NEW YORK | Bank Of America Tower | 1,200' Pinnacle / 945' Roof | 53 FLOORS [Archive] - Page 23

CoolCzech

Oct 17, 2007, 12:46 AM

I guess we'll find out if an actual pole will be installed, but that structural bracing definitely looks way thicker(not wider as a whole, but very thick braces) than depicted in the render.

I was thinking the same thing; the rendering shows the bracing as downright dainty compared to the reality. What we're getting looks less elegant, but will probably do a better job of keeping the spire from looking like a flagpole, a la the NY Times tower...

TechTalkGuy

Oct 17, 2007, 1:38 AM

Hey DubbaG, that is a very nice photo! :yes:

Which camera/lens did you use to produce that affect?

BTW, excellent quality! :tup:

CarlosV

Oct 17, 2007, 1:58 AM

Eat this!!

HA HA a city of spires!!!!

I must say that Conde has the best spire/antenna so far....
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/Picture158-2.jpg

:)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/Picture156-3.jpg

:)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/Picture161-2.jpg

dallasbrink

Oct 17, 2007, 2:22 AM

interesting

PhxSprawler

Oct 17, 2007, 4:15 PM

That is absolutely beautiful, Carlos! Thanks as always for the updates!

NYguy

Oct 17, 2007, 8:43 PM

Small accident today...
http://curbed.com/archives/2007/10/17/breaking_curbedwire_construction_accident_at_b_of_a_tower.php#more

http://curbed.com/uploads/2007_10_BofAWindowShot.jpg

http://curbed.com/uploads/2007_10_BofAStreetScene.jpg

http://curbed.com/uploads/2007_10_BofAwithArrow.jpg

NYguy

Oct 17, 2007, 9:18 PM

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/newyork/am-crane1018,0,2265031.story

Falling glass injures seven in Midtown

http://www.amny.com/media/photo/2007-09/32824265.jpg

By Justin Rocket Silverman
October 17, 2007

A busy midtown street turned into a horror show Wednesday afternoon after a debris bucket fell off a crane and plunged down 53 stories, leaving seven people injured, a carpet of glass covering Sixth Avenue, and panicked office workers running down the sidewalk.

Officials are on the scene investigating the cause and cleaning up, leaving 6th Avenue closed to cars from 35th to 46th Street, with sidewalks closed between 41st and 44th street. 42nd street is closed in the immediate vicinity of Sixth Avenue.

The Fire Department says the accident happened at 1 p.m. at One Bryant Park, the site of the Bank of America Tower currently under construction at 42nd Street and Sixth Avenue.

Deputy Chief John Sudnick said a bucket full of construction debris was being lowered on the crane, which rises to the top of the 54-story crystalline skyscraper.

Something snapped or broke and the bucket plummeted to the street below, landing behind the scaffolding of the Bank of America building.

"We determined it hit parts of the building, and took a lot of glass down with it," Sudnick said.

A woman who works across the street in Bryant Park said she heard "a huge crash, and everyone went running away from the building."

Seven people--four construction workers and three pedestrians--were left with minor cuts, Sudnick said.

"We have a good amount of glass on the struts holding the crane onto the building," Sudnick said, which means streets are likely to remain closed during rush hour.

Firefighters are going window-by-window inside the Bank of America tower, testing the glass and using sledgehammers to knock out those which may have been damaged.

"I walked by a few minutes after it happened and saw a bunch of people getting taken away in ambulances. I guess when glass is coming down, you better get indoors fast," said Kyle Moody, 24, of Middletown, Connecticut.

The building is scheduled to open in 2008 and will serve as Bank of America's headquarters. It will be the second-tallest in Manhattan, behind only the Empire State Building.

nequidnimis

Oct 17, 2007, 10:00 PM

I guess they do not use laminated glass on this project.

I would have thought laminated glass is mandated.

