That's due in part to the angle controls that are used for all high density parcels (typically R-3 zones). I'm going from memory, but looking at the elevations, you would project a 60 degree angle up from the property line on each side. If the building didn't protrude, then no further angle measurements for building height were needed. If it did protrude, you'd have to measure where on the building the protrusion occured (how high up).
Then when looking at the application on a plan view (from above), you'd find the mid point of the protrusion (typically mid point of the proposed building) and project an 80 degree angle out from the mid point. If the 'protrusion' was captured by the 80 degree angle, you were okay. You could also pivot the angle if it would help. But if there was still a protrusion through the 80 degree, then the plan would have to be altered. To give you a better view of how they work, I found
this old variance appeal from HRM. There are diagrams that show how the angles work, for those who are curious.
But it's the 60 degree angle from the PL that typically forced the buildings to a podium style, but so far back. Here in Calgary we don't do that, we have an envelope, but we use a combination of FAR, Floor plate restrictions and setbacks to establish the building envelope. So we may require a setback from the street, but with adjacent buildings there is usually very little. The floor plate restrictions usually apply once you reach a certain height, depending on the district. So if I look at the CC-X (Centre City Mixed Use) district, for any floor above 36m from grade - it's limited to a horizontal dimension of 44m wide and a floor area of 930 square metres. But in the CC-MH (Centre City Multi-residential high rise) district, any floor above 25m from grade has a maximum horizontal dimension of 37m and a maximum floor area of 650 square metres. These rules can be varied though. In both cases, the FAR is what limits the build out of the site - there is no height maximum.
Threaded Mode