HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


View Poll Results: Which Chicago casino proposal is your favorite?
Ballys at Tribune 24 18.18%
Ballys at McCormick 6 4.55%
Hard Rock at One Central 7 5.30%
Rivers at The 78 75 56.82%
Rivers at McCormick 20 15.15%
Voters: 132. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #781  
Old Posted Dec 21, 2021, 6:54 PM
Klippenstein's Avatar
Klippenstein Klippenstein is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 275
Of course, Lakeshore East is great in terms of residential density, but it is pretty secluded and not very lively in terms of its commercial offerings. If having a casino here creates a more lively and connected district in an already disconnected part of the South Loop it seems like it might be a boon to future commercial development in the area. I also like how the new plan seems to be less like Lakeshore East in that it’s more crowded, messy and urban with smaller scattered parks and buildings conforming more to the grid.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #782  
Old Posted Dec 21, 2021, 7:00 PM
twister244 twister244 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klippenstein View Post
Of course, Lakeshore East is great in terms of residential density, but it is pretty secluded and not very lively in terms of its commercial offerings. If having a casino here creates a more lively and connected district in an already disconnected part of the South Loop it seems like it might be a boon to future commercial development in the area. I also like how the new plan seems to be less like Lakeshore East in that it’s more crowded, messy and urban with smaller scattered parks and buildings conforming more to the grid.
Agreed, and it's why I prefer the 78 plan. Again, the McCormick site will be just a standalone casino. It's not placed in a way that will facilitate any sort of integration with nearby neighborhoods. People will go there, gamble, then leave. If that's your preference for a casino in the city, then I can see why you gravitate towards it. I prefer something more integrated. The Hard Rock proposal seems DOA, unless the Bears pass a Hail Mary to integrate a new stadium into the plan. I don't like the Tribune site given the lack of space and location. The Bally's Yards plan looks nice, but we have already discussed how it will probably have to deal with a fight from neighbors.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #783  
Old Posted Dec 21, 2021, 11:51 PM
Briguy Briguy is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by twister244 View Post
Agreed, and it's why I prefer the 78 plan. Again, the McCormick site will be just a standalone casino. It's not placed in a way that will facilitate any sort of integration with nearby neighborhoods. People will go there, gamble, then leave. If that's your preference for a casino in the city, then I can see why you gravitate towards it. I prefer something more integrated. The Hard Rock proposal seems DOA, unless the Bears pass a Hail Mary to integrate a new stadium into the plan. I don't like the Tribune site given the lack of space and location. The Bally's Yards plan looks nice, but we have already discussed how it will probably have to deal with a fight from neighbors.
Tbh the trib site should be the new lakeshore east. with Fulton market booming that’s exactly where people will want to be if it wasn’t so desolate currently. Physically that location is unbeatable. WL has plenty of retail so this space make s a lot of sense for office/housing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #784  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2021, 1:31 AM
Toasty Joe Toasty Joe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Wicker Park, Chicago, IL
Posts: 370
The city shouldn't be putting all of its eggs in one basket here with a casino.... multiple licenses should be given. The UC lots would be a prime location for a multi-casino entertainment district, supported by year-round events (many non-Chicagoans) and accessible to Chicagoans.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #785  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2021, 2:52 AM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 26,271
^ it's not up to the city.

Casino licenses in Illinois are doled out by the state, and they're only offering one to Chicago, so.......
__________________
"every time a strip mall dies, an angel gets its wings"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #786  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2021, 5:51 PM
thegoatman thegoatman is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: chicago
Posts: 402
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiRy View Post
If a 78 casino leads to the rail yard being capped and developed, and the big box retail is pushed out, that would be great.
Can't believe so much of Chicago's waterfront is underutilized. Agree, the city needs to pull a Hudson Yards and just cap all those tracks. MASSIVE waste of prime real estate. Oh and while we're at it, go ahead and cap all those tracks by Grant Park and close down Columbus ave to car traffic and you have the world's best front yard.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #787  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2021, 12:01 AM
bnk's Avatar
bnk bnk is online now
પટેલ. કે ન
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: chicagoland
Posts: 11,890
my subscription expired, anyone care to share some insight in this crains article


https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg...ders-fight-win

Behind the scenes of Chicago's casino bid battle
Rivals and allies are busy taking shots at each other—some valid, some not. Here's an inside look at the fight to win a prized Chicago casino.


