The mansard roof was redesigned at the request of community groups during the review process.

The more modern looking top is an improvement over the original rendering, but still the building is an architectural abomination. In fact, it is possibly the ugliest residential high-rise to be constructed during the recent boom.

The Marquee might not be a beauty queen, but it certainly isn't the ugliest condo building in the boom. For that, look a few blocks north and west to the Prison, ahem, Vision on State.

No defending any of the South Michigan stuff from Roosevelt to 18th, but it is still much better than the CMK junk at 1720 & 1640 Michigan down the street; filled with boatload of investor rented units. At least here you do not have to look at highrise windows where people put newspaper up for shades like at 1720 and 1640. This section of Michigan Avenue is quite disappointing in quality.

The best you could say about Marquee is that the ground floor retail space is well done, has a high quality appearence, and adds a nice streetscape. The retail space is already leased. At 1720 & 1640, you have ugly garage entrances, and a wierd cavern like retail space that is still empty. Someone in DPD should be fired for those projects on Michigan Avenue. Take any of the new Streeterville or Gold Coast high rises and put them on S. Michigan Ave, and they would be 1,000 times better.

Jeff,

This is why there is variety in real estate, for different tastes. Personally I think the CMK buildings at 1720 & 1620 (not 1640) are 1000x better than this building. In fact I am following 1620 quite closely and might make a move in the next few years I love the building and units so much.

Have to wait until for the investor shakeout first, however. Can't allow people who bought knowing it wouldn't be their primary residence to profit off _my_ hard earned income.

Well, if the discussion as to the issues being addressed at the local CAPS meeting is any indication, good luck on your purchase. At least you will not need to go far to "bring" home a "date".

Jeff,

The Brininstool+Lynch designed 1720 South Michigan won American Institute of Architects Chicago design award.

I also disagree about CMK in general. Their projects are all very edgy and forward-looking. Not the safe PoMo crap that suburbanites want in a downtown home.

Prison on State is actually much nicer than this junk. Marquee is completely banal and flat.

I agree with Anon, and have no clue how Gordy could rationalize that Vision on State is worse than Marquee Michigan. I think that Vision on State kind of gets a bad rap - while it is kind of on the boring side and certainly nothing spectacular, there really isn't anything about it that's all that abominable. Marquee Michigan, on the other hand….what a complete piece of junk!

Also, Jeff - I think I am in the majority when I say that the CMK buildings are arguably the nicest buildings on South Michigan Avenue, between 12th and 18th streets.

Isaac, you may be in the majority on this site, but the overwhelming opinion of people in the neighborhood is shock. It looks to many like public housing, and I have had several agents tell me they would not bother to list or take people there.

Renderings are one thing, but the actual product is abismal. I will have to post pictures of the 1st couple floors; it is a toss-up to what is the worst part about those projects:
a) The view into the residents homes with junk
piled up against windows. Nice touch.
b) The dead commerical space along Michigan Ave
with the sunken retail space
c) The long blank wall covering the garage podium
with several garage entrances directly onto
Michigan Avenue.
d) The incredibly high rental and investor
ownership and related issues.

We can agree, this project was tailored to one group, 1st time owners with the lowest cost per sq ft. Not surprising, take a look at the resales and people taking a bath.

Sir Isaac, some good information on the project.
http://cribchatter.com/?p=26
http://cribchatter.com/?p=36
http://cribchatter.com/?p=3647

Jeff- I find it hard to believe you have polled enough people to say the overwhelming opinion of people in the neighborhood is shock.

I am not a huge fan, but your out spokeness on the subject is ridiculous. We get it you don't like it.

To insinuate that it looks like public housing is as ridiculous as the idea that you have ascertained the opinions of the majority of the neighborhood.

We can have different opinions in regard to the look of the building, that is fine, but just walk by. However you fail to address any of the other points. It will be interesting to see how the building ages and looks in 5 years.

This building has been a popular discussion topic in the hood, as has been the 'Tic-Tac-Toe Red Stripe' building. The opinions are quite apparent.

Jeff,

Crib Chatter is, to all appearances, a good site.

But all we have are appearances - no contact info, no indication whatsoever who is behind the site or what their interests are.

Until someone puts their name and contact info behind the site and discloses what they're about there is no reason to believe anything on Crib Chatter that you don't independently verify.

Who's writing Crib Chatter and why? And why are there no identity tracks for the site on the Web?

