PDA

View Full Version : NEW YORK | Bank Of America Tower | 1,200' Pinnacle / 945' Roof | 53 FLOORS


Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41

BayRidgeFever
Apr 23, 2007, 9:10 PM
Umm you don't know that. In fact, in the last picture you can actually see it starting to form.

STERNyc
Apr 23, 2007, 9:28 PM
Umm you don't know that. In fact, in the last picture you can actually see it starting to form.

Maybe you misunderstood my point, as the last pic proves it. Its a little difficult to explain, but there will be no double fascade wedge feature creating the atrium shown in the rendering. Instead the slope will be flush. Continue reading the link I posted and you'll get a better idea, most people there agree that the design feature has been eliminated.

STERNyc
Apr 23, 2007, 9:39 PM
If the double fascade feature was to be built the steel structure for the wedge would have an "L" shaped footprint, the slope would then be added. Instead it is only the sloping configuration that is being built, hence for the wedge; no atrium, no double fascade.

NYguy
Apr 23, 2007, 9:58 PM
I posed at WNY that its become apparent that the dramatic atrium will not be built on the giant wedge facing Bryant Park.

http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3548&page=130

Its ashame but the finished building will in no way look like the original rendering:

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/06/01/greenskyscrapers/image/1_dods.jpg

That's not really a concern for me though. Never really thought it would be
that visible. I can see here what you're talking about...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/75901901/large.jpg

But the overall impact will be the same...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77567112/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77567125/large.jpg

CarlosV
Apr 24, 2007, 9:14 PM
from 5th ave...

April 24, 2007

:tup:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1711.jpg

Alliance
Apr 24, 2007, 10:58 PM
Its ashame but the finished building will in no way look like the original rendering:

I agree. I must say that I am disappointed.

CoolCzech
Apr 24, 2007, 11:58 PM
It seems the rendering features far sharper angles than the actual building. And aside from one set of photos where the glass actually looked nice, I can't say I'm crazy about the glass curtain. On the other hand, it's not bad - just not as nice as the rendering. And it IS undeniably tall and huge... never a bad thing. Regarding that vast atriunm-like space at the top of the tower in the rendering, I always wondered exactly how that would work - it just seemed like too huge a space to leave hollow and unused, so I'm not too surprised that it won't apparantly conform to that rendering.

It's funny how far from reality both the NY Times & the BofA towers renderings turned out to be.

sfcity1
Apr 25, 2007, 3:42 AM
I think there is still hope with the atrium. Based on the rendering, it looks as though the Atrium may be created not so much by the building slanting inward, but mores o by the glass atrium going outward.

bayrider
Apr 25, 2007, 5:42 AM
Wasn't there an article saying that BOA needed more square footage for its NYC operations even after completing this tower? Maybe that's why they got rid of the atrium

Fabb
Apr 25, 2007, 7:11 AM
Wasn't there an article saying that BOA needed more square footage for its NYC operations even after completing this tower? Maybe that's why they got rid of the atrium

That's what they might say. But, let's face it, dumping the atrium will make the tower more profitable. I think there is no other reason.

cactus22minus1
Apr 25, 2007, 5:53 PM
I can definitely see what people are describing in the atrium area. I really hate to see more and more things that will make this turn out so different from the renders because I loved them so much! The glass, I hope will look a little better once we see more of it, but it doesn't look real promising now. The atrium, or lack thereof, is not going to be something that will actually hurt the look of the building(as the glass could), but something that we knew could be better.

CoolCzech
Apr 25, 2007, 9:53 PM
Well, look at the bright side: maybe filling in the atrium space with real floors will make for a taller roof height...

ramvid01
Apr 25, 2007, 11:46 PM
From today...

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/4184/dsc00086qb0.th.jpg (http://img250.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc00086qb0.jpg)
http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/9523/dsc00088qj3.th.jpg (http://img250.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc00088qj3.jpg)
http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/6363/dsc00087gx9.th.jpg (http://img401.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc00087gx9.jpg)

Milllos
Apr 26, 2007, 6:55 AM
200 m, 43 floors!! Higher than Verizon. :notacrook:

Antares41
Apr 26, 2007, 12:44 PM
Maybe it just me, but, I never get to worked-up over renderings. I 've always considered them just approximations of what a bldg. might look like.
Artistic interpretations of a snapshot in time of how a bldg. might appear. Once the bldg. is actually constructed there are times in the day when the cloud cover is at a certain percentage, the sun's angle is high, the sky is clear enough when it will look just like the render and other times it will just look entirely different. Once a building start taking shape I just don't even bother looking at the rendering anymore. I just don't see any purpose in the exercise.

