Re: for a minute I thought they had combined
The two projects bother me, only in that they are so close together and are of such different styles.
The same architect did both projects - so some of the setbacks are located at the exact same height. So despite the fact that they are different styles the two buildings will 'speak' to each other in some respects if built.
Avenue4, I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on the 'mega-project' issue. That creates banility and seems more suburban. I think the city is better served when developers put together smaller infill projects on small properties to create a variety of styles and built form.
Larger properties that are 'master planned' have had mixed results. The most vibrant areas of the city seem to be those with an eclectic mix of uses and property owners.
Also in your example the Uptown/Crystal Blue site, well the properties that are currently one parking lot were originally two seperate properties. The second property where Crystal Blu is located was not available for the Pemberton Group to purchase when they started down the road to the Uptown project - so despite the fact that it may 'appear' to be easy to combine the properties today, the reality is that there is a couple year difference in terms of the property acquisition, demolition of old structures, planning and marketing of the two projects.
Land development is a complex process with a variety of business interests, owners and the timing is crucial in the advanced stages of planning that often occurs years before shovels hit the ground.
I don't really see any reason why the Pemberton Group or Bazis International would benefit from the combination of two very different projects. Nor any reason why the future residents of the towers or a reason why the city would benefit (the city would likely receive less benefit from one project).
