Great news all around..... As much as I wish we had something taller, I am more than happy to see this finally moving forward - Especially given the current economic headwinds.

I am also super happy to see there will be a pedestrian connection all the way to the lake now with the park.

God, if we end up with just one of these tacky slabs, we're really in for it. This will potentially be a blight on the lakefront for me: Retrofitting 'Chicago'-style windows into a tiered, NYC-style -- for crowded, lot-line-to-lot-line NYC building density that's not present at this site -- design does not a Chicago building make. The design barely works as a duo; a single one of these will look very awkward. I think there's a reason they're not showing dead-on N or S elevations of either tower -- they don't look like they're ascending; rather, disintegrating. See pg. 22 here: https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/...pplication.pdf

The way this building is oriented it would look really strange as a solo tower, really hope the other tower comes too.

Yes, unlike NEMA, this tower will look a bit strange if its sibling never comes to fruition.

Related will probably get it done, but timelines with them seem to be more than the usual development crapshoot.

I'm just going to go back to daydreaming about a single 2000 ft tower.

Is the final height 840 or 851?

Related never disappoints (yes that was sarcasm)

But in all seriousness, it sounds like the second tower wasn't cancelled entirely but rather more just uncertain at the time being, despite the rendering only showing one.

I was thinking this too, I know it sounds crazy to be optimistic but hopefully a few years down the road we'll be in a better time / place. It would be cool if they could apply for some extra height or at least build an identical twin. The views would indeed be amazing (and lucrative) from 900+ feet in that location.

I try not to think about it, but I'll be happy if Chicago can pull another 400m+ on some other site.

I suspect 840' is the zoning height, and 851' is the true structural height.

Waiting for bvic to confirm.....

It's a major feat they got construction financing for one tower, let alone two. Phase two will be built, it's just a matter of when.

This development news make me sick and very underwhelmed. Once again, we lose as a skyscraper city with this safe mediocre development.

We also lose Hole. Rest in peace Hole. :(

Calling the design blight on the lakefront is a bit extreme I would say.

Anyway, if Tribune East is built as designed then all sins will be washed.

yeah, that doesn't make any sense to me, especially when there is ALREADY a true lakefront blight thats been there for decades just north of the site on the opposite side of ogden slip:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8894...8192?entry=ttu

I've been trying to be happy that something is getting built but I hate to say that I agree. Real blown opportunity given the location, even if the twin gets built. I mean it's not bad but could've been much better.


It would take both that and Parcel I at the very least to make up for something like the Chicago Spire.

I really wish it stood at its original 1,000 foot height, but its better than nothing...or the gigantic pit and an empty plot that's not pleasant to look at.

Just a few weeks ago some of us were worried that there would be no ~495 ft tall towers under construction in the city for the foreseeable future after 1000M topped out. This project continues the 5 year streak of >800 ft tall towers being built in the city and bridges the gap until the next boom which hopefully will include Tribune East and Parcel I.

Same, but hopefully there will be enough demand in several years for the southern tower to go taller and revert closer back to the original scheme

I thought i had...

Last night they said 840' 🤷♂️

Sorry that's not clearer than it is... That's all that i can confirm.

https://uniim1.shutterfly.com/render...&ts=1697681753

840’ is amazing!

But Urbanize is reporting the height at 858' ,so which one is it?

You never said if that 850'-9" figure you posted earlier was the zoning height or the true structural height.

Zoning heights are pretty irrelevant, useful only for making a project comply with the city's arcane zoning requirements.

At SSP, we only care about the full structural height.

That image you posted is cool, but I can't make out any of the numbers on it.