CHICAGO | City Casino - Page 28

Rizzo · #**541** Posted **Nov 15, 2021, 5:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlw777

That's interesting and I wonder if it's intentional. Usually casinos are designed around perceptual isolation hence the lack of clocks and windows and the constant noisy slot machines. Usually they are designed to be viewed not to give people views. So I wonder if the railyard view is a positive for a casino because it's not a great view. Maybe in this instance the architecture is more about being viewed from the riverwalk / river than it is about giving people views.

That’s mostly correct but larger casinos will have an entire public side to them that’s increasingly transparent. These may be long corridors and lobbies that connect parking, hotels, restaurants, retail and event spaces. Behind those uses will be the gaming floor that’s blocked from the windows. Being able to see in an active, well lit, well designed interior is a better draw to visitors than blank walls.

This is less common with suburban and rural casinos because the buildings are isolated. In an urban environment, you want people to see activity within.

Sky88 · #**542** Posted **Nov 15, 2021, 6:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

The tower could be genius, actually. The 78 is not exactly in the usual tourist orbit of downtown, so an observation tower could lure tourists and families to that area the same way Vegas casinos have gimmicks. At the same time, it's not so gimmicky that it gets them laughed out of the room (like, say, a roller coaster). And in that location you don't really need to go supertall to get good views, you could probably do it at around 900'-1000' to be slightly taller than NEMA.

We don't usually see stuff like that at non-Vegas casinos because the focus is on habitual gamblers only, but it's good to see Rivers thinking about different possibilities for how they fit into the tourist ecosystem.

Building a 900-1,000 foot observation tower makes no sense as there are higher vantage points. The best would be to consider a tower that is taller, say 2,000 feet. For example, Goettsch Partners' Chicago Tower project could be an excellent choice not only for site 78 but also for McCormick's with excellent views of the lake as well as the city.

r18tdi · #**543** Posted **Nov 15, 2021, 6:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sky88

Building a 900-1,000 foot observation tower makes no sense as there are higher vantage points. The best would be to consider a tower that is taller, say 2,000 feet.

Pssh,why not 4,000 feet?

rgarri4 · #**544** Posted **Nov 16, 2021, 12:32 AM**

Is this proposal supposed to be on the north side of the 78? I know everything except for maybe the DPI is placeholder but this seems to go against there initial masterplan.

sentinel · #**545** Posted **Nov 16, 2021, 12:50 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rgarri4

Is this proposal supposed to be on the north side of the 78? I know everything except for maybe the DPI is placeholder but this seems to go against there initial masterplan.

Based on the rendering, I think it's located where the parabola shell structure would be..

galleyfox · #**546** Posted **Nov 16, 2021, 1:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel

Based on the rendering, I think it's located where the parabola shell structure would be..

Most of the casino and hotel is actually East of the extended Wells St. starting from Roosevelt. You can see the street parking in front of most of the structure in the rendering.

The observation tower is along the River next to Roosevelt.

The festival stage is where the shell structure in the rendering is.

Finally, the casino bridges over Wells St where the third structure along the river is.

sentinel · #**547** Posted **Nov 16, 2021, 2:11 AM**

Yeah, you are correct actually - looking at the images above, I didn't realize before that the casino and environs appear to extend over almost half of the riverfront Promenade..

Klippenstein · #**548** Posted **Nov 16, 2021, 4:28 AM**

Thanks for explaining galleyfox. I didn't see the road in the rendering before.

