CHICAGO | 110 N Wacker | 817 FT | 56 FLOORS - Page 62

Skyguy_7 · #**1221** Posted **Oct 30, 2018, 6:38 PM**

^Great catch! Safe to assume 30 additional feet in height equals 2 floors.

I wonder if it's only increased in height once, and this is how long it takes to see the boost officially recognized. Or has demand for space here resulted in at least 2 separate increases in floor count?

Zapatan · #**1222** Posted **Oct 30, 2018, 6:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7

^Great catch! Safe to assume 30 additional feet in height equals 2 floors.

I wonder if it's only increased in height once, and this is how long it takes to see the boost officially recognized. Or has demand for space here resulted in at least 2 separate increases in floor count?

Wouldn't it only be 16'? Or was it from before the 814' figure?

Would be cool if true though. This and WPS will look great along the river

gebs · #**1223** Posted **Oct 30, 2018, 7:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7

^Great catch! Safe to assume 30 additional feet in height equals 2 floors.

I wonder if it's only increased in height once, and this is how long it takes to see the boost officially recognized. Or has demand for space here resulted in at least 2 separate increases in floor count?

I work in commercial interior design, and I can definitely say that there's a lot of demand, speculative and interested, in this building. It wouldn't surprise me if the developer knew they could fill two more floors given how many potential tenants have done space plans on their floor plates.

Skyguy_7 · #**1224** Posted **Oct 30, 2018, 7:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Wouldn't it only be 16'? Or was it from before the 814' figure? ...snip...

Plan commission reads "..from 800 to 830 feet", which is where I got the 30 extra feet.

Steely Dan · #**1225** Posted **Oct 30, 2018, 7:11 PM**

my guess is that the plan commission item that says "from 800' to 830'", is simply using generic ball park figures.

i thought the 814' figure we currently have listed came from someone who saw recent CD's.

BVictor1 · #**1226** Posted **Oct 30, 2018, 9:18 PM**

i see steel

SolarWind · #**1227** Posted **Oct 30, 2018, 11:15 PM**

October 30, 2018

BonoboZill4 · #**1228** Posted **Oct 30, 2018, 11:35 PM**

Those steel beams are showing me how much of a beast this'll be

left of center · #**1229** Posted **Oct 31, 2018, 3:11 AM**

Finally rising out of the pit and making its presence on Wacker known!

gebs · #**1230** Posted **Oct 31, 2018, 2:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolarWind

October 30, 2018

How have I never noticed the low-rise office building behind 110 in this shot (29 N Wacker)? What are our feelings on this building and how long it will be until a developer buys it, razes it, and builds something HUGE in its place?

It looks like the kind of building, like GGP, that would have both harsh critics and fervent supporters.

Skyguy_7 · #**1231** Posted **Oct 31, 2018, 2:15 PM**

^ I like it. I believe it's a pre-war structure that had a facadectomy/renovation in the 80s. Someone either here or on FB's Forgotten Chicago posted a photo of it in its original state from decades ago. There's also a slight chance I'm entirely wrong and it was built in the 60s.

EDIT: Yep I was wrong. Built in '61. Thanks bnk

harryc · #**1232** Posted **Oct 31, 2018, 2:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by gebs

How have I never noticed the low-rise office building behind 110 in this shot (29 N Wacker)? What are our feelings on this building and how long it will be until a developer buys it, razes it, and builds something HUGE in its place?

It looks like the kind of building, like GGP, that would have both harsh critics and fervent supporters.

That hotel nobody notices by Harry Carmichael, on Flickr

RedCorsair87 · #**1233** Posted **Oct 31, 2018, 4:19 PM**

Let's save those brick buildings behind it, but the building itself can go. It's actually decent, but that is prime real estate especially as businesses shift west.

bnk · #**1234** Posted **Oct 31, 2018, 4:34 PM**

No leave it we need to let some sunlight in.

Features of

29 N Upper Wacker Dr

Floors
10

Total Size

129,230sqft
Year Constructed
1961
Year Renovated
2012
Building Class B
Parking Garage

Currently Fully Leased

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/arti...uy-29-n-wacker

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolarWind

October 30, 2018

]

Great pics. This one make be look further into that sectional barge.

This video below shows how it worked at 150 N Riverside. That particular sectional barge was bigger that this one because its crane used back than was more massive.
Here we are floating 4 million plus pounds of crane with a 300' boom. The heaviest pick was 237,000 lbs

• Video Link

https://www.poseidonbarge.com/

An Indiana company that sells and rents nationwide.

AMWChicago · #**1235** Posted **Oct 31, 2018, 5:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bnk

This video below shows how it worked at 150 N Riverside. That particular sectional barge was bigger that this one because its crane used back than was more massive.
Here we are floating 4 million plus pounds of crane with a 300' boom. The heaviest pick was 237,000 lbs

• Video Link

https://www.poseidonbarge.com/

An Indiana company that sells and rents nationwide.

Cool Vid! Reminds me of the voice from that TV show How It's Made lol

Notyrview · #**1236** Posted **Oct 31, 2018, 5:54 PM**

Great to see another steel beast taking shape

Donnie77 · #**1237** Posted **Oct 31, 2018, 6:32 PM**

Iguess the building is growing by thirty feet but not before it gets permission.

https://chicago.curbed.com/2018/10/3...south-loop-hq2

You would think Poseidon could afford a better graphic artist cuz that logo is a no go!

left of center · #**1238** Posted **Oct 31, 2018, 9:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by gebs

How have I never noticed the low-rise office building behind 110 in this shot (29 N Wacker)? What are our feelings on this building and how long it will be until a developer buys it, razes it, and builds something HUGE in its place?

It looks like the kind of building, like GGP, that would have both harsh critics and fervent supporters.

I don't mind it. It allows the older brick buildings to the east a bit more breathing room. Its also somewhat of a small lot, so there really isn't too many options for a very tall building to replace it. The elevator core would eat up too much of the floor plate to make a tall building economically viable there.

BonoboZill4 · #**1239** Posted **Nov 1, 2018, 3:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by left of center

I don't mind it. It allows the older brick buildings to the east a bit more breathing room. Its also somewhat of a small lot, so there really isn't too many options for a very tall building to replace it. The elevator core would eat up too much of the floor plate to make a tall building economically viable there.

Yeah, I think it's a pretty handsome little office building to be honest, and I love the metal detailing on the facade.

For the height bump, does this mean it will really go from 814 to 844 if the roof height is going from 800 to 830? If so that is awesome!

Zapatan · #**1240** Posted **Nov 1, 2018, 3:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BonoboZill4

Yeah, I think it's a pretty handsome little office building to be honest, and I love the metal detailing on the facade.

For the height bump, does this mean it will really go from 814 to 844 if the roof height is going from 800 to 830? If so that is awesome!

I think they were stating it would be somewhere between those numbers, as 814' is.