Believe the East tower (1200 S Indiana), the first tower, is all rental.

Taller one on Michigan is supposed to be condos.

My cynical self doubts the second tower will ever be built, but I'm hoping we can get this, 1000 S, and Essex Tower going. That will considerably change the skyline.

I really don't want the second tower to be built in its current form. I hate twin towers, even if they have a nice design.

Thankfully, it seems likely that the second tower will get deferred into the next cycle and hopefully get a new architect.

meh. i think the marina city corn cobs work better together as a twinned pair than they would as an individual tower.

The second tower will happen, it's just a matter of when. Let's get this one built first.

860-880 N. LSD work together quite nicely as well, though I could have live without 900-910.

I kind of feel the same in wanting something visually unique. I wouldn't mind at lest seeing other (taller) concepts for the corner of Roosevelt and Michigan.

I second this. The second tower may or may not happen this cycle, but it should eventually. These buildings at the southwest corner of grant park will have a huge impact and serve to lengthen the skyline further south.

Anyway, great news on the impending start. I thought this one was rushed through just to get approval before whatever deadline that was, then would sit for much longer. Glad I was wrong.

What excites me most is filling in the south wall of Grant Park

Only 100 condo units in phase 2, the rest (650 +/-) would be rentals.

Viñoly already said that the current twin tower design is just placeholder. Don't forget that the original concept had two distinctly different building designs for the two towers. I expect him to come up with something fresh for the second tower, and I am guessing the developer just didn't want to leave a blank spot on the lot when presenting the proposal to the public. Also twin tower is a disingenuous usage of the word twin, unless we are talking about fraternal twin towers haha

Don't.

No, all of phase 2 (Michigan & Roosevelt) would be condo.

That is incorrect. I know whereof I speak.

I think we both know of where we speak, but one of us happens to be wrong :shrug:

I don't know if the programming or intent has been changed, but the developers have stated previously the second building would be condo.

I could be wrong as 600+condo units means they'd have to sell at least 1/2 first for financing. We'll see when the project it re-presented in the future.

How about twins that are fundamentally the same design language but adopt some superficial differences like color, fenestration, etc.

Here's one random good looking example of a different Vinoly implementation on his building blocks theme, in Manhattan - although not a high rise. The glass is more dominant here, whereas the structural element expression in 1200 is pretty heavy (it could be lessened by say cloaking two out of three floors' spandrels with curtainwall glass, for example).
www.6sqft.com/new-renderings-of-rafael-vinolys-meatpacking-building-will-include-worlds-largest-starbucks/

Bingo! I'm most interested in it boxing in the park, which it will do no matter the design as long as they keep it tall. As for keeping it twin towers, I kind of think it would be nice to pay homage to the corn cobs, even if that wasn't his agenda. Whatever they do I just hope they light up up the two crown's nicely. Remember how badass One Museum Park West's crown original design was with that spiraling green glass? It would have been amazing to look at from LSD or the park. Sadley...we did not get that

Paying homage to the corn cobs is not the agenda - if any homage is being paid, it is to the Willis (nee Sears) tower, with its tube massing, although the structural system is not the same. It is a slight tip of the cap, but not a full homage.
Personally, I hate all these "homages" and "tips of the cap" to other buildings; that is a post-modern practice that, rather than allowing a building to be what it needs to be, feels this need to try to be in the same club as the buildings they are paying homage to. It's like the kid in school who is unsure of himself, and tries to suck up to the kid he admires by wearing the same cool clothes and saying to him "Hey look, we're wearing the same clothes! We're twinsies!" Do you think the kid he admires cares? Do you think he admires the kid in return? No, it's just a pathetic attempt to be cool by association.
That's not to say that architects and engineers need to reinvent the wheel with every building - if a building needs the same solution as the Sears building, then do it - just don't do it as an homage, do it as a genuine solution to the problem.

i wish they would do a "homage" to the height and build it 1800 feet or something.

Right. and plenty of infill going on behind it now

I'm just happy for the density. Hopefully with all the proposals and projects under construction within a few blocks of this we might see some decent retail stores open up. I think they are probably maxed out on nail salons, pilates fitness places, and dry cleaners.

Omg and storage. What's up with that? Chicago apartments are huge.