December 22, 2021 01:15 PM UPDATED 2 HOURS AGO


...









This site might sum it up





https://www.usbets.com/takeaways-dow...presentations/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #788  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2021, 1:23 AM
galleyfox galleyfox is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by bnk View Post
my subscription expired, anyone care to share some insight in this crains article


https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg...ders-fight-win

Behind the scenes of Chicago's casino bid battle
Rivals and allies are busy taking shots at each other—some valid, some not. Here's an inside look at the fight to win a prized Chicago casino.


December 22, 2021 01:15 PM UPDATED 2 HOURS AGO
It’s petty stuff

Quote:
In a new report made available to me, C3 Gaming Group, an industry consultancy working for Bally’s, projects that five years after opening, its casino by McCormick Place would have an effective tax on gross receipts of 32.7%, compared to 26.9% paid by Bluhm’s Rivers Casino in Des Plaines and 25.5% by Hard Rock’s outlet just over the Indiana border.
Quote:
Chris Jewett, Bally’s director of corporate development, replies that the firm recently completed work on a $150 million project in Rhode Island, and says that the marshaling yard property ultimately will be controlled by the agency that operates McCormick Place.
Quote:
Then there’s Nadhmi Auchi, the British businessman once convicted in France of accepting kickbacks. His company still controls the 78 property that Bluhm and Related Midwest are proposing to site the casino.

According to Bluhm, Auchi’s firm has agreed to sell the property to the new group for roughly $70 million. A spokesman for Related Midwest underlines that Auchi’s company, General Mediterranean Holding, will not have “any ownership or interest” in the proposed casino.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #789  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2021, 3:26 AM
generallogan generallogan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by galleyfox View Post

We’re quibbling about 5 minutes driving time between the 78 and McCormick Place, when the 78 should not be a driving destination at all.
This exactly. The 78 site should not be a driving destination, with only two access points, Wells/Wentworth and Roosevelt. Has anyone driven on Wells north of the 78 to Harrison? Not a road that screams easy access to a 24/7 casino. As transportation enthusiasts, I'd think most people on these boards would want the ultimate 78 site to be 80/20 public transportation/personal cars, and the site does indeed lend itself to this breakdown if built out as commercial/hotel/residential mix focusing on life sciences.

80/20 public/private transportation does not lend itself to a casino, in fact the opposite, with 80% of gamblers likely choosing to arrive by car. The LSD proposals can all be built with (or in the case of MPEA East already has) direct ramps from highways into parking lots. Again, this is what the target demographic Casino gambler (NON-Chicagoans from the suburbs or midwest) wants, easy access via a car.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #790  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2021, 4:40 AM
marothisu marothisu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 6,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by generallogan View Post
This exactly. The 78 site should not be a driving destination, with only two access points, Wells/Wentworth and Roosevelt. Has anyone driven on Wells north of the 78 to Harrison? Not a road that screams easy access to a 24/7 casino. As transportation enthusiasts, I'd think most people on these boards would want the ultimate 78 site to be 80/20 public transportation/personal cars, and the site does indeed lend itself to this breakdown if built out as commercial/hotel/residential mix focusing on life sciences.
While they are extending Wells and what you say is true, there's multiple other main roads in and out of downtown that serve the 78 either directly or very close - Roosevelt, State, Clark, etc are all well equipped technically and go right there or a block away.

In all honesty, none of these places are really ideal for anything traffic related. There will be people going to the 78 one who won't drive, but the traffic will be a nightmare there regardless (more than it already is in the area) and also in literally every other site.