CarlosV

Oct 18, 2007, 12:05 AM

That is absolutely beautiful, Carlos! Thanks as always for the updates!

thanks....this project is neearing completion..pretty soon i'll devote my time/attention to another building :yuck:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/Picture164-1.jpg

CarlosV

Oct 20, 2007, 11:38 AM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/Picture171-3.jpghttp://www.abc.net.au/southeastnsw/stories/Oil_rig_m1165329.jpg

Fabb

Oct 20, 2007, 4:51 PM

That's unfair, it looks much, much better than an oil rig.
I think that it'll be nicer than the Condé Nast antenna.

CarlosV

Oct 20, 2007, 5:45 PM

^
mmm it looks like an oil rig!!!! and I LOVE conde nast antenna!!! :) for some reason I always think Tokyo when I see it...

kznyc2k

Oct 20, 2007, 9:15 PM

I don't like the Conde Nast antenna (although I don't hate it), and so far I'm liking the girth of BOA's. At the very least, I much prefer we have this than the polar opposite -- the NY Times Toothpick.

AtlanticaC5

Oct 20, 2007, 11:20 PM

TechTalkGuy

Oct 21, 2007, 6:29 AM

I just got back from Manhattan and I had dinner at the Rainbow Room - with the view of the Bank of America, (it looks huge from any table in the restaurant) - there were a few guests at the restaurant talking about it.

You can tell that the spire will be much taller than the spire atop Condé Nast Tower. :yes:

Dac150

Oct 21, 2007, 2:02 PM

You can tell that the spire will be much taller than the spire atop Condé Nast Tower. :yes:

I am looking foward to seeing that.:yes:

aluminum

Oct 21, 2007, 2:05 PM

You can tell that the spire will be much taller than the spire atop Condé Nast Tower. :yes:

Around 80 feet taller, I guess.

TechTalkGuy

Oct 21, 2007, 2:24 PM

:previous: I'd say that just the viewing from my table, I can tell that the bottom of the spire is wider as it tapers upwards - that is how I can tell it will be exceeding every building except for the Empire State Building.

It has a magnificant presence from the Rainbow Room (or even the Top of the Rock).

It seems that more and more people are posing for pictures by the window at the restaurant - the view will get better as the construction proceeds.

PhxSprawler

Oct 22, 2007, 2:29 AM

I guess they do not use laminated glass on this project.

I would have thought laminated glass is mandated.

The glass was chosen to let light in when needed (to reduce heating and lighting costs), and to keep it out when not needed (to avoid A/C costs). It is a big part of its platinum LEED rating, and part of why it is my favorite building in Manhattan.

Read more here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Bryant_Park)

CoolCzech

Oct 22, 2007, 2:55 AM

That's unfair, it looks much, much better than an oil rig.
I think that it'll be nicer than the Condé Nast antenna.

Hey, I wouldn't mind an oil rig in MY backyard!

Besides - this is just the lower half of the spire.

CoolCzech

Oct 22, 2007, 2:58 AM

Scary stuff with that falling glass, I guess it was just luck no one got killed.

The tower is looking good though, will be interesting to see how it will turn out at the top when the facade catches up.

When you consider all the windows in Manhattan - and how old some of the towers are getting - it's a wonder this doesn't happen all the time.

NYguy

Oct 22, 2007, 5:34 PM

I just got back from Manhattan and I had dinner at the Rainbow Room - with the view of the Bank of America, (it looks huge from any table in the restaurant) - there were a few guests at the restaurant talking about it.

It will replace the ESB as the dominant icon from the view there....

Fabb

Oct 22, 2007, 5:42 PM

It will replace the ESB as the dominant icon from the view there....

It'll probably be the dominant eye-catcher, but I'm not sure that it'll gain easily the status of icon. The asymmetry won't make it easy to be immediatly recognizable. And the multiplicity of spires in the area will add to the confusion (I mean, for the general public, not for us).

