Jarrek
Active Member
What I don't understand is why they couldn't just make the pedestrian streets line up.
You're just way too forward thinking.
What I don't understand is why they couldn't just make the pedestrian streets line up.
What I don't understand is why they couldn't just make the pedestrian streets line up.
Profits. Three towers instead of two. Just yet another example of the city putting developer's interests ahead of the interests of its citizens.
I'm not sure your jumping to a quick conclusion has anything to do with it. The allocated density could have been reallocated within the site plan to produce the same number of units while lining up the pedestrian streets.
Well, the original site plan called for two towers and perfectly-aligned pedestrian streets, so I'm sure my conclusion has everything to do with it. Daniels didn't add a third tower and screw up the alignment of the street at the bidding of the city.
I'm confused...which third tower did they didn't add??
In the middle block, the one with the park, there were originally two towers planned, and the pedestrian path was originally in perfect alignment with the other two. But now the path was shift to the west, and there's three towers instead of two, two of those towers on the east side of the path.
...for the project south of Limelight, not Limelight itself. Limelight will only have two towers.
42
Question: is this hole where the south tower is being built? or both the south and north towers?