PDA

View Full Version : The Bank of America Tower a.k.a. One Bryant Park - by Cook + Fox Architects



Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

BrooklynRider
November 7th, 2003, 03:46 PM
No argument here. It's the perfect place for a 1000 footer.

A betting man would go with "under 1000 feet".

NYatKNIGHT
November 7th, 2003, 04:04 PM
Yeah, that's why I'm not betting, just wishing.

Arch
November 7th, 2003, 08:33 PM
When I saw the rendering (tres cool, by the way), the top of the building was at approximately 900 ft. They said it could be somewhat above that. I'm thinking about 930. There is also the broacast antennae which extends above that to about 1200 ft. So as usual, it depends on what you call the top.

NoyokA
November 7th, 2003, 11:00 PM
Im optimistic BoFa will top 900 feet, as such this just might become the Citicorp Center of the 21st Century.

TLOZ Link5
November 7th, 2003, 11:34 PM
Im optimistic BoFa will top 900 feet, inwhich case this just might become the Citicorp Center of the 21st Century.

I'd like to see how it plays to Condé Nast and Chrysler.

JMC
November 8th, 2003, 02:06 AM
Would it help if we called BOA shareholder relationshs and told them that they are being lame for not bulding a 1000+ footer in NYC?

kliq6
November 8th, 2003, 09:17 PM
maybe but NY has a fear of anything over 800 feet the past years,

NoyokA
November 8th, 2003, 11:02 PM
From the sound of it, this will become the tallest building in midtown. Also from the sounds of it you guys are complaining? What!

True, Bofa will not dominate the skyline, but it will have a profound impact on it. Location, Location, Location. And for the bank what a powerful advertising instrument! This will capture the public’s attention, that’s its purpose, the statistics aren’t important.

NoyokA
November 8th, 2003, 11:17 PM
BofA in seattle is ~970 ft. tall and BofA in Hotlanta is ~1000 ft. tall...IMHO, this NYC bad boy has got to be at least at tall as seattle's...I mean, this is NYC...They wanna be bigger than Citigroup (market cap), and I bet that's gonna come out in this building....And the others...in Dallas and Charolette..certaintly, there's a president here...In NYC, you go big or go home!

Having done a little research. Thanks to the CTBUH.

Bofa Seattle was built for Martin Selig and Columbia Seafirst, interestingly it was originally planned as a 1,050 foot-tall-tower.

Bofa Atlanta (1,023 ft.) was built for General D. Hines and Nations Bank.

Bofa Dallas (921 ft.) was also built for Nations Bank.

According to the CTBUH the tallest Bofa developed Building is Bank of America Center (779 ft.) in San Fransisco.

emmeka
November 9th, 2003, 10:49 AM
I have always liked the BOA in Seattle, nice and curvatious but simple!

JMC
November 9th, 2003, 12:53 PM
Stern, thanks for that info. Knowing that, I'm reeling my bets in...

Arch
November 9th, 2003, 02:18 PM
Having done a little research. Thanks to the CTBUH.

Bofa Seattle was built for Martin Selig and Columbia Seafirst, interestingly it was originally planned as a 1,050 foot-tall-tower.

Bofa Atlanta (1,023 ft.) was built for General D. Hines and Nations Bank.

Bofa Dallas (921 ft.) was also built for Nations Bank.

According to the CTBUH the tallest Bofa developed Building is Bank of America Center (779 ft.) in San Fransisco.
However, Nations Bank bought BoA and decided the BoA name was more marketable. So the buildings built for Nation's Bank are the one's to consider.

TLOZ Link5
November 9th, 2003, 02:48 PM
If you think about it, no one has complained about the great disparity between floors and height in Asian skyscrapers. Jin Mao Tower has an average floor-to-floor height of about 15.7 feet, which is more than in Citicorp. The same goes for the new towers in Hong Kong and Taipei.

Freedom Tower
November 9th, 2003, 04:21 PM
No one complains for a very good reason, Yao Ming has to be able to fit into their skyscrapers ;)

emmeka
November 10th, 2003, 05:55 PM
I hope this project isnt going to be a 'toy' for people like the wtc, I mean, theyve already changed the design completley- it might happen again.....

DominicanoNYC
November 10th, 2003, 07:20 PM
Skyscrapers.com (now also emporis.info/en) lists it as 781 feet.

Gulcrapek
November 10th, 2003, 07:56 PM
That's outdated. Never trust that site anyway. Nothing unless built is definite.

DominicanoNYC
November 10th, 2003, 09:27 PM
I've learned not to. A lot of the info on NYC is incorrect.

matt3303
November 11th, 2003, 12:04 AM
also I think skyscrapers.com seems more interested with other cities. They always have news and features about Istanbul or Liverpool (I think one week was 3 news stories in a row about some 21-story apartments in Glasgow) but NYC gets shafted.

emmeka
November 11th, 2003, 02:44 PM
That's outdated. Never trust that site anyway. Nothing unless built is definite.

Tell me about it, ive stopped using it because its about as helpful as a hole in the head.

DominicanoNYC
November 11th, 2003, 09:23 PM
Still you got to like some of the pics. Yet I would like better info.

BrooklynRider
November 12th, 2003, 04:06 PM
That's outdated. Never trust that site anyway. Nothing unless built is definite.

I agree. A totally overrated site that is rarely kept up to date.

kliq6
November 17th, 2003, 05:50 PM
Remeber for all those intereeted in seeing a rendering of the building, there is a publci meeting to determine if the city and state will give the tax breaks that will basically make or break this project on Thursday the 20th at the New Victory Theater on 42nd street next to the Reuters Building. It starts at 4pm

emmeka
November 19th, 2003, 04:57 PM
Do you think that they will release a rendering oficially after that?

They should do, I cant stand waiting!!!

NYguy
November 20th, 2003, 08:34 AM
I won't be going. Hopefully someone will go and take a camera in case the model is present...

kliq6
November 20th, 2003, 10:31 PM
went to the public meeting, could not take pictures. It looks as if the NYS EDC will condem the last three lots and Durst can start building in Mid 2005. 53 floors and about 960 feet without the antennea

NoyokA
November 20th, 2003, 10:34 PM
Good height. Did you see a design?

kliq6
November 20th, 2003, 10:57 PM
yeah two underground levels of mechanical, then street level retail. The first four floors of office space our trading floors for BOA, stretching from Ave of americas to the Conde Naste Building, with a small public plaza between then BOA and Naste towers. After the Fourth floor tower mainly rises up along 6th ave like most on corporate row. Basically kinda like bloomberg building, low rise along third with high rise area over lexington.

Basically he needs the state to cease control of the Ranch one and Mcdonlds along sixth, the only two buildings he does not own, inorder to make the 75,000 sf trading floors work to BOA needs.

Also the mentioned the NY Times Tower, the state seems as if it may give inand give some Liberty Bonds to that to make that project start rising

NoyokA
November 20th, 2003, 11:05 PM
960 feet is considerably taller than your average 53 storey building. Bloomberg Tower similarly has 53 floors and is about 850 feet, other buildings would be around 650 feet.

Is 960 feet to the top of the roof?

kliq6
November 20th, 2003, 11:14 PM
960 without the antentena. Th etrading floors on level three and flour will have 18 foot floor to ceiling heights, like the trading floors they are building all over Jersey City, if NYC wants to keep being a player in the fincial sector, mor eof these floors must be built before Jersey City Dominates the industry

ddny
November 20th, 2003, 11:43 PM
Darn...so it sounds like another big box for 6th Avenue?

JMC
November 21st, 2003, 01:17 AM
The first seven stories of Bear Stearns are trading floors...hence, the box. I've been in B of A's current HQ on 57th...small floor plastes, comparatively...

billyblancoNYC
November 21st, 2003, 02:41 AM
Why go 960 and not 1000? Is there a chance for a bigger crown? When will the renderings be released? Are they different from the old ones?

Kris
November 21st, 2003, 06:36 AM
November 21, 2003

Hearing Splits on Public Help for a Proposed Office Tower

By CHARLES V. BAGLI

The prospect of another skyscraper sets off a hue and cry in many Manhattan neighborhoods, but rarely in the glass-and-steel canyons along the Avenue of the Americas or 42nd Street.

But a local landlord, a local civic group and some politicians railed at a public hearing yesterday about a proposed 51-story, $1 billion skyscraper that would serve as a headquarters for Bank of America on the block between Broadway and the Avenue of the Americas, from 42nd to 43rd Streets. Critics opposed not so much the tower but public subsidies for the 2.1-million-square-foot project and the state's use of condemnation to gain control of the land.

Bank of America and its partner, the developer Douglas Durst, marshaled supporters, including the Real Estate Board, city and state officials, theater groups, the construction industry and an environmental group. The hearing was sponsored by the Empire State Development Corporation.

Mr. Durst, whose family owns all but three parcels on the block, has asked the state to condemn the site so that the project can go forward quickly, a move opposed by one landowner on the block.

"They're using the power of eminent domain to benefit private corporations, not for a public purpose," said the landowner, Joseph Bernstein, who is part of a group that owns two parcels on the block. Mr. Bernstein said the project would destroy new retail shops and override landmark laws while using $650 million in tax-free Liberty Bonds intended to revive Lower Manhattan.

Mr. Durst said yesterday that the building was an important project for the city and would generate $30 million a year in tax revenue.

In a letter submitted for the hearing, Andrew Alper, president of the city's Economic Development Corporation, said the project underlined New York's position as a financial capital. In defending the subsidies — $650 million in bonds and $56.4 million in tax breaks — Mr. Alper has said Bank of America is moving two of its four major divisions to New York.

But Tara Burke, a spokeswoman for Bank of America, said the bank's global corporate investment banking division and its asset management group were already in New York.

Wall Street analysts said Bank of America, based in North Carolina, wanted to move to a signature building in a prominent location to show it was a contender in investment banking. If the bank wanted a less expensive deal, real estate brokers said, it could move downtown, where rents are 30 percent lower than uptown.

