Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123
It would definitely be interesting to see an aerial view of the project.
Did anybody ask why they went with something so tall knowing that approval would be much more problematic?
|
Not really. I thought about asking that but it seemed like their rationale had already been covered in the speeches given by the UG rep and Clewes. The impression I got is that they lost confidence in the Twisted Sisters project's ability to succeed, that Clewes specifically wanted something "tall, light, airy, and iconic" for aesthetic and philosophical reasons, and that in terms of light on the street and wind dynamics, the new building is expected to behave as well if not better. He specifically mentioned that due to the narrower profile, the new buildings would allow for more light on the ground.
I get the impression that they feel it's less important to convince the naysayers in the general public than it is to convince the people in charge of making by-law amendments, and that if they make a solid technical case for the proposal, the naysayers don't need to like it at all since they aren't the target market anyway. And considering they don't't want to build the first project anyway, it's not like they're "losing" their chance to build it by proposing this.