Subscribe: 
On learning that it was open for business, I visited Coliseum Park, 1440 S Wabash Ave, on Friday and toured the new furnished model. Due to setbacks involving city permits and utilities companies, the four-story development has had a pretty slow go of it over the last two years, but that’s all in the past now.
As a reader noted last week, the finished building looks quite different from the renderings on the development’s Web site. That’s because the city demanded that the roof be modified, says Koenig & Strey agent Jason Stratton.
About half of Coliseum Park’s 39 condos have been sold, and the remaining one- to three-bedrooms are priced from the $310s to the $480s.
NewHomeNotebook:
• Rate and review Coliseum Park
Related posts:
{ 20 comments }
I would like to see that letter that the city wrote in regard to the roof. How many times do we here them claim the excuse that the City DPD is not in control of the look or design of the building, yet now they can demand change in this case. Interesting…
The roof as it is is an improvement from the rendering
Look at how badly both buildings use the southern exposure. Not only is it a corner with a southern exposure, but it overlooks a park. Shi* architects.
Improvement? This is another DPD clusterf— along with the community group who should have reviewed this. This fronts a major street. If they wanted to get rid of the roof, it would have been an improvement if they would added some additional brick detail and lental detail in the traditional Chicago style.
Additionally, they just added major long term costs to the ownership of the building with the flat roof design, which are notorious for leaking and maintenance requirements. (I wonder really if the developer claims are true). The also lost the opportunity for vaulted top floor units.
To top it off, they lost the opportunity to add decent boutique retail space, when they added 2 or 3 curb-cut garage access doors off of Wabash.
Had they put a curb cut on 15th for the garage, they would have added more floor space or parking space inside, while eliminating an eyesore on the streetscape.
The design could have been made greener with the addition of solar panels on the original roof, in addition to Alan’s comments about the Southern exposure.
^ I agree with 90% of your post, Jeff.
All I’m saying is that the new flat-top is an improvement over the previous roof rendering, which looks more like something that would belong on a senior condo development in suburban Toledo
Seriously. Those gables look ridiculous. As Jeff pointed out, though, how and why is it the city was able to play such a crucial role in this building’s design?
Google Street View shows Phase I of this project, with the gables, very much like the rendering.
If memory serves the first phase was townhomes – vastly overpriced for the time, which was about 15 years ago.
Flat roofs are actually superior to other roofs IF you use a “rubber” roofing material as opposed to the old Tar and Paper or something similar.
Simply put a silver coating on it and every ten years an elastometric coating over it and the roof should last longer than 50 years. The rubber roofs are a vast improvement over the old built up tar and paper. Easy to repair also. A handheld torch, industrial scissors and new material can go on in minutes for a patch. Which is seldom necessary. The most serious problem with them is the seams coming apart, but if you look at the roof a few times a year you can normally catch those before they cause any problems. Even those don’t normally occur until the material has been on for decades.
Rubber roof and wax free toilet seals are the greatest inventions known to man. Ok, that might be a bit of hyperbole.
Flat (or nearly so) roofs have been done for nearly a century w/o problems on industrial buildings – the high concept architects in Europe who took the aesthetic didn’t have access to the details and didn’t know how to make them leak free and passed that on when they came here, unfortunately.
If flat roofs were really a problem, industrial buildings wouldn’t be using them in the numbers that they do. Even torch down roofing is fairly trouble free (so I second IP’s assessment).
FYI:
Nobody builds perfectly flat roofs anymore. They all have a minimum slope of 1/4″ per foot to eliminate ponding.
Flat roofs were hardly ever perfectly flat. Almost all sloped.
For buildings and developments of this size, many associations are struggling with these flat roof designs. The are not usually built to commercial specs and loads, while also relying on scupper drain locations at the end of the roof, vs multiple drain locations on the interior of the roof.
In a perfect world they can be good, but the variables with spec, installation, and the propencity of flat roofs to ice damn, do not make this an ideal selection for a buiding of this size IMO.
I am dealing with this first hand on a Papageorge Hymes design, and know many other associations who are having some major specials assessments for these flat roof design which require more inspection and more maintenance. Even the smallest nail left after construction can be a problem.
I agree with your comments about Rubber and seam issues; unfortunately for the smaller buildings, developers are going with the asphalt based rolls in layers instead of a more processed rubber product with a stronger backer like on commercial applications.
