The 2 biggest skyscrapers currently u/c in New York City: Which one do you like better? :)


New York Times Tower
weighing in at 1142 feet and 52 stories
Currently set for completion in 2007; Steel expected to rise soon

http://img260.echo.cx/img260/3574/nyt5in.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)


One Bryant Park (Bank of America Tower)
beefy at 1200+ feet and 54 stories.....really fat too but a crystalline shape

http://img260.echo.cx/img260/972/bofafrompark2yx.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

Set for completion in 2008; a little behind NYTT in the race. Will be tallest on 42nd Street....finally beating the Chrysler Building!



Pick One! :)

Oh yeah.....I voted Bank of America.

You should've had a 3rd option in the poll - "I like them both equally" - coz that's what I would have voted. :)

Neither one makes me gaga. Another choice?

NYT is best 2ME!

really fat too but a crystalline shape It's not fat at all, it's just the angle (check out the 3d video below). Anyway, I prefer BOA.

http://www.durst.org/i_prop.asp?propertyid=12
Go to renderings/animations, and click the quicktime animation under "animations".

Finally New York adds two more towers above 1000ft. After losing the twin towers, only Chrysler and Empire State was over over 1000ft. Now with these two towers and the Freedom Tower (Which I hate the design) it will give New York 2 more distinct towers in the sea of skyscrapers that have very similar heights. I chose Times because, honestly, the BoFA reminds me of the Freedom Tower. The top of the BoFA looks as though it would be empty like the Freedom Tower's top.

this is really tough!

I prefer NYT so I voted for it, but the BOA is very exciting too

Deffinetly the New York Times Tower! I really like the top and shape, tall and slim!

NY Times building looks very similar to Shangri-La in Vancouver. Bank of America tower dosn't really appeal to me.

No doubt the NY Times tower. I just love it

is the height of one bryant plaza including the spire? (or antenna?)

Bank of America .. for sure!

2 more spires,new york starting to look like dubaI with the spires everywhere,nyt boa is a bit bulky and akward

Bank of America is huge, so I'll go for the slimmer New York Times Tower. I like both though.

I like the BOA a tiny bit more than the NYTT.

I like the BoA. I'm not too big a fan of NYT's top.

i can't make my mind up... I love them both!!

How tall is the NY Times Tower without the spire? 250 m?

That's a toughy, but BOAT edges out NYTT for me.

NTT looks to boxy.. i like BoA better. good to see NYC rebuilding.

1000 footers? :|

One's 950ft and the other is 850ft.

Anyways, I'll take BOA

I like both of them, and being on 42nd, all those spires will look like candles, I can't wait to see them built, on top of that the NYTT is already getting above ground!
Even though I like the BoAT, I prefer the NYTT for its top that beats all

What does everyone think now?

BOA:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v109/nyctowers/2007/Picture016.jpg

Picture by: Carlos123

NY Times:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1257/862558825_1d160d860d_b.jpg

Boa for sure.

Both are great and I wouldn't mind having either of the two in my city. But I think I'll go with the New York Times for now. I'm not really a fan of BOA's shape. Plus, it is so rare nowadays for a skyscraper to pull off a modernist design without looking too cheap and tacky. The NYT definitely pulls it off! But the more I look at BOA, the more I like it. I'll wait for BOA to be complete before I give my final vote, in which I will probably change my mind then. So, I won't vote just yet.

1000 footers? :|

One's 950ft and the other is 850ft.