Bettina Damiani, director of Good Jobs New York, and other critics of subsidy deals pointed out that there was no guarantee a corporation would make good on its promise to "grow jobs in New York." Bank of America, for instance, got more than $15 million in tax breaks and cash grants in 1993 to move to the World Trade Center instead of the suburbs. But the city terminated the benefit package in 1998 after the bank's payroll fell to 800, well below the 1,700 envisioned in the deal.


Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

NYguy
November 21st, 2003, 08:52 AM
yeah two underground levels of mechanical, then street level retail. The first four floors of office space our trading floors for BOA, stretching from Ave of americas to the Conde Naste Building, with a small public plaza between then BOA and Naste towers. After the Fourth floor tower mainly rises up along 6th ave like most on corporate row. Basically kinda like bloomberg building, low rise along third with high rise area over lexington.

What exactly did the top of the tower look like?

NYguy
November 21st, 2003, 09:03 AM
Maybe we should all be sending comments?


Comments from the public are invited on:

1) General Project Plan for One Bryant Park (6th Ave between 42nd and 43rd Streets) including proposed tax breaks;

2) Proposed condemnation of certain properties around the site currently owned by Durst;

3) Terms of the proposed ground lease and other project-related documents; and

4) Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the project.

Copies of the General Project Plan and DEIS are available for inspection at the ESDC office, 633 Third Avenue, Manhattan. Members of the public can request copies to be made for them at no charge by calling Regina Stephens at (212) 803-3818.

Written comments can be sent to the ESDC until December 22, 2003. They should be mailed to: Regina Sephens 633 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017.

emmeka
November 21st, 2003, 09:12 AM
Its a good idea but do you really think that they will answer?

kliq6
November 21st, 2003, 09:45 AM
the answer will be if they build they listened if no they didnt

tmg
November 21st, 2003, 10:57 AM
Its a good idea but do you really think that they will answer?

If you sent in specific comments on the Draft EIS, they are often included and answered in the Final EIS. Usually, the agency explains why it disagrees with whatever you suggest. But at least it provides a public response to your suggestions.


For an example, check out Appendix O of the Second Ave Subway supplemental draft EIS:
http://www.mta.info/capconstr/sas/sdeis/appendixo.pdf

Arch
November 21st, 2003, 08:06 PM
The comparison to the Bloomberg building must have been that they both are a tower above a large base. When I saw the renderings just a couple weeks ago, thats exactly what it was. But the top half of the building was carved (not unlike what some of us will be eating quite soon) or sliced to form a crystal shape. I highly doubt they would have changed the design drastically from just a couple of weeks ago.

Clarknt67
November 22nd, 2003, 05:15 PM
I take it that Pronto Pizza is gone as well?

And the Peep-o-Rama?! :cry:

TLOZ Link5
November 22nd, 2003, 05:18 PM
I take it that Pronto Pizza is gone as well?

And the Peep-o-Rama?! :cry:

:P :x :P

emmeka
November 22nd, 2003, 05:26 PM
naughty, naughty.

kliq6
November 22nd, 2003, 05:52 PM
It looks as if this tower will be built, from what i saw at the EDC meeting the offcials are really on Durst side here since this helps keep some fincial jobs fromleaving for Jersey or Charlotte

emmeka
November 23rd, 2003, 05:01 AM
Good!

billyblancoNYC
November 24th, 2003, 02:25 PM
www.nypost.com

BERNSTEINS COUNTER ESDC PLAN


November 24, 2003 -- Joseph and Ralph Bernstein are proposing to build a 40-story Americas House corporate housing condo on a plot that wraps around the northwest corner of Sixth Avenue and 42nd Street, rather than letting the state condemn their properties for a retention project.
The state's Empire State Development Corp. wants to take over the Bernsteins' properties so the Durst Organization can construct a new, 900-foot-tall Bank of America building.

"All they are getting from us is the ability to move their tower to the blockfront and adding 200,000 square feet, and putting more speculative offices on the market," Joseph Bernstein said by phone from Spain.

Durst said the Bernsteins' land is critical to creating the large floorplates that B of A needs for trading floors.

kliq6
November 24th, 2003, 03:49 PM
this guys proposal is not for real, he came with a architect that had been thrown off the Durst Project and went to a new firm and they hired him to draw an awful looking building

ZippyTheChimp
November 24th, 2003, 05:54 PM
I followed the link thinking there was a rendering there, and was confronted with Michael Jackson. After that, I don't need to see any ugly building.

TLOZ Link5
November 24th, 2003, 11:07 PM
Dear God! It's hideous!

emmeka
November 25th, 2003, 04:08 AM
So the Bryant park rendering isnt out yet then?

TLOZ Link5
November 25th, 2003, 10:31 AM
So the Bryant park rendering isnt out yet then?

Nope, not yet.

emmeka
November 25th, 2003, 10:55 AM
Damn it!

TLOZ Link5
November 25th, 2003, 02:33 PM
Damn it!

I know :(

We're all itching to see it, though apparently there's a diagram on skyscraperpage.com.

emmeka
November 25th, 2003, 02:34 PM
REALLY?!?!

TLOZ Link5
November 25th, 2003, 02:38 PM
At least the last time I was there.

Gulcrapek
November 25th, 2003, 05:11 PM
It's a mix of the two old versions. Just a filler, really.

emmeka
November 26th, 2003, 07:01 AM
When i went to look there was nothing there. And i was really exited as well... :cry:

NYguy
November 26th, 2003, 08:38 AM
by LOIS WEISS, NY POST

Here's a look at the 40-story Americas House corporate residences the Bernstein brothers want to build next to Douglas Durst's planned Bank of America tower.

Last week, the brothers filed plans to build the tower on the L-shaped parcel that they own near the southwest corner of 42nd Street and Sixth Avenue.

The state, however, wants to condemn the parcel, agreeing with Durst that the parcel is needed to construct One Bryant Park and retain Durst's anchor tenant, the Bank of America.

Confided Joseph Bernstein in a call from Spain, "I've still got a few issues up my sleeve."

Among them, we hear, is a Native American tribe that wants to create a museum in the retail space.

http://www.nypost.com/photos/biz11260336.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/image/23641315/large.jpg

NoyokA
November 26th, 2003, 08:54 AM
Let's see them sell units when it's completely enclosed by Durst's building.

NYguy
November 26th, 2003, 09:07 AM
Its an ugly building, but more importantly, look where it would sit. The BOA tower deserves that spot at the intersection where it can be view fully, not that 40-story eyesore....

JMGarcia
November 26th, 2003, 09:10 AM
I think that 1 story Pronto Pizza is what really deserves that highly visible corner spot. ;)

These guys have always had excessively bad blood between them but this is absurd.

TLOZ Link5
November 26th, 2003, 10:15 AM
When i went to look there was nothing there. And i was really exited as well... :cry:

Weird...because it works for me.

JMC
November 26th, 2003, 01:28 PM
Pronto Pizza serves beer in 32 Oz. styrofoam cups...$4.00...proposing to build that windowless monstrosity amounts to blackmail.

kliq6
November 26th, 2003, 02:24 PM
pronto pizza is some of the worst pizza in NY, i for one will be glad to see it go

emmeka
November 26th, 2003, 02:50 PM
When I saw that little building i laughed out loud. What a stupid thing to do, put a small residential building on the site for BOA, This has to be a joke. Its something to keep us occupied while we're waiting for the rendering for Boa.

NoyokA
November 29th, 2003, 12:05 PM
The real question is wether BOFA sign on if its large floor-plates are compromised?

In which case will NYC loose $30 million a year in tax revenues?

Fabb offers a happy medium for all us. From ssp:


Why not merge the two projects and build a taller, mixed-use tower ?
Like Big John in Chicago. I believe that's what happened.

Pottebaum
November 29th, 2003, 02:02 PM
So what is going on with this Bank of America tower? There have been so many developments about this that it is hard to keep them all straight! :P

What are the chances of it getting built?

matt3303
November 30th, 2003, 12:11 AM
It would be the worst thing in the world to see this (almost) 1,000 ft. tower turned into another boring apartment development. Sadly, I don't think this proposal is meant to be a joke.

JMC
November 30th, 2003, 03:59 AM
like the article said, BOA can build this sucker, downtown, for 30% less. This other POS (and if you don't know what that means, I'm not gonna tell ya) is just a way of tryin' to extract more $$ from the parcel.

If this market contnues to consolidate or trend upward, my chips are on that site; if not, count on BOA being build downtown, somewhere. Reason baing, it all comes down to what the trading desks can produce beyond $x-amt. per sq/ft divided by the length of the mortgage.

Either way, I'm not counting on that POS getting build. It's a bluff. IMHO.

Times sq. has regulations on neon light...if all else failed, someone, someplace, would find a way to shut it down.

kliq6
November 30th, 2003, 02:02 PM
Building dowtown cost maybe 40 % more then midtwon, there is a reason that besides the NY mercantile exchange no office develoopment has been built below Chambers street since 1989. Plus besides two lots along Front street and site 5-c and b in the fincial district north, south of Tribeca, no other areas can be built on unless you buy a few old builds and knock them down, like they were going to do for the NY Stock exchange

JMC
November 30th, 2003, 04:10 PM
What about the empty lots on Nassau, behind J&R; and, the empty lot across from 20 Exchange?

Clarknt67
November 30th, 2003, 05:27 PM
Pronto Pizza serves beer in 32 Oz. styrofoam cups...$4.00....

Good to know, it's a block from my office. I think I've found a way to get through the 2nd 1/2 of my day!

NyC MaNiAc
November 30th, 2003, 10:14 PM
How estatic I would be if BofA had the balls to build Downtown...

kliq6
December 1st, 2003, 11:31 AM
JMC
What about the empty lots on Nassau, behind J&R; and, the empty lot across from 20 Exchange?


