MA Casino Developments

ParkerChris said:
In addition, the BCEC is dying for more hotels to be built in the area. What could spur hotel growth better than a resort casino?
Click to expand...

Total agreement here. Wish we had a creative casino group in the fray. How about a Maritime Themed Casino? I hear the QE2 is still up for sale. They could buy it, renovate dry dock 4, make it the center piece for the casino and build entertainment (replace the pavillion) and gaming floor around it.
That way Boston gets, a world class resort casino. BCEC gets, at least, 500 hotel rooms, and an entertaiment venue within walking distance. Boston also gets a major tourist attraction the QE2 (alla Queen Mary in Long Beach).
Just in case you forgot what she looks like.

QE2 11 Nov 2008
 
Last edited:
^^^^
That's the best idea I've heard in a long time.
 
BosDevelop said:
why does everyone keep saying the Seaport when that is not a realistic option due to land acquisition costs alone? A casino the size that we are talking about here will need a considerable amount of land and land in the Seaport isn't exactly cheap these days. The Seaport might be the best location but is it even a realistic option from a cost perspective? I have serious doubts.
Click to expand...

I think MPA still owns a lot of the underutilized lots at the tip of the Seaport (i.e., east of the BofA Pavillion). A casino could conceivably lease the space from MPA. I still wouldn't support an urban casino, but it makes more sense than East Boston.
 
TheRifleman said:
So that will never happen. The thought process for planning is fucked in this city.
Click to expand...

But just think of what a great addition to the Harbor Walk it would be.
We can still dream.
 
BeeLine said:
Total agreement here. Wish we had a creative casino group in the fray. How about a Maritime Themed Casino? I hear the QE2 is still up for sale. They could buy it, renovate dry dock 4, make it the center piece for the casino and build entertainment (replace the pavillion) and gaming floor around it.
That way Boston gets, a world class resort casino. BCEC gets, at least, 500 hotel rooms, and an entertaiment venue within walking distance. Boston also gets a major tourist attraction the QE2 (alla Queen Mary in Long Beach).
Click to expand...

As is usual -- Boston was there first - in 198(7,8,9?) DECWorld took over the then commonwealth Pier (aka the World Trade Center) for the summer and lacking the Seaport Hotel - Ken Olsen had both the QE2 and the Pacific Princess (aka the "Love Boat") tied up alongside for hotel rooms and some fine dining

your's trully had a fine dinner in the Princess Anne Room on the QE-2 courtesy of DEC

so here's the real novel idea:

1) Drive the QE-2 up the inner Harbor to the Tobin Bridge
2) Turn right at the entrance to the Chelsea Creek
3) Drive the QE-2 up to the oil tank farm near to Suffolk Downs
4) Park her there until a canal can be dug through to the Suffolk Downs Grandstand
5) Drive her there -- where she can be permanently moored -- Voila le casino

singapore_flyer_singapore_1.jpg


and right next to her -- Paul Revere's Ride -- 300 ft tall ferris wheel with enclosed pods -- in the mode of the London Eye or the Singapore Flyer on the other side of her

th


The Boston version of the Berliner Fernsehturm (television tower) next to Alexanderplatz with the banks of the new canal lined with biergartens as -- an der Spree

6.jpg
 
Last edited:
BeeLine said:
Total agreement here. Wish we had a creative casino group in the fray. How about a Maritime Themed Casino? I hear the QE2 is still up for sale. They could buy it, renovate dry dock 4, make it the center piece for the casino and build entertainment (replace the pavillion) and gaming floor around it.
That way Boston gets, a world class resort casino. BCEC gets, at least, 500 hotel rooms, and an entertaiment venue within walking distance. Boston also gets a major tourist attraction the QE2 (alla Queen Mary in Long Beach).
Just in case you forgot what she looks like.

QE2 11 Nov 2008
Click to expand...

Love this. Love the SS United States more
http://www.ssunitedstatesconservancy.org/
 
RE: Transportation improvements at Suffolk Downs per proposal. They are saying $40 million in improvements. This is just 4% of the project budget of $1B. Considering that the traffic is the biggest infrastructure complaint (i.e. not the many social problems and general business practices of casinos) I would think it should be higher. Site control is established. Water and sewer are not problematic here.
 
Pardon the drive-by nature of my replies -- I'm a bit swamped at the office today, but you folks devote some thought to my posts on this issue, and you deserve a response.

DominusNovus said:
I was not trying to speak ill of that area, either specifically or in general; I happen to like Revere a lot, and admittedly have little experience with Orient Heights in particular. I apologize if you thought I meant to cause offense.
Click to expand...

We're cool, DN. I do get my nose out of joint sometimes. From a distance, it's easy to perceive that East Boston and its environs are tough places to live. And if I have an edge about me "in the real world," it's because of where I grew up. The rules of living a good and prosperous life in East Boston are simple: Be aware, or be a pawn. I'm more of a rook.

TheRifleman said:
I'm not really sure if Beton even has feelings.
Click to expand...

I wear them on my sleeve, bub.

HenryAlan said:
This is my greatest reservation and why I don't think there should be any casinos in this state. Unfortunately, we are going to have four of them. Whether you are able to prevent an East Boston location won't change this basic truth. With that in mind, I'm open to the concept of a casino at Suffolk, but only if I am convinced it's the best location. So far, I haven't been convinced.
Click to expand...