Awkab
Apr 26, 2007, 6:27 PM
^ well, a rendering should at least be accurate in terms of major design elements. A huge atrium running down a large portion of the building that would be lit dramatically at night would be considered a major design element, and something that people would use to judge the design of a proposed building.

I understand the atrium being filled in for the sake of profitability...that's the owners choice of course. But I can't say that I'm really that excited to see the finished product now. I mean, I'll of course continue to lurk here and check out the photos and progress, but this building does not excite me anywhere near how it did when the first renders came out (similar situation to the NY Times building).

As a counterpoint, the renderings of Comcast Center in Philadelphia really underwhelmed me to be honest...I was glad that the city was getting a new tallest, but I wasn't really impressed with the design..it was okay, but just that. Now that CC is nearly topped out and the glass is going in, the innovative lighting design has been revealed, and everyone can see that the renderings were inaccurate (much fatter than the building actually is), I can hardly wait to see the final product. I think it's going to be stunner.

So maybe there is a lesson for these people doing the renderings...whatever you do, don't make it look better than the final product, because than you are just setting the building up for disappointment.

CarlosV
Apr 26, 2007, 9:58 PM
April 26, 2007




:worship:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1732.jpg





http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1730.jpg





http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1728.jpg




:jester:
THE FORCE IS STRONG WITH THIS TOWER !!!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1727.jpg

NYguy
Apr 26, 2007, 11:54 PM
Still now word on where the spire itself is being built. A couple of months ago, Durst said it was being assembled. I've never seen an accurate rendering of it.

CoolCzech
Apr 27, 2007, 1:01 AM
Let's say for argument's sake that in fact occupiable floors are put to the very top of the glass canopy (that appears hollow in the rendering). What would that make the new roof height? (Or does the current roof height figure already include the top of the glass?)

CarlosV
Apr 29, 2007, 2:48 AM
Saturday April 28, 2007



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1741.jpg




http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1742.jpg




http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1743.jpg

knarfor
Apr 29, 2007, 4:42 AM
Wow! Suddenly, the facade looks the way it was depicted in the renderings. Great photos!

Scruffy
Apr 29, 2007, 5:40 AM
Wow! Suddenly, the facade looks the way it was depicted in the renderings. Great photos!

Not quite. With that last shot, it is official that whats in the render will not be the final product. As was brought up earliar, the glass will hug the exterior instead of creating that inner hollow space that looked so cool going all the way up to the crown. I know a lot of people are satisfied with the tower but i'm officially out of love with it. thats right. you're dumped. its not me, its you.

knarfor
Apr 29, 2007, 5:51 AM
Tisk tisk, breaking up over the internet. What's the world coming to... :D

I was only talking about reflectivity and coloration, but I didn't really say so explicitly. I did read that comment by Stern and he is correct about the change. It's a shame, that's for sure. Though I don't think the building is ruined by it. Less interesting for sure, but not ruined.

STERNyc
Apr 29, 2007, 6:08 AM
Tisk tisk, breaking up over the internet. What's the world coming to... :D

I was only talking about reflectivity and coloration, but I didn't really say so explicitly. I did read that comment by Stern and he is correct about the change. It's a shame, that's for sure. Though I don't think the building is ruined by it. Less interesting for sure, but not ruined.
It's not ruined, but because of it I have lost all interest in this construction. It’s sad because it was the only building in New York City following the Hearst Tower that I’ve allowed myself to excited over, I was anxiously awaiting the double facade atrium, it would be the first skyscraper I have seen with such a feature, I was imaging that the atrium feature would give it a certain glow, I was picturing sitting in Bryant Park near dusk and just watching the effect of the lights going on and the setting sun would have on the wedge, and then at night-time the luminance of the wedge as it would be lit from within. Citicorp has a certain glow to it at night-time and I was expecting something even greater here. Now that the wedge will be flush, there will be no glow; it will just be dull faceless glass.