Both zoned under the Bloomberg Dowtown plan as residential and 20 exchange is to be converted possible starting mid next year

Eugenius
December 2nd, 2003, 05:58 PM
The Maidmans also had grand luxury apartment plans for their 17-story eyesore in the middle of the site. They even put up scaffolding as if they were going through the motions of converting to apartments. Ultimately, Durst paid them off and knocked the thing down.

emmeka
December 4th, 2003, 09:35 AM
I wondered about that.

kliq6
December 4th, 2003, 10:22 PM
The IDa cancelled todays meeting over tax breaks for Bank of AMerica, i assume then we wont know till early next year if this will be built

emmeka
December 5th, 2003, 12:14 PM
does that mean that we wont be seeing a rendering till next year?

NoyokA
December 5th, 2003, 12:28 PM
Probably. But next year is only in a few weeks....:lol:

emmeka
December 5th, 2003, 03:59 PM
Thank god!!! :D

Edward
December 6th, 2003, 01:40 PM
Some buildings from the site of One Bryant Park (http://www.wirednewyork.com/1bryant_park.htm) tower. 5 December 2003.


http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/one_bryant/1bryant_pronto_pizza_5dec03.jpg


http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/one_bryant/1bryant_tads_steaks_5dec03.jpg

ZippyTheChimp
December 6th, 2003, 02:16 PM
Pronto, Tad's, Peep-O-Rama. Add a Blarney Castle, and this spot is ready for preservation.

TLOZ Link5
December 6th, 2003, 04:44 PM
Pronto, Tad's, Peep-O-Rama. Add a Blarney Castle, and this spot is ready for preservation.

Throw in a V.I.M., and it's eligible for protection by UNESCO.

Pottebaum
December 6th, 2003, 05:25 PM
umm, what exactly is the Peep-O-Rama? :? :oops:

billyblancoNYC
December 7th, 2003, 03:20 AM
Somewhere to take the kids... to teach them about the "birds and the bees." And, I assume, how to teach them how to walk into a store and not touch anyone or anything, and try to avoid anything odd looking on the floor.

James Kovata
December 7th, 2003, 06:56 PM
Somewhere to take the kids... to teach them about the "birds and the bees." And, I assume, how to teach them how to walk into a store and not touch anyone or anything, and try to avoid anything odd looking on the floor.

Exactly! :D

BrooklynRider
December 7th, 2003, 10:03 PM
Peep-O-Rama: A singles bar for Easter Marshmallow Peeps to hang out at.

krulltime
December 8th, 2003, 02:23 PM
8) They should move the M O S E X museum to this spot as well. I dont know why they built it on Fifth Avenue (conservative area). I am pretty sure that being close to Times Square and the history that it has with S E X stuff that this is the perfect location for it. They sure will attract $$$ Tourists!!!

Oh and for all you kids out there...ask your parents to take you in for a 'birds and the bees' lesson...

billyblancoNYC
December 8th, 2003, 03:41 PM
MOSEX would be a good fit here, but it's not in the shi-shi 5th ave, though.

It's 5th and 27st, which is the Flatiron area. While not exactly seedy or punk, this is a pretty "hip" area, so it's not too out of place.

debris
December 19th, 2003, 01:43 AM
(NY Times)

Durst Gets Land to Build Tower Near Times Square

By CHARLES V. BAGLI

Published: December 19, 2003

Completing an effort begun 36 years ago by his father, the developer Douglas Durst yesterday bought the last of 32 parcels on an entire city block near Times Square, where he intends to build a 50-story skyscraper.

The final two parcels, on a block steeped in New York history, scandal and real-estate wars, came with one of the highest-ever price tags in New York: about $384 for each square foot of land. However expensive, the deal clears the way for Mr. Durst to build a $1 billion, 2.1-million-square-foot office tower that would serve as the New York headquarters for the Bank of America, on most of the block bounded by 42nd and 43rd Streets, between Broadway and the Avenue of the Americas.

The new tower would stand just east of 48-story Condé Nast tower that Mr. Durst built in the late 1990's.

The deal also eliminates the possibility that the owners of the last parcels — "holdouts" in the parlance of real estate developers — will wage a legal battle against the Bank of America project.

"Even by the normally tortuous standards for getting deals done in Manhattan, this was still a bit drawn out," said Peter Hauspurg, chairman of Eastern Consolidated Properties, a real estate broker who has been involved in the on-again, off-again negotiations for 18 years. "All the bloodletting, chest-beating and yelling are finally over."

The eastern end of the block consists mostly of one- and two-story buildings, fast food and T-shirt shops, all of which will be demolished.

Mr. Durst and the Bank of America paid roughly $46 million for two small parcels owned by a group that includes Joseph Bernstein, Rafi Morris Nasser and Rafi Albert Nasser. The price comes to about $384 a square foot, or more than double the sum paid for the most expensive parcel at 300 Madison, the skyscraper under construction a block away on 42nd Street. Real estate lawyers said they could not recall a more costly piece of land for a development in New York.

The two sides had regarded each other warily, and the deal almost fell apart at the last minute. Mr. Bernstein threatened to bring a lawsuit challenging condemnation. At a recent bargaining session, Mr. Durst offered $36 million, while the Nassers asked for $52 million, said two people involved in the talks. Both sides agreed to write down a compromise number on a piece of paper. The meeting broke up amid recriminations when Mr. Durst raised his bid to $37 million and the Nassers countered with $62 million, the two people said. But yesterday both sides wished each other luck.

Mr. Durst also has a contract to buy a third parcel, at the southwest corner of 43rd Street and the Avenue of the Americas. The tiny building there is owned by Susan Rosenberg, whose father, Harry Goldberg, bought the building in 1948 and opened a pawnshop.

Mrs. Rosenberg said her parents met when her mother, who ran a nursing registry, rented space on the third floor of the building. She said that after 55 years of having the building in her family, she was ready to let go of it.

"It's a great thing for New York," she said. "Let it build up. I think Seymour would've been happy," she added, referring to Seymour Durst, who began efforts to buy property in the area.

Mr. Durst said the building project was on course. "We don't expect any issues to come up in the condemnation," he said. "I'm sure my father's very pleased with the turn of events."

In 1967, Seymour Durst bought the family's first property on the block, White's Seafood Restaurant, which offered a complete dinner for $6 and what it called the best clam chowder in Times Square. Two years later, he bought the Hotel Diplomat, which in the 1970's was the site of Le Jardin discothèque and the cocaine arrest that began Abbie Hoffman's six years of hiding from the law.

The Bernsteins and the Dursts met in 1986, when Seymour Durst sold the Bernsteins some property at 46th Street and the Avenue of the Americas that became the site of Americas Tower. Mr. Bernstein offered to sell Mr. Durst two parcels he had just acquired on the 42nd Street block for $11 million.

The developer turned him down, instead offering to lease him all the parcels he owned on 42nd Street. But Seymour Durst scuttled the deal when Mr. Bernstein became embroiled in a scandal over his role in buying real estate for the Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos with money looted from that country's treasury.

Douglas Durst and Mr. Bernstein have been vying for control of the block ever since.

"I wish them all luck," Mr. Bernstein said yesterday. "They deserve it, and the block deserves a great building."

Kris
December 19th, 2003, 06:30 AM
http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2003/12/18/nyregion/durst.184.jpg

billyblancoNYC
December 19th, 2003, 10:26 AM
Huge plot, surprised it's 32 parcels. Well, it's good it's "over." Wish it was a smaller plot, so the 2mill would have to be built much taller. Oh well.

NYguy
December 19th, 2003, 11:53 AM
I am now eagerly awaiting this tower's design...

krulltime
December 19th, 2003, 03:03 PM
:D YES!!! I can't wait for the design as well...

dbhstockton
December 19th, 2003, 04:51 PM
Wish it was a smaller plot, so the 2mill would have to be built much taller. Oh well.

There's plazas and a theater to be preserved, so that pushes it up a little bit.

BrooklynRider
December 19th, 2003, 05:05 PM
As a follow-up to Conde Nast, I am betting money on a design that will be stellar and certainly "better than Freedom Tower".

yanni111
December 19th, 2003, 07:00 PM
dont worry that the plot size is too big since it wont be built to fit the entire plot. They will want a sizable gap between it and Conde Nast. That was the entire reason for the purchase of those small lots on 6th avenue so that the building will be on 6th with a nice space between it and Conde. And Bank of America doesnt want a wide + short building, they want a taller building to AT LEAST match in height to conde nast.

emmeka
December 20th, 2003, 06:07 PM
Its like dragging rusty nails through my face, waiting for this design.

HURRY UP!

Arch
December 21st, 2003, 09:05 PM
I suppose they are waiting for the hub bub from the Freedom Tower to die down a little. I wouldn't want to try to get attention for my project right now.

This is certainly proving that New York is picking up speed again.

Arch
December 22nd, 2003, 04:58 PM
Press Release Source: Bank of America; The Durst Organization


Bank of America and The Durst Organization Close Deal To Co-Develop and Anchor 2.1-Million-Square-Foot Tower
Monday December 22, 2:11 pm ET


NEW YORK, Dec. 22 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Bank of America has formally concluded a dual agreement with The Durst Organization to develop the first major midtown Manhattan office project of the new century.
(Photo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20031222/NYM128 )
The agreement is expected to create thousands of new construction-related jobs in midtown and expand the boundaries of "green" development.

Under the agreement, Bank of America and Durst, as equal partners, will co-develop the 2.1-million-square-foot Bank of America Tower at One Bryant Park on West 42nd Street. The financial services company will become the tower's primary tenant, establishing its headquarters there for its New York- based businesses and occupying more than one million square feet.

The signing was announced by Carter McClelland, president of Banc of America Securities and New York market president for Bank of America, and Douglas Durst and Jody Durst, co-presidents of The Durst Organization. The agreement is in escrow, pending various final governmental approvals of funding and other proceedings to facilitate the project.