A popular discussion in the hood is a completely different statement the overwhelming opinion of the people of the neighborhood is shock. I can drum up many people who would disagree. I don't think you can possibly speak for the neighborhood and you have done nothing to prove that you can. If you want me to address all of your points, which I never said I was going to, here it goes:
A. One man's junk is another man's treasure
B. I see dead commercial space all over the neighborhood.
C. Blank garage podium walls are most certainly not unique to this building.
D. I doubt you have any exact figures on the high rental rate in this building or any other building.

Once again we all are very clear that you don't like the building. Stop banging the drum and claiming to speak for the masses.

Joe, you just described the entire internet, every site.

Geoff, ummm, yes I do have them. Rental rates are usually required disclosure, and a standard question to ask when buying a unit. Just call a realtor listing in the building and ask, they will tell you. As well, see some of the links above in cribchatter for further anecdotal evidence.

As to your other points, essentially you are saying, 'everything else sucks, so what is the difference'…that is the exact problem with developer, city, and some resident expectations in the south loop. Try harder.

No that is not what I am essentially saying. What I am specifically saying is your opinion is not the opinion of everyone, though you claim to be some sort of neighborhood poll taker. What you dislike, others like. This is a concept you seem to have way too difficult of a time understanding.

As for the rates of this building being rental as compared to other buildings in the area please disclose the information. I would be interested.

As for problems I highlighted that are similar in other buildings it is to question why you continue to harp on these aspects of these two buildings alone. I never said everything else sucks, or that this sucks, those are clearly your words and opinions, not mine.

Once again we get it, you hate the building. Your incessant whining for over a year now about it has grown very tiresome.

Guys,
I don't even have to google this Marquee building to know that Pappageorgie designed it! It's classic schlockitecture and is a disgrace to Michigan Ave. This city is about striking design and architectural significance and frankly…everything churning outta that chop shop known as P/H is terrible for the city's image. Vision on State is no different. It's horrible. Those windows are like 2 feet wide and when will their developers stop painting concrete buildings yellow? It was a bad idea in the 70's and it's a bad idea now. I'm willing to bet that P/H is behind the monstrosities at 'K Station' as well. Has anyone seen that junk? http://www.leftbankchicago.com/index_02.php

http://www.kstationchicago.com/

Jeff,

Perhaps it's escaped your notice, as so much does, but there are people here with names and histories and an address and phone number and disclosed interests in what we write.

That's true of every site on the Internet that merits any credibility. If you haven't figured that out you're in deep trouble.

We're a world away from Crib Chatter.

Sir Issac,

I'm definitely willing to stand behind Vision as HANDS DOWN the worst of the condo boom for the south loop. There is NO architectural detail…it's a prison! However crude the Marquee's references are to historical detail, at least it was a little more imginative than a (poorly) painted concrete fortress. If any building was up for nominee of a public housing impersonator, Vision takes the honors!

Stokes, you nailed the K Station developments as well…more P/H garbage. That firm is very curious to me, as they have the potential for good design (Park Michigan (if it gets built), some of the Museum Park towers, Emerald), but so much of their work is laughable. It must be a sweatshop of CAD monkeys, or the developers they work for just don't care. If people seem to be buying/leasing their products…maybe they don't…

Sir Isaac - you hit the key difference between South Loop & Lake Shore East by Grant Park or Streeterville/Near North.

Lake Shore east has a master planner and multiple architects vs what was given in the South Loop. They bulk of the other designs are high quality, good design, and most importantly good material (although Aqua is turning out to be highly over-rated IMO). In general, they are using modern or contemporary architecture to create something appealing, where as in the bulk of the South Loop, developers are using contemporary architecture to hide the fact they are minimizing quality of material used, (which is what the CMK buildings do in my opinion).

South Loop has the "B" Team of architects, and developers yapping about "price-point", skimping on architectural features, material, and overall quality claiming the market won't bear it…yet it seams they have created their own vicious cycle for future development, and failure to raise the bar. Just take a look at some of the buildings with problems and special assessments.
We are stuck comparing 'crummy' stuff to 'crummy stuff'.

This is a great comment thread. I'm interested in knowing what you all think of the building that I bought in, 1555 Wabash.

www.1555wabash.com

Mike,

As a buyer, we'd appreciate it if you would review 1555 Wabash at NewHomeNotebook.

We're also encouraging everyone who has any familiarity with any new construction project (not just a walk-by opinion) to write a review of it at NewHomeNotebook.

