NEW YORK | NYSE Tower | 1,792 FT / 546 M | 140 FLOORS | NEVER BUILT - Page 2

scalziand · #21 Posted **Jan 15, 2009, 4:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by STERNyc

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy

If I'm not mistaken, this was proposed to be built east of the FDR.

Correct you can see 1 Financial Square behind it.

Oh jeez, I can't believe i missed 1 FS peeking out from behind. Now the proposal is making a lot more since to me, as it were.

NYguy · #22 Posted **Jan 16, 2009, 7:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by STERNyc

Too bad this wasn't built.

But there's alot of what if's.

The WTC was attacked because they were symbols of Americas economic might. If this was built not too far away and being taller and connected to the NYSE perhaps this would have been attacked instead.

Correct. That's also true of Trump proposals and other supertalls that were never built. This one would have been a recently completed building around the time of the attacks. It's hard to get into the mind of a terrorist, but even if they had targeted this one, they probably would have went after the WTC as well, because of a failed attempted years earlier. But the 900 ft NYSE tower that was going to get built was another casualty of 9/11 in my opinion. It was canceled as a direct result of the attack and fears in the aftermath.

the architect26 · #23 Posted **Jan 30, 2009, 2:42 AM**

this is not good Architecture or even Ok Architecture, New York didnt miss a thing.

NYguy · #24 Posted **Mar 27, 2009, 6:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the architect26

this is not good Architecture or even Ok Architecture, New York didnt miss a thing.

The antenna certainly could have used some work, but I don't think we've seen enough to give that type of judgment.

ethereal_reality · #25 Posted **Mar 28, 2009, 8:41 PM**

^^^The building would look better if it continued to a point.
Like a stretched version of the Transamerica Pyramid.

J.M. · #26 Posted **Mar 31, 2009, 1:37 AM**

Well the Buildings atenna looks kinda akward, but 1 WTC's style of attena would sure make it look gorgeous in my mind

Abit more to the base would have been great aswell.

JDRCRASH · #27 Posted **Apr 2, 2009, 6:18 PM**

Hard to believe the whole things would've be 2,300 ft.

aceflamingo23 · #28 Posted **Oct 23, 2009, 1:13 PM**

Maybe if this would have actually gotten built, the design for the Freedom Tower would be different

M II A II R II K · #29 Posted **Oct 23, 2009, 3:55 PM**

Assuming this tower wasn't the one to get targeted instead.

TonyAnderson · #30 Posted **Oct 29, 2009, 7:36 AM**

So we're already assuming a never-built object was the possible target of terrorist attacks? Hmm

MolsonExport · #31 Posted **Dec 17, 2009, 5:39 PM**

reminds me of the 'shard' in london.

Dac150 · #32 Posted **Dec 17, 2009, 5:54 PM**

This would’ve been a very awkward and imposing structure. It really in no way would’ve paid a complimenting factor to the Downtown skyline.

J.M. · #33 Posted **Jun 21, 2010, 1:07 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac150

This would’ve been a very awkward and imposing structure. It really in no way would’ve paid a complimenting factor to the Downtown skyline.

Well yeah, it'd be an attention whore. Honestly, Brooklyn needs a supertall, close to Lower Manhattan, but definitely not in L.M..

SkyscrapersOfNewYork · #34 Posted **Jun 21, 2010, 5:02 AM**

always liked this one

Onn · #35 Posted **Jun 24, 2010, 3:00 PM**

NY really needs a supertall like this. I'm surprised they didn't build it, especially during a peak of American economic might. It's a brilliant looking building, especially for the time it was proposed. It was ahead of its time with the solid glass curtain wall. A real shame, who knows when we'll see another proposal this dashing come along.

uaarkson · #36 Posted **Jun 24, 2010, 3:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac150

This would’ve been a very awkward and imposing structure. It really in no way would’ve paid a complimenting factor to the Downtown skyline.

I'm gonna have to go with this. I don't like anything about the design, and it wouldn't have ruined the already ruined south side skyline of LM.

Zerton · #37 Posted **Jun 24, 2010, 7:24 PM**

I don't know about ruining the dt skyline. With the new WTC it could have made an interesting 'gate' like the two towers in Hong Kong.

SkyscrapersOfNewYork · #38 Posted **Jun 24, 2010, 7:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by uaarkson

I'm gonna have to go with this. I don't like anything about the design, and it wouldn't have ruined the already ruined south side skyline of LM.

ya the eastern side of LM's skyline could be better

MolsonExport · #39 Posted **Sep 16, 2010, 1:30 PM**

I don't care for the angles. But then, I don't like the Donald's hair either.

nim3 · #40 Posted **Oct 29, 2010, 7:18 PM**

personally i think that the nyse tower should have been build at the former site of the world trade center. not what there building now .........its a horrible desighn and larry silverstien should be asamed of himself. this is what new york needs not the little dinky freedom tower