"More than 500 professionals and staff from more than 70 consulting and professional firms and five law firms have been going full speed on this project for many months, working 60-hour weeks in some cases," Douglas Durst noted. "It's been a colossal effort to ensure a project that will have an enormously beneficial impact on our city's economy."

The 51-story skyscraper will include a variety of leading-edge conservation and environmental advances, from water conservation using rain runoff and gray water recycling, to wind turbines and co-generation of power and cooling.

The building will rise adjacent to The Durst Organization's flagship tower, the Conde Nast Building at Four Times Square, home of the Conde Nast publishing empire and the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. One Bryant Park will extend along 42nd Street to Avenue of the Americas, diagonally across from Bryant Park.

Demolition on the site is expected to begin in spring 2004. Occupancy is anticipated for early in 2008, when bank of America will move its associates into the new tower under terms of a 20-year lease.

"By providing an opportunity for one of the world's premiere financial institutions to increase its commitment to New York, One Bryant Park already has made an important contribution to New York and demonstrates to the world the vitality of our city," said the Durst co-presidents in a joint statement. "We look forward to a long, mutually satisfying relationship and to creating not just a spectacular visual experience, but also the most environmentally advanced building possible."

"To say we're excited about our plans to construct a Bank of America tower in the heart of New York would be an understatement," said Mr. McClelland. "This new building symbolizes our commitment to having a significant, long- term presence in a key business market and the financial capital of the world."

Mr. McClelland added: "We are pleased to be partnering in the project with The Durst Organization, which is well-known in New York for its innovative, environmentally-sensitive approach to building landmark office towers. We're also extremely grateful for the support we have received from the city and state, which has made this major new development possible."

Andrew M. Alper, president of the New York City Economic Development Corporation, commenting on the project's pending approval to use Liberty Bonds as part of its financing package, said One Bryant Park represents "an excellent use of the Liberty Bond Program because it brings jobs and investment to New York City.

"By assisting Bank of America in consolidating its New York City-based employees and creating a global securities trading headquarters in midtown, we help secure the City's position as the premier location for the financial services industry," Mr. Alper added. "This project will have far-reaching beneficial effects for all of New York City."

The architectural firm of Cook + Fox designed One Bryant Park.

Bank of America will provide financing for the construction and permanent loans. The leasing program will be under the direction of Thomas Bow, senior vice president of leasing for The Durst Organization.

Founded in 1915, The Durst Organization is one of New York's oldest and largest privately owned real estate firms, with an office building portfolio comprising more than 6.5 million square feet, excluding One Bryant Park. In addition to its office properties, Durst is developing The Helena, a 500-unit apartment residence on West 57th Street at 11th Avenue, which is expected to open in early 2005.

The Durst Organization is widely recognized as a world leader in the development of technologically advanced and environmentally responsible commercial property. Its flagship tower at Four Times Square has been praised by environmentalists for its many "green" design and operating characteristics. Additional information is available at www.durst.org.

Bank of America is one of the world's largest financial institutions, serving individual consumers, small businesses and large corporations and institutions with a full range of banking, investing, asset management and other financial and risk management products and services. The company provides unmatched convenience for consumers in the United States, serving 1 in 3 American households with 4,200 banking centers, more than 13,100 ATMs and an award-winning Internet site with more than 7 million active online users. Bank of America is rated the number one Small Business Administration Lender in the United States by the SBA. The company has offices in 150 countries and relationships with 94 percent of U.S. Fortune 500 companies and 76 percent of the Global Fortune 500. The 6th most profitable company in the United States, Bank of America had $737 billion in assets, $414 billion in deposits and a market capitalization of $116.2 billion at September 30, 2003. Bank of America Corporation stock (ticker: BAC) is listed on the New York Stock Exchange.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Bank of America; The Durst Organization

This looks like a really good sign. They've got the land, they've got the tenant signed on. They are ready to go. Now what does it look like? Not much mention of the architecture but at least they mention the architects.

Co-Presidents... gotta wonder how that works.

NoyokA
December 22nd, 2003, 05:06 PM
RENDERING:

http://prn.newscom.com/cgi-bin/members/thumb/wmark?doc=PRN/prnphotos/docs/036/291&size=512&logo=logo

NoyokA
December 22nd, 2003, 05:17 PM
Anyone else see a similarity with the Freedom Tower?

JMGarcia
December 22nd, 2003, 05:18 PM
Anyone else see a similarity with the Freedom Tower?

First thought in my head. A better version of the Freedom Tower. ;)

NYatKNIGHT
December 22nd, 2003, 05:25 PM
Nice. More please.

NoyokA
December 22nd, 2003, 05:27 PM
I like the design, its very European.

TLOZ Link5
December 22nd, 2003, 05:29 PM
Emmeka will surely approve :mrgreen:

NoyokA
December 22nd, 2003, 05:30 PM
An early Christmas present? :lol:

NYguy
December 22nd, 2003, 05:45 PM
RENDERING:

http://prn.newscom.com/cgi-bin/members/thumb/wmark?doc=PRN/prnphotos/docs/036/291&size=512&logo=logo


NICE!

NoyokA
December 22nd, 2003, 05:45 PM
Im having trouble with the height though. Compared to the Verizon Building it does not look 960 feet. Im trying to picture Citicorp Center there and it would dominate the vicinity.

I believe the building might be 850 feet to the top of the screens. 960 feet to the bottom of the spire, and a small antennae above that.

NYatKNIGHT
December 22nd, 2003, 05:53 PM
How tall is Verizon? 630'?

JMGarcia
December 22nd, 2003, 05:56 PM
How tall is Verizon? 630'?

Yup.

NoyokA
December 22nd, 2003, 05:57 PM
Yes. It might just be the angle because the Interchem Building to the far right is also about 630 feet but looks about half the height.

Im skeptical because One Bryant Park will only have 51 floors.

NYguy
December 22nd, 2003, 06:04 PM
From the rendering, the top of the building looks empty. How many floors does the Citicorp have?

Gulcrapek
December 22nd, 2003, 06:14 PM
A very good first impression and sneak peek... I desire more angles.

Gulcrapek
December 22nd, 2003, 06:15 PM
I just made a mental comparsion: it looks a little like the Gallery at Metrotech tower with a more developed skin, and of course taller.

NoyokA
December 22nd, 2003, 06:18 PM
I'll make a visit to the architects this week, hopefully they'll clear up the height.

Arch
December 22nd, 2003, 07:07 PM
Stern: Where did you get that image?

That's a bit different from the rendering I saw a month or so ago. The top is more angular. I can see that being 950' or so. Compare to 4 Times Square and draw the lines forward. Also it looks like its tapering so that alters the perspective a lot.

I think the top of the spire is at 1200' still. Looks like the top is a sculpture like the cage at the Freedom Tower, but more integrale to the building.

Looks like the gardens that didn't make it to the Freedom Tower are going to be here.

For a firm without much of a record, this is a huge jump.

Gulcrapek
December 22nd, 2003, 07:12 PM
Fox has quite a record with Fox&Fowle, among the pioneers of green building design. They've had a sizable influence in Times Square.

NoyokA
December 22nd, 2003, 07:12 PM
Based on my math The top of the building is 814 feet.

Top of the spire is 973 feet.

Arch
December 22nd, 2003, 07:17 PM
Fox has quite a record with Fox&Fowle, among the pioneers of green building design. They've had a sizable influence in Times Square.

True, but the new firm is untested and Fox was not the design leader at F&F.

4 Times Square was a great leap forward for green office buildings. This looks like the Dursts are trying to 'one up' themselves. I read somewhere (testimony from the hearing last month by the AIA, I think) that they are trying to achieve a LEED Platinum which would be a first. I don't even think Freedom Tower is trying to get that.

(Stern: I see you got the photo from the article posted earlier. I just skimmed right over the link).

TLOZ Link5
December 22nd, 2003, 07:19 PM
From the rendering, the top of the building looks empty. How many floors does the Citicorp have?

59.

NYguy
December 22nd, 2003, 09:15 PM
(NEWSDAY)

Bank, Durst Seal Manhattan Skyscraper Deal

December 22, 2003

Bank of America and The Durst Organization announced Monday that they had formally concluded an agreement to develop a 2.1 million-square-foot office tower in midtown Manhattan.

Under the terms of the deal, Bank of America, a financial services firm, and Durst, a privately held real estate developer, will be equal partners in the development of the $1 billion Bank of America Tower.

Bank of America will be the primary tenant in the 51-story tower, which will replace a string of small storefronts along West 42nd Street at Sixth Avenue.

"This new building symbolizes our commitment to having a significant, long-term presence in a key business market and the financial capital of the world," Carter McClelland, New York market president for Bank of America, said in a statement.

Demolition of the current site is expected to begin in the spring of 2004, and occupancy is anticipated early in 2008, when Bank of America will move its employees into the new tower under terms of a 20-year lease.

Bank of America employees are currently scattered at five locations around New York City.

The deal is in escrow pending final government approval of funding and other proceedings.

NYguy
December 23rd, 2003, 08:41 AM
I don't know about the height of the building, but that spire/antenna tops the 1,000 ft mark for sure...


http://www.pbase.com/image/24382832/original.jpg



DURST INKS DEAL FOR BOFA MOVE

By STEVE CUOZZO

December 23, 2003 -- BANK of America has signed a long-awaited lease to be the anchor tenant in Douglas Durst's new, $1 billion One Bryant Park - a 20-year, 1.1 million square-foot deal that's even more meaningful than the big numbers suggest.

The lease - clinched Friday in a matter-of-fact signing at Durst's office - represents a milestone in the Durst family's nearly 40-year campaign to develop the big block bounded by Sixth and Seventh avenues and 42nd and 43rd streets.

Although Durst and the bank signed a non-binding term-sheet agreement last spring, it did not guarantee a final deal.

The site has long been one of Midtown's most visible eyesores.

The new tower will replace a few notable businesses like Buzzy O'Keeffe's Laura Belle catering space, but mostly a grungy array of low-rise "taxpayers" and shuttered porn venues.

