Quote:
Originally Posted by tildahat
It's been close to 10 years now, but I was once on the Bouldin Creek NA steering committee, and many of the same people are still involved in the 04 NAs (or are now City Council members) and their opposition to 'tall buildings' reaches a bizarrely fanatical, almost religious level. Somehow if a building is 60 feet and one inch it's the same as 1000 babies starving to death. I'm being sarcastic, but I'm kinda serious. Some of these people would get so emotional and choked up talking about the waterfront overlay it was weird, and you didn't really know how to engage with them.
|
You aren't exaggerating - the Town Lake people have almost have a religious zeal about protecting the waterfront from the blight of tall. Likely dates back to the Hyatt - a particularly ugly development.
The problem is - there is a way to do tall next to the water that is gorgeous and draws people in to the waterfront - and frames it beautifully and provides a dramatic contrast between urban and park - like the buildings around Central Park or the waterfront of Vancouver.
In any case, the problem with the sun light argument stuff is not whether one building might impact the sunlight another receives - but that if we start giving sunlight and air easements to every existing building, we can never build a dense vibrant urban core. If you want sunlight and view protections - you should build in the rural environment or pay a lot of money to buy the land you want to protect.