Um...Very interesting idea, this location just might work for a new casino in Chicago. Hope you are listening mayor Lightfoot...

I was talking with a co-worker of mine about it who's born and raised in the Bronx. Apparently here in NYC there's a similar thing where there might be a casino put somewhere in the city (I had no idea). One of the concerns is putting it in a neighborhood where the average resident doesn't really have a lot of money - at least according to him. That sort of thing to people in maybe less than ideal neighborhoods economically might be seen as sort of an attack.

The more I think about it, the more I'm pretty solid that Chicago should put it in or near downtown. See if you can make a "program" to hire from some of those areas, but putting it in some of those areas might not exactly be the best thing to do and many residents might actually see it that way.

NYC already does have a casino at Aqueduct, which (with approximately 6500 machines) is comparable to the proposed Chicago casino. Unfortunately, Chicago hasn't had a racetrack in city limits since 1905, so we don't have such an obvious location...

Now here's an idea. Imagine rebuilding the Washington Park Racetrack at it's original location in Washington Park. Like so many other tracks, it could be a combined racetrack and casino.

Then we could move the Obama Library back to the Washington Park location and make one big combined facility: The Washington Park Club Racetrack, Casino and Obama Library!

https://i.redd.it/po26wa2e95u11.jpg

Although some further digging shows that the historic racetrack was actually south of the existing park, in what's now Washington Park Subdivision (between 6oth and 63rd).

Tribune Site
 

I dont hate this idea. It offers highway access. potential to be on the new street circulator.

CURBED: Tribune Media’s River District interests buyers as potential casino site
The 37-acre waterfront site went up for sale in February.]

The northern part of the site near the Freedom Center printing facilities at Halsted and Chicago, could have a temporary casino ready in a matter of months, according to a person familiar with the development. Unlike other sites under consideration, such as Michael Reese and U.S. Steel, it wouldn’t be a development starting from scratch. The downtown site has infrastructure and a build-out ready, vacant warehouse. Currently, Tribune Media has a deal to co-develop the waterfront parcel north of Chicago Avenue with Riverside Investment & Development.

That speed and capacity is an important advantage of the location if the city wants to start collecting revenue as soon as possible, which Lightfoot might need to fill the budget hole. The legislation allows for a temporary gambling site (land operations or a riverboat) to open for up to two years, with an option to extend for another year, while a more permanent development is built.

Huh. :shrug:

Sorry, I meant a new one. I'm aware of Resorts World Casino.

I don't hate this notion, either. It's quite central, with great bus access, fairly good street access, and still at least somewhat separated from the rest of the downtown core. Not too shabby!

Aaron (Glowrock)

I think the Tribune Media location might be the ideal spot. While it isn't serviced directly by rail, the #66 bus is the second most active bus line in the CTA (which links up to nearby blue, brown, and red lines), and the #8 isn't far behind. And both run 24 hours. You also have minimal NIMBY issues here. McCormick will be happy the casino won't be right in convention-goer's faces, and yet it's still easily accessible to convention-goers. You can easily draw from people seeking nightlife in nearby hoods, without detracting from those existing scenes. Essentially you get a downtown location without all the problems of being downtown.

Yeah, close enough to the train stations that it can bring in day trips from the burbs, close enough to the L/buses for chicagoans, and in a desirable yet underdeveloped location. Because it makes so much sense, we can now scratch it off the list, because the city doesn't make logical financial moves :haha:

There's also the possibility of restoring the rail from the Tribune location to around Michigan Ave via the Kinzie St bridge and Carrollton Ave.

You could throw in a new Metra stop too

Oops

and this was pretty obvious

Consultant says none of the five sites work

https://www.chicagotribune.com/polit...n6a-story.html

This is just the beginning of a negotiation.

If I'm a private operator, here and now is the time that I have the most leverage.

This isn't a private operator negotiating. It's a feasibility study done by a third party consultant.

No surprise they basically said what Lightfoot hinted at, the tax structure needs to be rejiggered in the legislature to make it economically feasible.

I also found this interesting:
There's a $1 tax on anybody who enters the casino, and we're randomly giving away 30% of that to Maywood and Summit? Why? Did their reps sneak that into the bill?

^ I know that, I'm just saying that this consultant's data will be very useful to potential private operators trying to get the best deal for themselves in negotiating terms with the city.

The Maywood thing probably has someting to do with the Hawthorne Race Track lobbying for a kickback since this will "undermine our existing gambling business" or something...

Nope, nothing to do with this. It's just a cash grab, plain and simple.