NYguy

Oct 22, 2007, 5:42 PM

OCTOBER 21, 2007

1.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87693900/large.jpg

2.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87693925/large.jpg

3.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87693951/large.jpg

4.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87693960/large.jpg

5.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87693964/large.jpg

6.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87693979/large.jpg

7.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87693988/large.jpg

8.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87693997/large.jpg

9.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87694006/large.jpg

10.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87694013/large.jpg

11.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87694018/large.jpg

12.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87694024/large.jpg

13.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87694031/large.jpg

14.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87694038/large.jpg

Bonus: the Chrysler approves...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87694268/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87693960/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87694006/original.jpg

NYguy

Oct 22, 2007, 5:46 PM

It'll probably be the dominant eye-catcher, but I'm not sure that it'll gain easily the status of icon. The asymmetry won't make it easy to be immediatly recognizable. And the multiplicity of spires in the area will add to the confusion (I mean, for the general public, not for us).

Location alone will make this one an icon. The shape is not that important, mainly the top. This will be neither the Times spire, nor the Conde antenna. The Sears Tower is an icon, yet the setbacks give it a different look, depending on the view.

Fabb

Oct 22, 2007, 5:48 PM

Great pictures !

But the placement of the spire puzzles me. It looks nothing like that :

http://www.durst.org/prop/images/1bp/print/1.jpg

aluminum

Oct 22, 2007, 8:24 PM

My guess: This thing is way off from becoming an icon.
You don't make icons by sticking 300-400' poles on top, you make them by building high, like the old WTC or possibly the new WTC.

NYguy

Oct 22, 2007, 8:33 PM

My guess: This thing is way off from becoming an icon.
You don't make icons by sticking 300-400' poles on top, you make them by 'building' high, like the old WTC or possibly the new WTC.

One of the dumbest statements I've seen yet. New York has many smaller icons, such as the Woolworth for example. This will be the second tallest in Midtown - whether you want to count the spire or not.

As I've mentioned already, its location alone will mark its status as an icon:

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87693960/medium.jpg__http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87694038/medium.jpg

TechTalkGuy

Oct 22, 2007, 9:12 PM

One of the dumbest statements I've seen yet. New York has many smaller icons, such as the Woolworth for example. This will be the second tallest in Midtown - whether you want to count the spire or not.

As I've mentioned already, its location alone will mark its status as an icon:

I will share my observations next month when I'm dining at the Rainbow Room again and as always, observe how others respond to a new icon from the "south view".

Now, one thing that bugged me - a table directly in my view was packed with people and this guy kept snapping photos of them (with the towers behind them) - he must've been snapping for at least 10 minutes straight.

With a new icon - the snapshots are only going to get worse.

Why didn't I snap a photo of it?

Because I see it all the time and we have great contributors like NYguy doing such a great job.

Besides - the spire is no big deal until it is complete.

As for those who suggest that the (currently under construction) spire looks nothing like the finished product - that's because it is not finished yet. :rolleyes:

aluminum

Oct 22, 2007, 9:32 PM

New York has many smaller icons, such as the Woolworth for example.
The dumbest reply I've ever seen. Are you comparing woolworth with boA ? Woolworth is an icon because it was built 792' tall in 1913 not 2013, an incredible achievement for that time. In this era 900' or whatever is no even close to becoming an achievement. This thing can never replace ESB or Chrysler as an Midtown icon. Just because you and some other guys like you like ridiculously tall poles on top, doesn't mean the whole New York does. Try to digest other peoples' opinions. You're not the king here and nor is this absolute monarchy. Case Closed.

Crawford

Oct 22, 2007, 9:42 PM

The dumbest reply I've ever seen. Are you comparing woolworth with boA ? Woolworth is an icon because it was built 792' tall in 1913 not 2013, an incredible achievement for that time. In this era 900' or whatever this is no even close to become an achievement. This thing can never replace ESB or Chrysler as an Midtown icon. Just because you and some other guys like you like ridiculously tall poles on top, doesn't mean the whole New York does. Try to digest other peoples' opinions. Your not the king and nor this is absolute monarchy. Case Closed.