This means that much of the casino complex would be on the land where river once ran, which seemed like they were trying to avoid building on. Maybe since it's only the low rise portions it's not as much of an issue?

west-town-brad · #**549** Posted **Nov 16, 2021, 2:28 PM**

would be great if this casino design connects into the river walk, or can help fund some extension of it

sentinel · #**550** Posted **Nov 16, 2021, 2:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toasty Joe

looks more like 2/8 of the segments from the illustrated overhead ^^^

you mean 1/4?
(Sorry, I measure stuff all day long and I got a chuckle out of that)

Rizzo · #**551** Posted **Nov 16, 2021, 3:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel

you mean 1/4?
(Sorry, I measure stuff all day long and I got a chuckle out of that)

But we don’t say “it’s 1/4th city blocks in a mile”. We would say 2 of the 8 blocks are occupied by a new use for the sake of clarity. Although it’s pretty ambiguous regardless how this will be sited

ardecila · #**552** Posted **Nov 16, 2021, 3:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by west-town-brad

would be great if this casino design connects into the river walk, or can help fund some extension of it

I'm sure it would. The riverwalk along the front of the casino is surely included. There's room under Roosevelt viaduct to easily extend it north, but anything further would depend on CMK developing their property.

galleyfox · #**553** Posted **Nov 19, 2021, 6:13 PM**

More renderings for the proposals.

One Central - Hard Rock

McCormick Place - Rivers

The 78 - Rivers

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg...tails-released

twister244 · #**554** Posted **Nov 19, 2021, 6:24 PM**

Yep - 78 is now my official favorite. It's a great location, beautiful design. The Hard Rock is uninspiring. I'm way happier to see the 78 proposal look stunning than to have an unrealistic One Central Hard Rock look more beautiful.

thegoatman · #**555** Posted **Nov 19, 2021, 6:27 PM**

I'll be fine with any of them except the Lakeside Mccormick place one. If we're gonna build a casino we need to go big.

The 78 one looks amazing

left of center · #**556** Posted **Nov 19, 2021, 6:40 PM**

The more I see renderings of the 78 casino project, the more I like it. Its also probably more feasible simply because there are not as many residents that would abut the site to complain about it since much of the land there is either empty fields or commercial. We might get some bitching from the people at Dearborn Park, but the insular nature of their subdivision should shield those suburbanites from all the 'nasty' human activity. I especially love the integration with the river and riverwalk.

Is that exoskeleton tower's function to be an observation deck? I assume they could put restaurant/bar space up there s well. Depending on how high it'll would out being, you would get some fantastic views of downtown from there.

thegoatman · #**557** Posted **Nov 19, 2021, 6:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by left of center

The more I see renderings of the 78 casino project, the more I like it. Its also probably more feasible simply because there are not as many residents that would abut the site to complain about it since much of the land there is either empty fields or commercial. We might get some bitching from the people at Dearborn Park, but the insular nature of their subdivision should shield those suburbanites from all the 'nasty' human activity. I especially love the integration with the river and riverwalk.

Is that exoskeleton tower's function to be an observation deck? I assume they could put restaurant/bar space up there s well. Depending on how high it'll would out being, you would get some fantastic views of downtown from there.

Can we tear Dearborn Park up? I'm sure some developers can buy up all the properties and redevelop it. Real estate is too prime for some little 1 story townhomes.

But I agree, love the riverwalk integration. I honestly think with this the riverwalk could be extended all the way to Chinatown and the Architectural boat tours could come this way too.

twister244 · #**558** Posted **Nov 19, 2021, 6:48 PM**

I'm trying to figure out how tall that observation tower is based off the rendering. I am guessing north of 500 feet, but short of 800 feet. Hard to tell for sure. Also looking forward to night renderings to see how they envision it being lit up.

Randomguy34 · #**559** Posted **Nov 19, 2021, 7:04 PM**

The office tower to the east of the observation tower has been stated to be 50 stories (~750 ft). This suggests the observation tower is close to 1,000 ft.

nomarandlee · #**560** Posted **Nov 19, 2021, 7:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by thegoatman

I'll be fine with any of them except the Lakeside Mccormick place one. If we're gonna build a casino we need to go big.

The 78 one looks amazing

I understand wanting new and shiny toys. As much as I like the bold plans of the 78 proposal however I think the Lakeside may make the most practical sense. It could probably begin hosting in 3-6 months. Dollars could perhaps go a lot further in refurbishing Lakeside rather then building new.

It also may be the last best chance to stop the Lakeside Building from becoming a dilapidated black elephant.

No matter what proposal wins I think we shold be generally pleased given the preliminary designs