So was the building it was used to, well, build. The helicopter just happened to hit the smallest of the two obstructions. Are you suggesting the building shouldn't have been put there in the first place because it encroached on a heli route? Fat chance of that ever happening.
err no, you are assuming that conclusion yourself.
the tower and the crane..
crane in excess of of the height of the building..
from the AAIB special report:
At the time of the accident the building had reached its full height; the crane tower had reached a height of 572 ft agl. On top of the crane tower was a cab unit, a counterjib ‘A’ frame and counter weight platform attached to the crane tower by a bearing ring, which allowed the jib to rotate (slew) in the horizontal plane. The crane had a ‘luffing’ jib, which meant the full length of the jib pivoted in the vertical plane from a point a further 11.5 ft above the height of the tower section.
During out-of-service periods, such as overnight, the jib was parked in the ‘minimum jib’ position, at a 65° angle above the horizontal. At the time of the accident this gave a total height from the ground to the tip of the jib of 719 ft
And:
The crane was lit at night with red lights, both on its tower and jib. The tower lighting consisted of mains powered steady red lights at approximately 50 m intervals. The jib lighting was provided by solar powered lights. The Air Navigation Order requires the lighting to be of medium intensity (2,000 candela) and that the obstacle be lit at night only.