Quote:
Originally Posted by VarBreStr18
According to this drawing, the parkade is above ground but pushed against the hillside. See all those plants at the ground level of the parkade. And then the supporting legs are on top of the parkade. So there is not that much excavation required.
|
How do you know that that's parkade?
And not, for example, Amenities?
That drawing seems to give no indication one way or another and you just seem to be guessing.
And furthermore, both the renderings and the schematic plans they have on their own website seem to support the view that they are the latter (Amenities).
For one thing if we're to go by the renderings (equally unreliable) you almost never put glazing that large and that high for parkade structures. That's a waste of money. And the schematic plans for the amenities they have there also support this notion showing amenities space on ground level.
Secondly, if the rezoning application for the phase two part indicates that the project will have underground parking, then what's the logic that the phase one would have above ground parking (equally wasteful use of usable above-ground floorspace) when it could be placed more efficiently underground?
Usually the only time it makes fiscal sense to have your parking above ground instead of underground would be if your project is located in a location where it would be considerably more expensive to excavate and maintain an underground structure - like the aforementioned high-water table, swampland, unstable soil structure locations.
This site seems to fit none of those conditions.
So what's your reasoning for coming to such a conclusion?
Prev
Linear Mode