Um, Woolworth is an icon because it is beautiful. Building tall is not an "achievement." Is building short an achievement? How about building wide? :rolleyes:

And what's with those ridiculous structural poles? We need tall boxes, and nothing else! Time to tear down the Eifel Tower and build a giant monolith. Now that would be an achievement. :koko:

MikeS

Oct 22, 2007, 9:48 PM

dallasbrink

Oct 22, 2007, 9:51 PM

It will be interesting to see how this building sheds rainwater during a heavy downpour. Will the runoff adhere to the sides all the way down or will it cascade off of the sloped sides. If the later, pedestrians will need stout umbrellas.

Cascade, it would almost imposable for it to rain hard enough for it to turn into a waterfall, also the angles arnt extreme enough

rich_200

Oct 22, 2007, 11:09 PM

Um, Woolworth is an icon because it is beautiful.

Are you sure being the tallest of its time is not the main reason?

TechTalkGuy

Oct 23, 2007, 12:25 AM

Are you sure being the tallest of its time is not the main reason?

That is a real ignorant statement about a classic building! :hell:

I especially like the Chrysler Building, not because it was once the tallest, but because it looks beautiful today. :yes:

CoolCzech

Oct 23, 2007, 2:10 AM

TechTalkGuy

Oct 23, 2007, 2:29 AM

I think in general the word "icon" has become way, way overused. Very few buildings are "iconic" in the sense that they are famously instantly recognizable as a symbol of a place. The Statue of Liberty and the ESB, and perhaps the Chrysler, are "iconic" of New York City. Other buildings - like the Woolworth - are stunning and certainly architecturally worthy, but ultimately simply not as famous as the SoL, for example.

I like the BofA a lot, but I doubt it will become as famous as the ESB or Chrysler.

I understand your point, CoolCzech - however, I have an additional point to add.

I'll add the MetLife building in the center of Park Avenue - that is very iconic for me and I could list many others that also have a powerful impact (Times Square #1 and #2) are not the tallest, but - well, you get my point.

Anyhow, the Bank of America is very inconic from the Rainbow Room because it has a striking appearance that simply cannot be ignored (it's beautiful). :yes:

CarlosV

Oct 23, 2007, 3:39 AM

aluminum

Oct 23, 2007, 3:47 AM

^^ I totally agree on that.

Western Spaghetti

Oct 23, 2007, 4:10 AM

I like BofA, count me in as a fan. Will it be as famous as ESB or Chrysler? Not at all, but still a very nice building IMO.

Thanks for those update pics!

Alliance

Oct 23, 2007, 4:32 AM

my two cents....

I love the design of BOA building, but when they claim that this building will be the second tallest building in NYC it makes me laugh........it hardly makes a dent in the skyline....................

spire.

I like the design of the building, but I thought it was a really bad execution. The base is way too wide, they lost some of the nice angles present with the original design, but above all, the siding is hideous imo.

disappoitning to me. I was looking forward to this one.

CHAPINM1

Oct 23, 2007, 7:07 AM

GEE, I didn't know this building was sooooo terrible... :rolleyes:

NYguy

Oct 23, 2007, 1:05 PM

Now, one thing that bugged me - a table directly in my view was packed with people and this guy kept snapping photos of them (with the towers behind them) - he must've been snapping for at least 10 minutes straight.

With a new icon - the snapshots are only going to get worse.

Certainly from the observation deck as well. For years (before the closing), the definitive postcard shot of Manhattan was taken from the GE observation deck. The Empire State building dominated the picture perfect view from there. Now, a new icon will steel the spotlight. The Empire State will obviously still be there, but in the background. Already some of the unaware among us think it (BofA) is the Freedom Tower rising...:haha:

NYguy

Oct 23, 2007, 1:12 PM

The dumbest reply I've ever seen. Are you comparing woolworth with boA ? Woolworth is an icon because it was built 792' tall in 1913 not 2013, an incredible achievement for that time. In this era 900' or whatever is no even close to becoming an achievement. This thing can never replace ESB or Chrysler as an Midtown icon. Just because you and some other guys like you like ridiculously tall poles on top, doesn't mean the whole New York does. Try to digest other peoples' opinions. You're not the king here and nor is this absolute monarchy. Case Closed.

