Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
With O'Hare, I was actually thinking connected to the airport directly or even machines within the airport. Still, that's not nearly as good as an actual resort casino.
Dont rule out Ohare as there is room to work a building in. Especially as the terminal upgrade plans are fluid and the western transportation link is in progress. Additionally, a buyout of the Hilton could be done. Just food for thought.
Reese is a Bad Choice
The Michael Reese location seems great due to proximity to McCormick Place and downtown but is a TERRIBLE location. The casino needs to be (1) close to an El stop (2) close to a major highway and then (3) close to downtown in that order. The Reese site is way too far from the El and I'd rather see the casino right off 90/94 or 290. We also don't need to be crowding the prime lakefront area with less desirable things like a casino when high rises will surely fill in on their own.
Taylor is Best out of Five
Out of the five locations the old Taylor Homes makes the most sense cause it satisfies all three criteria above and is close to Sox Park. With 81 home games fans can spill out and fill in the casino. Look at what Pittsburgh did with a casino right near it's football and baseball stadiums.
Best Site in Chicago
The BEST site would be near the United Center. Soooo much open land to fill in on immediate west side. Bulls, Blackhawks and concerts spilling out all winter to fill in the casino. And you have 290 and the blue/pink/green lines to take anyone there from all over the city (including tourists). And it's relatively safe for the tourist crowds and would create an even better connection between downtown and the west side.
Dont rule out Ohare as there is room to work a building in. Especially as the terminal upgrade plans are fluid and the western transportation link is in progress. Additionally, a buyout of the Hilton could be done. Just food for thought.
But what would be the point? The city is already allowed to have gaming at O’Hare and Midway...thus giving the city three sites. By putter ng a casino in the airpot, you shoot yourself in the foot with three venues turned into two
Besides, congestion arose nd O’Hare is already a nightmere. Why add a full casino, a nonflight related activity which would one make already bad crowding worse
I think extremely congested areas like O’Hare and the Loop are bad locales for a casno. First off, they unnecessarily make things more conjested. Second parking is exorbitant Detroit may be able to have its casinos downtown, but Detroit is not Chicago and its core far less dense and crowded
I really believe Michael Reese is by far the best site, the one that lets you have your cake and eat it. Reese is on the fringe of the downtown area (North to Cermak are reasonable extremities for the greater downtown area. And with McCormick Place close by, you would get both downtown conventioneers and tourists...that vaunted out of towners tax money feeding in
Reese gives you not only downtown but the lakefront and the possibility of a new Metra stop near Soldier Field The casino would have a hotel that would be a success by location and incredible views
And with Reese, you get another sought after piece of the puzzle. Reese is downtown fringe it is also South Side..and putting a casino on the South or West sides was a goal
Reese is a Bad Choice
The Michael Reese location seems great due to proximity to McCormick Place and downtown but is a TERRIBLE location. The casino needs to be (1) close to an El stop (2) close to a major highway and then (3) close to downtown in that order. The Reese site is way too far from the El and I'd rather see the casino right off 90/94 or 290. We also don't need to be crowding the prime lakefront area with less desirable things like a casino when high rises will surely fill in on their own.
Taylor is Best out of Five
Out of the five locations the old Taylor Homes makes the most sense cause it satisfies all three criteria above and is close to Sox Park. With 81 home games fans can spill out and fill in the casino. Look at what Pittsburgh did with a casino right near it's football and baseball stadiums.
Best Site in Chicago
The BEST site would be near the United Center. Soooo much open land to fill in on immediate west side. Bulls, Blackhawks and concerts spilling out all winter to fill in the casino. And you have 290 and the blue/pink/green lines to take anyone there from all over the city (including tourists). And it's relatively safe for the tourist crowds and would create an even better connection between downtown and the west side.
Reese is a bad location only if there isn’t a good transit connection for tourists—it takes essentially making a Metra Electric 16th street connector running to Union Station and beyond (specifically to the airport), upping service frequency and negotiating for the South Shore Line Service to allow pick up northbound within Chicago and alighting when southbound in Chicago. These are things that should be done regardless. If they aren’t done, then yea, it’s not as good of an option.
