SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Development (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=86)
-   -   CHICAGO | City Casino (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=239761)

skysoar Aug 5, 2019 7:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiPlanner (Post 8649671)
Thoughts: CBOE HQ as a location for the Casino?
  • Access to LaSalle Street Station
  • Access to the Blue line at LaSalle
  • Downtown
  • Close to Union Station
  • Stradles Ida B. Wells (Congress)
  • Theoretical expansion onto the parking lots/garages adjacent or going over top of the Metra
  • Trading floors could transition to gambling venues

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

marothisu Aug 5, 2019 10:28 PM

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.

ardecila Aug 6, 2019 5:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marothisu (Post 8650180)
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...

Natoma Aug 6, 2019 7:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 8650863)
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).

jpIllInoIs Aug 9, 2019 12:27 AM

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.

r18tdi Aug 9, 2019 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs (Post 8653472)
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

Huh. :shrug:

marothisu Aug 9, 2019 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 8650863)
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...

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

glowrock Aug 9, 2019 8:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs (Post 8653472)
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.

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)

Freefall Aug 12, 2019 4:19 PM

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.

BonoboZill4 Aug 12, 2019 4:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freefall (Post 8655916)
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:

rlw777 Aug 12, 2019 4:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freefall (Post 8655916)
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.

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.

Freefall Aug 12, 2019 10:34 PM

You could throw in a new Metra stop too

maru2501 Aug 13, 2019 2:44 PM

Oops

and this was pretty obvious

Consultant says none of the five sites work

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

the urban politician Aug 13, 2019 2:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maru2501 (Post 8656831)
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.

Freefall Aug 13, 2019 6:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 8656840)
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:
Quote:

The [$1] per-person admission tax would be divided between Chicago, which would get 70 cents, and the villages of Maywood and Summit, which would each get 15 cents.
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?

the urban politician Aug 13, 2019 6:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freefall (Post 8657155)
This isn't a private operator negotiating. It's a feasibility study done by a third party consultant.

^ 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.

LouisVanDerWright Aug 13, 2019 9:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freefall (Post 8657155)
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?

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...

ardecila Aug 13, 2019 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright (Post 8657368)
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.

Quote:

https://thevillagefreepress.org/2019...hicago-casino/

Maywood’s cut would likely translate into millions of dollars a year in automatic revenue, said Senate Majority Leader Kimberly Lightford (4th) — a Maywood resident and the lawmaker most responsible for setting the village up for the potential financial windfall.

Lightford said that Maywood and Summit were selected based on the extent of their needs. The lawmaker cited a variety of criteria, such as poverty levels and even food desert status, to make the case for why those communities deserved a share of gambling revenue.

The arrangement isn’t new. When Rivers Casino in Des Plaines opened in 2011, the host city agreed to share some of the revenue it receives from the casino with 10 in-need South Suburban communities: Dixmoor, Ford Heights, Hodgkins, Phoenix, Robbins, Harvey, Markham, Riverdale, Summit and Chicago Heights.

From 2011 to 2017, those communities received nearly $32 million in casino income from Des Plaines, the Journal and Topics reported. Lightford referenced data that shows the running total could be nearly $48 million.

“I was really bothered by [the Rivers City revenue-sharing arrangement], because Des Plaines feeds into the West Suburbs — not the South Suburbs,” Lightford said, adding that she was determined to make sure that the West Suburbs aren’t overlooked this time around.
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...

nomarandlee Aug 13, 2019 11:57 PM

A report without much surprise in it.

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

Chicago has a rare opportunity to be create a large, urban “Las Vegas Strip style urban casino in a major metropolitan area,” the report says.

“As such, to the extent there are any proposals from casino developers that approximate a Las Vegas Strip style casino resort we would expect the location to be more centrally located in close proximity to existing tourism infrastructure, or at least skewed in a direction that is less penetrated with existing and future casino ventures than the areas to the south of Chicago,” the report says.


skysoar Aug 14, 2019 2:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomarandlee (Post 8657551)
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.


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:21 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.