When all is said and done, I actually don't think that the Marshalling Yards or McCormick are going to win. If you're thinking about the workers there and everyone's commitment to hiring people who need the jobs, you are going to make it more convenient for them to get to work in various modes of transit. Those who cannot afford a car are essentially shut out the Marshalling Yards easily. McCormick Place site is basically 1.5+ mile walk from the nearest CTA station. The 78 site is basically about a half mile away from the Roosevelt stop and close to 2 major interstates that serve the south and west sides too on top of that. If you're talking an equity game from who actually works there, which everyone has basically committed to then The 78 is the best bet for that by far.
__________________
Chicago Maps:
* New Construction https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...B0&usp=sharing
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #791  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2021, 5:02 AM
thegoatman thegoatman is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: chicago
Posts: 402
Quote:
Originally Posted by marothisu View Post
While they are extending Wells and what you say is true, there's multiple other main roads in and out of downtown that serve the 78 either directly or very close - Roosevelt, State, Clark, etc are all well equipped technically and go right there or a block away.

In all honesty, none of these places are really ideal for anything traffic related. There will be people going to the 78 one who won't drive, but the traffic will be a nightmare there regardless (more than it already is in the area) and also in literally every other site.

When all is said and done, I actually don't think that the Marshalling Yards or McCormick are going to win. If you're thinking about the workers there and everyone's commitment to hiring people who need the jobs, you are going to make it more convenient for them to get to work in various modes of transit. Those who cannot afford a car are essentially shut out the Marshalling Yards easily. McCormick Place site is basically 1.5+ mile walk from the nearest CTA station. The 78 site is basically about a half mile away from the Roosevelt stop and close to 2 major interstates that serve the south and west sides too on top of that. If you're talking an equity game from who actually works there, which everyone has basically committed to then The 78 is the best bet for that by far.
There will be a new red line station built at the 78, which is perfect.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #792  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2021, 5:30 AM
marothisu marothisu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 6,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegoatman View Post
There will be a new red line station built at the 78, which is perfect.
Right that too..
__________________
Chicago Maps:
* New Construction https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...B0&usp=sharing
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #793  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2021, 2:42 PM
OrdoSeclorum OrdoSeclorum is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 460
Quote:
Originally Posted by generallogan View Post
This exactly. The 78 site should not be a driving destination, with only two access points, Wells/Wentworth and Roosevelt. Has anyone driven on Wells north of the 78 to Harrison? Not a road that screams easy access to a 24/7 casino. As transportation enthusiasts, I'd think most people on these boards would want the ultimate 78 site to be 80/20 public transportation/personal cars, and the site does indeed lend itself to this breakdown if built out as commercial/hotel/residential mix focusing on life sciences.

80/20 public/private transportation does not lend itself to a casino, in fact the opposite, with 80% of gamblers likely choosing to arrive by car. The LSD proposals can all be built with (or in the case of MPEA East already has) direct ramps from highways into parking lots. Again, this is what the target demographic Casino gambler (NON-Chicagoans from the suburbs or midwest) wants, easy access via a car.
These arguments about "casinos need cars" are so strange. Sure, most people arrive to most crummy casinos in this country by car. And most people arrive to most hotels by personal car in this country. In Chicago, very few tourists, visitors and conventioneers are driving their personal cars around. Hotels need car access, but even a very large hotel like the Palmer House with over 1600 rooms doesn't cause traffic jams due to traffic because those 3500 guests and employees aren't arriving and leaving at the exact same time.

I've been in town when there's a huge convention, a U2 concert and a soccer game all going on on the same day and I barely even notice anything different. Chicago is a huge city. If the South Loop can accommodate 70,000 Bears fans all arriving and departing at the exact same time, a constant trickle of Ubers picking up and dropping off 1/20th the number over many hours few blocks away isn't going to be unworkable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #794  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2021, 4:21 PM
jpIllInoIs's Avatar
jpIllInoIs jpIllInoIs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by marothisu View Post
While they are extending Wells and what you say is true, there's multiple other main roads in and out of downtown that serve the 78 either directly or very close - Roosevelt, State, Clark, etc are all well equipped technically and go right there or a block away.

In all honesty, none of these places are really ideal for anything traffic related. There will be people going to the 78 one who won't drive, but the traffic will be a nightmare there regardless (more than it already is in the area) and also in literally every other site.