The problem with having it near the stadiums is that it again becomes a locals casino though better as one would assume people going to events there have some disposable income. However, what would make casinos most worthwhile is being able to attract well-heeled people from outside of Chicagoland. A resort casino done at Michael Reese straddling the tracks/station to the other side can be a high-rise making it an attractant with lake views and a fairly close view of the downtown skyline. If it’s done well enough, then convention goers could potentially spend quite a bit there. The problem is if it’s even able to be pushed through as such because a much lesser version of this then becomes impossible to be this larger attractant and then devolves into a locals mostly casino which isn’t of much good.
Reese is a bad location only if there isn’t a good transit connection for tourists—it takes essentially making a Metra Electric 16th street connector running to Union Station and beyond (specifically to the airport), upping service frequency and negotiating for the South Shore Line Service to allow pick up northbound within Chicago and alighting when southbound in Chicago. These are things that should be done regardless. If they aren’t done, then yea, it’s not as good of an option.
The problem with having it near the stadiums is that it again becomes a locals casino though better as one would assume people going to events there have some disposable income. However, what would make casinos most worthwhile is being able to attract well-heeled people from outside of Chicagoland. A resort casino done at Michael Reese straddling the tracks/station to the other side can be a high-rise making it an attractant with lake views and a fairly close view of the downtown skyline. If it’s done well enough, then convention goers could potentially spend quite a bit there. The problem is if it’s even able to be pushed through as such because a much lesser version of this then becomes impossible to be this larger attractant and then devolves into a locals mostly casino which isn’t of much good.
You have to have the El and a major highway near it. The infrastructure you're talking about building out is not realistic. Unless you build out a feeder El track connecting the red/green line to Soldier and on down to the casino it makes no sense at the Reese site.
Tourists and well-heeled people go to sports games alllll the time. Stadiums are literally tearing out seats to build more suites because they know the high end clientele spends more at games. Tourists flock in to go to games and concerts. When I was at soldier field for the Rolling Stones concerts I overheard so many people saying how they flew in just for the concert and made a weekend out of it in Chicago.
I work in finance and travel a lot for work. On numerous occasions on the road my co-workers and I have said "Is there a casino nearby?" If it was close and easy to get to we would go....if far we balked at the idea. The immediate west side is close, has existing infrastructure, and is easily accessible from McCormick Place on the green line. I'm not against the South Side but IF you do throw it near McCormick Place then literally throw it right next to the Cermak El Stops.
You have to have the El and a major highway near it. The infrastructure you're talking about building out is not realistic. Unless you build out a feeder El track connecting the red/green line to Soldier and on down to the casino it makes no sense at the Reese site.
Tourists and well-heeled people go to sports games alllll the time. Stadiums are literally tearing out seats to build more suites because they know the high end clientele spends more at games. Tourists flock in to go to games and concerts. When I was at soldier field for the Rolling Stones concerts I overheard so many people saying how they flew in just for the concert and made a weekend out of it in Chicago.
I work in finance and travel a lot for work. On numerous occasions on the road my co-workers and I have said "Is there a casino nearby?" If it was close and easy to get to we would go....if far we balked at the idea. The immediate west side is close, has existing infrastructure, and is easily accessible from McCormick Place on the green line. I'm not against the South Side but IF you do throw it near McCormick Place then literally throw it right next to the Cermak El Stops.
The infrastructure I’m talking about building is really minimal. The 16th street connector has a mostly existing right-of-way and the deviation for Metra tracks to go to the airport is minimal. Chicago’s best bet to having great mass transit has been for a long while to make Metra into a S-Bahn/RER network and this is a good push towards it.
Essentially, it’s go big or don’t do it at all. Without a massive destination resort, you’re either making a minimal tax contribution and/or doing the regional economic equivalent of robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 07-21-2019 at 08:12 PM..
Reese is a Bad Choice
The Michael Reese location seems great due to proximity to McCormick Place and downtown but is a TERRIBLE location. The casino needs to be (1) close to an El stop (2) close to a major highway and then (3) close to downtown in that order. The Reese site is way too far from the El and I'd rather see the casino right off 90/94 or 290. We also don't need to be crowding the prime lakefront area with less desirable things like a casino when high rises will surely fill in on their own.
