NEW YORK | Bank Of America Tower | 1,200' Pinnacle / 945' Roof | 53 FLOORS - Page 150

CoolCzech · #**2981** Posted **Aug 26, 2008, 11:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac150

It makes a nice dent in the skyline. Something I'm noticing about the spire; any shorter and it wouldn't fit, and any taller and it wouldn't fit. I know the spire has earned some bad rap, but when looking at the building as a whole from that standpoint, among others, the building wouldn't be complete without it.

A nice spire adds spice to a building and to the entire skyline. NY isn't like most cities, where even a 600 or even 500 footer can standout.

aaron38 · #**2982** Posted **Aug 27, 2008, 2:23 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lecom

Actually when you see it in person, the mundane office facade is what gives the building a surreal quality that couldn't be achieved with a more avant-garde facade. It's like seeing a boring office tower break and shift dimentsion in a manner you really wouldn't expect it to. This gives the tower a touch of deconstructivism more interesting than its deconstructivist massing.

I think I know what you mean. Only a portion of the fascade was done when I saw it last year, but I felt that the glass was stately, for lack of a better word. It was high quality, but not flashy, blending in well with surrounding office buildings.

That was an aspect that I liked. That if you were a pedestrian just walking, it doesn't stand out from the rest of the streetwall. But look up and there it goes.

NYC4Life · #**2983** Posted **Aug 27, 2008, 6:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoolCzech

A nice spire adds spice to a building and to the entire skyline. NY isn't like most cities, where even a 600 or even 500 footer can standout.

Those building heights here in NY are lost in the shadows of taller towers.

Dac150 · #**2984** Posted **Aug 27, 2008, 7:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYC4Life

Those building heights here in NY are lost in the shadows of taller towers.

Exactly, as is BofA. It's amazing that even a building that closes in on 900' still has trouble making a dent in the skyline. From some perspectives BofA stands out, but in general it gets lost in the jungle.

It seems the only way for a generally tall tower to stand out in the Manhattan skyline is for it to be located in and around either the Hudson or East Rivers. That is the case for TWT, NYTT, and to a degree Citrgroup Center. But even at that where at tower might stand out on one side of the island, it's lost from sight from the other. BofA is close to the middle of the island.

NYC4Life · #**2985** Posted **Aug 28, 2008, 3:52 AM**

Even those towers in Lower Manhattan are hard to pinpoint in the skyline.

3countriesplan · #**2986** Posted **Aug 31, 2008, 7:10 AM**

I think this tower is one of the more disappointing new buildings in NYC for a long time. It has a low roof height and a huge spire on top. The distance from the roof to the tip of the spire is about 3/8 as high as the whole height of the building. They should have just built a dunce cap on top.

aluminum · #**2987** Posted **Aug 31, 2008, 7:48 PM**

^

Its not a very unnatural thing to hate that spire.

This is how it would look without the spire:

Not bad, huh ?

[SP]Neo · #**2988** Posted **Aug 31, 2008, 8:04 PM**

looks good with and without spire. you could get used to both options.

Apex · #**2989** Posted **Sep 1, 2008, 5:38 AM**

^^ Looks twice as good sans-spire, imho. :-\

CGII · #**2990** Posted **Sep 3, 2008, 2:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

Is it just me or are there way more construction accidents in New York City than Chicago or similar large metros? It can't be due just to the fact there are more project in NY, because the difference isn't that huge. I can only remember two major accidents in Chicago this year, one a carpenter fell down and elevator shaft and died and the other a forum burst on MOMO and dumped some cement down on the street.

NY has had two crane collapses alone in the same period of time.

Any ideas as to why this is, or am I just seeing things and thinking there are more accidents in NY than Chicago when its really the same?

1: NY has more new highrise construction going on right now than, I think, ever. as a result,

2: the DoB is absolutely swamped and cannot handle all inspecting/enforcing safety violations.

NYC4Life · #**2991** Posted **Sep 3, 2008, 8:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CGII

1: NY has more new highrise construction going on right now than, I think, ever. as a result,

2: the DoB is absolutely swamped and cannot handle all inspecting/enforcing safety violations.

3. Many inspectors are inexperienced or not certified.

4. Worldwide Crane shortage may contribute to more accidents.

Nowhereman1280 · #**2992** Posted **Sep 3, 2008, 8:39 PM**

^^^ I would have supposed that was the main cause, but NY only has about 3x's as much activity as Chicago and 5x's as many buildings as Chicago, so as a percentage, you'd think both cities would be equally swamped. I wonder if anyone has the actual stats on total construction accidents in major cities world wide. It would be interesting to see Chi, NY, London, Dubai, HK, and the other major cities in comparison...

Not to provoke, but if there really are such bureaucratic problems in NY, I have a feeling that Daley would never let such things fly in Chicago...