Durst built and owns the Conde Nast tower at 42nd and Seventh, just west of One Bryant Park.

He said he expects demolition to begin once a few technical and environmental matters are worked out with the Empire State Development Corp.

Durst recently won preliminary approval from the city and state for $650 million in low-interest Liberty Bond financing for the tower.

Durst also just inked a hard-fought deal to buy out the last few holdout landlords on the block.

Expansion-minded Bank of America, which is in the process of acquiring Fleet Boston Financial, will occupy 1.1 million square feet of the tower's 2.1 million feet. The rent has been reported at $60 a foot.

B of A was represented by Jones Lang LaSalle president Peter Riguardi and the firm's John Ryan III - who, Riguardi said, "did nothing but shepherd this deal for the past year."

Riguardi termed it "a symbol that the New York City economy is coming back."

In a statement, B of A's New York market president, Carter McClelland, said, "To say we're excited about our plans to construct a Bank of America tower in the heart of New York would be an understatement."

The bank will occupy the lower half of the 51-story tower, designed by architects Cook + Fox. Occupancy is planned for early 2008.

Gulcrapek
December 23rd, 2003, 01:04 PM
Absolute sweeeeeeetness.

emmeka
December 23rd, 2003, 01:32 PM
If you look at it properly, you can clearley see that there is a sharp 'cut' into the building facing bryant park. this is covered by a curtainwall of glass, it forms kind of an open atrium. I like it , but from that angle it seems so fat.

Arch
December 23rd, 2003, 03:31 PM
From what Douglas Durst said during a recent lecture that I attended, the front corner is a series of stacked atriums which may be planted. Its part of the green components of the building (Double wall atrium for tempering, pre-heating and filtering air as well as preventing heat build up inside office space).

It is large, but making two 'towers' out of it seems to have helped reduce the bulk. I'm sure the economics and interior space planning requirements of the end user (BoA) had a big impact on the shape.

Any major office building built today is going to have to find ways to visually reduce the huge floor plates that tenants want these days. Compare with the ESB whose floor plates are tiny and not well suited to today.

NYguy
December 23rd, 2003, 07:50 PM
Absolute sweeeeeeetness.

It is. I even like the antenna on top. I made a slight correction to a height estimation someone did at the skyscraperpage forum. From the rendering (if you can use one), the Verizon bldg appears about 2/3 the height of the BOA building (excluding the antenna).


http://www.pbase.com/image/24396531/original.jpg

TLOZ Link5
December 23rd, 2003, 07:54 PM
They're on the same avenue, though, and 1BP seems a bit more set back from the street.

NYguy
December 23rd, 2003, 08:30 PM
They're on the same avenue, though, and 1BP seems a bit more set back from the street.

That's the correction I made. Also, the further set back it is, the higher the actual height...

DominicanoNYC
December 23rd, 2003, 09:46 PM
Nice. Are there any other angles?

yanni111
December 24th, 2003, 01:36 AM
the rendering clearly shows the building to be at least 900 ft, heres my calculations.
Using the markings made by NYGuy on the photo, take a ruler and you will see that from the ground to the top of the sloping section it is almost exactly 12 cm. From the ground to the top of the 630 ft red line marker extending from the Verizon building on the left it is 8.5 cm. So thats 3.5 cm from the 630 ft line to the top of the sloping section.
This means:
8.5cm = 630 ft
1 cm = 74 ft
so 3.5 cm = 259 ft (which corresponds to the 18 floors you can count about the 630 foot red line, 18 x 14 ft avg = 252 ft)

630 ft + 259 ft = 889 ft

The extension of the red line which basically adjusts the height of Verizon as it would look if it were standing in the same spot as BOA eliminates the addition of more feet because of distance.

Here is where more height can be added to the 889ft.
There is the possibility that the BOA face does not sit on 6th avenue equal to the position that Verizon sits. If it is farther set back then even more feet should be added.

One more thing must be considered. When standing on the ground looking up, the floors that are higher up get "squished" and appear shorter then the ones closer down to your eye level. So the upper floors when measured as i did are losing some height which lowers the total height conversion i did from cm to ft. I wont guess how much should be added because of that optical illusion but i will say 900 ft is the ABSOLUTE MINIMUM it will be to the tip of the slope or I WILL EAT MY HAT!!!!

NYguy
December 24th, 2003, 11:31 AM
The more I read about it, the more it sounds like Freedom Tower...

Bank of America and The Durst Organization Close Deal To Co-Develop and Anchor 2.1-Million-Square-Foot Tower

Monday December 22

NEW YORK, -- Bank of America has formally concluded a dual agreement with The Durst Organization to develop the first major midtown Manhattan office project of the new century.

The agreement is expected to create thousands of new construction-related jobs in midtown and expand the boundaries of "green" development.

Under the agreement, Bank of America and Durst, as equal partners, will co-develop the 2.1-million-square-foot Bank of America Tower at One Bryant Park on West 42nd Street.

The financial services company will become the tower's primary tenant, establishing its headquarters there for its New York- based businesses and occupying more than one million square feet.

The signing was announced by Carter McClelland, president of Banc of America Securities and New York market president for Bank of America, and Douglas Durst and Jody Durst, co-presidents of The Durst Organization. The agreement is in escrow, pending various final governmental approvals of funding and other proceedings to facilitate the project.

"More than 500 professionals and staff from more than 70 consulting and professional firms and five law firms have been going full speed on this project for many months, working 60-hour weeks in some cases," Douglas Durst noted. "It's been a colossal effort to ensure a project that will have an enormously beneficial impact on our city's economy."

The 51-story skyscraper will include a variety of leading-edge conservation and environmental advances, from water conservation using rain runoff and gray water recycling, to wind turbines and co-generation of power and cooling.

The building will rise adjacent to The Durst Organization's flagship tower, the Conde Nast Building at Four Times Square, home of the Conde Nast publishing empire and the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. One Bryant Park will extend along 42nd Street to Avenue of the Americas, diagonally across from Bryant Park.

Demolition on the site is expected to begin in spring 2004. Occupancy is anticipated for early in 2008, when bank of America will move its associates into the new tower under terms of a 20-year lease.

"By providing an opportunity for one of the world's premiere financial institutions to increase its commitment to New York, One Bryant Park already has made an important contribution to New York and demonstrates to the world the vitality of our city," said the Durst co-presidents in a joint statement. "We look forward to a long, mutually satisfying relationship and to creating not just a spectacular visual experience, but also the most environmentally advanced building possible."

"To say we're excited about our plans to construct a Bank of America tower in the heart of New York would be an understatement," said Mr. McClelland. "This new building symbolizes our commitment to having a significant, long- term presence in a key business market and the financial capital of the world."

Mr. McClelland added: "We are pleased to be partnering in the project with The Durst Organization, which is well-known in New York for its innovative, environmentally-sensitive approach to building landmark office towers. We're also extremely grateful for the support we have received from the city and state, which has made this major new development possible."

Andrew M. Alper, president of the New York City Economic Development Corporation, commenting on the project's pending approval to use Liberty Bonds as part of its financing package, said One Bryant Park represents "an excellent use of the Liberty Bond Program because it brings jobs and investment to New York City.

"By assisting Bank of America in consolidating its New York City-based employees and creating a global securities trading headquarters in midtown, we help secure the City's position as the premier location for the financial services industry," Mr. Alper added. "This project will have far-reaching beneficial effects for all of New York City."

The architectural firm of Cook + Fox designed One Bryant Park.

Bank of America will provide financing for the construction and permanent loans. The leasing program will be under the direction of Thomas Bow, senior vice president of leasing for The Durst Organization.

JMC
December 24th, 2003, 05:15 PM
Was it Mad Max or Dune, where they recycled their urine as potable water...hmm...?

I have been told, by several building engeneers, that some building do something similar...filter their own waste water for (re)consumption.

ZippyTheChimp
December 24th, 2003, 05:54 PM
I think by NYC Dept of health code, it cannot be classified as potable, but it can be used for other purposes. The Hearst Tower will have such a system. It's already in use in the BPC residential Solaire.

http://www.batteryparkcity.org/diary.htm

Click on the Chapter 4 Water tab. You will need Flash 6

Freedom Tower
December 24th, 2003, 06:38 PM
This building gets more and more similar to the freedom towers design. Now it will have wind turbines! It's good though. Clean energy is the way to go!

krulltime
December 24th, 2003, 07:25 PM
THIS SO AWESOME...What a gift!!!

I love this rendering of the building. I want to see more...

I am wondering about the antenna though. No news of whom is going to use it? That's a big antenna. :roll:

JMC
December 24th, 2003, 07:54 PM
Thanx Zippy. Technology never ceases to gross me out.

:wink:

ZippyTheChimp
December 26th, 2003, 09:45 AM
The graphic is graphic.

Edward
December 27th, 2003, 01:23 AM
The site of Bank of America Tower (http://www.wirednewyork.com/1bryant_park.htm). 25 December 2003.

http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/one_bryant/1bryant_park_42nd_25dec03.jpg (http://www.wirednewyork.com/1bryant_park.htm)



http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/one_bryant/1bryant_park_sixth_25dec03.jpg (http://www.wirednewyork.com/1bryant_park.htm)



http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/one_bryant/1bryant_park_43rd_25dec03.jpg (http://www.wirednewyork.com/1bryant_park.htm)

PHLguy
December 27th, 2003, 06:20 PM
It is not 719 feet...it was stated to be 900 feet but the top is lattice work. but hey whatever

Pottebaum
December 27th, 2003, 06:40 PM
lol, that area might not seem like much to all of you, but to a small town person yearning to live in an urban enviroment (like me ;) ), that looks like paradise!

NYguy
December 28th, 2003, 10:00 AM
It is not 719 feet...it was stated to be 900 feet but the top is lattice work. but hey whatever

No one said the building was 719 ft....