Taylor is Best out of Five
Out of the five locations the old Taylor Homes makes the most sense cause it satisfies all three criteria above and is close to Sox Park. With 81 home games fans can spill out and fill in the casino. Look at what Pittsburgh did with a casino right near it's football and baseball stadiums.
Best Site in Chicago
The BEST site would be near the United Center. Soooo much open land to fill in on immediate west side. Bulls, Blackhawks and concerts spilling out all winter to fill in the casino. And you have 290 and the blue/pink/green lines to take anyone there from all over the city (including tourists). And it's relatively safe for the tourist crowds and would create an even better connection between downtown and the west side.
Reece is near I-55 and Lake Shore Drive, and not far at all from the Dan Ryan/Kennedy. It's actually very central to major roadways. I will agree there's no L access, but there is Metra access, which is good. it's also pretty close to downtown, only about a mile south of Roosevelt I believe. That satisfies at least two of your criteria right there. I think with the hotel boom going on in the McCormick place area, a casino/resort would fit right in. The resort would likely rival the new Marriott Marquis in height, so it would be a high rise, not low/mid-rise.
As Crumbler mentioned, a high rise resort would give people staying there views of the lake, as well as downtown. This can't be done anywhere on the west side.
But what would be the point? The city is already allowed to have gaming at O’Hare and Midway...thus giving the city three sites. By putter ng a casino in the airpot, you shoot yourself in the foot with three venues turned into two
Besides, congestion arose nd O’Hare is already a nightmere. Why add a full casino, a nonflight related activity which would one make already bad crowding worse
I think extremely congested areas like O’Hare and the Loop are bad locales for a casno. First off, they unnecessarily make things more conjested. Second parking is exorbitant Detroit may be able to have its casinos downtown, but Detroit is not Chicago and its core far less dense and crowded
I really believe Michael Reese is by far the best site, the one that lets you have your cake and eat it. Reese is on the fringe of the downtown area (North to Cermak are reasonable extremities for the greater downtown area. And with McCormick Place close by, you would get both downtown conventioneers and tourists...that vaunted out of towners tax money feeding in
Reese gives you not only downtown but the lakefront and the possibility of a new Metra stop near Soldier Field The casino would have a hotel that would be a success by location and incredible views
And with Reese, you get another sought after piece of the puzzle. Reese is downtown fringe it is also South Side..and putting a casino on the South or West sides was a goal
I agree, do not make a fully built casino in O'Hare, just add gaming kiosks and slot machines there, and build the casino elsewhere. No need for that, especially considering Rivers is already right nearby anyways. Rosemont/O'Hare area is already packed with development with more on the way, so a casino just isn't necessary in that area.
Contrast that with the Reece location which is a very undeveloped area with huge potential, being near a convention center, the lake, Metra Electric, and a fast transitioning area with hotel rooms and restaurants already on the way... as well as a fast gentrifying neighborhood just to the south/west. In my experience, this area also isn't too crazy when it comes to traffic, compared to many other parts of the city.
The casino 100% needs to be within 2-3 blocks of an El stop. No one uses the Metra to get around the city limits. I'm all for thinking big and making it a resort on the lake but given how painful it is to get to Soldier Field unless you have an El extension built from Roosevelt with stops at Soldier, McCormick Place and the Reese site...then the Reese location will be a failure. It has to be easy for both tourists and local Chicagoans to get to.
Just like all the other places I listed with casinos. Are you ready to sell the city into that category of permanent depressed sh*thole when it is currently considered one of the top cities in the nation to visit? I'm not.
I've not been to Reno, but the other two are certainly not "decent areas" by any stretch. Windsor is basically Canadian Detroit, and Niagara Falls (on both sides of the border) is the worst kind of tacky tourist trap hell. Windsor basically exists so that 18-20-year-old Detroit residents can go to bars, and the only thing worth seeing in Niagara Falls is the actual falls themselves, if you can get past the piles of schlock to get to them.
I will leave Chicago long before its downtown becomes anything resembling those places-- and I love Chicago, so sure as hell hope it doesn't.
Pretty much the only areas of Reno that suck are the areas around the casinos and around the airport. The rest is freaking gorgeous. I think they are working on fixing that though to make it far more pedestrian friendly and less focused on gambling. more upscale entertainment, dining and well, gambling
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
