Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyNYC
I have no problem with the location.. means nothing to me that it would be next door to the UN. In my eyes, way better location then Nassau County, Citifield and Coney Island.
|
The location is terrible because there's no subway, or any type of major mass transit. It's not geared up for the throngs of people a casino needs to attract. Coney Island is better than most, save for Times Square as far as that goes. And that area is an absolute no-go during General Assembly Week. Build the market rate residential, which it's zoned for, and keep the designs as sharp.
As for the known (or supposed) bidders, the only reason I would put this ahead of Citifield is because that location is park land - even though it's a parking lot. It would first take a state action to rezone it, and they aren't doing that. Cohen should have tried to swap places with the soccer stadium. Getting a location to hold the casino is the first step to even putting together a proposal. Which is why it was important for the Sands to get the land agreement in Nassau county, and why Bally's got the golf course in the Bronx. But that Bronx location is further removed than even this one.
I would be very surprised if either of the 2 "racinos" got a license. It's often repeated in the media that they are the favorites, but only because they haven't read the RFP.
70% of the bid will be based heavily on economic development (NEW development as well as spillover to other local businesses), and the number of jobs created.
This is a large plot of land that needs to be developed, but there's really nothing surrounding it that would benefit from having the added casino and it's visitors there, nor much of a reason for tourists to be over there. There are just too many better options. They need locations with and that can support high volumes of people coming and going.