HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development


View Poll Results: Which Chicago casino proposal is your favorite?
Ballys at Tribune 28 19.58%
Ballys at McCormick 7 4.90%
Hard Rock at One Central 9 6.29%
Rivers at The 78 79 55.24%
Rivers at McCormick 20 13.99%
Voters: 143. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #481  
Old Posted Oct 31, 2021, 3:02 PM
VKChaz VKChaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: California
Posts: 526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
^ Now that you mention it, there aren't many nearby sites for the McCormick/Lakeside proposals to fulfill the hotel component of the RFP. Crains mentioned rumors about One Central being connected to the casino bid in some way, so maybe they're providing the hotel connection while the actual casino is in McCormick/Lakeside.
Did someone trying to add a hotel component or make a casino bid perhaps have something to do with One Central efforts in Springfield recently? Who knows. But hotel connections already exist through McCormick so that kind of thing can be used but doesn't seem true to the intent of a hotel/casino combination
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #482  
Old Posted Oct 31, 2021, 3:43 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 1,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by VKChaz View Post
Did someone trying to add a hotel component or make a casino bid perhaps have something to do with One Central efforts in Springfield recently? Who knows. But hotel connections already exist through McCormick so that kind of thing can be used but doesn't seem true to the intent of a hotel/casino combination
Yeah, the RFP asked for a new hotel with at least 500 rooms, meeting space, restaurants, bars, and entertainment venues in order to have a successful casino-resort. The city said they'll accept proposals with less than 500 rooms, but strongly recommends a bid meets the threshold in order to be successful.

The above requirements would also explain why recent news on One Central focuses heavily on its retail and entertainment venues.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #483  
Old Posted Oct 31, 2021, 4:29 PM
galleyfox galleyfox is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kngkyle View Post
Not a fan of either the Tribune or Marshalling Yard sites. Of the two I'd give the nod to the Marshalling Yard simply because there's no hope of that scar being developed in the next 30 years otherwise.

The other three sites are all better - The 78, McCormick (east?), and One Central (if this is the Hard Rock bid? I'd be surprised if there was no bid for One Central).
I most support the casino going on land with lower prospects for development in this century.

I oppose a casino going on the 78 unless it’s on the level of Singapore’s Marina Bay Sands. A low-rise casino complex with a single tower or two is a waste of high-potential land. The 78 is perfectly capable of creating a high rise river canyon on its own.

As for Hard Rock, the CEO claimed Friday that the project would be “many, many billions”, so it sounds pretty substantial.


Quote:
Frankly, working with the city and understanding what they were looking for, not just a casino, but a true entertainment destination – obviously, no one in the world does it as well as Hard Rock,” Allen said at the grand opening celebration for the Hard Rock Cincinnati Casino. “So, we’re not suggesting we’re going to win. But certainly our brand is more than just gaming. And that’s something we think matters to the city of Chicago.”

“The Hard Rock Hotel in Orlando is all about families. So, certainly, Gary and Rockford would be similar to Cincinnati, a little bit more regional-focused. Certainly, Chicago is an international city. Without getting into the details of our proposal, it is much larger, many, many billions (of dollars) as far as the project size itself.”
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cas...o-license/amp/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #484  
Old Posted Oct 31, 2021, 6:36 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Briguy View Post
They absolutely CANNOT put what looks to be a 1500+ car garage at halsted and Chicago. No freaking way. No way on this damn earth. Halsted is a parking lot as is from 3pm to 8pm from lake to Fullerton.

Halsted is the only n-s road between the north side and west side between lasalle and Ashland. I can barely ride my bike through the traffic as is. This proposal will also nix any possibility of a north branch transit way.

Not to mention there should be 10000 housing units and several million ft2 offices on that site.

This is the worst proposal for what is probably the best site left in Chicago. We are not some bombed out Detroit or Cincinnati whoring their best sites out to the highest bidder for a few million dollars.


Could not think of a worse idea.
Too soon to get hung up about traffic, we don’t have enough information.

We don’t know for sure what the access situation would be to the Trib site but there appears to be a new road in the rendering leading south to Grand or maybe some new Ohio Feeder ramps if there is room.

Also the aerial rendering of Ballys Tribune (not posted in this thread) shows a red-paved road that sure looks like a transitway, so I don’t think they’re closing off the possibility for that to be built in the future.

__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...

Last edited by ardecila; Oct 31, 2021 at 6:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #485  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2021, 3:32 AM
bnk's Avatar
bnk bnk is offline
પટેલ. કે ન
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: chicagoland
Posts: 12,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by galleyfox View Post
I most support the casino going on land with lower prospects for development in this century.

I oppose a casino going on the 78 unless it’s on the level of Singapore’s Marina Bay Sands. A low-rise casino complex with a single tower or two is a waste of high-potential land. The 78 is perfectly capable of creating a high rise river canyon on its own.

As for Hard Rock, the CEO claimed Friday that the project would be “many, many billions”, so it sounds pretty substantial.




https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cas...o-license/amp/

Exciting times. It feels like this is finally going to happen.

