Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire
Probably the least likely of all explanations IMO.
If they were that concerned about encouraging the use of public transportation they wouldn't have screwed the city on the SWBRTROW.
|
When the Hydro move was happening I was in a few continuing education classes with Hydro employees. The planned underground parking in the Hydro tower was definitely reduced from the planning stage to the construction stage, for whatever reason. To offset the lost parking Hydro then signed a long term lease on the basement of CityPlace accessed off the loading dock on St Marys for additional parking spaces. At the time the CityPlace basement was being used as storage for MPI. The loss of that space sent them scrambling and it was shortly after that they purchase CityPlace and its related parking lots.
Hydro also reportedly
did limit parking to encourage transit use. One of their selection criteria for a site placed a high level of importance on being on a major transit corridor. The plan seemed to be employees could take transit from home or they could park at the Taylor site and take transit from there.
One of the questions people should be asking is if the plan, as was sold to the public, was to locate Hydro employees under one roof, why does the Taylor site remain so active for Hydro operations?