Originally Posted by trofirhen
Does this not all point up the necessity of taking the foot off the view-cone control brake pedal? Many buildings in the CBD have already undergone
significant height reductions, to leave the mountains visible. Can't we be a "normal" city and allow for a bit of extra height (like maybe a murderous 40 meters) or 10-15 storeys?
This tree-hugger attitude is really doing little more than depriving the city of a bit of extra dynamism, and the numbers I quoted - while ballpark, of course - are not really excessive.
Or are they?
It could also be that towers closest to the edges of downtown maybe shouldn't be the tallest? Viewcones aside, doesn't it make sense to have shorter towers along the edge and then tier up to taller towers in the centre of the DT peninsula to maximize views for people living within downtown?