I like how Lightford (not to be confused with Lightfoot) doesn't even bother to hide her anger that other, needier communities in the South Suburbs were getting money before her community.

Welcome to Chicago, folks...

A report without much surprise in it.

The most interesting take away to me.....

We all know those five Casino locations suggested were nothing more than trial balloons. Now that consultants have verified those five could never be, City and State officials will get down to serious business. I believe downtown has always been the choice of the city . Lightfoot is learning there are political choices and there are business choices. In Chicago more often than not business choices prevail.

My take so far is that Lightfoot had the feasibility study done mostly to prove that the current structure isn't financially viable (the 72% tax), and she is not concerned with the precise location at this time. In her statements yesterday she continued to deflect back to this point when reporters asked questions about which location she currently favored. However, she eventually reiterated that she wants the Casino to spark economic development on the South/West side. This could be political even though she knows that closer to downtown makes more sense, but we don't know yet. I do like the fact that she seems to be taking an unemotional, data-driven approach to evaluating the feasibility of a casino in Chicago. Fingers crossed.

I've been intrigued by the defunct Holiday Inn location across from the Old Post Office.
Downtown adjacent, few residential neighbors, room to expand?, incredible transit access.

It's a good thing we (at least appear to be headed toward) are going back to the drawing board. If a casino is going to happen, let's at minimum avoid a disaster from the get-go. Location and financial structure need a thorough re-think.

Only a block from a Blue Line station is "incredible transit access?"

Tell a potential visitor, in 20 words or fewer, how to get there by transit from Water Tower Place.

Take the red line south to Jackson. Transfer to the blue line and get off at Clinton. Then you're there!

or, alternatively
Just put it in google maps, and do what the phones says

LOL!

that's a true generation gap marker right there.

has anyone under the age of 30 literally asked another human being for directions, ever?

Mr. D's concerns have gone the way of the dodo.

It's also two blocks away from the Union Station bus terminal, so yeah, it has great transit access.

A gambler can afford a $10 Uber.

Hell the casino could arrange a discount whenever it is the destination I bet.

When I’m on the bus, and some suburban boomer asks the driver where the bus goes, while holding their phone...

Angry.

This whole casino issue is a total cluster fuck and how they fix it I don't know.

It has to go back to Springfield to make it work and it needs to be downtown, period to make a real return.


There are tons of articles out there today. Blair Kamin made the most perinate suggestions.


I wont even provide one link because if you searched it you could find 10 articles from today and yesterday alone.


This is Lightfoots big agenda to fix.


She should work with Pritzker to make it workable otherwise Chicago will never see a casino in a lifetime.


Whos idea was it for them to take 74% of all of the gross?


Like how greedy can you get.



No major casino owners could even make a slight profit at that insane rate.




This is a major fubar beyond a doubt.



This is her most important decision, and Pritzker needs to get real


no tourists will ever venter into a no go zone to play for money.


This needs to be high end, period. Don't fuck this up Lightfoot.


Ok just one link


https://www.chicagotribune.com/colum...kiy-story.html


Column: A consultant disses Lightfoot’s casino sites. Now what?

By Blair Kamin

Chicago Tribune |
Aug 14, 2019 | 3:23 PM




So a consultant has branded five casino sites floated by Mayor Lori Lightfoot, all on the South and West Sides, as out-of-the-way losers.
Which raises the question: If the casino must be downtown, where should it go?

…


All kidding aside, this casino stuff is serious business. It’s the first high-profile building project that will bear Lightfoot’s imprint. It could throw off enough profit to help Chicago climb out of its financial hole.



…



Not only did the state-hired consultants, Las Vegas-based Union Gaming Analytics, conclude that “onerous” taxes and fees imposed by the city and state would discourage private casino operators from investing in any of the five sites.


….


Wherever a downtown casino goes, it will be at odds with Lightfoot’s agenda of spreading development to the South and West sides.
It will be no easy task to balance her commendable drive for equity with the pressing need to balance Chicago’s books.

Actually, where the bus goes is a tough question to answer using the phone. The only place you can see route-specific maps is as PDFs a couple of levels deep in the Pace or CTA website. And, of course, your phone has no way of knowing what run you're on, and if it's a short-turn at Western or goes all the way to Midway.

Yes, but the front of the bus tells you exactly where it's going

Well, transit from Water Tower Place is pretty suboptimal to get from most other places downtown by that measure. It is really easy to pick in almost any city random locales where it isn't the most convenient to use PT to get from location to another if one is looking not to connect them for the sake of an argument.

