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

[lakegz]

^id say more like 150ish

[CoolCzech]

Originally Posted by Islander

It certainly does look messy and crowded, but hey, that's Manhattan! You can't building anything within the skyline hump of midtown (or downtown) without it being mostly blocked and buried unless it's well over 1,000 feet tall, or on the east or west edge of the crowd of skyscrapers. I think it should actually be pretty visible from the east though.

What's really too bad is that One Bryant Park has to be literally next door to the Conde Naste - both would be stand out buildings if only there were some space between them.

Oh, well - can't have everything, I guess. I do think that One Bryant Park is one of the smartest looking structures under construction anywhere in the world.

[High Pointer]

Even though I can't say I particularly like the BOFA tower design, I do give the building credit for breaking loose of the conformist boxy design of much of NYC's scrapers.

I crappily removed Conde nast from this rendering to show how much BofA would stand out....



It looks almost as tall as ESB!

[knarfor]

I don't think this link was posted here:

http://www.durst.org/i_prop.asp?propertyid=12

Take a look. There is an awesome animation that shows the true proportions of the building. You will be surprised at how slender it will actually be.

edit: please note that the animation takes quite a while to load, even with a broadband connection.

[JACKinBeantown]

Originally Posted by -GR2NY-

So this is gonna be like 200 feet taller to teh roof than the bloomberg?

Actually more like 14 feet taller to the roof. Then another 140 feet to the top of the glass wall. Then another 300 feet to the top of the spire/antenna.

[carfreak01]

Wow, this tower would look really different were it not blocked by Conde Naste. Oh well, i guess that's the price you pay for density. It is New York, after all.

[bayrider]

^^ or at least take down that stupid antenna on Conde Nast

[Fabb]

No, I like Cond� Nast better with the "stupid" antenna.
And I think that they'll form a nice pair.

[High Pointer]

Darn you Conde Naste!!!

[Lecom]

No, I think its good where it is.

Originally Posted by High Pointer

Darn you Conde Naste!!!

Hey! Don't blame Conde Nast! It was there first! :p

But don't blame BofA either...because it's a beautiful tower, and it's taller...

[Fabb]

Well, I don't want to ruin everybody's pleasure, but Cond� Nast would be less disturbing if BofA had another 200 ft.
I'm probably stating the obvious.

[NYatKNIGHT]

I couldn't agree more. That location demands a very tall building.

[FerrariEnzo]

Wowzers:

[FerrariEnzo]

Good cross-section:

[Matace]

^Nice.

[Just Rich]

Here's some architectural elevations with heights.

[Islander]

Originally Posted by knarfor

I don't think this link was posted here:

http://www.durst.org/i_prop.asp?propertyid=12

Take a look. There is an awesome animation that shows the true proportions of the building. You will be surprised at how slender it will actually be.

edit: please note that the animation takes quite a while to load, even with a broadband connection.

Great animation. The building isn't very overweight at all, now that I see it from every angle.

[High Pointer]

Nice structural rendering...looks like an improved design for FT.

I hope that the thing on top is a spire, not an antenna, then NYC will have another 1000' by emporis standards.