PHLguy
December 28th, 2003, 07:20 PM
It is not 719 feet...it was stated to be 900 feet but the top is lattice work. but hey whatever

No one said the building was 719 ft....


NYGuy, i was talking about this
http://www.pbase.com/image/24396531/original.jpg

ZippyTheChimp
December 28th, 2003, 07:45 PM
The post is a little confusing, but he said that he corrected the height estimations on the rendering. Someone else, using the green line as a 630 ft reference, estimated the building height to be 719. The red line is the adjusted 630 ft reference, making the building approx 900 ft.

JMC
December 28th, 2003, 07:50 PM
it is always possible that the rendering pic, above, is intentionally underrepresenting the building's height; since, NIMBY B.S. about blocking out the last remaing bit of sun, from Bryant Part, could certainly spark some kinda "movement."

NYguy
December 29th, 2003, 03:39 PM
Correct Zippy....

TLOZ Link5
December 30th, 2003, 11:13 PM
The site is on the western edge of Bryant Park, so it would only be well past office hours before the building's shadow encroaches on it.

JMC
December 30th, 2003, 11:49 PM
"office hours" ??

You must be in college...

:wink:

the Italian Stallion 718
December 31st, 2003, 12:20 AM
That building is pretty hot, has a modernish look to it, but thats besides my question...does any one know when constuction will initiate? I can wait to see that in the sky....Just think about it, i mean, lately (last few years) the major construction boom has been predominately in Asia..China, Korea, Japan, ect., but with the new structures and awsome plans in the making (olympic village, Bloomberg, bank of America Tower, the nets staduim, the prospects in BK, the new towers in Downtown; ie, 7 WTC, the WTC complex, and the new Ratner tower, this towe, and many other new tall structures will, i think, show New York City's will to survive, even if we are the victims of terrorist attacks, ect. I'm really happy about all of this! :lol: , but yea, going back to my main question...any one come across any dates for construction and or completion? Thanks

NYguy
December 31st, 2003, 09:01 AM
Some photos taken yesterday (Dec. 30) from Bryant Park. The new BOA tower will have a dramatic presence here...


http://prn.newscom.com/cgi-bin/members/thumb/wmark?doc=PRN/prnphotos/docs/036/291&size=512&logo=logo


http://www.pbase.com/image/24640016/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/image/24640013/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/image/24640019/large.jpg

TonyO
December 31st, 2003, 10:50 AM
I liked the original rendering, but this one is great as well. Any # of stories quoted?

ZippyTheChimp
December 31st, 2003, 11:40 AM
I liked the original rendering, but this one is great as well. Any # of stories quoted?
Ask Kelvin at SSP.com. :P
http://forums.wirednewyork.com/viewtopic.php?t=1920&start=45

ZippyTheChimp
December 31st, 2003, 11:57 AM
The site is on the western edge of Bryant Park, so it would only be well past office hours before the building's shadow encroaches on it.
Off today, just waiting for tonight's festivities - so I figured it out.

The street grid points to the NE by 30 degrees. The BoA site is NW of the park, and 42 st at 300 degrees. Using data from US Naval Observatory (http://www.usno.navy.mil/) for June 22, the sun sets at 08:30 at 302 degrees, right along 42 st - which means the building will never cast a shadow on the park.

But I was never too good at cipherin', so I think you should take your new camera to the park next June and get us some shadow studies.

TonyO
December 31st, 2003, 12:22 PM
I liked the original rendering, but this one is great as well. Any # of stories quoted?
Ask Kelvin at SSP.com. :P
http://forums.wirednewyork.com/viewtopic.php?t=1920&start=45

Thanks Zippy, that clears things up. :)

TLOZ Link5
December 31st, 2003, 08:59 PM
For some reason skyscrapers.com now lists it as "Never Built."

Gulcrapek
December 31st, 2003, 09:44 PM
They probably mean the 781 foot design.

matt3303
January 1st, 2004, 03:09 PM
It's facade reminds me of the new Freedom Tower... but it's a much better design.

NYguy
January 1st, 2004, 07:08 PM
Took a few more photos of the site today...the new BOA tower will rise into the frame, joining Verizon and Conde Nast in the sky...


http://www.pbase.com/image/24691951/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/image/24691998/large.jpg

emmeka
January 2nd, 2004, 07:25 AM
times sq tower is looking good.

NYguy
January 2nd, 2004, 09:42 AM
times sq tower is looking good.

It looks good, but the upper tower seems to have stopped, Goldman Sachs style...

emmeka
January 4th, 2004, 07:04 AM
what? if youre referring to the transparent meshwork, i think that it is nicely different. it is only transparent from some angles. and its good to have a buiding that dosent end in a glass crown. (i actually like glass crowns, but still)

NYguy
January 4th, 2004, 09:36 AM
what? if youre referring to the transparent meshwork, i think that it is nicely different. it is only transparent from some angles. and its good to have a buiding that dosent end in a glass crown. (i actually like glass crowns, but still)

NO, the upper 10 to 15 floors have been incomplete for a long time now..

emmeka
January 5th, 2004, 11:57 AM
I think youll find thats called construction.

Anyway it hasnt taken that long!

NYguy
January 5th, 2004, 04:54 PM
I think youll find thats called construction.

Anyway it hasnt taken that long!

I know its called construction. But it has been that way for a long time. I've watched this tower rise from the ground up. The cladding on those upper floors came to a halt a long time ago. I know the building isn't complete - the slowdown at the top has the "appearance" of stopping, just as the Goldman Sachs tower in JC did.

emmeka
January 5th, 2004, 07:26 PM
Fine. Have it your way.

Kris
January 10th, 2004, 02:22 AM
http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2004/01/11/realestate/cov.184.1.jpg
dbox for Cook & Fox

ZippyTheChimp
January 10th, 2004, 09:20 AM
A little chunky, but I like it.

NYguy
January 10th, 2004, 10:27 AM
Fine. Have it your way.

It's not "my way", its a fact... :roll:

Arch
January 10th, 2004, 10:43 AM
Isn't that a different rendering? Or is it just clearer? It looks like the lighting is different.

PHLguy
January 10th, 2004, 11:41 AM
i quess its clear now that the top will be nearly 200 feet of lattice work because you can see the spire and the sky through the last nearly 200ft :?

emmeka
January 10th, 2004, 12:29 PM
not latticework but a wall of glass. :)

Gulcrapek
January 10th, 2004, 12:32 PM
Chunky is right..

PHLguy
January 10th, 2004, 12:45 PM
The more i see that building the more and more i dislike it, its much too fat and the lattice work/ glass on the top just looks awful...Why cant we build a tower thats thinner, and 1000 feet to the top with 70 occupied floors?


i guess cuz its new york :x :evil: :(

emmeka
January 10th, 2004, 12:45 PM
chunky. yeah thats the only major glitch in the design.

I think that the design is even better than i was expecting. the glass/ latticework is one of the best parts.

that was a very nice insult to the design that you made but i think we need shovels.

ZippyTheChimp
January 10th, 2004, 01:18 PM
The more i see that building the more and more i dislike it, its much too fat and the lattice work/ glass on the top just looks awful...Why cant we build a tower thats thinner, and 1000 feet to the top with 70 occupied floors?


i guess cuz its new york :x :evil: :(
Short answer: economics


The days of slender office buildings like Woolworth, 70 Pine, Chrysler and ESB are over. Commercial tenants want large floor plates. Worldwide Plaza was an attempt to provide this and evoke the towers of the 20s and 30s. I think the result was less than satisfactory.

As for occupied space on top, Chrysler, ESB, etc do very well with empty spires.

There is much more infrastructure within office buildings today. The higher the building, the more space is given to service shafts. These shafts are of no economic use to the tenants, and adding floors on top subtracts space from all the floors below. Eventually you reach a point of diminishing returns, and it’s not economical to go higher.

There is much less service demand on residential floors. Future supertalls that are viable economically, and not just expressions of national ego, are probably going to be mixed use, such as the Bloomberg Tower.

NoyokA
January 10th, 2004, 01:33 PM
A little chunky, but I like it.

I like it too. The design process looks really interesting. The architects probably designed the building 2-D from an odd vantage, the North Grace Plaza. The building is divided and its two roofs interplay by joining at different heights, it’s a performance of shapes that is more common on a smaller scale. Not to neglect Bryant Park the southern shape is the more dramatic of the two, and is enhanced with a double wall, this effectively makes the building 3-D. The different dimensions aren’t seamless, but it’s a successful design.

PHLguy
January 10th, 2004, 02:59 PM
zippy, i get your explanation but im sure that NYC will have at least 1 80= 1100 foot office tower in NYC soon enough, think of the con ed site tower at 1100 feet and 86 floors...

NYguy
January 11th, 2004, 01:36 PM
i quess its clear now that the top will be nearly 200 feet of lattice work because you can see the spire and the sky through the last nearly 200ft :?

200 ft may be a little high, but I do see more "green" in that rendering...its the same as the old, just clearer...

http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2004/01/11/realestate/cov.184.1.jpghttp://prn.newscom.com/cgi-bin/members/thumb/wmark?doc=PRN/prnphotos/docs/036/291&size=512&logo=logo


I'll go out on a limb, and say that the "top" glass section will cover no more than 100 to 120 ft...


http://www.pbase.com/image/24794475/original.jpg

PHLguy
January 11th, 2004, 02:00 PM
well i copied it to paint and did some measuring crap with pixels...id rather not go into that but but i got a roughly 135 foot open space...i still dnot know weather the tower is 960 feet tall or 900...


if it were 900 the roof would be 765...the roof is thicker so we'll say that the highest floor is 15 feet under the roof so it is around 750'...this building's alot like citicorp


if it were 960 the roof would be 825 leaving the highest occupied floor at 810...


lets hope its the second one

PHLguy
January 11th, 2004, 02:01 PM
give me a minute and ill figure out the hieght of the building from pixels...although the rendering may not be accurate....so far it looks slighly to short to be 960 or even 900 feet

PHLguy
January 11th, 2004, 02:05 PM
OK i figured it out by pixels...the building is 819 feet to the tip of the glass, either they lowered the tower or the rendering is innacturate

ZippyTheChimp
January 11th, 2004, 02:52 PM
If you mean the left corner to the tip, then I get the same (820'), but on the right side I come up with 880'

PHLguy
January 11th, 2004, 04:19 PM
i got 819 to the top of the glass and 788 to the lower corner... but i dont know if i got thrown off the the buildings angle

PHLguy
January 11th, 2004, 04:23 PM
never mind zippy you were right. i accidently measured from the top of the verizon tower instead of the white line...i get the same now

NYatKNIGHT
January 12th, 2004, 12:47 PM
A little chunky, but I like it.
Yes it is, but it's at its chunkiest from this angle - at the corners. Then again, that's the showcase view....

