Hm, its ok.

Here is an article we wrote about the building and a high-resolution rendering in color:

http://www.newcityskyline.com/Arquit...aBuilding.html

By the way, we have the height of the building but before we release it we have to wait until we're given the green light by the developer, which should be within the next two days.

BVictor or Steely, feel free to use the rendering for the first page.

^Awesome work. Thanks!

Finally! Thanks, Marvel!

I'll have to digest this a bit....

Hmm. Unfortunately, the color rendering doesn't give that much more to go on.

http://www.newcityskyline.com/Arquit...ller_Image.jpg
...two things: i don't think this will be 1000 feet. and the center and the base are really weak. overall, the design isn't too offensive. and the top looks like it'll look pretty cool at night. but for such a high profile location, i have to say that this imo is gonna turn out to be a big failure just like its neighboor, 340 On The Park.
:tup: my 2 cents

you're the first person i ever heard describe 340 as "a big failure". do you like any buildings that have been built in chicago in the past 30 years? i'm not saying that you have to, but all i ever hear you talking about is how bad everything is, and, well, i guess i'm just not as negative as you.

Pretty unattractive -- even in color.:(

I was hopeful that the color rendering would show a more striking building...I'm not bowled over.

Its too bad that this center will not be lined up down McClurg Ct, instead it will be lined up with the building right across the river.....Darn it.... I was hoping that it would line up down the street.

Couple things.

1. I just don't see how 340 is "a big failure." I am with Steely on this.

2. Why the hating on the Arquitectonica building. I have held off on commenting on this tower until I could see sharper, color renderings. Maybe it's my unrepentant modernist heart, but I am grooving on the design. Unlike many others, I really like the base, with the different glazing. I think the massing is pretty cool. IF they use quality materials (please oh please let it be limestone) than I think this will be a handsome building. Clearly they are working toward a contemporary vision of a muscular mid-century Chicago ( and New York) style.

30 years...? um, well there are only a few buildings that i think are worth while in this city built after 1950. i like most of the SOM buildings we have. Um... let's see... Title and Trust Building is pretty nice. Smurfit-Stone Building is fun to look at and looks cool in the skyline, but it's no great building. There are a few newer buildings that i like: 181 West Madison, Hyatt Center, 191 North Wacker Drive, One South Dearborn... there are more here and there. and as far as this boom goes, i really think most these building are really bad, with a few obvious exceptions: 300 North Lasalle, 353 North Clark, 600 North Fairbanks, 680 North Rush, MoMo, and the Spire... but imo, architecture has become a very pathetic thing in recents decades. and most people's opinions on this forum scare me. sorry but i'm impressed with poured in place concrete. :shrug:

modernist heart? muscular mid-century Chicago (and New York) style? no offense but are you serious?

oh ok, you like the old stuff, that's cool. you and i obviously have radically divergent opinions about architecture. now that i have a better idea of where you're coming from, i can understand your comments more clearly. your 340 comment threw me for a bit of a loop, but now that i know your general preferences, let's move on.

back to arquitectonica...........

From the rendering it looks like the Arquitectonica building is right up against the Regatta. I don't understand the reasoning for this. Since they are combining the lots for three buildings, it would seem to me that they could allow space all around.

Two things…this is a preliminary drawing and the likelihood that this is going to be the final design is very improvable. I spoke with someone in Magellan Development Group, which is the developer of the project, and they said this is just kind of a “test design”. That’s why they’re not very willing to even release the height of the building. She said the height of the building changes from day-to-day and they probably won’t have a final number for months. Nonetheless, they did give us a potential height but they don’t want us to share it until they say it’s ok to do so.

We had been trying to get the rendering for quite a while now but they were very reluctant due to the fact that more than likely the skin and colors of the building are going to change as well. According to the person we’ve been talking to, the design of the building as a whole could also change.

So before we make any real judgments, it would be wise to wait a little bit longer. She said it’s going to take a few months for them to revise the current design and make any appropriate changes.

They also don’t have a name for the building as of now and they refer to it as “The new lakeshore East Tower”.

http://www.newcityskyline.com/Arquit...ller_Image.jpg
That's better! I like this building a lot; it looks very simplistic, but I think when you inspect it closer, you see a wealth of detailing.

Perhaps it's just the angle of the rendering, relative to the Regatta; we know from descriptions given by others that it sites far enough away from the Regatta to have enough room between them, so I think it's just the angle.

i wanna see a rendering of that whole stretch of buildings, that whole side of the river.