When all is said and done, I actually don't think that the Marshalling Yards or McCormick are going to win. If you're thinking about the workers there and everyone's commitment to hiring people who need the jobs, you are going to make it more convenient for them to get to work in various modes of transit. Those who cannot afford a car are essentially shut out the Marshalling Yards easily. McCormick Place site is basically 1.5+ mile walk from the nearest CTA station. The 78 site is basically about a half mile away from the Roosevelt stop and close to 2 major interstates that serve the south and west sides too on top of that. If you're talking an equity game from who actually works there, which everyone has basically committed to then The 78 is the best bet for that by far.
Roosevelt, Clark & State are not equipped to handle the number of tour busses that will be required to fill the casino. While the Rsvlt CTA station is an excellent feeder for pedestrians, we have to acknowledge the number of Hotel shuttles, and suburban shuttles that will be generated. The decking over of Wells street will most likely be the access for the busses. Cant imagine a graceful way to handle that traffic.

McMK has the dedicated bus lanes along the Metra row as well as a built out Cermack rd already handling this specialty traffic. And 78 has no equivalent to the LSD access and I55/94 access.

Be interesting to see the details from the developer on what their estimates are for each mode of transit usage.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #795  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2021, 4:31 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,327
Problem with the new 15th & Clark Red Line station is that it will be a long, lonely walk to the casino site at the 78. Maybe that will feel tolerable on a summer evening in 2055, once everything is built out and retail leased. But in the meantime, traversing the windswept wastes? That's not a walk that's going to seem appealing to any visitors. Same with the long walk up the Roosevelt viaduct from the Roosevelt stations. Yes, South Loopers going to Whole Foods do it, but we don't enjoy it.

The marshaling yards, like the Burnham Lakefront, is supposed to have a busway next to the IC tracks allowing south lakefront express buses to leave Pointe du Sable Lake Shore Drive at 31st and come downtown via a new busway with a couple of stations en route and then the McCormick Busway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #796  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2021, 4:50 PM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 1,665
A 3 block walk is hardly a long, lonely walk....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #797  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2021, 5:06 PM
jpIllInoIs's Avatar
jpIllInoIs jpIllInoIs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
A 3 block walk is hardly a long, lonely walk....
Have you seen the condition of casino creatures?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #798  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2021, 6:38 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: 2,316
There are buses to NWI casinos all along 90/94 south of 31st St that pick up south side residents 24/7. If those casinos can pay for the cost of shuttling people 10-15 miles, surely the casino at the 78 can economically operate small shuttle buses/vans that regularly take people to the Roosevelt stop, the future 15th red line stop, and even Union/Ogilvie for the suburban crowd.

Fact is, we are simply not going to find the "perfect site", one that site immediately on top of transit, is centrally located, has a large area to build on, is near other attractions/entertainment areas, is near large roadways, etc. We can only find the site that comes closest to meeting those criteria. The 78 comes pretty damn close, along with the McCormick spot which is 2nd in my opinion. The other sites, while they may excel in one or two areas, all have overall bigger problems that make them less viable options.
__________________
"Eventually, I think Chicago will be the most beautiful great city left in the world." -Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #799  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2022, 7:31 AM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 1,665
A website was created for Hard Rock's proposal 4 days ago. The website is very detailed and mentions that private capital is already secured for the project. The website's existence might not imply anything and be just for formality, but still, why only now make a public website? Hopefully this isn't a bad omen that the city is leaning towards One Central's proposal

Website: https://www.hardrockchicago.com/

Last edited by Randomguy34; Feb 6, 2022 at 7:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #800  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2022, 2:10 PM
jpIllInoIs's Avatar
jpIllInoIs jpIllInoIs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
A website was created for Hard Rock's proposal 4 days ago. The website is very detailed and mentions that private capital is already secured for the project. The website's existence might not imply anything and be just for formality, but still, why only now make a public website? Hopefully this isn't a bad omen that the city is leaning towards One Central's proposal

Website: https://www.hardrockchicago.com/
Well art least they preserve the "hallowed" parking lot. Imagine the uproar had the plan included developing the most sacred parking lot in Chicago, And the children what about the children?
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 4:29 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.