Your comments here are fairly transient, but NewHomeNotebook is a permanent way to share your opinions with prospective buyers and with each other. And, we'll be adding a lot more functionality to that site over the comingi months.

Mike,
I would hope you didn't get a unit where the master bedroom is borrowed light (not on a windowline) and that your master doesn't have a strip closet. It shocks me that so many units still have partial height walls in bedrooms. There is no excuse for that in new construction. A rehab - ok, I get it…but new construction?! Come on! Get creative architects! Shallower footprint with more ins and outs on the exterior creates more windowlines. It's not a difficult concept.

Mike, I think the action for that area could pick-up, pending better market. You have:
> Columbia college constructing the AV learning center at 16th & State,
> Discussion of plans for the auto repair center site across the street from you…
> Discussion of the church selling the lot to the south of you…
> EJ&E railroad abandonment discussion (5-10 year outlook), or at least less rail traffic
> Sedgwick development on 1900 south Wabash as a south anchor
> Finally a completion of the development across from Coloseum Park (after 10 years) to the North

Point is, that area is starting to fill in, and if you hold 5-10 years, indicators are probable for a very different area by then. Enjoy it.

Stokes,

I think the problem is the more corners on a building the more money the developers shell out. "Ins & outs" get to be expensive if there are too many of them.

Has anyone driven State St between 22nd and I-55?

Thanks for the comments everyone, but I should have been clearer in my comment; I didn't mean to change the topic. Since everyone was talking about the aesthetics of the buildings in the neighborhood, I was interested in hearing everyone's take on the outside appearance of 1555 Wabash based on the plans.

@ daveydoo,

The above average number of corners is one of the things that drew me to 1555 Wabash.

@Stokes,

I agree with what you said about bedrooms, windowlines and strip closets. For the record, our master bedroom has a window and a walk-in closet. The second bedroom is a partial wall room, which is fine for our purposes.

Regarding driving State St. between Cermak and I-55, I do often - why do you ask?

Stokes,

I have, a number of times, and I think I understand the reason for your question. Also done some walking, and recommend driving.

Stokes - Pappageorge/Haymes did not design the Marquee. Sedgwick Properties has an in-house architecture and design department, so they are both developer and architect for this project.

http://cribchatter.com/?page_id=2

"…no contact info…"

Got a Tip? Contact Me! cribchatter@yahoo.com

"…no indication whatsoever who is behind the site…"

My name is Sabrina

"…or what their interests are."

I am not a real estate professional (not an agent, a broker, a developer, a flipper or involved in the mortgage industry.) I just love real estate.

What's your point, George, besides repeating mine?

We have no reason to believe an anonymous claim.

Sabrina "I just love real estate" could be a front for harvesting e-mail addresses from commenters and reselling them to whoever.

There is no reason whatsoever to take this site or its claims at face value.

There's every reason to believe the site is not what it claims to be. Legitimate people have full names, phone numbers, tracable domain name registrations, and addresses. "Sabrina" has none of these on public view.

For all anyone knows "George Costanza" could be "Sabrina."

Joe,

She doesn't need credibility as all of her claims can be independently verified. She's a blogger who earns revenue from third parties who pay for banner ads on her site.

Yes Sabrina could very well be George Costanza or someone with a large short position on the tradable Chicago Case Shiller Index futures, indeed and we have no idea. But this doesn't detract from the facts posted on the site that can be independently verified.

As an old chap hate to tell you Joe but you can't control the flow of information on this here internet thing.

Bob,

I lecture developers and marketing people almost daily about their inability to control what's on the Internet, so don't need to be reminded of that.

I don't visit CribChatter that often, but have never seen a banner ad. Google ads, yes. Those don't generate all that much revenue on that site's volume.

Independently verifiable facts are not all that's presented on the site.

And, as an old chap, you know very well that facts can be presented selectively and very effectively in the service of unknowable bias. Every good con comes wrapped in credible facts.

What, would you guess, is "Sabrina's" reluctance to identify him / herself? There is no positive reason for maintaining anonymity.

"For all anyone knows "George Costanza" could be "Sabrina."

Nice try on the misdirect Joe but you know I'm not.

Joe Zekas,
Why would you care who sabrina is anyway? She writes a blog. She combs through real estate listings once or twice a day, posts a little bit of info and lets people yammer about the real estate.

Who cares?

Now you're probably a delusional real estate agent who, deep down, is just scared of losing his job. I feel for you. But Sabrina isn't single-handedly destroying the Chicago Real Estate Market. She is providing a better website than this for discussing real estate.

