CHICAGO | City Casino

[southoftheloop]

Originally Posted by Randomguy34

There's a new video on The 78's website showing an aerial of the site. Really demonstrates how imposing the towers are, and how The 78 will extend the skyline south. You can also see the changes in park size: https://www.78chicago.com/sites/defa...trict-hero.mp4

I can see why the McCormick Place site perhaps most realistic, rational, appealing from City's POV...but what the hell, this seems like it's a risk worth taking. Would change how we view the center of the city, and that's not easy to do in a big town like this

[The Lurker]

Can't say I share the same enthusiasm most on this forum seem to have for the observation tower. Especially not one that's 1500 feet tall in a neighborhood that is still so lowrise dominant. It would be a sore thumb in this location.

It is 1 - 3 miles from most of downtown's significant architectural landmarks. Even visiting the skydeck I feel disconnected from the city just from being so high above the rest of it. The Signature Room or 360 on the other hand bring you a little closer and more intimate with the city. The Tribune site would have been more appropriate location for an observation deck.

I understand Related doesn't own that site but if they must have an observation deck at the 78 I'd rather it occupy the top floors of a hotel tower that emulates the form of the St. Charles Airline bridge (if that was the intent) and it doesn't need to be over a thousand feet high to have spectacular skyline views from there.

[thegoatman]

Originally Posted by Randomguy34

There's a new video on The 78's website showing an aerial of the site. Really demonstrates how imposing the towers are, and how The 78 will extend the skyline south. You can also see the changes in park size: https://www.78chicago.com/sites/defa...trict-hero.mp4

This is by far the most striking, unique, skyline-changing proposal. This has to win.

[Tombstoner]

Originally Posted by marothisu

If you are staying on the strip then you can walk, depending on distance.

The only casino in the US I can think of with a rapid transit stop nearby is Resort World in NYC (Queens). Which is all the way out near JFK. The station has a ridership of 600K. Not huge but also apples to oranges as far as location goes. It's near a bunch of people but far away from any sort of Upper middle or upper class area, and not close to where tourists are already staying. Chicago's mo matter where it goes will be different from that anyway.

Last month, MA moved forward with plans for a footbridge across the Mystic to connect Assembly Square to Encore.

[Tombstoner]

Originally Posted by thegoatman

Good shit man. i also agree there should be a museum on site, would expand our museum campus.

Not sure a museum about the South Loop would be a crowd-pleaser or remotely on par with Museum Campus. I LOVE museums but a lot of them are very niche and won't be sustainably entertaining or educative.

[sentinel]

The problem with the tower that's part of the 78 proposal, it has to have a sizable amount of functionality (I don't know what the best programming would be). Otherwise, it risks becoming viewed as an even larger urban boondoggle than the Vessel sculpture in Hudson Yards.

[bhawk66]

That tower is the biggest 'click bait' gimmick to win votes it's comical. Apparently it's working. Also, have locals on this forum forgotten that Chicago weather basically sucks for the better part of 5 months. The 78 plan looks like it was conceived for Miami. Half of it's sell in these pretty drawings is open air. Picture the jet stream coming through in January for all those decks. Riiiiight. Basically 5 months of the year the outdoor area including the lovely steps to the river, are rendered useless . And that view across the river is absolutely stunning /sarcasm. Bally's McCormick Place Marshaling Yards (or Hard Rock at One Central if it could happen) gets my vote. The casino should have views of the lake. It will be an international draw, among locals obviously. Memories of a UPS warehouse roof and railyards doesn't exactly scream postcard. But Lake Mich from your 10'th floor hotel room does.

[marothisu]

^ How great of you to assume because a few people posted a like for the observation tower. I don't even like the observation tower but the rear of the propsal is clearly better than the others.

[Bonsai Tree]

Originally Posted by bhawk66

That tower is the biggest 'click bait' gimmick to win votes it's comical. Apparently it's working. Also, have locals on this forum forgotten that Chicago weather basically sucks for the better part of 5 months. The 78 plan looks like it was conceived for Miami. Half of it's sell in these pretty drawings is open air. Picture the jet stream coming through in January for all those decks. Riiiiight. Basically 5 months of the year the outdoor area including the lovely steps to the river, are rendered useless . And that view across the river is absolutely stunning /sarcasm. Bally's McCormick Place Marshaling Yards (or Hard Rock at One Central if it could happen) gets my vote. The casino should have views of the lake. It will be an international draw, among locals obviously. Memories of a UPS warehouse roof and railyards doesn't exactly scream postcard. But Lake Mich from your 10'th floor hotel room does.

Ah yes. Here we go again. Back to the "downtrodden community doesn't want x thing but we're gonna put it there anyway." The Marshalling Yards is stupid for a few reasons, but the fact that everyone advocates it over the clear objections of the community is ridiculous. I hope I speak for most people on this forum, but I think that Bronzeville is improving a ton and can be an even better neighborhood. Placing a casino there is a huge disservice to the neighborhood and what people there have stood for. Look back on the public comments for the Michael Reese site. People in the neighborhood were thrilled that the community was going to be dense and vibrant. They actually wanted taller towers along the lakefront iirc. And now we're just like eh who cares. I simply can't get behind that. I'd understand if the city chose the Lakeside center. But to get behind something like the Marshalling Yards is terrible. Also, good luck getting the Marshalling Yards approved. The people who currently own it (Farpoint etc.) have said point-blank they aren't selling.

