the most recent significant office/res. mixed-use skyscraper in chicago that i can think of is 900 N michigan, completed in 1989.


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________



this is old info, and may be very out of date, but if we apply it to the 70 floor and 64 floor counts, we can make some educated guesses as to the potential height ranges.

WOLF POINT SOUTH & EAST
Chicago, IL
2,000,000 sq. ft. mixed-use development that will
include:
Wolf Point South - a 1,270,000 sq. ft. office tower that
includes 270,000 sq. ft. of residential space in 150
condos and parking for 280 cars
Wolf Point East - a 600,000 sq. ft. residential tower that
will contain 700 units and parking for 170 cars
Part of Wolf Point development




so according to that, wolf point south is approximately 20% residential/80% office. applying that ratio to the floor count: 14 floors residential/56 floors office.

14 residential floors x 10'-12' per floor = 140' - 168'

56 office floors x 13'-16' per floor = 728' - 986'

so that's a total of 868' - 1,154''.

let's throw in an extra 20' for that really tall and dramatic lobby level and we get:

888' - 1,174'.




as for the east tower, 64 residential floors x 10'-12' per floor = 640' - 768'

let's throw in an extra 20' for that really tall and dramatic lobby level and we get:

660' - 788'.



the 950' and 750' ballpark figures we've heard for these two from the very beginning very safely fall in those ranges.

and with a spire, who knows how high the south tower could go?

Edit:my memory is bad today apparently

Based on 340 On The Park, also 64 floors and by the same developer, I SPECULATE that the East tower will be 672'

I further SPECULATE that the south tower will be 645 feet, like the 70 story Lake Point Tower. :tup:

I'll riot if they were to do something as goofy as that

Apparently we're a bunch of cheeto-stained mouth-breathers overreacting to old, probably bogus news...

At least according to this world-class, gem of a blog post :uhh:
http://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/2...eeding-frenzy/

^ dear god. holy overreaction, batman! :haha:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...6c4e42b143.jpg
source: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/467107792575699435/

That whole post was incredibly hostile. What gives?

a desperate cry for attention?

traffic to his blog has probably quintupled in the past hour. :D

cheetos are just ok

Good to know! Kinzie's been ripped up for months, I'm glad there is some upside to all the construction work.

Re: my earlier comment, the Kinzie/Clinton intersection is a tricky one with that forest of columns. They can't close off Canal (like they should) until they sort out the issues at Clinton, otherwise even small delivery trucks won't be able to turn south without detouring to Desplaines.

Fortunately the Alta building included a setback from Clinton, so they could realign the intersection if needed...

Says the wannabe muckraker who can't go for a paragraph without using alliteration or puns.

He probably puts ketchup on his hotdogs.

Oh my. :koko:

He usually is unable to even make it through a title without making some horrible pun or reference to 1970s TV shows. He's kind of a weirdo

Haha ya like reacting with the haughty tone of Barbara Walters is just silly.

^^ No. A line or two about our over-excitement could be comical, but "Editor" sat around for at least an hour of his menial life to devout an entire blog post on his irrelevant website just to chirping us. And from behind his keyboard no less. I feel sad for the guy. Nothing better going on but to berate a small group of construction enthusiasts.

This^ that website is such a total waste of time... most of what he does is post a single photograph from a developer with a catchy headline and then fail to contribute even the smallest iota of new info or reporting...

It is like the worst writing in the world.

A. SSP has a lot more insider info floating around between members than you realize. Also, just about any question one has about a development can and will be answered here almost immediately. In fact, beyond the regular user base, we often see new members who are clearly directly involved in these projects and just following these boards join just to chime in and answer a tricky question that has "stumped the chumps".

B. The issue with the CAB post was that he wrote more words lambasting a brief speculative conversation about possible buildings heights on SSP than the original conversation itself had. Beyond that, the vast majority of the words in that conversation were in a single post by Steely which was really just a breaking down of possibilities (and therefore necessarily more long winded).

Such conversations might seem silly to most people, but they are a part of what makes SSP so interesting. If you are a newbie reading a post like Steelys would teach you a lot about how different uses result in different floor to floor heights and how there's even a range of possible ceiling heights within each use. Seems totally wonky and unecessary information, but when I was younger and trying to learn about real estate I gleaned countless study hours of information off this forum by reading posts like that.

That said, enough about the ding dong over at CAB, we've wasted enough time talking about it already. I wasn't going to post anything further about it myself, but felt it necessary to defend the honor of my favorite website!