CHICAGO | 300 North LaSalle | 785 FT / 239 M | 60 FLOORS - Page 7

Steely Dan · #**121** Posted **Feb 8, 2006, 3:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chi_Coruscant

Somebody @ SSC mentioned this building is at 809'. Can anyone confirm it?

interesting. although this richradsonhomebuyers guy also previously reported that he saw recent drawings showing the elysian would stand 735' tall, yet when victor called his reliable source on the elysian projects team, the height was only 700' - 5". it could have been that richardsonhomebuyer was looking at a CCD height (chicago city datum) and confused it for the actual building height.

300 north lasalle may indeed now stand 809' tall, but until we get some other confirmation, we're gonna be sticking with the 775' figure.

Norsider · #**122** Posted **Feb 8, 2006, 5:24 PM**

Steely, mark it down. The height is 809' 9"

Sourcing on this is air tight.

FlyersFan118 · #**123** Posted **Feb 8, 2006, 5:40 PM**

Spoiled rotten bastards.

This one oozes Chicago flavor. Chicago's one of those cities that has its own style, like London. This rocks, especially the top of it. This is one of the nices boxes I've seen. Lucky.

Marvel 33 · #**124** Posted **Feb 8, 2006, 6:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyersFan118

Spoiled rotten bastards.

Steely Dan · #**125** Posted **Feb 8, 2006, 6:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norsider

Steely, mark it down. The height is 809' 9"

Sourcing on this is air tight.

are you able to expand upon this airtight sourcing?

i'm not trying to deny that the new figure is correct, i'm just a bit skeptical when it comes to these kinds of things when we don't know the actual source.

VivaLFuego · #**126** Posted **Feb 8, 2006, 6:06 PM**

Will the 350 N. Lasalle building (which like its pretty modernized) be torn down to accomodate this? or will this be wedged between 350 lasalle and the river?

rgolch · #**127** Posted **Feb 8, 2006, 7:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyersFan118

Spoiled rotten bastards.

Sorry, I have to make a second laffy face to Marvels. Funny line.

jpIllInoIs · #**128** Posted **Feb 8, 2006, 8:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

Will the 350 N. Lasalle building (which like its pretty modernized) be torn down to accomodate this? or will this be wedged between 350 lasalle and the river?

I thought it was going to replace the ugly 3 level parking deck that fronts the river and is just east of the old Helene Curtis Bldg.

zerokarma · #**129** Posted **Feb 8, 2006, 8:51 PM**

I love the rendering

spyguy · #**130** Posted **Feb 8, 2006, 9:24 PM**

I don't doubt richardson. Although I can understand your skepticism I don't think he is trying to fool us or anything. Perhaps he saw another version of the Elysian with that height, who knows?

BVictor1 · #**131** Posted **Feb 8, 2006, 11:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

Will the 350 N. Lasalle building (which like its pretty modernized) be torn down to accomodate this? or will this be wedged between 350 lasalle and the river?

350 N. LaSalle won't be torn down. The only thing to be demolished will be the parking structure. They will, from what I understand, be building partly over Carroll Street using the air rights.

VivaLFuego · #**132** Posted **Feb 9, 2006, 2:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVictor1

350 N. LaSalle won't be torn down. The only thing to be demolished will be the parking structure. They will, from what I understand, be building partly over Carroll Street using the air rights.

Good to hear. 350 has its own, odd charm. In that case, this 300 N. Lasalle tower will be alot more slender than people might think, seeing as it will be set back from the river some as well. This is gonna be a truly awesome tower.

Chicago Shawn · #**133** Posted **Feb 9, 2006, 7:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyersFan118

Spoiled rotten bastards.

Yes that we are. There are still a few more huge proposals in the pipeline that haven't even been made public yet.

To add onto what Victor said, yes the tower will only occupy the disgusting abonimation parking garage site (shit, just give me a jack hammer and I'll help tear down that monstrosity). The tower site will include a set aside for a future transit station on the Carroll Avenue right of way. There will also be a two level river walk, with an outdoor resteraunt on the upper level.

rds989 · #**134** Posted **Feb 9, 2006, 8:14 PM**

Steely,

What changed to make you put the 810' figure on the thread name? New info on the reliability of the richard poster on SSC?

Or did you just cave to hope? To me it sounds likely that the 810' figure is measured from the sunken plaza or the river (which would be about right in relation to a 775' height from LaSalle St).

Steely Dan · #**135** Posted **Feb 9, 2006, 8:24 PM**

^ i have it on an anonymous assurance that the 810' figure is correct. if it turns out to be wrong, no big deal. either way, victor will get a peek at the CD's at some point and either confirm or correct the height.

rds989 · #**136** Posted **Feb 9, 2006, 8:29 PM**

^ooh, good news. But I swear I remember that victor or somebody else similarly plugged in and intrepid had actually talked to someone connected to the architect or developer and that person had definitively said the height was 775. If I had time, I bet I could find that in previous pages of the thread. Oh well -- 810 is better than 775!

BVictor1 · #**137** Posted **Feb 9, 2006, 9:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ i have it on an anonymous assurance that the 810' figure is correct. if it turns out to be wrong, no big deal. either way, victor will get a peek at the CD's at some point and either confirm or correct the height.

Okay people here's the skinny... The height of 809' 9" is correct, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, 809' 9" is the height taken from CCD (Chicago City Datum). Remember, heights that are used on Emporis, this forum and the record books are taken from the main entrance. The main entrance for this building is on LaSalle Street, and the street is +25' 9" CCD. So here's what we do... 809' 9" - 25' 9" = 784' 0". That's the height of this building.

My source is from Hines Development, and I can say no more.

Oh, demolition of the parking structure should begin sometimes in March if all goes as planned.

Steely Dan · #**138** Posted **Feb 9, 2006, 9:37 PM**

^ i thought that the 809'-9" figure sounded like a CCD height.

anyway, thanks for getting the real height victor. you never fail.

and this is an opportune time to remind anyone who may have access to project drawings to ALWAYS check what the 0'-0" mark is when looking at elevation heights. just because you see a tag listed as 809'-9" at the top of the building doesn't mean that is the actual height of the tower.

spyguy · #**139** Posted **Feb 9, 2006, 9:43 PM**

Still an increase, a small one at that however

Marvel 33 · #**140** Posted **Feb 10, 2006, 4:26 AM**

^^^ 16' shy of the 800' mark. Not bad at all! That's only the height of three very short people standing on top of each other.