Patrick
Apr 29, 2007, 7:35 AM
Not quite. With that last shot, it is official that whats in the render will not be the final product. As was brought up earliar, the glass will hug the exterior instead of creating that inner hollow space that looked so cool going all the way up to the crown. I know a lot of people are satisfied with the tower but i'm officially out of love with it. thats right. you're dumped. its not me, its you.

You know, I have to agree.

This tower sucks!

Hopefully it gets better cause its so bland and boring!

Dac150
Apr 29, 2007, 2:17 PM
You know, I have to agree.

This tower sucks!

Hopefully it gets better cause its so bland and boring!

Bland and Boring are two words for from this towers description. I think you mwan innovative and creative. If you ever walk north up the avenue of americas from this building, you'll find a huge canyon of bland and boring buildings. This building breaks that trend.

And for everyone else, you should all know by now that you can never go by renderings to be the exact final product. S stop with all the same "this building isn't the same as the renderings crap". The first and seceond times, okay, but the constant repeat of the same thing.....enough already.

CGII
Apr 29, 2007, 2:29 PM
Bland and Boring are two words for from this towers description. I think you mwan innovative and creative. If you ever walk north up the avenue of americas from this building, you'll find a huge canyon of bland and boring buildings. This building breaks that trend.


This building would've broken the trend even further if it had had the promising double facade. Dammit why'd they have to get rid of that? It's going to look so awkward at the top when the parapet starts, now.

Busy Bee
Apr 29, 2007, 2:44 PM
^Value engineering, the nemesis of architectural expression.

NYguy
Apr 29, 2007, 4:19 PM
It's still my favorite building under construction, has the same impact for me...

APRIL 28, 2007

1. The Times is not the only tower that can play with spires...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77919091/large.jpg

2.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77919137/large.jpg

3.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77919181/large.jpg

4.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77919215/large.jpg

5.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77919242/large.jpg

6.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77919247/large.jpg

7. joining the new "shiny" towers down 42nd Street...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77919294/large.jpg

8.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77919313/large.jpg

Jersey Mentality
Apr 29, 2007, 10:09 PM
what is the building under construction next to BofA?

Dac150
Apr 29, 2007, 10:18 PM
Its not under construction. Its the former Verizon Building, and its simply just getting refurbished with a new facade and interior. You never knew that???

CoolCzech
Apr 30, 2007, 1:17 AM
It's the old Verizon building undergoing a total makeover.

Lecom
Apr 30, 2007, 2:01 AM
^A totally unnecessary one, too.

carfreak01
Apr 30, 2007, 4:44 AM
I'm holding out hope that they'll add the 'second skin' to the angular sections later....


...but not much hope.



The glass beyond the roof will look awkward now, and disconnected from the rest of the building, which will ruin the perception from the ground.

CoolCzech
Apr 30, 2007, 1:21 PM
It's not ruined, but because of it I have lost all interest in this construction. It’s sad because it was the only building in New York City following the Hearst Tower that I’ve allowed myself to excited over, I was anxiously awaiting the double facade atrium, it would be the first skyscraper I have seen with such a feature...

Well, I wondered about that huge, empty space up on top all along - an awful lot of money (and foregone office space) just for a never-before-seen feature.

It's not really a shocker that it didn't come to pass. I admit it would have been cool, though.... sort of like what Libeskind originally had in mind for the FT.

Adyton
Apr 30, 2007, 6:32 PM
It's too bad this building will top out at 814' as far as offices/roofline especially given the fact that 1.) they could have leased out alot more space if they would have added 10, 20 or 30 more floors, and 2.) the building would have looked MUCH better with more height especially with it's huge mass in the lower floors.

Maybe we'll be surprised and Durst will add some floors and height... I know... wishful thinking :rolleyes:

NYguy
Apr 30, 2007, 7:19 PM
^A totally unnecessary one, too.

By your opinion. I'm sure the owners think otherwise.

NYguy
Apr 30, 2007, 7:23 PM
It's too bad this building will top out at 814' as far as offices/roofline especially given the fact that 1.) they could have leased out alot more space if they would have added 10, 20 or 30 more floors,

I believe this tower is maxed out on its size, or how much space was possible on site. There was even a smaller version of this tower planned. This tower certainly could have used more space (its seemingly already too small) buts that's why you have so many other office towers going up now.

Anyway, the so called "roof" height will be the 960 ft mark.