Email address harvesting? Ummm…probably doesn't work very well given that it's pretty easy to give a fake email addy on a site that doesn't regulate comments. Just like I gave you a fake email addy so that I don't get spammed by your crappy overpriced listings.

Joe,

If I had to take a wild guess it might be that she doesn't want to be held accountable for any content a developer or owner finds offensive.

I could easily see an owner nearing financial distress, which are frequently displayed on the site, decide to sue the blogger in a frivilous lawsuit as they hold her partly to blame for their situation.

jerry,

It would have taken you about 3 seconds to discover I'm not a real estate agent.

Bob,

Fear of being held accountable for what "she" says? That reassures me about the site.

George,

Since I don't know who you are or who Sabrina is I can't be sure you're not each other.

Joe,

Come on — you're losing me here. Any read of CribChatter would lead you to believe that Sabrina is just a blogger fascinated by the Chicago real estate market. The only times she censors comments is when she thinks the comments might hurt a seller's feelings — when criticism of decor gets a little too harsh. Yes, she happens to think the market is overpriced, but I don't think that's a crime. And if she doesn't want to be named, that's her business — she doesn't claim to have all of the answers.

Yes, some of the commenters there take it a bit too far, but at least they're allowed to do that. I have to say that your iron-fisted approach has had a tremendous chilling effect on comments here — sometimes for the better, but mostly for the worse.

Michael,

Up until now I've really approached CribChatter with kid gloves - at least by the standards of some of the worlds I've lived in.

I'm not led to believe what you believe about CribChatter even though what you believe may very well be true. There just isn't any reason to think it is, and many reasons to think it isn't.

Let me cite just a few. Someone - perhaps several someones - is breaching MLS rules by providing "Sabrina" access to MLS data they've agreed to keep confidential. Someone, perhaps only "Sabrina," is making what appears to unauthorized use of copyrighted photos on CribChatter. Sorry, but that's my clients' data that's being misused for purposes that aren't adequately disclosed, and I get protective of my clients' interests.

Commenters here also sometimes take things a bit too far and though I often respond strongly to them, they're free to do that.

"Sabrina" is to be commended for the loyalty and trust s/he's inspired among some people. It would be nice if there were more transparency about the interests in which that loyalty and trust is being deployed.

Crib Chatter is a harmless site. Joe, perhaps you are the diluded one?

Joe, you have clearly gone over the brink. Breathe deeply. Count to ten. Now count to twenty. You're not helping your image, let alone your site.

How would sellers be anything other than delighted by the free publicity they get on cribchatter? Since when is mls data "confidential"? Are you implying that I cannot trust a real estate agent to give me the full, relevant information about places I might be interested in buying, because that agent has a pact to keep things secret from anyone "outside the know"?

Kenwortey,

Some MLS data is publicly available through agents and some of it is private and confidential for a myriad of good reasons. This is so basic and elementary a concept that I'm shocked you haven't encountered it.

Previous listing history, for example, is not data that's accessible by the public. Have you ever seen it on any broker / aggregator Web site?

If you think sellers are "delighted" by the way CribChater presents their properties you need to take a hundred deep breaths, count to a thousand and get a good year's sleep.

Joe,

Sites such as Ziprealty have previous listing history if it is a continuous listing and has been reduced several times. The Chicago Tribune website has an area where you can see prior sales history on units. Most of what is on CC is from publicly available sources.

Bob,

I don't know whether "most" of what is on CribChatter is from publicly available sources, but much of it is not, and requires direct MLS access, and is posted in violation of MLS rules, i.e. with the cooperation of someone breaching those rules. Many of the photos on the site appear to be posted in violation of others' copyrights. It appears to be cribbed chatter.

If you trust a site whose content seems to derive from breaches of trust and violations of rights, that's your call. It strikes me as an incredibly naïve position to adopt.

"Sabrina" purports to blog from a love of real estate. With rare exceptions s/he posts three properties a day, Monday through Friday, with Saturdays, Sundays and holidays off. Those posts are time-stamped to appear at 5:30 a.m., 10:12 a.m. and 1:09 p.m. (plus or minus a few minutes on occasion).

It hasn't been my experience that people who do something for the love of it remain unaffected by that love on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays, or that they timestamp the product of that love with such regularity. Again, in my experience, that's the behavior of someone who's in it for a buck.

You may not wonder how "Sabrina" is being paid, or by whom, or to what end, but I do.