Again, I don't really care. What I do care about is the same as ever. And that's what I posted as succinctly as I can:
I've measured temperatures on the sidewalks exceeding 130 F. What about the children walking to/fro the park? Fry them like ants? I jest somewhat, but the specifics of this spat are far less important than future zoning implications of every other property from here to eternity? How much can your property (and what is your right) to degrade the surrounding environment, public space, and properties? This has been answered throughout the years (see: lead smelters and various other LULUs or Locally Undesirable Land Uses), but progress has a way of always bringing new issues to the fore. In this case, that is LEED or (supposedly) green design which emphasizes cooling inside of buildings naturally through (in this case) reflectivity and in this case that means at the expense of everything around it. In other words, Museum Tower represents a LUBT, or Locally Undesirable Building Technology. That's why I've maintained from the beginning this HAS to go to court to establish a precedent to how similar issues are addressed in the future. Less mess, more straight forward, but MT/Nasher spat is the battle to spare the war.