Editor:
Re: Lowering George won’t be an easy sell, Coast Reporter, May 15.
The last sentence of your recent editorial in Coast Reporter closes with the words “…decide for yourself if a project of this magnitude will beautify or uglify Gibsons Harbour.”
Certainly, beauty (and ugliness) are in the eye of the beholder, but they are not words that appear in the official community plan (OCP), at least not in any sections pertaining to harbour building guidelines. Instead, it contains words such as “form” and “character.”
Form is defined as “the visible shape or configuration of something,” and character is defined as “the combination of qualities or features that distinguishes one thing from another.” To be sure, these are only somewhat less subjective measures than “beauty,” which is why, for the avoidance of doubt and confusion, the OCP explicitly designates a height limit of 35 feet. It would be difficult for the document to be more clear on that point.
That said, in our world, money talks and people vote, which all means that The George is quite obviously a done deal. There is not much left to do but watch it rise up. However it turns out, in years from now, at least one side will have the satisfaction of telling the other side, “I told you so.”
Only one question remains, and that is: “What exactly is the purpose of a public consultation OCP exercise, other than to keep well meaning (and perhaps naive?) community-oriented people occupied and distracted while the real decisions are being made elsewhere?”
Alan Donenfeld, Gibsons
