CHICAGO | City Casino

[west-town-brad]

if we care about preserving and re-using our historic built environment, the lakeside center would be the option to pick. it looks nice an fresh in the renderings, though not sure where the hotel goes.

https://preservationchicago.org/2016/03/04/lakeside-center/

the 78 option looks like some weird moon base to me. maybe its just the rendering. I want to like but it's starting to look a bit gimmicky the more I look at it.

[Kngkyle]

Disappointed by the Hard Rock proposal, very uninspiring and generic. The Bally's proposals have it slightly beat but both of their proposed locations are problematic for different reasons. I just can't see McCormick East becoming a Casino without 10 years of legal battles. The 78 is the best located, best architecture, and overall best proposal by a wide margin. It's also the only proposal including a unique attraction other than just gambling - the observation tower. It's a no brainer.

[marothisu]

The 78 one is the best and it's not even close. Build it.

[psxvz]

Originally Posted by thegoatman

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.

Amazing how casual people are about destroying neighborhoods.

I'm also surprised people think the 78 would be the easiest to build since it seems to be the one that would garner the most amount of community pushback.

[Randomguy34]

Dearborn Park is an exclusionary neighborhood that treats the rest of the city as outsiders through racist dog-whistling remarks. That should have no place in a city, let alone one as segregated as ours.

The 78 is in a separate ward, which is how it was able to be approved in the first place despite being next to Dearborn Park.

[southoftheloop]

I would also vote for 78, but the Lakeside Center option could end up being quite classy...

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by southoftheloop

I would also vote for 78, but the Lakeside Center option could end up being quite classy...

I can't remember, is the City going to put these out for public voting, even non-binding? Is that a thing, or am I imagining this?

[VKChaz]

Originally Posted by west-town-brad

if we care about preserving and re-using our historic built environment, the lakeside center would be the option to pick. it looks nice an fresh in the renderings, though not sure where the hotel goes.

https://preservationchicago.org/2016/03/04/lakeside-center/

the 78 option looks like some weird moon base to me. maybe its just the rendering. I want to like but it's starting to look a bit gimmicky the more I look at it.

If Lakeside doesn't happen, maybe this proposal at least gets more people thinking of reuse opportunties. Though money for repair needs to be part of the mix

[Randomguy34]

Originally Posted by sentinel

I can't remember, is the City going to put these out for public voting, even non-binding? Is that a thing, or am I imagining this?

The city is holding community meetings, as well as researching which location will be best, but the mayor has the final say on which proposal gets chosen. City Council still has to approve the proposal, where it then is eligible to get a license from the Illinois Gaming Board

[Handro]

The 78 is stunning. It looks worthy of a world class entertainment center for a world class city. I love the progressive design--Chicago doesn't get enough (any?) of that type of architecture for high-visibility projects these days.

Lakeside is also nice. From the limited vantage point a couple of renderings provides it seems to do a great job of leveraging its lakefront location.

Hard Rock proposal is bad, so it's good that it's probably the least likely. Also is that a surface parking lot they included right along the lake? Lol good luck with that, team.

EDIT: Oops, egg on my face, I just realized there is already a lot there according to google maps. Never noticed it from LSD before

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by Randomguy34

The city is holding community meetings, as well as researching which location will be best, but the mayor has the final say on which proposal gets chosen. City Council still has to approve the proposal, where it then is eligible to get a license from the Illinois Gaming Board

Thanks for clarifying, this is very much ringing a bell now..

[thegoatman]

What proposal y'all think is coming on top?

[Via Chicago]

i agree with the consensus that its a toss up between Lakeside Center if you prefer adaptive reuse of a historically significant structure, or the 78 if youre leaning more towards cutting edge neighborhoood transformation/"modern" architecture (as well as some actual public amenities like obso deck/new river walk). altho it is pretty JGMA circa 2010 lol.







will prob boil down to which one is easier to actually get off the ground, which prob gives the edge to LC

ballys and hard rock are just taking a tired Vegas aesthetic and plopping it in an urban environment, which makes both of them non-starters IMO

[chicubs111]

^ The 78 is light years away from the best spot and design and i dont know how anyone can say otherwise. If the city is gonna be looking for a iconic state of the art entertainment center is all about new construction and not reusing the lakeside center.

[marothisu]

Can someone explain to me the Lakesidr Center hype? Because I'm really not understanding what the big deal is..

[left of center]

I get the need to invest in the Lakeside Center, which apparently needs many millions of dollars in repairs to keep the building viable, but something about putting a casino on the lakefront seems tacky to me. We have a world class waterfront with a massive, nearly uninterrupted lakefront park system, and having a casino there just seems wrong. IMHO.

And yes, the river is technically our second waterfront, but its not nearly as high visibility as the lakefront in this instance.

Originally Posted by thegoatman

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.

Its funny you mention that, I have a realtor friend who works for @properties that says that's supposedly exactly what's going on. According to what he has heard, developers are buying up properties as they go to market and rent them out, waiting to get to a tipping point where they can demo the entire development. As this is all hearsay, take it with a grain of salt. Might actually be true, and might also be absolute nonsense. The optimist in me hopes its the former rather than the latter.

[Randomguy34]

^ If true, I could imagine a massive amount of residents selling their properties if The 78 gets the casino. Many residents would have their "suburban dream" disrupted and sell to whoever is fine living next to a casino + office district. Once a tipping point is reached, *boom* we end up with another megadevelopment. Maybe something akin to the original Dearborn Station redevelopment

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

But just for fun, here's Dearborn Station part deux, as proposed in 1923:

[CrazyCres]

Found some Executive summaries on all 5 projects.

Something to note is that the observation tower at Rivers 78 will be over 1,000ft tall according to the summary on page 2.

Summary of all Five Proposals:
https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/city...ses/2021/November/SummaryOfProposals.pdf

Ballys at Tribune:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Yzn8PJtRw_MFjiaQSzoGUcw3Wqb28TvY/view

Ballys at McCormick:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gcS5Yn0SZmxi_89HTFJnncAfvoPmpufF/view

Hard Rock:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WLedSQZwJuE808uc48yZB7agbZ5dC13X/view

Rivers at McCormick:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pysL84lwQNgjBhK0Byvk132rsQv7NSJm/view

Rivers at the 78:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RZxAApvLyKny5p0eNxoCXjGIf5shejzT/view

[Randomguy34]

Edit: CrazyCres beat me to it, here's two more interesting points along with some high-quality renderings I managed to extract:

- Hard Rock expects to conservatively bring in $355 million annually in tax revenue

- Bally's proposal with upfront pay the city a $50 million "incentive payment" if they get chosen







Summaries: https://www.chicago.gov/city/en/sites/chicago-casino/home/rfp.html

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by left of center

Its funny you mention that, I have a realtor friend who works for @properties that says that's supposedly exactly what's going on. According to what he has heard, developers are buying up properties as they go to market and rent them out, waiting to get to a tipping point where they can demo the entire development. As this is all hearsay, take it with a grain of salt. Might actually be true, and might also be absolute nonsense. The optimist in me hopes its the former rather than the latter.

First impression: unlikely. Unless it’s a very very recent trend.

I’m just glancing through the current titles on record for now, but the grantees look pretty typical for a downtown-ish neighborhood in Chicago. There’s not a disproportionate number of Trusts or LLCs or owners with multiple properties that I can see so far.