[Contra]

At this rate we'll be topped out by fall.

 

[Benito]

Today.

 

[Edward Skira]

 

[Riseth]

The most boring skyscraper award goes to...

Call me crazy but I really wish the 80's rendition of this complex went through instead even though I'm fond of Bay Adelaide West.

 

[ADRM]

 

[Benito]

Today.

 

[Riseth]

I still remember lurking on here while Bay Adelaide West was rising. Boy things have changed since then.

 

[Red Mars]

Thu Sep 3, 2020

Was surprised when Brookfield property security approached me from the south side and asked me to stop taking pictures -
from the sidewalk of the building under construction on the other side of the street. Said I could not take pictures from the sidewalk or even if I stood
on Temperance St.

What's with security during covid days? Few people in the tower and I guess he got the short stick to come talk to me.
I waited a little longer than usual as there were vehicles (delivery trucks too) on the street vying for spots. It's usually walk up take a few pics and leave.
After going through my pics I found the source of my hassle (5th pic). He (security) never approached me as I was no way near the property he was looking
after and must have called the security desk of the southern tower to have someone come and speak to me.

Security said Brookfield owned the sidewalks and Temperance Street. I had finished taking my pics from this angle and took a couple more before heading to Bay St.

 

[wmedia]

^ It is a bit of a grey area. You are legally permitted to shoot film/photos of private property (buildings) from a public space (sidewalk)... as long as you're not invading someone's privacy. Using a long-lens on visible people situated on private property is considered an invasion of privacy, so in theory, construction workers could complain.

Film or photos of people in public places (street, sidewalk, park) where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy, is fine... unless you use someone's image to sell a product, then it's considered an infringement on their right of publicity.

Great pics though!

 

[ShonTron]

Dumb rent-a-cop overstepping his authority. Temperance Street and the sidewalks are public property, and like said above, the only concern might be an invasion of privacy, though I don't think there's anything legally prohibited either. It's like filming a police interaction.

 

[Riseth]

That's something I've been mindful of when taking pics of construction sites. There shouldn't be anything wrong with it but I'm always on the lookout for anyone trying to hassle me.

 

[3Dementia]

@ Red Mars
I think there's probably some pandemic fatigue in play. Experts around the world are busy churning out stuff about the "disillusionment phase" of Covid that many are experiencing.

But most importantly, can you tell me what kind of sandwich the guy in the 4th pic is eating... before you photoshop him out?

Great pics as always. Cheers.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

Sounds like someone was looking for their Alameda County Sheriff's Office moment. /sigh

 

[wmedia]

I don't think there's anything legally prohibited either. It's like filming a police interaction.

Filming a police interaction on private property would be argued under balancing the right to privacy and the public interest. You would have a harder time arguing that shots of a construction worker on private property is in the public interest.

In my time in the film industry I've had to deal with legal issues surrounding many location shoots on public property that overlap private property. Most people are accommodating, but never just assume they will be. If someone's having a bad day, and the law is on their side, which it often is, they can cause you some headaches!

That said, when it comes to casual construction photos for UT, it's very unlikely anything would ever get as far as legal action.

 

[NeilV]