Henry, I'm glad you're paying attention. If this is such a swell idea for the Commonwealth, then why didn't the people get to vote on it? This is an ugly legislation. It would still be ugly if I were Westy's neighbor in Lexington.

Shepard said:
Beton Brut, out of curiosity, would you and your comrades support the casino at the Seaport?
Click to expand...

I don't speak for anyone by myself in this forum. With that said, I'd like to take two approaches to answer your question:

1.) My opposition to the Suffolk Downs proposal is two-fold; it's the wrong way forward to enhance the livability and sustainability of East Boston, Revere, and other surroundings communities; the legislation that allows the proposal is a bad deal for the entire Commonwealth (as stated in previous posts).

2.) If your question is more about site than content, a successful resort/destination-style complex (with a gambling component) would be better located in a district that attracts conventioneers, and is located on an interstate highway (I-90) than at Suffolk Downs.

Understanding the landscape of (South) Boston politics, I can not imagine a scenario where this alternative would be allowed by any elected official representing that part of the city.

Re-purposing an ocean liner is an interesting concept. In terms of making it work from a money standpoint, costs may be higher than the land acquisition and construction of equivalent amenities on terra firma.

Semass said:
RE: Transportation improvements at Suffolk Downs per proposal. They are saying $40 million in improvements. This is just 4% of the project budget of $1B. Considering that the traffic is the biggest infrastructure complaint (i.e. not the many social problems and general business practices of casinos) I would think it should be higher.
Click to expand...

$40 million won't cover the cost of painting new stripes on roads between the terminus of I-90 and Copeland Circle. There's a thread on this topic.

Also: http://www.route1project.com/default.htm

Good luck extracting the $400-$500 million dollars to complete these projects from a debt-burdened Caesars Palace.
 
Last edited:
Suffolk Downs proposes to remake Route 1A outside the entrance of new gambling resort

By Mark Arsenault, Globe Staff

Suffolk Downs proposes to remake Route 1A outside the track’s main entrance by building a northbound “flyover” to carry traffic over the troubled Boardman Street intersection, as well as adding lanes, lights and making other improvements around the track in an effort to address long-standing congestion problems.

Traffic is one of the top concerns raised over a proposal to expand the 77-year-old thoroughbred horse track into a casino resort, by adding hotel rooms, restaurants and amenities and 200,000 square feet of Las Vegas-style casino games.

The track has promised to commit $40 million to improve roads and intersections around the site. The $30 million to $35 million Route 1A project is the centerpiece of Suffolk Downs’s traffic plan. Other improvements would be the subject of negotiations with local communities.

Suffolk Downs expects that its $1 billion resort, when complete, would generate between 10,000 and 15,000 car trips a day. Route 1A, which often backs up at the morning and evening rush, carries about 60,000 cars a day past the main entrance to Suffolk Downs, according to R. David Black, senior project manager at Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., of Boston, the track’s traffic consultant.
Click to expand...


http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/201...683IkAIYN1o4iU5CG7TI/story.html?p1=News_links
 
Boardman Street is blocks south of the track entrance, so I don't understand this proposal.
 
And I don't understand why you'd need a "northbound flyover" at all. If anything, you'd need it for southbound, no? Don't understand this at all.

EDIT: NVM, I think I get it now.



ALSO, WHY IS THERE ALWAYS A COP CONTROLLING THE LIGHTS AT BOARDMAN? I think that's what he does anyway. I bet he gets paid normal "detail" pay, too! And it doesn't seem to help at all, since traffic is still always screwed up. It's mind boggling.
 
Those traffic improvements, to my unprofessional eye, look ridiculous, half assed, and not-very-helpful.
 
BostonUrbEx said:
Those traffic improvements, to my unprofessional eye, look ridiculous, half assed, and not-very-helpful.
Click to expand...

Urb -- " Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc.," -- Suffolk's traffic consultant -- is a very reputable consulting firm. That said -- the direction of the consultant's work might be guided by the customer who is of course paying the bill. So Suffolk might have said give me your best solution to the traffic problem that doesn't cost more than X -- where as the optimum solution might have been 2X+7

One would need to see the results of the simulations for all of the alternatives which were considered to see why they chose this particular amelioration
 
If some of the other roadway projects in the metro area are any indication, this thing will be a mess and take a long time to finish.
 
whighlander said:
Urb -- " Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc.," -- Suffolk's traffic consultant -- is a very reputable consulting firm. That said -- the direction of the consultant's work might be guided by the customer who is of course paying the bill. So Suffolk might have said give me your best solution to the traffic problem that doesn't cost more than X -- where as the optimum solution might have been 2X+7

One would need to see the results of the simulations for all of the alternatives which were considered to see why they chose this particular amelioration
Click to expand...

This is how it works in my experience. I am not a traffic engineer but have been on many project teams and seen it first hand. To me traffic engineering is all Voodoo and BS because there is never a perfect solution and all metrics such as LOS dot really tell you all that much. I would hate to be a traffic engineer, especially in this situation because you just cant win. If you dont come up with a solution that they can afford, they will just fire you and find someone else.
 
I'm no expert, but I see a by pass of a busy intersection as helpful. Is it a case of the entrance to Suffolk Downs not being improved enough? Or more than just those two intersections need to be addressed? And in all fairness to them I believe them when they say any other redevelopment of that land probably wouldn't pony up as much to improve the current configuration. And again perhaps these improvements would be insufficient b/c I am no traffic engineer, but how many people go to casinos during rush hour times. I'd wager most go during off hours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top