Farpoint is working with Rush Street on its South Side proposal, so Goodman said there’s no way GRIT would give up its redevelopment agreement for Bally’s.
“That’s just not going to happen,” Goodman said. “We have not met with Bally’s and do not plan on it either. I think the RFP speaks for itself."
The RFP states, "as long GRIT is proceeding diligently and in good faith to pursue its redevelopment of the Marshaling Yards, the MPEA will not market, sell, lease, or otherwise transfer or encumber any portion of the MPEA Marshalling Yards or enter into any discussion, negotiation, or agreement to do so with any party other than GRIT for at least 36 months."

https://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/...Pos=5#cxrecs_s

[thegoatman]

[QUOTE=Bonsai Tree;9481150] Ah yes. Here we go again. Back to the "downtrodden community doesn't want x thing but we're gonna put it there anyway." The Marshalling Yards is stupid for a few reasons, but the fact that everyone advocates it over the clear objections of the community is ridiculous. I hope I speak for most people on this forum, but I think that Bronzeville is improving a ton and can be an even better neighborhood. Placing a casino there is a huge disservice to the neighborhood and what people there have stood for. Look back on the public comments for the Michael Reese site. People in the neighborhood were thrilled that the community was going to be dense and vibrant. They actually wanted taller towers along the lakefront iirc. And now we're just like eh who cares. I simply can't get behind that. I'd understand if the city chose the Lakeside center. But to get behind something like the Marshalling Yards is terrible. Also, good luck getting the Marshalling Yards approved. The people who currently own it (Farpoint etc.) have said point-blank they aren't selling.


Interesting. So the marshalling yards probably isn't happening and I have serious doubts about the One central proposal. So the only real prospects are the 78 proposal, The Mccormick Place, and the Tribune site?

[bhawk66]

Originally Posted by marothisu

^ How great of you to assume because a few people posted a like for the observation tower. I don't even like the observation tower but the rear of the propsal is clearly better than the others.

I don't understand how a giant patio(s) is clearly better than the others in a city notorious for long cold grey winters? I think presentation, which was very polished and well done, has swayed opinion. And that tower is the hook for some. To even use the word Eifel Tower in the same sentence as this stick figure Tower is completely disingenuous by the developer and shows you what his motives are. It would be a joke that would take Chicago's reputation for architecture down a notch or three. It screams "Look at me!" in a city that is already established with great architecture. Why doesn't 78 just put a Six Flags there and get it over with. The casino in this city should be understated but classy. Very classy. This is clown shoes, imo. Chicago is not Vegas. Nor should it ever try to be. A lot of folks are thinkin Vegas when they would be better off thinking Monte Carlo. Elegance and class. Not garish design tricks. A casino in the city is a nice addition of entertainment to a great cultural city. Not a main attraction. "Just go over there and play nice". It could end up being a huge missed opportunity to class this city higher.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by bhawk66

Please tell me how a giant patio (the rear) is clearly better than the others in a city notorious for long cold grey winters?

Typo via phone.

I meant the rest of the proposal.. I like the integration into the planned development as well as with the South Loop overall (as a nearby resident I think it's fine).

Compared to the others too this is the winner. Lakeside Center looks like something they threw together half assed and looks like a complete after thought. The marshaling yards one would work if they really meant it to be a more suburban thing. Aldo the residents and alderman have already stated many times they sorry want a casino there. One Central? Lol. The Tribune Site one I actually don't mind minus some logistical matters.

The observation tower to me, zero fucks. I dont care about that. Do away with it for all i care- its still better than the other proposals. Tribune and The 78 are trying to be more like a Macau in terms of urban integration, not Vegas.

[Halsted & Villagio]

Originally Posted by bhawk66

I don't understand how a giant patio(s) is clearly better than the others in a city notorious for long cold grey winters? I think presentation, which was very polished and well done, has swayed opinion. And that tower is the hook for some. To even use the word Eifel Tower in the same sentence as this stick figure Tower is completely disingenuous by the developer and shows you what his motives are. It would be a joke that would take Chicago's reputation for architecture down a notch or three. It screams "Look at me!" in a city that is already established with great architecture. Why doesn't 78 just put a Six Flags there and get it over with. The casino in this city should be understated but classy. Very classy. This is clown shoes, imo. Chicago is not Vegas. Nor should it ever try to be. A lot of folks are thinkin Vegas when they would be better off thinking Monte Carlo. Elegance and class. Not garish design tricks. A casino in the city is a nice addition of entertainment to a great cultural city. Not a main attraction. "Just go over there and play nice". It could end up being a huge missed opportunity to class this city higher.

This whole "understated" thing that has somehow seeped in the thought patterns of many Chicagoans has no root in the history of a city whose motto has historically been, "make no little plans". Understated is one thing... lacking vision/not being innovative, daring and bold is quite another thing.