If say we were talking about getting to the OPO location/Holiday Inn lot from say O'Hare, Wicker Park, or Logan Square then it is pretty darn accessible via the Blue Line. It is also pretty darn close for any train riders using Union Station, bus riders using Greyhound, and those with cars from just about anywhere given that Jane Byrne is an 1/8 mile away.

The insinuation by you that it is in some sort of transit desert and not one of the most accessible locations, if not THE most, for all types of transit in the whole metro area is totally absurd.

Also, take the 151 to the end and then walk two blocks is probably an acceptable answer...

My friend and I made a phone app 7 years ago for CTA where you can put in the bus route number (or pick from your favorites) and it will draw the route on the map for you and also draw every single stop on the map. If you tap on the stop, it tells you when the next busses are coming. Also works for the trains.. but not PACE or Metra. Just CTA.

This data has been available on s public api for years. I'm sure other people have used it how we did since then.

I still remember when cell phones weren't a thing, so you call up someone on the house phone, make plans to meet up, you have to be pretty specific with directions and what the meetup place looks like, and then arrive at the destination and wait for them not know when they were going to show up or if they got lost trying to get there.

Haha, I grew up just on the end of the house phone era. I got my first cell phone at 17, but before that I guess I always just went to peoples houses to hang out as a kid, or in high school I would meet at their house first and then drive somewhere together. I never had to meet people at 3rd locations. That must have been pretty difficult back then if the person didn't show up haha.

The good old days :)

I can’t imagine how slow it was to do business before the internet. It would take a week to set up a group meeting.

I'm 37. I didn't have a cell 'till I was like 24, I went all through college without one. True story. I think I thought it was pretty punk rock I didn't own one. No doubt I am am outlier.

I'm in my 30s but definitely remember having to actually ask for directions, plan it out in advance, etc - not have any cell phones. I still remember by heart a few land line phone numbers of the parents of some of my best friends even though I haven't called those numbers in over a decade. Hell, I still remember my dad's office phone number by heart somehow

Id put it at the old Fisk power station. Restore the industrial early 20th century architecture and keep developing the south branch of the river.

Millennials.....

Looks like things are getting back on track

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2020/5/...lori-lightfoot

^ Good to see. I'm still not convinced that casino gambling is the silver bullet for our fiscal problems, but if done smartly it could at least provide some boost to the city's bottom line.

I doubt we'll see any further movement on the casino this year as operators are not in an expansion mode, but perhaps next year the city will be able to launch a formal RFP. I'd rather see a process where developers are allowed to choose their own site and have the location be part of the evaluation.

My fear is that we end up with a suburban style casino in the wrong spot, like in Detroit, Pittsburgh, St Louis or Cincinnati. Those poor decisions will stymie downtown development and do not really help the brand of a thriving downtown. Boston got a suburban casino, but put it in an industrial area of Everett which is okay. Detroit's Greektown Casino and New Orleans Harrah's are better examples of downtown casinos but still leave MUCH to be desired. If operators will insist on a suburban design then we should at least put the casino in some industrial area on the South Branch, or next to Sox Park. A more urban design opens up many other options for location - Motor Row, Fulton Market, United Center area, Goose Island, etc. Macau has a lot of smaller casinos that fit into urban neighborhoods and could be a good model.

OneCentral is the ideal location for the casino in my view. It would nicely tie into the tourism traffic that McCormick Place gets as well as Soldier Field. I'm sure the local residents would throw a fit though.

Can we get a massive boat? It could cycle between McCormick Place and Navy Pier.

Maybe after all the cruise companies go out of business they could steal one of their boats.

NYC developer seeks home for historic SS United States after planned rebirth as hotel
https://www.inquirer.com/resizer/GZN...RLLNNP3J4E.jpg
by Jacob Adelman, Updated: March 11, 2020
NYC developer seeks home for historic SS United States after planned rebirth as hotel.

https://www.inquirer.com/real-estate...-20200311.html

We could get that ship:)

^ Sadly, much bigger than Seawaymax.

I tend to agree regarding putting it in or close to downtown. For one reason or another, I don't think it would be as successful as if you put it in some random far flung place say south of South Shore along the lake. You'd get far more tourist dollars by keeping it close to downtown. By all means, hire people who need it but put the thing near downtown.

In my own mind, the casino should play to a lot of people whether high rollers or not. You could probably make it the type of place where a high roller actually wants to be seen rolling up to it. I think that it would become more successful the more you can appeal to tourists (and probably some high rollers) to spend some money there. Just my 2 cents though.