Hardly. Your ignorance abounds, so I'll give you a lesson for the day:

i·con
NOUN:

1. An image; a representation.

2.An important and enduring symbol:

3. One who is the object of great attention and devotion

Blame yourself for your own ignorant statements before you go off on a rant.

NYguy

Oct 23, 2007, 1:18 PM

I especially like the Chrysler Building, not because it was once the tallest, but because it looks beautiful today. :yes:

The Chrysler Building is THE most iconic skyscraper in all of Manhattan, as far as I'm concerned. As much as I love the Empire State Building, I think no building says New York like the Chrysler. Besides, half the people think its the Empire State anyway.

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87694268/medium.jpg__http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87693960/medium.jpg

kingsdl76

Oct 23, 2007, 1:26 PM

spire.

I like the design of the building, but I thought it was a really bad execution. The base is way too wide, they lost some of the nice angles present with the original design, but above all, the siding is hideous imo.

disappoitning to me. I was looking forward to this one.

Personally, I like the design of this building. I'd like to see it 100 ft taller or so but thats just wishful thinking. The problem with this building, in my opinion, is a superficial one. I'm referring to the type of glass they're installing. They should've used something more reflective....similar to the type of glass used for the Trump Tower going up in Chicago or Comcast Center in Philly or even 7 WTC. That type of glass would've made BOA look much better and I think it would've given the building a larger presence in the skyline as well.
Who know's....maybe in the future they'll install different glass just like they are doing to BOA's neighbor right now. :cool:

NYguy

Oct 23, 2007, 1:32 PM

As far as second tallest in Manhattan? (for the next couple of years)...from the diagrams, you get the picture...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87744550/medium.jpg

Alliance

Oct 23, 2007, 3:19 PM

Personally, I like the design of this building. I'd like to see it 100 ft taller or so but thats just wishful thinking. The problem with this building, in my opinion, is a superficial one. I'm referring to the type of glass they're installing. They should've used something more reflective....similar to the type of glass used for the Trump Tower going up in Chicago or Comcast Center in Philly or even 7 WTC. That type of glass would've made BOA look much better and I think it would've given the building a larger presence in the skyline as well.

Definately agree. Its sad to see an unconventioal form destroyed by the spray-painted stripiness. Instead, it should have been highlighted.

Crawford

Oct 23, 2007, 3:42 PM

spire.

I like the design of the building, but I thought it was a really bad execution. The base is way too wide, they lost some of the nice angles present with the original design, but above all, the siding is hideous imo.

disappoitning to me. I was looking forward to this one.

The building is for an investment bank. This means it has to be wide because investment banks demand huge trading floors and want all their equities/fixed income, etc. groups on the same floor. This is an economic reality.

The fact is that is is bigger than all but a handful of buildings under construction on earth. There are very few office towers with 2.1 million square feet of space.

PhxSprawler

Oct 23, 2007, 4:50 PM

It will be interesting to see how this building sheds rainwater during a heavy downpour. Will the runoff adhere to the sides all the way down or will it cascade off of the sloped sides. If the later, pedestrians will need stout umbrellas.

I cannot answer the design specs, but I do know the building will keep all its rainwater to use for flushing toilets. Little will be wasted on pedestrians, I'm sure.

To everyone else:

Sorry to be repetitive, but this building is an icon for its environmental friendliness, hence the smart windows that we should all despise Verizon and Trump for, not praise.

It has a cogeneration plant that sends out cleaner air than it ingests, it allows circulation to limit carbon monoxide, it has windows that allow heating in winter and block light during the day, it limits the heat island effect with its windows, it is made mostly of recyclable materials, it produces the majority of its own energy, etc. etc. etc.