Anyways, I'll take BOA



Right:

In Hong Kong:

Bank of China is only 1001'

Central Plaza is only 1,014'

The Center is only 958'

as opposed to 1,227'- 1,205'- 1,135'

and in Dubai

Emirates office tower is 1,020 ft and not 1,163'

Burj Al Arab is 900 ft and not 1,053'

Emirates Hotel tower is 856' and not 1,001'

In Chicago, Trump is 1,171'- not 1,362'

Shun Hing Square in Shenzhen is 1,066' not 10 ft taller than ESB by way of teeny antennae's that make it 1,260'

Seg Plaza in Shenzhen 957', and not 1,167'

and @ 1,056' Citic plaza is not 1,283'

point is: Of course they are all considered taller because of their pinnacle heights but if Central Plaza is 1,227' then Boa is 1,200 ft. That thing ontop of Shung Hing Square officially ranks it higher than the Empire State Building.. they are spires. Then the spire on nytt counts just the same.

In my opinion, Bank of America has a much more sleek design.

And thanks nygirl, people need to leave New York's spires alone.

BoC's and Central Plaza's (and The Center's for that matter) spire's look good in proportion to their height.

Some of the new NYC buildings under construction have strangely disproportionate looking spires.

I don't think that's the case. Regardless they are spires that add height. Without the spires on Boc it barely breaks 1,000', without the spire on The Center it wouldn't even break 1'000 ft. The issue of official height by spire is objective observation. The fact that they look good is subjective opinion. The registered height is based on fact and not opinion. Therefore if those buildings in HK are 200 feet taller officially by way of spire than the same goes for these buildings in NY. Like it or not. If the building's spires in New York don't count then why should everywhere else? The fact is they do count in New York and they do count everywhere else you see one. So knock Shun Hing Square off of your top lists.. Because Empires' spire which is actually structurally connected to the rest of the building rises much taller than that of the rooftop of SHS. If this is the case than Burj Dubai is 200 ft shorter than it actually is scheduled to top out at ( leaving 200 extra ft for some other city to claim WTB one day). Let's face it the pinnacle on that building is no different than the spires on Petronas and we all know how that debocle turned out.
The thing is we almost all collectively recognize these spires as additional heights on all these buildings. 1200 ft sounds alot better than 1000 ft. Doesn't change the fact that BOC is a fantastic building but significantly drops the height.

I see all buildings with the spires for the heights they are with their spires. BOA and Nytt spires are drastically taller than most others. I can accept that. Doesn't change the fact that they pass the 1000' mark. Does it?

B of A's better.

Both didn't do much for me when they were first planned, and in both cases I've completely reversed my views. They're both fantastic. :cheers:

I don't think that's the case. Regardless they are spires that add height. Without the spires on Boc it barely breaks 1,000', without the spire on The Center it wouldn't even break 1'000 ft. The issue of official height by spire is objective observation. The fact that they look good is subjective opinion. The registered height is based on fact and not opinion. Therefore if those buildings in HK are 200 feet taller officially by way of spire than the same goes for these buildings in NY. Like it or not. If the building's spires in New York don't count then why should everywhere else? The fact is they do count in New York and they do count everywhere else you see one. So knock Shun Hing Square off of your top lists.. Because Empires' spire which is actually structurally connected to the rest of the building rises much taller than that of the rooftop of SHS. If this is the case than Burj Dubai is 200 ft shorter than it actually is scheduled to top out at ( leaving 200 extra ft for some other city to claim WTB one day). Let's face it the pinnacle on that building is no different than the spires on Petronas and we all know how that debocle turned out.
The thing is we almost all collectively recognize these spires as additional heights on all these buildings. 1200 ft sounds alot better than 1000 ft. Doesn't change the fact that BOC is a fantastic building but significantly drops the height.

I see all buildings with the spires for the heights they are with their spires. BOA and Nytt spires are drastically taller than most others. I can accept that. Doesn't change the fact that they pass the 1000' mark. Does it?

Course not, just pointing out that some of the newer towers being built in the Big Apple have ungainly spires.

Both of these structures are very remarkable, but this is owned by BoA. I would like these two buildings a lot more if they didn't cheat their height with huge spires.

New York Times for being a superior design.

I think the freedom tower is gonna look good with the spire.

my vote is for b of a, considering the height and the angles.

BoA for me :)