-GR2NY-
Apr 30, 2007, 8:35 PM
hm full floors left?

CoolCzech
May 4, 2007, 11:51 PM
No updates?

Hey, Carlos! Stop snapping pictures of yourself and get us some new shots of this building! ;)

CoolCzech
May 4, 2007, 11:53 PM
Wow! Suddenly, the facade looks the way it was depicted in the renderings. Great photos!


The glass seems to clear up, depending on the lighting... check out the pics NY Guy posted; it looks absolutely fabulous in those.

CarlosV
May 5, 2007, 12:01 AM
No updates?

Hey, Carlos! Stop snapping pictures of yourself and get us some new shots of this building! ;)


LOL :haha: ok ok I will go tomorrow!!

CarlosV
May 6, 2007, 3:37 PM
Saturday May 5, 2007



;)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1766.jpg



:rolleyes:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1769.jpg



:yes:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1770.jpg

Fabb
May 6, 2007, 5:34 PM
The people on the sidewalk look ridiculously small next to the construction. It's a monster, really.

CoolCzech
May 6, 2007, 6:53 PM
Yes, it is... yet it's merely the equivalent of 4 WTC, the smallest of the new World Trade Center towers!

And most mind boggeling of all: the World Trade Center might not even be the largest such complex to be built in New York over the next few years. Vornado's Madison Square Garden project might eclipse even the New World Trade Center.

What a time to live as close to Manhattan as I do! :)

CarlosV
May 6, 2007, 9:20 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1768.jpg

skymetalscraper
May 7, 2007, 12:14 PM
:slob: :banana: :slob:
yes this baby will be as tall as the smallest WTC tower, but it looks so tall :slob:

NYguy
May 7, 2007, 2:29 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1768.jpg

My favorite under construction right now. I do like the Freedom Tower, but so much is still left unseen. We still don't know what the spire will look like, just some ideas.

NYguy
May 7, 2007, 2:32 PM
MAY 5, 2007

Skyscrapers in the spring...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78372784/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78372797/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78372784/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78372797/large.jpg

beanhead4529
May 8, 2007, 4:33 AM
they did a decent job with the glass. not great though

Scruffy
May 8, 2007, 5:54 AM
all right, i'll play

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c81/Scruffy88/DSC04045.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c81/Scruffy88/DSC04052.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c81/Scruffy88/DSC04087.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c81/Scruffy88/DSC04090.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c81/Scruffy88/DSC04088.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c81/Scruffy88/DSC04091.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c81/Scruffy88/DSC04104.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c81/Scruffy88/DSC04110.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c81/Scruffy88/DSC04111.jpg

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c81/Scruffy88/DSC04120.jpg

Fabb
May 8, 2007, 6:08 AM
all right, i'll play

You played good.
I love it, all the unexpected angles and the asymmetry. It's a mountain-like skyscraper.

NYguy
May 8, 2007, 11:50 AM
** Removed for copyright infringement **

CarlosV
May 8, 2007, 1:24 PM
98 % leased!!! WOW

colemonkee
May 8, 2007, 4:42 PM
Scruffy, those last few pics from Bryant Park are some of the best I've seen yet. You caught the light and reflections on the glass just right. This is not to take anything away from Carlos or NYguy, who also take great shots.

It's starting to look more and more like the render, just a tad darker and heavier. But that's to be expected - they usually make the renders more light and airy than the way the buildings appear in reality.

antinimby
May 9, 2007, 12:03 AM
Renowned chef Charlie Palmer...Tim Bartley, vice president of business affairs for the Charlie Palmer Group,Damn, chefs now have their own business/corporate groups.

NYguy
May 9, 2007, 12:09 AM
With the rise of this tower, and so many others either planned or rising in Midtown and Downtown, I'm reminded of Manhattan's "glory" days, when the skyline and rankings were constantly changing...

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/04/30/8405390/

With boots, I decided, and a hardhat. I would scale the newest temple of commerce, the Bank of America tower that will soon be second only to the Empire State Building on New York City's skyline. When the heavy grate of the elevator swings open on the unfinished 37th floor, there is, technically, no floor. Just an expanse of rain-soaked, corrugated metal that at once provides a skeleton view of the building's vast interior and, near the edge, of Manhattan's Bryant Park and the corporate landmarks that Bank of America's crystalline pinnacle will soon surpass.

