This is such a silly thread and it's just become irritating how this clock tower has become an issue whereas it's really a non-issue.
Mostly it's stirred up from people who have an agenda and have hardly ever visited these holy places.
The fact of the matter is that there will be more high rises to accommodate the exploding population of pilgrims each year. If any of you have ever been to the holy sites then you would appreciate the dire need of infrastructure to accommodate all these people. I've always been impressed by the saudi's how they take serious the development of both soft and hard infrastructure at the holy sites. They put a lot more effort their than in other cities and i'm quite confident than no other muslim country could do what the Saudi's are doing in terms of spending and development.
Now what are the arguments people come up with?
1) It's too large and it over shadows the Kaabah/minarets. In the Quran/sunnah/aqeedah there is no mention that it is not permissible to build over the Kaabah/minarets. In fact in the holy Quran making things unnecessarily haraam is forbidden. In surah al-Imran verse 93 the Bani-Israel were challenged to find it the taurah what foods they had self-proclaimed to be haraam. We take our ultimate guidance from the Quran and Sunnah as muslims. If it is not impermissible explicitly there, then we have nothing to worry about.
2) It's luxurious and most people can't afford it: Again silly argument, where there is demand there is supply. Have any of you ever tried to book a room in peak times? I personally have and the rooms are booked months in advance! It maybe out of some your budget but don't assume its the same for everyone. Wealth is such a relative thing, what maybe affordable for you might not be the same to me. The fact that many pilgrims prefer living on a site close to haram sharif and are willing to pay for it justifies it's existence. For those who can't afford that convenience, remember it's Allah (swt) that decides how he distributes wealth. People have a problem with the shopping mall but have no problem with the various souks outside, why have a problem with a clean air conditioned place for commerce in 50+ degrees heat? Its the same thing?
3) It should be a low rise area: Ok you have a low rise area, ever wondered how far that area would spread? Makkah is limited as it is, due to its mountainous topography, new "low rise" developments would have to cost an extortionate amount just to make suitable the land for building upon foundations. But the most pressing issue is every pilgrim wants to live near haram sharif. Preferably walking distance, no one wants to have to walk for miles for one salat and certainly not get caught in that awful traffic around haram. The only solution? Go vertical to accommodate the most amount of people.
4) They have demolished Islamic architecture: Again 100% agree with the saudi's on this. There is NO need to preserve everything as is in sacrifice of the well-being and convenience of present say-hajjis. Yes be careful not destroy the environment unnecessarily and all artifacts of interest can be preserved in a museum. But not building because some sahaba's house may have been their and some idiots (mostly our south-asian muslim variety) wanting to to turn it into a shrine is just dumb.
5) its bad taste, the architecture doesn't fit in with the surroundings: As one member mentioned previously, have you seen the final renders of the project? The Saudi government has embarked on an ambitious phase-wise development of haram sharif. Yes right now it may stick out abit but more high rises are expected to be built which should dilute its affect. When the various phases of the projects are completed according to the master-plan i'm sure it will be much more aesthetically pleasing.
Another esteemed member summarized everything I said by saying it's a 21st century solution to a 21st century problem. I just thought i'd expand upon that in simple english for those who are easily swayed but the uninformed/agenda-driven