We did not build the Sears Tower thinking we should be understated. We did not create the first skyscraper in history by thinking how can we conform to the norms of others. We did not beat out New York for the Worlds Fair in 1893 and get the reputation of being "the Windy City" for the wind that blows here, but because we had cojones and brashness of thought, words and vision. And New York, for all of its flaws, has continued to push the envelope and I give them credit for that - they miss on some, and hit on others -- but at at-least they try. Somewhere along the way Chicago has stopped "trying" and has begun to settle for the mundane -- for understatement -- and its no coincidence that our lack of bold/visionary endeavors and architecture (of late) has coincided with this current movement of emphasizing "understatement" in our city.

We are in the Midwest. That does not mean we have to think like we like in Nebraska. Chicago was ALWAYS different from the areas around us in our thinking... in our not being afraid to make a "statement". Why build it if is not going to be transformative? The 78 is bold, different and yes, transformative. Dare I say, it is something Daniel Burnham himself would have endorsed -- the 78 "has the magic to stirs men's blood".

[MAC123]

Originally Posted by bhawk66

The casino in this city should be understated but classy. Very classy.

lmao no. It should not be "understated"

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by MAC123

lmao no. It should not be "understated"

Understated is exactly the reason why Chicago fades a little bit more and more lately, and then some people wonder why.

[thegoatman]

Originally Posted by MAC123

lmao no. It should not be "understated"

What a backwards way of thinking, 100% agree with everybody above. The Lakeside Mccormick Place looks so bad and half assed. The Marshalling Yards, like someone stated above, is gonna face steep opposition so I dont think thats happening. The One Central one is the least likely one to get picked. So the only real options for a world class destination is the Tribune site and the 78. By far the most unique striking one is the 78, but I wouldn't mind if the Tribune site gets chose.

We need something that's gonna draw people from all over.

[Chicago_Forever]

Originally Posted by bhawk66

I don't understand how a giant patio(s) is clearly better than the others in a city notorious for long cold grey winters? I think presentation, which was very polished and well done, has swayed opinion. And that tower is the hook for some. To even use the word Eifel Tower in the same sentence as this stick figure Tower is completely disingenuous by the developer and shows you what his motives are. It would be a joke that would take Chicago's reputation for architecture down a notch or three. It screams "Look at me!" in a city that is already established with great architecture. Why doesn't 78 just put a Six Flags there and get it over with. The casino in this city should be understated but classy. Very classy. This is clown shoes, imo. Chicago is not Vegas. Nor should it ever try to be. A lot of folks are thinkin Vegas when they would be better off thinking Monte Carlo. Elegance and class. Not garish design tricks. A casino in the city is a nice addition of entertainment to a great cultural city. Not a main attraction. "Just go over there and play nice". It could end up being a huge missed opportunity to class this city higher.

By your flawed logic, Daley Plaza, the Riverwalk, and all other great outdoor spaces in the city shouldn't exist due to our notoriously long, cold and grey winters. You might not know this but despite its cold brutal winters, Chicago is an outdoors city. The dozens of rooftop bars, patios and outdoor dining options is proof of this.

Also, out of the 5 proposals, the 78 is the one that least resembles a casino, and I think the design is very classy. I don't usually like observation towers b/c they normally resemble a toothpick with an olive near the top, but this one, though not the Eifel Tower, is quite unique and attractive in its own right.

The other proposals are all boring and look like your typical casinos out in Vegas and around the country. The city only has one chance at this so going with your typical run of the mill casino design is not an option. While Rivers McCormick place is an exception, it's too understated and forgettable. Even if related doesn't win, I'd hope they find a way to proceed with their vision for that section of the 78 development.

[bhawk66]

Originally Posted by Chicago_Forever

By your flawed logic, Daley Plaza, the Riverwalk, and all other great outdoor spaces in the city shouldn't exist due to our notoriously long, cold and grey winters. You might not know this but despite its cold brutal winters, Chicago is an outdoors city. The dozens of rooftop bars, patios and outdoor dining options is proof of this.

It's not flawed logic. Those are all public spaces. A casino is a separate entity and should be treated as such.

Are the rooftop bars and outdoor dining even open Dec-Mar? Add Nov & Apr in there too, realistically. Outdoor city? Huh? Sure, in the summer and fall.

[bhawk66]

Originally Posted by MAC123

lmao no. It should not be "understated"

I disagree. It can have excellent, modern architecture with fine details and appointments and still be understated and a world class destination.

Talk about lack of vision.

[Chicago_Forever]

Originally Posted by bhawk66

It's not flawed logic. Those are all public spaces. A casino is a separate entity and should be treated as such.

Are the rooftop bars and outdoor dining even open Dec-Mar? Add Nov & Apr in there too, realistically. Outdoor city? Huh? Sure, in the summer and fall.

You obviously don't get it so this will be my last reply on the topic. By your logic, rooftop bars, outdoor dining and such shouldn't exist because they can't be used Dec-Mar or Nov-Apr. That's complete nonsense.