Residence Inn Chicago, Chicago, Adequate

OpinionWell's Blog

Home » United States » Illinois » Chicago Destinations » Chicago Hotels » Residence Inn Chicago

OpinionWell
Rank

13th

Out of 415

Residence Inn Chicago	Average Price: $264 Check Rates

Hotel Class:

410 North Dearborn Street

Chicago, 60610 View map

3-Star Hotel Rank: 4 of 73
Average review rating: 4.63

OpinionWell Value Index: 7

Traveler reviews analyzed: Expedia (74) , MyTravelGuide (20) , Travelocity (14) , TripAdvisor (515) , YahooTravel (3)

SAFE TO BOOK ? (3/5 issues found)

Is this hotel safe to book? See the trends in negative comments below to find out the real deal before you commit:

Construction:	There are recent comments about Construction.
Noise:	Recent comments complained about noise.
Room Smell:	No recent comments about room smell were found.
Parking Fees:	Recent comments complained about parking fees.
Bed Bugs:	No recent comments about bed bugs were found.

Search reviews for other problems

Keyword Cloud

The hotel review keyword cloud displays the words commonly used to describe the features and services of this hotel. Select a word and explore.

All Positive Negative

Keyword Search

accommodating (15) adequate (19) attentive (17) awesome (24) beautiful (18) best (78) better (69) big (57) cares (22) clean (290) cleanliness (13) comfortable (182) comfy (15) convenient (71) courteous (22) decent (26) efficient (16) enjoyable (12) excellent (93) exceptional (27) fabulous (13) fantastic (37) fast (17) free (186) fresh (23) friendly (288) fun (19) good (302) great (646) happy (38) helpful (251) huge (27) impressed (21) liked (170) love (43) magnificent (29) new (74) nice (335) perfect (66) pleasant (37) pleased (19) plenty (61) positive (15) professional (15) quiet (49) reasonable (32) roomy (12) spacious (68) welcoming (25) wonderful (68)

Adequate

Appears in 19 comments.

The following words were used in comments with Adequate:
bathroom (2) bed (2) breakfast (4) facilities (4) good (2) great (2) hotel (2) kitchen (2) nice (2) not (4) pool (2) room (7) shower (2) small (3) sofa (2) studio (2) suite (3) warm (2) water (2)

Users can vote for helpful comments, which are saved in the Most helpful section.

Sort by:

See all

1. We stayed in a corner suite which had more than adequate room.

"Very nice hotel " Read full review on TripAdvisor 2/12/2012 Vote

2. Another issue we had with the room was that, despite having the air conditioning on and set at 68 in December, the room was still quite warm, mostly due to the fact that there was only one vent that we could find, and it was way over by the window, not allowing for adequate air flow.

"Cramped for 4 adults " Read full review on TripAdvisor 1/7/2012 Vote

3. Bathroom facilities were adequate, nice shower.

"Great location for a great price. " Read full review on TripAdvisor 1/6/2012 Vote

4. Rooms are very adequate for a downtown location.

"Very good in many ways. " Read full review on TripAdvisor 1/3/2012 Vote

5. The bed was good -- not great, but more than adequate.

"For Business or Pleasure, this Property Scores " Read full review on TripAdvisor 10/11/2011 Vote

6. But it was certainly adequate for us, the coffee was good and my son loved the fresh made waffles.

"Perfect location, good accommodations " Read full review on TripAdvisor 7/31/2011 Vote

7. We had a studio suite which was more than adequate, with a view of Harry Caray's for my son the Cub fan.

"Perfect location, good accommodations " Read full review on TripAdvisor 7/31/2011 Vote

8. The fitness room was adequate, but hot.

"Not Bad, but Not Great " Read full review on TripAdvisor 7/22/2011 Vote

9. Standard rate including free breakfast, while not great, was adequate for quick bite on the way out the door for tourist activities.

"Great location and accomodation for family vacation " Read full review on TripAdvisor 6/16/2011 Vote

10. The only thing I would change in the room would be to put in a slightly larger TV, but the one provided was adequate.

"Will definitely stay here again " Read full review on TripAdvisor 5/19/2011 Vote