All of this makes it LEED Platinum certified. Google it.

rich_200

Oct 23, 2007, 7:06 PM

That is a real ignorant statement about a classic building! :hell:

I especially like the Chrysler Building, not because it was once the tallest, but because it looks beautiful today. :yes:

There are many beautiful skyscrapers in New York, in the case of the Woolworth I think that what made it an icon is that it was the tallest of its time. I am not saying it was not beautiful, just that it being beautiful is not the main reason that turn this building into an icon. Perhaps if it wasn´t the tallest it would have still being an icon, but not as important and famous as it is today. If you think another thing, it is OK, but calling ignorant an OPINION just because you don´t agree only shows how intolerant you are.

Alliance

Oct 23, 2007, 8:04 PM

Sorry to be repetitive, but this building is an icon for its environmental friendliness, hence the smart windows that we should all despise Verizon and Trump for, not praise.

That doesn't mean we can't feel that BofA its not very attractive. They may be smart, but I think they're ugly and detract from the building.

Dac150

Oct 23, 2007, 8:09 PM

Tough crowd. Generally I've noticed a lot of mixed feelings about every NYC skyscraper currently going up and or proposed.

BofA was a hit or miss building IMO. I think it leaned more as a hit. I will agree that the facade is not what it was portrayed to be in the renderings, but you got to expect that. Overall, I am pleased with the building. I love the location, love the height, and love the size.

Alliance

Oct 23, 2007, 9:02 PM

Dac150

Oct 23, 2007, 9:10 PM

New York is trying different diections, you can't complain about that. I just think that none of them have worked so far. ( at least with NYT and BofA)

However, the WTC developement is finally getting underway and there is some potential there. Nothign groundbreaking, but there could be some nice buildings.

I'm not complaining, and I think they have worked. It's a new generation of architecture.

And who are you, the master of all buildings? The new WTC has more than a little potential. And by looking at the renders, they are going to be more than nice buildings. You have a nag for downplaying New York skyscrapers.

Alliance

Oct 23, 2007, 9:16 PM

I'm not complaining, and I think they have worked. It's a new generation of architecture.

And who are you, the master of all buildings? The new WTC has more than a little potential. And by looking at the renders, they are going to be more than nice buildings. You have a nag for downplaying New York skyscrapers.

Then I have a nag for downplaying all skyscrapers.

Renders are nothing, show me something real and I can form an opinion on its merits. Renders mean very little.

Dac150

Oct 23, 2007, 9:21 PM

Renders are nothing, show me something real and I can form an opinion on its merits. Renders mean very little.

Actually, some of the WTC renders that have been shown look very realistic as if they were pictures.

But I can agree with you that for the most part renders only give a generalization of the building's outcome. I've seen it time and time again.

Patrick

Oct 24, 2007, 6:11 AM

my two cents....

I love the design of BOA building, but when they claim that this building will be the second tallest building in NYC it makes me laugh........it hardly makes a dent in the skyline....................

I agree, same with the NY Times Tower. To me poles are cheating if you claim the BofA tower is the 2nd tallest in NYC.

JMGarcia

Oct 24, 2007, 7:44 PM

I believe if you take the spire off of both BOA and the Chrysler then BOA would be the taller of the 2.

NYguy

Oct 24, 2007, 7:47 PM

I agree, same with the NY Times Tower. To me poles are cheating if you claim the BofA tower is the 2nd tallest in NYC.

You can't have it both ways. Either spires count, or they don't. The fact is, they do. Most of today's tallest include spires.

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87744550/medium.jpg

Another fact is that New York's skyline at its greatest included peaks with spires. Hopefully, some of the newer Midtown towers along the 33rd St corridor will have spires.

NYguy

Oct 24, 2007, 8:02 PM

From the diagrams, comparison to other spires and towers...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87807984/original.jpg

Daquan13

Oct 24, 2007, 8:24 PM

I thought that 150 Greenwich Street (Tower 4) was given a spire also.

