height was the highest elevation. He did point out in his first note that table 1 in a report to council dated May 12 showed the height changes compared to the earlier design, and included the “proposed height to Canadian geodetic datum,” which means sea level. We missed that, and so are not blameless. But since no one else in the Greater Gibsons area caught it either, or at least wrote in or called in to challenge us on the numbers, one has to conclude that the method of disclosure was somewhat obscure.
File it under strange.