The symbolism of those towers, though, isn't simple. The names GE, Citigroup, and MetLife stand as tall on the 500 as they do on the skyline. But the Chrysler Building is a pointed reminder of companies - Pan Am, RCA, Woolworth - that have vanished from both.

The Manhattan skyline will once again be dominated by big name towers...

tone99loc
May 9, 2007, 2:12 AM
^ I think the Singer Building got the shortest end of the stick when that industry shrank:)

ardiem
May 9, 2007, 2:23 AM
...The new ground floor space will include a larger, 8,800-square-foot space for the restaurant...Other terms of the new agreement were not disclosed. Asking rents for the ground floor are about $425 per square foot, according to Durst....
Pardon my ignorance, but is this $425/sqft per month or year (or some other figure)?

Scruffy
May 9, 2007, 4:52 AM
a month i think. 425 seems awfully high. office rates are usually 50-100 per sq foot but those are needed in bulk. not like retail i guess. i have no basis on retail pricing.

thanks for the comments on the pics, i try my best. =)

antinimby
May 9, 2007, 5:32 AM
^^ Your pics seem to be a lot more clear and crisp than the others. What is the resolution of your camera?
Pardon my ignorance, but is this $425/sqft per month or year (or some other figure)?You pay rent on a monthly basis, not yearly. ;)

Milllos
May 9, 2007, 11:14 AM
Next 8 floors (+crown and spires) :banana:

Fabb
May 9, 2007, 2:21 PM
Next 8 floors (+crown and spires) :banana:

So, the last floor should be there before July 10, right ?

sabino86
May 9, 2007, 4:05 PM
^^ Your pics seem to be a lot more clear and crisp than the others. What is the resolution of your camera?
You pay rent on a monthly basis, not yearly. ;)

I thought office rent per sq foot was yearly, but what the hell do I know? :koko:

thoraudio
May 9, 2007, 4:12 PM
You pay rent on a monthly basis, not yearly. ;)

but leases are usually for a year (or more). Commercial listings will often say '$20/ft', meaning $20/foot/year.

For 1000 sq ft, $20/ft would be $20,000/year, not 20,000 a month.


I'm not familiar with the N.Y.C. market.... but $450/ft/year is steep.

Milllos
May 9, 2007, 4:31 PM
So, the last floor should be there before July 10, right ?

Yes, it will be until June 10 surely, progress is much more faster, cause building is thinner and thinner.

It will be pretty xmas present. :D

http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/2258/graphos3.jpg

Milllos
May 9, 2007, 4:31 PM
http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/4233/graphxv3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Buck
May 9, 2007, 4:47 PM
Fantastic glass treatment!

CarlosV
May 9, 2007, 7:34 PM
Wednesday May 9th, 2007

I LOVE IT...higher and higher


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1775.jpg




http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1776.jpg





http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1777.jpg


:tup:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1778.jpg

ardiem
May 9, 2007, 8:08 PM
Oh, they opened up the lawn - it was closed when I was in BP about a week ago. Thanks for continuing to post your photos, Carlos.

CarlosV
May 9, 2007, 8:20 PM
:) you are welcome, yes today was a beautiful day in Gotham...very warm and blue skies no clouds!!

Wednesday May 9th, 2007

I LOVE IT...higher and higher


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1775.jpg




http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1776.jpg





http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1777.jpg


:tup:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1778.jpg

Fabb
May 9, 2007, 8:48 PM
It's going to be gorgeous. An instant classic.

MONACO
May 10, 2007, 12:50 AM
:D

WOW.....that building is going to have a huge presence! Those pictures are amazing!

NYguy
May 10, 2007, 1:07 PM
http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/4233/graphxv3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

I hope I'm looking at that spire by September. Could be a little sooner at this rate.

CarlosV
May 10, 2007, 9:43 PM
May 10, 2007


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1780.jpg





:banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1789.jpg

NYguy
May 11, 2007, 12:12 AM
It's interesting watching a tower of this size rise, knowing that it's already "sold out" (it's 98% leased). Manhattan continues to be starved for space, but much relief is on the way in the form of even larger towers...:yes:

antinimby
May 11, 2007, 12:48 AM
I'm not impressed, still looks kinda short to me. :cool:

NYC2ATX
May 11, 2007, 2:09 AM
Its really entertaining to watch this building grow and watch the glass gradually bend in different places.

