See final paragraph - set to be the tallest building in Western Canada. The article focuses on the 14 stories of underground parking that will be included, which does seem excessive given that the SkyTrain is literally across the street.

  • bishopolis@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Councillors are asking the same question

    They’re second-guessing the engineer too? It’s like when I tell my cab driver how to steer or recommend suture style to my doctor.

    No need to be a jerk.

    Agreed. ;-)

    • zephyreks@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Senakw proposal shows that you don’t really need to develop that much parking and that developers are happy to include less parking when city bylaws permit it.

      • bishopolis@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s a lot wrong with the Senakw proposal. But I’m not surprised when developers are told they don’t have to do something that they jumped at the idea. Developers would happily exclude water and power if they only had the opportunity.

        • zephyreks@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The Senate development is funded by the Squamish, designed for the Squamish, and plans to house the Squamish. You’re saying that somehow the developer got more say in the project and proposed things actively against the interests of the Squamish nation… And the Squamish just rolled over and accepted it?

    • IntlLawGnome@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      They aren’t “second-guessing the engineer.” Again, no parking analysis has been completed. They’re asking questions that are appropriate to ask.

      • bishopolis@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You don’t feel that councillors asking experts questions about decisions made following their expertise are actually perfect exemplars of second-guessing?