NYguy
January 12th, 2004, 05:39 PM
If you mean the left corner to the tip, then I get the same (820'), but on the right side I come up with 880'

I think we need Kelvin fro ssp to clear things up for you both.... :lol:

radical overemphasis
January 13th, 2004, 02:39 PM
Okay, i think that we have established the potential heights for the building.

When do you think that we will see different angles/will there be different angles?

emmeka
January 14th, 2004, 02:34 PM
There should be.

Do you think that the first 6+ floors will be commercial like time warner?

I know that theres a replacement for the current theatre.

NYguy
January 15th, 2004, 10:04 AM
Scanned an ad for Durst properties today...notice how BOA towers over Conde Nast...


http://www.pbase.com/image/25154045/original.jpg

NoyokA
January 15th, 2004, 10:05 AM
WOWSAZZAS!

Not 960 feet, my ass! sorry about that. BUT WOWSAZZAS!

NoyokA
January 15th, 2004, 10:19 AM
Whereas BOFA resembles the Freedom Tower from Bryant Park, it coincides with 5 Times Square a block west. If Ernst and Young wasn't hidden behind TXSQ Tower, it would create an interesting, almost intentional juxtaposition.

http://www.kpf.com/images/Projects/timessq/n1294_3001z.jpg

NYguy
January 15th, 2004, 10:30 AM
Testimony at public hearing on 20 November 2003 in support of One Bryant Park

The AIA New York Chapter, the founding Chapter of the American Institute of Architects, which represents nearly 3,200 architects, professional affiliates, and public members, and its Planning and Urban Design Committee, is in support of the proposed building at One Bryant Park by Fox & Cook Architects and the condemnation process making the assemblage possible.

The site, because of its size and location, is a pivotal link between the corporate office corridor on Sixth Avenue, the open space of Bryant Park and the animated Times Square entertainment district. The proposed 51-story Bank of America building will be about two million gross square feet on an 87,000 square foot site; it will house 8,000 workers.

The proposed project is significantly larger than its neighboring buildings; however, because it is to the north of Bryant Park, it will not cast shadows on the park itself.

The project is being proposed under the auspices of the Empire State Development Corporation, rather than through City Planning, to facilitate the condemnation process.

We believe the condemnation serves a public purpose for the following architectural reasons:

1) Architectural merit
The size, form and expression of the building will give it an iconic presence on the midtown Manhattan skyline. The bulk of the building area is contained in a sculpted tower that has facets which will change the perception of the building with the passage of the sun, giving it a kinetic, crystalline appearance.

2) Sustainability
The building has been designed to qualify for a LEEDS Platinum rating, a first for a building of this scale. It incorporates a number of “green” strategies, reducing emissions, energy and water requirements to a significant degree. Facets of the curtainwall to the south have been designed with a deep double wall as part of this sustainable strategy; this is the most visible portion of the building where the “green” nature of the building will be easily apparent. This building will set a high standard for future commercial office buildings.

3) Transportation/Circulation The site is located within walking distance of the major regional transportation hubs of Grand Central Terminal and the Port Authority Bus Terminal. It sits between the Sixth Avenue subway station at 42ndStreet (B, D, F and V) and the Times Square subway station (1, 2, 3, 9, 7, N, Q, R, S, W). This unique concentration of public transportation facilities can absorb the density of the proposed development. A public benefit of this project is that it will enhance public transportation facilities by providing a number of subway related amenities.

These new facilities include a stair and glass entry pavilion within the property line at the northwest corner of Sixth and 42ndStreet, providing a new below ground walkway between Sixth Avenue subways and the Times Square subways, and new stairs at the western end of the site to this passageway. This connection will expand the capacity of 42ndStreet for pedestrian movement and will allow pedestrians to walk below ground from Eighth Avenue to Fifth Avenue.

The character of these below grade passages needs to be addressed, particularly if it is in the free or paid zone, and whether there will be retail.

4) Public Amenity Spaces
The project will provide a number of pedestrian circulation amenities. These spaces include a 5’ sidewalk widening on 42ndStreet, an open entrance plaza on the south side of the site at 42ndStreet and Sixth Avenue, an enclosed “urban garden room” to the north at 43rdStreet and Sixth Avenue, and a through block arcade at the west end of the site connecting 42ndand 43rdStreets.

Added population coming from the building will put even more pressure on Bryant Park, and one possible solution would be to increase the size of the “urban garden room” by eliminating the through block arcade, and consolidating this space at Sixth Avenue by pushing the building about 35 feet closer to 4 Times Square. An alternative public amenity to relieve the congestion created by the new population might be to create a rooftop garden on the setback portion of the building, located between the tower of 4 Times Square and the new One Bryant Park tower. Rooftop gardens were a characteristic of the Times Square area at one time.

5) Landmarked Theater On the 43rdStreet side the site and façade encompasses the Henry Miller Theater, a New York City Landmark. The interior of the theater is not viable for use as a theater in its current condition for code, functional and market reasons. The proposed project retains the 43rdStreet façade for a nominal dimension in its current location as well as certain spatial and decorative elements of the internal plan, while completely rebuilding the theater to modern specifications.

ZippyTheChimp
January 15th, 2004, 10:36 AM
That 880 ft I came up with is using Verizon as the scale, but since BofA is further away, the scale would be smaller - so the measurement is at least 880 ft.

NoyokA
January 15th, 2004, 10:36 AM
An urban garden room and a roof top garden, to act as a public application of its green architecture, an interesting gesture, that would be appreciated by tourists and tenants alike.

Just Rich
January 15th, 2004, 11:39 AM
Wow...nice catch NY Guy!
Looks like 1000' to me!

NoyokA
January 15th, 2004, 01:20 PM
Maybe not 1000 feet, but close.

http://galleries.soaringtowers.org/albums/Stern/bofa_001.jpg

NYatKNIGHT
January 15th, 2004, 01:46 PM
I hope that rendering is correct but won't hold much stock in it, they often aren't and this one seems a little sketchy.

NoyokA
January 15th, 2004, 01:55 PM
I dont think so, the rendering matches up to all the information previously given.

billyblancoNYC
January 15th, 2004, 03:32 PM
If it's 960, why can't they push it to 1000!?

NYguy
January 15th, 2004, 05:12 PM
Maybe not 1000 feet, but close.

http://galleries.soaringtowers.org/albums/Stern/bofa_001.jpg

That looks about right from everything we know. I only have one (small) problem with the tower - a building that bulky should be taller, but I'm not complaining! :D Bring it on....

PHLguy
January 15th, 2004, 07:43 PM
the building does not start construction till 2005....maybe it will be even taller in the end! but with 960-1000 feet and a 1200 foot spire, im more than satisfied!

NoyokA
January 15th, 2004, 08:11 PM
I made a few observations from the night-time rendering:

http://galleries.soaringtowers.org/albums/Stern/bofa2.jpg

NoyokA
January 15th, 2004, 10:14 PM
Confirmation from Bob Fox:


Your information, also in the public record for the project is correct. The demolition will begin in the Spring, the approximate height of the building is 960 feet, and the height of the antenna is 1200.



Robert F. Fox Jr., AIA, Partner

Cook+Fox Architects LLP

30 Cooper Square

NY NY 10003

t: 212 477-0287

f: 212 477-4521

bfox@cookplusfox.com

Gulcrapek
January 15th, 2004, 11:04 PM
Wow... I haven't gotten e-mail replies from Pelli, Forest City Ratner, SOM, SHoP, or Boymelgreen (still waitring for that one). How do you do it?

NoyokA
January 15th, 2004, 11:13 PM
First I called the firm. And they replied through email, so they had a better idea of who I was.

Gulcrapek
January 15th, 2004, 11:19 PM
Oh. I made my father call the Thor Equities rep in charge of the GAMT tower, he left a message, the guy called our house when we weren't home, my mother didn't know who he was so she said call back later, and he never called back again.

Anyway back to BoA.

Just Rich
January 16th, 2004, 01:01 AM
Quicky model and quicky views
http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa1.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa2.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa3.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa4.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa5.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa6.jpg

JMGarcia
January 16th, 2004, 01:03 AM
Its Libeskind's Garden Tower without the exaggeration in the spire.

Kris
January 16th, 2004, 01:15 AM
Another needle. What for? It could do without it.

NYguy
January 16th, 2004, 10:59 AM
Confirmation from Bob Fox:


Your information, also in the public record for the project is correct. The demolition will begin in the Spring, the approximate height of the building is 960 feet, and the height of the antenna is 1200.



Robert F. Fox Jr., AIA, Partner

Cook+Fox Architects LLP

30 Cooper Square

NY NY 10003

t: 212 477-0287

f: 212 477-4521

bfox@cookplusfox.com


Good work!

NYguy
January 16th, 2004, 11:02 AM
This reminds me of another thing - the view from the reopened deck at the GE Building will be more impressive than it ever has been...


http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa3.jpg

Just Rich
January 16th, 2004, 11:57 AM
From Downtown, with Conde Nast antennae (1150'?) and I threw in the New York Times Tower just for the hell of it.
http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa7.jpg

NYatKNIGHT
January 16th, 2004, 12:07 PM
Those views are great, the building will definitely impact the skyline. It fills in the sky where Conde Nast doesn't.