Carlos, I was in Midtown Wednesday morning/afternoon, right in that area. We probably walked right past eachother. :haha:

antinimby
May 11, 2007, 2:41 AM
Here's a cross section of the restored Henry Miller's Theatre at the base of this tower:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/05/10/arts/Miller600.jpg
A cutaway depiction of Henry Miller’s Theater on West 43rd Street, in the Bank of America Tower, scheduled
to open in the fall of 2008.

The NY Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/10/theater/10roun.html) from which the above is taken from.

CarlosV
May 11, 2007, 4:37 AM
Carlos, I was in Midtown Wednesday morning/afternoon, right in that area. We probably walked right past eachother. :haha:

:rolleyes: mmmmm imagine....

Scruffy
May 11, 2007, 7:29 AM
damn that theater goes deep. such as is the case in nyc. everything goes really high or really deep. the theater looks sizable but it seems to be lacking a public space except for that narrow spot on the second floor. i guess everyone is going to have to hang out outside during intermissions. but it will still be cool to have a state of the art hi tech theater being built

NYC2ATX
May 11, 2007, 1:24 PM
that theater is incredible, is it going to be for broadway/off-broadway performaces, a music venue, other shows, maybe a little of each?

fioco
May 11, 2007, 4:07 PM
Antinimby posted a direct link to the New York Times article beneath the photo; a classy way to post. But for those who are link-challenged ;) , here's a teaser excerpt from the article:

The Shuberts, Nederlanders and the Jujamcyn theater chain all approached the Durst Organization about the theater, some interested in becoming owners or part owners, but were unable to make a deal. As a long-term tenant it was Roundabout that fit the bill, said Douglas Durst, a co-president of the Durst Organization. (It can’t hurt that Mr. Durst sits on the Roundabout’s board.)

kznyc2k
May 11, 2007, 9:50 PM
the theater looks sizable but it seems to be lacking a public space except for that narrow spot on the second floor.

I imagine they'd have direct access to the through-block arcade..?

NYguy
May 12, 2007, 12:15 AM
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/05/10/arts/Miller600.jpg

Another example of a tower bringing benefits to the city. I suppose the Times Center (that theater portion of the Times Tower) will be a benefit as well.

Thskyscraper
May 12, 2007, 3:04 AM
Man this tower is just so sweet!!!

pico44
May 12, 2007, 4:43 AM
I'll admit that I wasn't much of a fan of this tower. But seeing the quality of the glass (which is outstanding) and the grace with which it achieves its angles has me rethinking me position. What Fabb said is perfect, this is a real mountain of a building. It isn't the NYTT, but lets face it, the NYTT is a once-in-a-generation skyscraper.



Notice the quality of the joint between vertical and slanted facade in this picture by Carlos. I may very well look back at this picture as the moment I started to fall in love with the BOA tower.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1789.jpg

NYguy
May 12, 2007, 12:12 PM
It isn't the NYTT, but lets face it, the NYTT is a once-in-a-generation skyscraper.

Thank heavens for small miracles....:tup:

CarlosV
May 12, 2007, 6:08 PM
Notice the quality of the joint between vertical and slanted facade in this picture by Carlos. I may very well look back at this picture as the moment I started to fall in love with the BOA tower.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/CIMG1789.jpg


This will be a beautiful looking skyscraper...:yes:

CGII
May 13, 2007, 8:03 PM
Here's a cross section of the restored Henry Miller's Theatre at the base of this tower:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/05/10/arts/Miller600.jpg
A cutaway depiction of Henry Miller’s Theater on West 43rd Street, in the Bank of America Tower, scheduled
to open in the fall of 2008.

The NY Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/10/theater/10roun.html) from which the above is taken from.

I read that article in the paper and it gave the impression that the theatre was a historic one preserved within the building...I couldn't believe it but the low resolution black and white image printed within was enough to plant the seed of doubt.

fioco
May 13, 2007, 8:36 PM
http://www.ibdb.com/files/VenueImages/1197-1L.jpg
http://www.ibdb.com/files/VenueImages/1197-3L.jpg
Designed in the Neo-classical style by architects Paul R. Allen and Ingalls & Hoffman, it was built by and named for actor-producer Henry Miller. It opened on April 1, 1918 with the play The Fountain of Youth.

