CHICAGO | City Casino

[thegoatman]

Originally Posted by marothisu

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

Agree, easily the most basic and boring of the bunch. Really hope the 78 one gets picked. beautiful riverfront location, new riverwalk, and a supertall? sign me up

[Kngkyle]

The Bally's upfront payments are amusing. Yea our proposals kind of suck in comparison but we'll give you an extra $50M to pick us. Hope the city doesn't fall for that.

[ChiTownWonder]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I disagree. Putting the casino in South Loop or One Central doesn't do anything for the parts of the South Side that are actually struggling. A casino can open up hiring to people from all parts of the city, no matter what side of Madison it sits on. What South Loop needs is more good urbanism and infill. A suburban-format casino will only hurt the area (the city has laid out ambitious design goals but I'm skeptical these will actually have an impact - get ready for a turd like this).

Oddly enough ardecila seemed to predict what the 78 proposal would be like. Different scale and image but it functions more like the example than the other proposals. Lakeside is the way to go, the 78 looks like a crossover episode of "Black Mirror" and "Love Island." And I don't like how it doesn't seem to promote any flow from the street behind it to that extravagant riverfront, other than through the building itself of course. At least we could get an endangered building restored.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by ChiTownWonder

Oddly enough ardecila seemed to predict what the 78 proposal would be like. Different scale and image but it functions more like the example than the other proposals. Lakeside is the way to go, the 78 looks like a crossover episode of "Black Mirror" and "Love Island." And I don't like how it doesn't seem to promote any flow from the street behind it to that extravagant riverfront, other than through the building itself of course. At least we could get an endangered building restored.

It seems like you did not realize that a lot of the buildings in The 78 rendering aren't even accurate to the current buildings anywhere in the actual view of the renderings..minus a few well known and iconic buildings.

I'd take that with a grain of salt.

[west-town-brad]

Originally Posted by marothisu

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

simple. the city has been looking for a use for the historic lakeside facility for what, 20 years now?

and if you want a facility that is "uniquely chicago" it's hard to beat the LC option

[west-town-brad]

Originally Posted by 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.

the option must be compared to what is there now, an empty unused building. we cant compare a casino in LC to an uninterrupted lakefront, because that is not going to happen, nor is it the current state.

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.

real estate agents are so cute....

[west-town-brad]

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

The Bally's upfront payments are amusing. Yea our proposals kind of suck in comparison but we'll give you an extra $50M to pick us. Hope the city doesn't fall for that.

the city can easily use that as a negotiation tactic to get something more out of any of the bidders

[southoftheloop]

Originally Posted by west-town-brad

simple. The city has been looking for a use for the historic lakeside facility for what, 20 years now?

And if you want a facility that is "uniquely chicago" it's hard to beat the lc option

+1

[left of center]

Originally Posted by west-town-brad

the option must be compared to what is there now, an empty unused building. we cant compare a casino in LC to an uninterrupted lakefront, because that is not going to happen, nor is it the current state.

Is LC currently not used at all for conventions? Another concern of mine was if LC was used, where would McCormick Place replace that 1 million+ sqft of exhibition space.

Originally Posted by west-town-brad

real estate agents are so cute....

Again, its all hearsay. He hates Dearborn Park as much as most of us do; it was a fun conversation to have over a few beers.

[rivernorthlurker]

Originally Posted by west-town-brad

simple. the city has been looking for a use for the historic lakeside facility for what, 20 years now?

and if you want a facility that is "uniquely chicago" it's hard to beat the LC option

Yeah in retrospect LC makes almost too much sense... Next to McCormick main and Soldier Field and Wintrust Arena. It's a de facto 'entertainment district' already. And can use the Hyatt McCormick too - maybe they can get in on a deal somehow as well.

Additionally it could be feasible to do a ferry from Navy Pier to the LC casino which would just put the icing on the cake. Even I'd enjoy riding that.

[Chicago_Forever]

Go 78 or go home!

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by ChiTownWonder

Oddly enough ardecila seemed to predict what the 78 proposal would be like. Different scale and image but it functions more like the example than the other proposals. Lakeside is the way to go, the 78 looks like a crossover episode of "Black Mirror" and "Love Island." And I don't like how it doesn't seem to promote any flow from the street behind it to that extravagant riverfront, other than through the building itself of course. At least we could get an endangered building restored.

The 78 casino plan is not growing on me the way I hoped. For one, it craps all over the city's investment in Wells-Wentworth. That was supposed to be a grand boulevard, but this decks over it like it was Lower Wacker or something. Buildings should not deck over major streets, and when it's unavoidable to do this then the connection should be a narrow glass skybridge like the ones at Northwestern or Rush hospitals. This whole thing is just a typical casino turd in deconstructivist clothing. Terrible urban design despite a few gestures like the riverfront plaza.