I found it odd when I visited Belgravia’s Union Row development, that the roofing material was a grey shingle like tar paper, and they had installed with a boat load of small pieces and a lot of joints. Good luck with that
Jeff,
If you’re not a pro, you shouldn’t be commenting about roofs. Some of your comments are naive and ridiculous. Are mistakes made? Sure. But you don’t know what they are. My advice to any condo association would be to obtain all the warranty info from the developer. 15 year or more warranties backed by major manufactures are not unusual.
Excuse me, MC, what did I indicate that is wrong?
15 year warrenty in Chicago? I have yet to see a developer offer better than 1-2 years. The pitched roof on the original design discussed here would have been nearly maintenance free.
Flatroof designs on smaller buildings like this and in townhomes is a problematic art. Modified asphalt roofing or felt paper is the most common installation, and most CRC members will tell you this. Ice Daming is quite problematic in these homes because of exposed roofing with warmer under surfaces due to insulation issues.
I have had far too much exposure in the area in inspection, repair, and review than I want to.
Felt paper? What is that? It’s not a roofing system. Modified asphalt roofing? Perhaps what you really mean is a torch down, single ply, modified bitumen system. Don’t even try to pretend.
There are many strategies for minimizing ice damning. One is just better ventilation. Another is to just acknowledge it and design for it. When the water backs up, it’s only a problem for pitched shingle roofing.
The warranty doesn’t come from the developer. It comes from the manufacturer when a certified installer is used.
ment to say ON felt paper underlayment…APP Modified Bituman with a base sheet of felt paper underlayment is what is quite typical…you do realize bituman is synomous with asphalt?
http://www.rsimag.com/rsi/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=18916
I am calling BS on your idea that ice damning is a problem on pitched shingle roofing. Ice damning is a problem on any roof with seams, joints, areas around scuppers, and drains, etc. Ice damning is problematic on many of these townhome designs similar to Pappageorge/Hymes designed roof deck floor, with bedroom below.
Many factors can cause damage during ice damn
conditions; issues such as membrane spec, insulation, drainage, venting, lack of heaters on downspouts, or poor seam condition.
What specifically is your problem, that I made comments about a specification that a developer is using?
I have NO idea what types of roofs developers are putting on buildings today so I won’t speak to that. I would have guessed rubber, but apparently I would have been wrong.
I do know from extensive personal experience in renovating that “rubber” on flat roofs is a “wondermonious thang”.
Tear the old roof off, put down one layer of “tar and paper” roofing then torch down the “rubber”. Paint it with “silver” then do a 10 minute. inspection a few times a year for seams pullng apart. It’s a great product.
By the way Joe Zekas was right. A flat roof is not level or perfectly horizontal. They normally pitch/slope from the front of the building to the rear. They are much easier to repair than shingles roofs with greater “pitches”. Ice damming occurs on almost any roof. The best way to avoid it is to only build in warm climates.
I suspect much of the “bad rep” flat roofs get is because of the use of tar and paper, which needs to have a layer added every 5 years or so, and other substandard materials or installation.
Jeff,
I reglanced at your previous post. Since you qualify general remarks with disclaimers, I hesitate to say that you were flagrantly wrong. But some of your terminology is a bit off. For example, you said something about not meeting “commercial specs and loads”. Are you talking about snow and wind loads? Those are the same for all buildings.
IP,
The wondermonious roofing that you like is modified bitumen. Another good material is EPDM rubber which is commonly glued down -not torched.
MC,
I prefer calling it rubber. Modified Bitumen has too many letters for me to deal with.
Rubber merely has two r’s, two b’s, and an “e” and “u”. My brain prefers that.
I remember trying to get through a “spec sheet” on rubber roofing years ago and my brain actually hurt.
Now at least I know the difference between EPDM and the modified bitumen. I could never get to the third paragraph to figure it out. I’ve only seen the “torched” material put down. Nasty work.
By the way, I will give them credit for at least using a quality brick and sticking to a smaller brick size for a better appearence.
The projects that combine the larger semi-gloss cheap looking brick (so they can skimp in install cost) and exterior cinder block in the rear are insulting. Brick it or glass it, but do it with good materials that last…owners will pay for it.
Comments on this entry are closed.