I'd love details of all of the bids when they are ready and I hope they keep it open to the public eye.

If a home town insider takes this and a Hard Rock or someone else is clearly better, sunshine and light is the best way to clear the room for clarity.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #486  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2021, 3:20 PM
Handro Handro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by galleyfox View Post
I most support the casino going on land with lower prospects for development in this century.
100% agree and I think the (justified, in this case) NIMBY pushback to a River North casino will make that location a no-go. I would bet this ends up near McCormick--it makes too much sense as an out-of-towner entertainment district.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #487  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 6:20 PM
left of center's Avatar
left of center left of center is offline
1st Ward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Big Onion
Posts: 2,459
I agree, the Marshalling Yards could be a big megadevelopment play with many/multiple tall towers. To have a such a low rise development with one single hotel tower would be a waste on such a prominent site.
__________________
"Eventually, I think Chicago will be the most beautiful great city left in the world." -Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #488  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 6:26 PM
sentinel's Avatar
sentinel sentinel is offline
Plenary pleasures.
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by left of center View Post
I agree, the Marshalling Yards could be a big megadevelopment play with many/multiple tall towers. To have a such a low rise development with one single hotel tower would be a waste on such a prominent site.
Perhaps, but also perhaps more tax revenue can be generated by the casino and hotel, as compared to residential highrises, not to mention that a pretty sizable residential and commercial development is already in the works directly west of the marshalling yards. A casino and hotel makes more sense to me for that area primarily because of proximity to McCormick Place..and if city planners were really smart, they should consider studying how to create a true South Loop entertainment district that can be built up over 10-15 years. A massive place like Chicago can easily have multiple entertainment districts, like all big cities throughout the world. I don't understand the preoccupation with focusing on just River North as the primary entertainment/nightlife center of the City..that's very small thinking..
__________________
Don't be shy. Step into the light.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #489  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 7:03 PM
sentinel's Avatar
sentinel sentinel is offline
Plenary pleasures.
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcp View Post
You mean, like One Central

More tax revenue maybe, but don't want that steering the ship when the late-phase of the 31st street project already includes high-rises (granted, way off in the future)
Don't even get me started on One Central lol
I hope it never happens.
__________________
Don't be shy. Step into the light.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #490  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 7:21 PM
VKChaz VKChaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: California
Posts: 526
Quote:
Originally Posted by sentinel View Post
Don't even get me started on One Central lol
I hope it never happens.
Maybe not that specific plan, but something needs to happen there eventually. Even now, some of the opposition may be people not wanting to lose their views or have entertainment in their midst.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #491  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 7:33 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,546
How unrealistic would it be for the casino to take over (part of?) the McCormick West building and for McCormick Place to develop the Marshalling Yards as a replacement?
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #492  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 7:39 PM
galleyfox galleyfox is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 787
Quote:
In one development, Florida-based Hard Rock disclosed it wants to put its proposed casino at One Central, the multi-use megadevelopment being pitched by developer Bob Dunn on air rights over Metra Electric tracks just west of Soldier Field.
Quote:
In another, Chicago casino developer Neil Bluhm lifted the veil on his surprise bid to build a casino on the South Side lakefront, in Lakeside Center, the historic but obsolete building that is the easternmost structure in the McCormick Place Campus.
https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg...w-bears-factor
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #493  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 7:46 PM
marothisu marothisu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 6,567
LOL this One Central saga. All I have to ask is wtf? One minute it's real then it's not then it's real again then not and then it's back to maybe being real?
__________________
Chicago Maps:
* New Construction https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...B0&usp=sharing
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #494  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 7:51 PM
VKChaz VKChaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: California
Posts: 526
Quote:
Originally Posted by sentinel View Post
Perhaps, but also perhaps more tax revenue can be generated by the casino and hotel, as compared to residential highrises, not to mention that a pretty sizable residential and commercial development is already in the works directly west of the marshalling yards. A casino and hotel makes more sense to me for that area primarily because of proximity to McCormick Place..and if city planners were really smart, they should consider studying how to create a true South Loop entertainment district that can be built up over 10-15 years. A massive place like Chicago can easily have multiple entertainment districts, like all big cities throughout the world. I don't understand the preoccupation with focusing on just River North as the primary entertainment/nightlife center of the City..that's very small thinking.
If it is the Tribune site, that isn't exactly RN. That location could create a kind of cluster with RN and Fulton Market for restaurants and entertainment. Halsted creates something of a link to Fulton, plus Greektown is in the mix. Not too far north is activity around North Ave and Halsted. Also some commercial space along West Grand might provide an opportunity. I agree with the general point of small city thinking.