I had such high hopes that The 78 could be our version of a European ecodistrict, a mix of highrises and midrises with strong public space/green space, livability, and transit access. This casino shows that Related doesn't really care about any of that.

I'm gonna stick with my first pick and go with the Tribune site, especially if Bally's picks up the tab for a new footbridge at Erie. That's also a hulk, but at least it's no worse than the hulk that's already there (Tribune plant) and can offer synergies to an existing neighborhood.

[CrazyCres]

How can I create a poll to discover which proposal is the most popular?

[southoftheloop]

I'd place good money that the city goes with Lakeside Center....it's an instant solution to a problem without other apparent remedies

[twister244]

Originally Posted by southoftheloop

I'd place good money that the city goes with Lakeside Center....it's an instant solution to a problem without other apparent remedies

I don't have anything against a proposal in LC..... Never mind, I do have something against it. Based off the renderings I have seen, BLEH.

It just doesn't get me excited. It looks like they half-assed a proposal knowing it won't go anywhere since LC requires so much investment. Like... they threw some lighting and white paint on the ceiling with a Rivers logo on the glass wall. The outside rendering shows nothing aside from retrofitting the existing building with a slab of paint, glass, and some lighting. There's absolutely nothing that draws me into that proposal. I get that LC should be leveraged for something grand, but a Rivers Casino? Really?

TBH though, the the Tribune Ballys site isn't far from the LC proposal for me. That's another one that just doesn't get me excited. It's not the best location to me, and it feels squeezed. I put it slightly above LC, but still below Hard Rock.

For me, 78 is my top favorite, followed by Bally's McCormick proposal.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by ardecila

The 78 casino plan is not growing on me the way I hoped. For one, it craps all over the city's investment in Wells-Wentworth. That was supposed to be a grand boulevard, but this decks over it like it was Lower Wacker or something. Buildings should not deck over major streets, and when it's unavoidable to do this then the connection should be a narrow glass skybridge like the ones at Northwestern or Rush hospitals. This whole thing is just a typical casino turd in deconstructivist clothing. Terrible urban design despite a few gestures like the riverfront plaza.

I had similar reservations when I first saw the renderings.

Despite the depiction of crowds, there’s nothing to actually draw and keep crowds by the riverfront except for the observation tower. It’s not like there’s a wonderful view on the other side, and almost all the shops, cafes, and entertainment are across the street and most probably inside the casino complex. The other sides of the building look to be blank walls as well.

[SIGSEGV]

Crazy idea: hotel component in the middle of DSLD (maybe decked over in parts). There's enough of a median that it's probably not completely impossible, though access would be... strange.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by twister244

I don't have anything against a proposal in LC..... Never mind, I do have something against it. Based off the renderings I have seen, BLEH.

It just doesn't get me excited. It looks like they half-assed a proposal knowing it won't go anywhere since LC requires so much investment. Like... they threw some lighting and white paint on the ceiling with a Rivers logo on the glass wall. The outside rendering shows nothing aside from retrofitting the existing building with a slab of paint, glass, and some lighting. There's absolutely nothing that draws me into that proposal. I get that LC should be leveraged for something grand, but a Rivers Casino? Really?

TBH though, the the Tribune Ballys site isn't far from the LC proposal for me. That's another one that just doesn't get me excited. It's not the best location to me, and it feels squeezed. I put it slightly above LC, but still below Hard Rock.

For me, 78 is my top favorite, followed by Bally's McCormick proposal.

I think we both agree about Lakeside. it looks exactly like what it is - someone repurposed an convention space for a casino and put almost no thought into it. Probably costs the least of the bunch, which also means it gives the least amount of opportunity for people to get jobs around construction (plenty i'm sure.. still but not as much as making a brand new building).

[Randomguy34]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Crazy idea: hotel component in the middle of DSLD (maybe decked over in parts). There's enough of a median that it's probably not completely impossible, though access would be... strange.

For a 20-year installment of only $6.5 billion, the city and state could go for One Central

[generallogan]

The idea for the casino is to bring gamblers from the suburbs and outside of the city. Easy access to these customers should be the #1 priority. Gamblers with wads of money to or hopefully from the casino should not/will not be boarding the red line to take a leisurely train ride home.

Security has to the a huge priority for a casino, and most of the time that is provided by the physical distance it takes to get there. Most new casinos are built blocks off the strip in Vegas, not with their casino immediately facing the strip. Or park car, walk walk walk, then casino. That whole inward facing thing serves a security aspect as well as a no daylight goal.

Roosevelt is already bumper to bumper from the highway most of the day. Wells wentworth is too narrow for the amount of new traffic from the north or south approaching the site.

The only site that can realistically provide security, easy highway access, robust parking, and room for future experience (there will be more casinos in Chicago's future if this is a success) is the truckyards south of mccormick. Sophia King will come around.