FastFerrari82

Oct 25, 2007, 4:31 AM

thanx for the diagram...175 is da shizz nizzle:P

nequidnimis

Oct 25, 2007, 4:38 AM

Perhaps the diagram should include I.M. Pei's Fountain Place (originally Allied Bank Tower) : there are similarities...

http://www.pcfandp.com/a/p/8212/3.html

CHAPINM1

Oct 25, 2007, 5:48 AM

This building is VERY worthy of being NYC's second tallest, it has 2.1 million square feet of office space for God sake!!! I don't know any other building in NYC with that much, possibly besides the ESB. Also, look how thick it is. The Chrysler building cheats with it's height also. The only difference is, the Chrysler cheats by going up to 1,046 with a spire and BOA cheats by going up to 1,200 feet. Looks to me that BOA IS taller. Also, at 900 some odd feet, BOA is still A LOT thicker than the Chrysler building at 900 some feet. BOA has 154 feet on what is now the third tallest which also claims it's height with a spire, enough said. Just my two cents.

Fabb

Oct 25, 2007, 7:05 AM

This building is VERY worthy of being NYC's second tallest, it has 2.1 million square feet of office space for God sake!!!

55 Water Street has over three million sq ft.
And it's not very tall... so the floor area doesn't mean much.

CHAPINM1

Oct 25, 2007, 7:08 AM

55 Water Street has over three million sq ft.
And it's not very tall... so the floor area doesn't mean much.

I never knew that, it is kinda bulky as well I guess. I wonder how big the largest (bottom floors) and smallest (highest occupied floor) of BOA are.

CarlosV

Oct 26, 2007, 1:47 AM

^

The Pan Am Building (Metlife Building) has 2.8 million ft² (260,000 m²)

CHAPINM1

Oct 26, 2007, 4:43 AM

Sorry to change the subject, but ANY idea as to when construction is to recommence?

aluminum

Oct 26, 2007, 8:14 PM

This building is VERY worthy of being NYC's second tallest, it has 2.1 million square feet of office space for God sake!!!

If your assumptions about 'floor space affecting building height' are true, then Merchandise Mart in Chicago must be one of the tallest buildings in the US.

Alliance

Oct 26, 2007, 10:06 PM

100% on that one.

Not to mention, if a building is thicker at a given height...thats makes it taller. Finally the question of spires has been eliminated!

CarlosV

Oct 27, 2007, 7:14 PM

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

:)

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

Fabb

Oct 28, 2007, 7:15 AM

The trilogy (NYTimes, Condé Nast, BofA), as shown in Carlos' picture, will probably become very famous.

TechTalkGuy

Oct 28, 2007, 6:24 PM

The trilogy (NYTimes, Condé Nast, BofA), as shown in Carlos' picture, will probably become very famous.

Trilogy?

You forgot a few others!

How about this list of spires:

1. Empire State Building (only a mile away from the cluster)
2. Chrysler Building
3. Bank of America
4. Condé Nast Tower
5. New York Times

Now - I did not count the spires of the towers Downtown, just limited to Midtown. :cool:

Alxx611

Oct 28, 2007, 8:26 PM

I think Fabb maybe was refering to them as the Times Square trio, and that maybe Empire and Chrsyler aren't clustered quite close enough to them to be part of the group and I agree.

Dac150

Oct 28, 2007, 8:54 PM

BofA, NYT, and Conde Nast are their own cluster of spires.

CoolCzech

Oct 29, 2007, 12:31 AM

Quite honestly, I wish there was more space between the Conde Naste, BofA, and NY Times towers. It seems that from many angles, the view of at least one is blocked by the other two. But most of all, I wish the NY Times Tower didn't look like a desolate, post-apocalyptic grey hulk of a shipwreck brooding over the skyline. What an unspeakable disapointment it turned out to be.

Patrick

Oct 29, 2007, 12:43 AM

I like the NY Times tower, most of it, but really, the top ruins it, looks like it partially collapsed or something :/ BofA looks great, reminds me of the future 2 World Trade Center.