I am not familiar enough with what is around the area or planned, but I wonder if the Marshalling Yards would provide an impetus for more adjacent entertainment or just be an island. The location of 78 at least looks like it could be integrated into the urban fabric. I also wonder what the impact is of plopping it into a more fully developed area vs one that is more nascent. And would it have any impact on how future development unfolded.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #495  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 8:19 PM
BrinChi BrinChi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 397
Great - Lakeside Center is one of my top choices mostly because it ensures that building is preserved. And if it an expansion could kick off One Central I wouldn't complain either. I'm good with One Central as long as the public isn't taking the financial risk, and there's a well thought out plan for integrating into our existing transportation network.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #496  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 9:01 PM
west-town-brad west-town-brad is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 864
so all of these "bids" are for putting a casino in a location that is not owned or controlled in any way by the "bidder"?

kind of weird...

if you win the bid, but can't secure the location you suggested in the bid, do you still get the license?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #497  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 9:15 PM
sentinel's Avatar
sentinel sentinel is offline
Plenary pleasures.
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by VKChaz View Post
If it is the Tribune site, that isn't exactly RN. That location could create a kind of cluster with RN and Fulton Market for restaurants and entertainment. Halsted creates something of a link to Fulton, plus Greektown is in the mix. Not too far north is activity around North Ave and Halsted. Also some commercial space along West Grand might provide an opportunity. I agree with the general point of small city thinking.

I am not familiar enough with what is around the area or planned, but I wonder if the Marshalling Yards would provide an impetus for more adjacent entertainment or just be an island. The location of 78 at least looks like it could be integrated into the urban fabric. I also wonder what the impact is of plopping it into a more fully developed area vs one that is more nascent. And would it have any impact on how future development unfolded.
C'mon, that's splitting hairs - it's literally across the north branch of the river from River North, it's close enough in terms of proximity.

I'm talking a good distance away, like where McCormick place is located, stretching south on top of the marshalling yards, all the way to 31st St.

Not everyone in the City or even surrounding suburbs wants to be in River North. Why shouldn't Chicago have separate entertainment districts separate from one another? It's clearly big and complex enough to support distinct areas, especially if the demand is there (and it is).
__________________
Don't be shy. Step into the light.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #498  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 9:25 PM
VKChaz VKChaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: California
Posts: 526
Quote:
Originally Posted by sentinel View Post
C'mon, that's splitting hairs - it's literally across the north branch of the river from River North, it's close enough in terms of proximity.

I'm talking a good distance away, like where McCormick place is located, stretching south on top of the marshalling yards, all the way to 31st St.

Not everyone in the City or even surrounding suburbs wants to be in River North. Why shouldn't Chicago have separate entertainment districts separate from one another? It's clearly big and complex enough to support distinct areas, especially if the demand is there (and it is).
The point isn't to split hairs. Neighborhood names are inconsequential. The center of gravity of RN is clearly apart from the Tribune site. The point I will reiterate is about a ring of somewhat interconnecting areas that may be able to create a sum greater than the parts and offer further adjacent areas for similar development.
Regardless, other areas of entertainment are fine and could be welcome, but the city and private sector need to get behind it. And a casino located to the south doesn't ensure anything in the way of an entertainment area apart from the casino itself.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #499  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 9:56 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 1,984
If Hard Rock at One Central gets chosen, that's going down as the funniest saga in the city's planning history. Imagine being an urban planning major in 2065 and you read a chapter starting with "The city and state was so desperate for tax revenue from a casino that they gave a development $6.5 billion in tax revenue"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #500  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 10:17 PM
Mister Uptempo's Avatar
Mister Uptempo Mister Uptempo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrinChi View Post
Great - Lakeside Center is one of my top choices mostly because it ensures that building is preserved. And if it an expansion could kick off One Central I wouldn't complain either. I'm good with One Central as long as the public isn't taking the financial risk, and there's a well thought out plan for integrating into our existing transportation network.
Lakeside Center has a lot going for it. Most likely the gaming floor would be in Exhibition Hall D on Level 3 of Lakeside. 300,000 sq ft with 50 foot ceilings and only 8 support columns to work around-
Add the lobby/ballroom immediately to the south of Hall D, which is connected to the rest of McCormick Place via the SkyBridge, and you add another 50,000 sq ft. At 350,000 sq ft, it would immediately become one of the largest gaming floors in the US, possibly too much gaming floor to start, as a number of gaming positions awarded to the city are intended to be located at O'Hare and Midway.

Despite its size, Hall D, with its massive walls of windows, has a light, airy quality about it. But casino owners do everything within their power to control the players' environment, which means the windows get blacked out or they locate restaurants and lounges around the perimeter, which will have much the same effect. I hope it can be pulled off without Lakeside looking like a mausoleum from the outside.

Having the 4200-seat Arie Crown Theater is another plus, having the potential to draw people into the casino who otherwise might never consider going there. I can recall at Horseshoe in Hammond that whenever there was a performance at The Venue, the table minimums on the main floor were raised about 20 minutes before the house let out.

One drawback I see is that the entrance to Arie Crown is located on Level 2. There is an exhibition space on Level 2, Hall E, but the ceilings are only 15 feet high and is a forest of columns. They'll have to find a way to drive that theater crowd onto the gaming floor. Hall E would be best used for back of house operations.

I'll be interested to see how Bluhm/Rush Street proposes to build a 500-room hotel on site.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:55 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.