The theatre had its first major hit with Noel Coward's The Vortex in 1926. Following Miller's death that same year, the theatre was managed by his son Gilbert, who bought it in 1930. From the 1930s through the late-1960s, the theater enjoyed its golden years, with performances by Helen Hayes, Leslie Howard, Lillian Gish, Douglas Fairbanks, and Ruth Chatterton gracing its stage.

In 1968, it was sold to Seymour Durst. It showed feature films as the Park-Miller until it became a porn palace called Avon-at-the-Hudson. In 1978, it was converted into the discotheque Xenon. Twenty years later, it returned to legitimate use as the Kit Kat Club, borrowing its name from the popular revival of Cabaret it was housing. It was rechristened the Henry Miller when Urinetown opened in 2001.

The theatre was closed in 2004 and subsequently demolished to make way for a 57-story skyscraper. Its facade, landmarked by the city, will remain, and the Durst Organization will include a 950-seat theatre within the new structure. -- Wikipedia

From Durst Website:
Design Intent

* To create a state-of-the-art Broadway playhouse that captures the intimacy of the original Henry Miller’s Theater and captivate present day audiences with excellent sightlines, spacious and accessible audience amenities and a newly configured auditorium
* To invoke the original theater’s design intent and spirit within the new design
* In keeping with the original “playhouse” design, to strive to bring the audience and performers together to create an intimate Broadway experience.

Henry Miller Theater

* 50,000 square foot reconstructed theater
* Neo-Georgian land-marked façade of original 1918 Allen, Ingalls & Hoffman-designed Theater preserved and restored
* Restoration and reconstruction of the historic oval reception room, doors and decorative plasterwork, and incorporation of salvaged elements into the new design
* Increased seating capacity to almost 1,000
* Fully ADA accessible, including approximately 20 wheelchair viewing positions, a spacious box office lobby, and improved toilet facilities
* Incorporation of a large lobby bar at the orchestra level, a bar/café on the ground floor level, and a restaurant at an upper mezzanine within one building
* A fully functional fly-tower and scenic loading facilities
* Upgraded capacity and standards of lighting and electrical systems, Improved back-of-house circulation and accommodations

CoolCzech
May 13, 2007, 8:36 PM
Maybe only the old facade of the theatre was preserved?

CoolCzech
May 13, 2007, 8:38 PM
Oh, you answered my question, fioco!

Lecom
May 13, 2007, 8:59 PM
Too bad the skin is uninspiring.

Scruffy
May 14, 2007, 1:08 AM
The theater was completely demolished and left as part of the grand pit when digging the foundation. the only thing that was saved was the outside facade, which i thought was a nice touch

CoolCzech
May 14, 2007, 1:22 AM
Pity they didn't try to save some of the interior, too.

pico44
May 14, 2007, 1:36 AM
Walked by today. I'm not quite as excited as I was a few days ago.

As for the theater, I just hope the seats have a decent amount of leg room. So many of the theaters built in the early twentieth century don't take into account the fact that there are human beings taller than 5'6".

NYguy
May 14, 2007, 12:40 PM
Can't get enough of this one...

MAY 13, 2007

1.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758460/large.jpg

2.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78759785/large.jpg

3.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758528/large.jpg

4.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758533/large.jpg

5.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758537/large.jpg

6.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758549/large.jpg

7. My favorite view of the tower, side by side with the Conde Nast

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758572/large.jpg

8.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758611/large.jpg

9.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758647/large.jpg

10.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758667/large.jpg

11.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758669/large.jpg

12.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758671/large.jpg

13.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758675/large.jpg

14.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758678/large.jpg

15.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758681/large.jpg

16.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758693/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758460/medium.jpg_http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78759785/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758528/medium.jpg_http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758533/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758537/medium.jpg_http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758549/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758572/medium.jpg_http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758611/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758647/medium.jpg_http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758667/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758669/medium.jpg_http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758671/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758675/medium.jpg_http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758678/medium.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758693/medium.jpg_http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/78758681/medium.jpg

ManhattanManDan
May 14, 2007, 1:08 PM
I'm very excited to see the completion of Bryant Park.. I didnt realize it was right next to conde nast.

CoolCzech
May 14, 2007, 6:51 PM
Whereabouts Manhattan you from, Dan?