NYguy

Oct 29, 2007, 1:10 PM

OCTOBER 28, 2007

1.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/88058660/medium.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/88058660/large.jpg

2.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/88058665/large.jpg

3.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/88058700/large.jpg

4.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/88058761/large.jpg

5.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/88058767/large.jpg

6.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/88058772/large.jpg

7.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/88058776/large.jpg

8.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/88058783/large.jpg

9.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/88058815/large.jpg

10.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/88058841/large.jpg

11.
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/88058844/large.jpg

PhxSprawler

Oct 29, 2007, 6:22 PM

:previous: Woo hoo! Progress! Thanks, NYguy!

TechTalkGuy

Oct 29, 2007, 8:45 PM

:previous: Yes and Thank You very much, NYguy!! :worship:

innov8

Oct 30, 2007, 4:10 AM

Late last week I got to visit the great city of New York for a couple days
and snap a few shots. I had a great time despite the rain for couple days.
These shots were taken Sat. evening and night after the rain from the Rock.

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/5258/nyconebryantparkbofatowhl1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/7517/nyconebryantparkbofatowcw8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/3598/nyconebryantparkbofatowex1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

CarlosV

Oct 30, 2007, 11:09 AM

very nice...
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/7517/nyconebryantparkbofatowcw8.jpg

colemonkee

Oct 30, 2007, 2:49 PM

Great shots, innov8. I wonder what they plan to do with the "cap" on the old Verizon building. Hopefully it's clad in the green glass like the rest of the tower. Imagine these shots when BofA is finished. We need a Homer Simpson drooling smiley...

Complex01

Oct 30, 2007, 4:34 PM

:previous:

::Mmm Tower = AAAhhhhaaarrrrrgggg::

:haha:

very nice...
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/7517/nyconebryantparkbofatowcw8.jpg

I agree. What a good looking shot, with an awesome tower...

:yes:

NYguy

Oct 30, 2007, 5:49 PM

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/5258/nyconebryantparkbofatowhl1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Already taking its spot on the stage that is Manhattan.

The spire, along with the Conde Naste antenna will make those towers appear somewhat like "twins".

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/7517/nyconebryantparkbofatowcw8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Notice also that the occupied space will be near or about 900 ft...

Dac150

Oct 30, 2007, 6:37 PM

Very nice shots. Thank you!

tdawg

Oct 31, 2007, 1:59 AM

CoolCzech, i disagree with your comments about the new Times tower. Have you seen it in person? It's really stunning up close.

NYguy

Nov 1, 2007, 3:46 AM

Have you seen it in person? It's really stunning up close.

I was gonna make a joke, but I'm already tired of talking about the Times tower here.

CarlosV

Nov 1, 2007, 4:00 AM

CoolCzech, i disagree with your comments about the new Times tower. Have you seen it in person? It's really stunning up close.

agreed, up close it is very futuristic (at some angles)...from far away at the right time of the day ......when the sun is hitting it......looks out of this world...especially as seen from down 8th avenue....:tup:

CHAPINM1

Nov 1, 2007, 4:45 AM

I honostly cannot tell by the progress, but has construction been been moving foward as of recient?

NYguy

Nov 1, 2007, 12:13 PM

I honostly cannot tell by the progress, but has construction been been moving foward as of recient?

Sure has.

CHAPINM1

Nov 1, 2007, 4:14 PM

Great to know, and thank you! I was just wondering because I thought I heard that there was to be a bunch of red tape that Tishman had to go through before construction was to recommence because of their little accident.

CoolCzech

Nov 1, 2007, 9:51 PM

Originally Posted by tdawg
CoolCzech, i disagree with your comments about the new Times tower. Have you seen it in person? It's really stunning up close.

Yes, indeed I have. It's big enough, and that's a plus. On the other hand: it's grey. Really, really grey. And the whole facade blends into one bland, grey mass. And the base of the spire... looks like a mess.

NYguy

Nov 1, 2007, 10:47 PM