JayW
January 16th, 2004, 12:12 PM
Heh...on that last rendering, if they had decided to build it east of ESB, it would look like a giant antennaed (sp?) bird-flip to a would-be terrorist...strangely apropos.

TLOZ Link5
January 16th, 2004, 04:31 PM
Can I get a w00t?

yanni111
January 16th, 2004, 07:30 PM
Christian how is another spire/antenna a bad thing? Would you prefer flat roofs all around? The vast majority of buildings have a flat roof already. We need MORE spires not less!! more i say more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gulcrapek
January 16th, 2004, 07:52 PM
They're getting a little too common around TXSQ though.

TLOZ Link5
January 16th, 2004, 08:31 PM
They're getting a little too common around TXSQ though.

Were they too common in Lower Manhattan in the '30s?

Gulcrapek
January 16th, 2004, 08:32 PM
Nope, but in TXSQ they're thin, extremely elongated pole type things.

NYguy
January 16th, 2004, 08:38 PM
Christian how is another spire/antenna a bad thing? Would you prefer flat roofs all around? The vast majority of buildings have a flat roof already. We need MORE spires not less!! more i say more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

AGREED!

TLOZ Link5
January 16th, 2004, 08:39 PM
Nope, but in TXSQ they're thin, extremely elongated pole type things.

Your point? :D

Gulcrapek
January 16th, 2004, 08:45 PM
It starts to look weird after a while. Really thin things popping up out of nowhere, seemingly unattached to any buildings. Kind of like a midwest antenna cluster.

NoyokA
January 16th, 2004, 09:12 PM
Nope, but in TXSQ they're thin, extremely elongated pole type things.

That would be a spire!

Gulcrapek
January 16th, 2004, 10:04 PM
Bleh. I can't explain. :P

Kris
January 17th, 2004, 09:59 AM
The roof isn't flat and the spire appears simply added to the sculpted body as an afterthought to conform to this fashionable convention.

fluffypolly
January 17th, 2004, 11:54 AM
isnt it an antennae

TLOZ Link5
January 17th, 2004, 01:33 PM
It starts to look weird after a while. Really thin things popping up out of nowhere, seemingly unattached to any buildings. Kind of like a midwest antenna cluster.

That's quite an unfair comparison, considering I've seen some of said antenna clusters up-close.

ZippyTheChimp
January 17th, 2004, 02:13 PM
I agree with Gulcrapek. It would be ok isolated, but the proximity of Conde Naste, and NYT tower down the road.

Old Aunt Tenna had a farm.

NYguy
January 17th, 2004, 05:07 PM
How could you go wrong with this? I say add a few more. They're like exclamation marks on the skyline, the kingdom of New York....


http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa7.jpg

ZippyTheChimp
January 17th, 2004, 05:32 PM
ee-eye, ee-eye, oh! :P

fioco
January 17th, 2004, 09:06 PM
When will I learn not to have food or drink in my mouth as I read these threads? It doesn't make for a pleasant keyboard but the laughter is quite therapeutic.

But may it never become the midtown pincushion.

NoyokA
January 18th, 2004, 11:12 AM
Ill admit the spires would look better as a whole if they were better integrated with there respective designs, and each werent soo grossly over proportionate.

BrooklynRider
January 18th, 2004, 01:42 PM
I like buildings that have crowns, some that taper into spires. I think a spire with no contextual tie-in to the rest of the building looks tacked on. I believe buildings like Times HQ, Freedom Tower and this BoA building are using spires to insinuate a height the building itself will never reach.

fluffypolly
January 18th, 2004, 02:49 PM
it is not a spire, it is an antennae according to what i have heard

PHLguy
January 18th, 2004, 05:43 PM
now lets make the roof at 1200' and the spire at 1440 :D

Ninjahedge
January 22nd, 2004, 11:30 AM
I think it is fine. It does not take away from the Chrystler Bldg or the Empire State, so whatever.

As for not wanting a pincusion, who really cares, until it gets to the point (cough) where there are spikeys on every block, we really do not have too much to worry about.

Thing is, looking at the renderings, I was wondering who had the 3D model.... The gamer in me is thinking that that would make an EXCELENT map... ;)

yanni111
January 23rd, 2004, 11:04 PM
i was driving up 6th avenue today and noticed that from the 20s and below on 6th the Chelsea Tower's water tower which is masked with a slanted roof thingy will look pretty cool with the slanted BOA building rising much higher behind it.

Kris
January 25th, 2004, 03:32 AM
January 25, 2004

F.Y.I.

Debt Clock Will Tick On

By MICHAEL POLLAK

Q. Now that the Durst real estate empire has bought the last holdout properties on the Avenue of the Americas between 42nd and 43rd Streets for an office tower, what will become of the National Debt Clock the Dursts put up on that block?

A. It is likely to move one block north. Douglas Durst, president of the Durst Organization, said it was considering putting the clock "over or next to the entrance" of the Durst building at 1133 Avenue of the Americas, between 43rd and 44th Streets. But there is one problem, Mr. Durst said: "It doesn't quite fit." If it cannot be placed there, he said, it will go to another Durst building.

The green and white sign, facing northbound traffic on a four-story building just south of 43rd Street, has two electronic figures that are constantly changing: "Our National Debt" was more than $7.006 trillion late last week and was rising by more than $1,400 a second; "Your Family's Share" was more than $76,470 late last week.

The billboard-size clock was put up by Mr. Durst's father, Seymour B. Durst, in the late 1980's to call attention to government borrowing. It was turned off for nearly two years while the federal government ran a surplus, but in July 2002 it was turned back on.

In December, Douglas Durst completed an effort begun 36 years earlier by his father when he bought the last of 32 parcels on the eastern end of the city block, where the debt clock now sits. He intends to build a 50-story, $1 billion office tower that will include the New York headquarters for Bank of America. The small structures on the site, mostly one- and two-story buildings that house fast food and T-shirt shops, will be demolished.

E-mail: fyi@nytimes.com

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

ZippyTheChimp
January 26th, 2004, 10:04 AM
If things don't change, the debt clock may blow a fuse.

Kris
February 4th, 2004, 05:26 PM
Another look at the site, thanks to bpg88:

http://www.pbase.com/image/25718935/original.jpg

krulltime
February 4th, 2004, 05:28 PM
:shock: Such a prime spot....

TLOZ Link5
February 4th, 2004, 09:04 PM
No can see pic, Gul.

Gulcrapek
February 4th, 2004, 10:04 PM
Huh?

TLOZ Link5
February 5th, 2004, 12:31 AM
Nevermind, it loads now.

billyblancoNYC
February 10th, 2004, 11:41 AM
An interesting piece of straphanger news was buried in the fine print of the Empire State Development Corp.'s legal ad announcing the condemnation of land for Douglas Durst's One Bryant Park project.

Among other amenities Durst will provide at the site, the new home for Bank of America, is a block-long underground pedestrian concourse for subway riders, connecting the 42nd Street stations at Sixth and Seventh avenues.

The connection under the long block between Sixth and Seventh fills in the missing link between the Sixth Avenue line's station, which connects underground to Fifth, and the vast Times Square station, which sprawls all the way west to Eighth.

It means that passengers will for the first time be able to walk underground all the way from Fifth Avenue to Eighth Avenue.

Other developers have built new subway pedestrian links as part of their projects. Boston Properties did so in the 1980s, connecting the No. 6 line at 51st Street and the E and F (now the V) trains at 53rd Street. But Durst's might be the longest.

Durst will also build a covered pedestrian walkway between the new building and his Conde Nast Tower next door, linking West 42d and 43rd streets.

By STEVE CUOZZO
http://www.nypost.com/realestate/17567.htm

OKoranjes
February 10th, 2004, 12:49 PM
if more buildings DID have flat roofs AND were vegitated, our world would be that much cleaner. Flat rooves aren't always a boring thing and can serve very useful purposes. They also have economic (very proven), aesthetic, and psychological advantages over bare roofs.

http://www.greenroofs.com/Greenroofs101/economic.htm

NYguy
February 14th, 2004, 09:23 AM
BofA Development To Get City Benefits

By Barbra Jarvie
Feb 13, 2004

NEW YORK CITY-Final inducement approval for $650 million in Liberty Bond financing for the Bank of America development has been doled out. And the city will provide Bank of America with up to $38.5 million in sale and real estate tax benefits and another $3.5 million in energy benefits over 25 years.

Bank of America and the Durst Organization are collaborating on a 2.1 million sf tower on West 42nd Street in Midtown. The project, which is estimated to cost upwards of $1 billion, received preliminary approval for Liberty Bond financing in September 2003.

Bank of America plans to consolidate the majority of its 2,995 employees from five locations in Manhattan in the new building in 2008, and projects the creation of more than 2,800 jobs over the term of the deal. Bank of America will become the primary tenant on a 20-year lease occupying more than a million sf.

“This project will provide a tremendous return to the City, in terms of both jobs and revenue, which far outweighs the costs of the benefits, ” IDA Chairman Andrew M. Alper says.

The building will rise adjacent Durst's flagship Condé Nast Building at Four Times Square. The 51-story skyscraper will also include a variety of conservation and environmental advances, from water conservation using rain runoff and gray water recycling, to wind turbines and co-generation of power and cooling.

JMGarcia
February 14th, 2004, 11:06 AM
The 51-story skyscraper will also include a variety of conservation and environmental advances, from water conservation using rain runoff and gray water recycling, to wind turbines and co-generation of power and cooling.

New York - city of many windmills! ;)

fioco
February 14th, 2004, 05:22 PM
"Nieuwe Amsterdam." Or should this architectural feature more properly be referred to as Post-nieuwe-amsterdamism?

Gulcrapek
February 14th, 2004, 05:33 PM
Nieuwe, Nieuwe Amsterdam. Emphasis mandatory.