Sugarhouse: It Ain't Easy Stopping Cheesy

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

th's picture

Wow. Cheap and cheesy = to small.

You wanna dance? LET'S DANCE!

new kenzo's picture

perhaps they can try to offset the cheap n cheesy factor by replacing it's carpeting? I went in for a bit of gawking a couple months after they opened and it was so run down already, at that point, that it gave me the creeps. Casinos are sad places usually.

"vinegar of lil richard ninja" , yo

Kuishimbo's picture

What were we talking about? I just passed out after reading about replacing the carpeting at Sugarhouse. I started thinking about the poor guy that would have to pull up the old carpeting. The horror!

How often do you have to replace the "I" key on your computer?

LST's picture

Size matters!

It's all so beautiful.

TheSomers's picture

LOL LOL in regards to some of the comments.

It kinda sucks with all of the delays given to Sugarhouse which caused what it is there now to be a far contrast to what was originally proposed. What was originally proposed was pretty impressive but the community groups which stalled it for 2 years or longer and caused the delays for all those jobs was a major catalyst to what is there now. (and of course delayed reform to the BPT and NPT as a result) It is what it is. All of the traffic and crime concerns did not come into play at all... just a lot of fear that caused the delays.

At least they are rethinking the expansion. It would be great if there were some nice restaurants in there which could bring in some more patrons besides just gamblers.

http://www.thesomersteam.com/
Chris Somers - Realtor/Owner , REMAX Access
Investor/ Developer/ Blogger
1033 N 2nd St - 5th floor (Rialto building)

Isaac's picture

Could Sugarhouse incorporate Johnny's Hots into the casino? That would be awesome. Well, that and not having fear of getting robbed in the parking lot. A poker room would be nice too. OK, there's really not much to get me to go into Sugarhouse.

FishtownYo's picture

Isaac wrote:
Could Sugarhouse incorporate Johnny's Hots into the casino? That would be awesome.

Now there's a good idea. That would recognize one of the hardest working people in the neighborhood. They rock.

I thought when they moved into the newer building it wouldn't be the same, but they got better. I love Johnny Hots, just had a fishcake sandwich and hot fries with american cheese on Friday.

--
What is so bad about religion is that it fosters a primitive form of morality that hinders progress in virtually any domain beneficial to our modern world.

Newcomer's picture

TheSomers wrote:
It kinda sucks with all of the delays given to Sugarhouse which caused what it is there now to be a far contrast to what was originally proposed. What was originally proposed was pretty impressive but the community groups which stalled it for 2 years or longer and caused the delays for all those jobs was a major catalyst to what is there now. (and of course delayed reform to the BPT and NPT as a result) It is what it is. All of the traffic and crime concerns did not come into play at all... just a lot of fear that caused the delays.

At least they are rethinking the expansion. It would be great if there were some nice restaurants in there which could bring in some more patrons besides just gamblers.

I'm sure it would have been super awesome and so classy if it weren't for those pesky community groups trying to exercise caution when the casino was proposed -- what thriving neighborhood wouldn't welcome slots with open arms?

lighterthief's picture

new kenzo wrote:
perhaps they can try to offset the cheap n cheesy factor by replacing it's carpeting? .

That carpet was VERY poorly chosen. Looked like "insert profanity filter substitution here" soon after it opened. Word to the wise light blue is to be avoided in casino carpeting, always.

Empty factories to the east and all our waste
The shape of things that came shows on the broken workers face

TheSomers's picture

I have been in Sugarhouse once, a few days after it opened to see the access to the River. Just remember it being very smoky and crowded. And I kept asking myself what happened to the original proposal and renderings ?

http://www.thesomersteam.com/
Chris Somers - Realtor/Owner , REMAX Access
Investor/ Developer/ Blogger
1033 N 2nd St - 5th floor (Rialto building)

Kenzo's picture

David Oh even said flat out that he didn't care for what was built---it should have been a resort casino. I think the expansion should complete that dream or they shouldn't even bother. You can't fix halfa--ed with halfa--ed. You just get whole---sed.

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

TheSomers's picture

Kenzo wrote:
David Oh even said flat out that he didn't care for what was built---it should have been a resort casino. I think the expansion should complete that dream or they shouldn't even bother. You can't fix halfa--ed with halfa--ed. You just get whole---sed.

Agreed.

On a side note, did you see the original renderings and proposal for Sugarhouse? It was quite impressive. What we ended up with was similar to the proposal for Delaware and Spring Garden which was god-awful. And of course, Mayor Nutter went back on his campaign promises to reform the BPT and NPT which the casino revenue was going to be the main catalyst for that reform, but the City spent all the money instead....

http://www.thesomersteam.com/
Chris Somers - Realtor/Owner , REMAX Access
Investor/ Developer/ Blogger
1033 N 2nd St - 5th floor (Rialto building)

Newcomer's picture

TheSomers wrote:
I have been in Sugarhouse once, a few days after it opened to see the access to the River. Just remember it being very smoky and crowded. And I kept asking myself what happened to the original proposal and renderings ?

Was there a smoking ban in the original plans?

Kuishimbo's picture

TheSomers wrote:

It kinda sucks with all of the delays given to Sugarhouse which caused what it is there now to be a far contrast to what was originally proposed. What was originally proposed was pretty impressive but the community groups which stalled it for 2 years or longer and caused the delays for all those jobs was a major catalyst to what is there now. (and of course delayed reform to the BPT and NPT as a result) It is what it is. All of the traffic and crime concerns did not come into play at all... just a lot of fear that caused the delays.

At least they are rethinking the expansion. It would be great if there were some nice restaurants in there which could bring in some more patrons besides just gamblers.

If you are planning on building a casino in a residential area, you can expect protests by the community. If you are building any large complex in a residential area, you can expect protests. Sugarhouse should have been prepared for that. It's their fault that place is a crap hole. They still could have designed a nice looking building even though it was smaller than originally planned.

How often do you have to replace the "I" key on your computer?

TheSomers's picture

Kuishimbo wrote:
If you are planning on building a casino in a residential area, you can expect protests by the community. If you are building any large complex in a residential area, you can expect protests. Sugarhouse should have been prepared for that. It's their fault that place is a crap hole. They still could have designed a nice looking building even though it was smaller than originally planned.

Good point.

http://www.thesomersteam.com/
Chris Somers - Realtor/Owner , REMAX Access
Investor/ Developer/ Blogger
1033 N 2nd St - 5th floor (Rialto building)

TheSomers's picture

Newcomer wrote:
Was there a smoking ban in the original plans?

They have designated "smoking areas" and "non-smoking areas" but since the place is small, the second hand smoke is quite strong. Now that was my observation a long time ago, so I do not know if anything has changed since then.

http://www.thesomersteam.com/
Chris Somers - Realtor/Owner , REMAX Access
Investor/ Developer/ Blogger
1033 N 2nd St - 5th floor (Rialto building)

dan

TheSomers wrote:
It kinda sucks with all of the delays given to Sugarhouse which caused what it is there now to be a far contrast to what was originally proposed. What was originally proposed was pretty impressive but the community groups which stalled it for 2 years or longer and caused the delays for all those jobs was a major catalyst to what is there now. (and of course delayed reform to the BPT and NPT as a result) It is what it is. All of the traffic and crime concerns did not come into play at all... just a lot of fear that caused the delays.

Sorry, I reject that analysis.
* the design was always ugly
* it has been a magnet for crime
* we don't know about the traffic issues, because the numbers of visitors to the slots barn is less than the estimates provided by either SugarHouse or its opponents.
* it's true that less was built than promised (restaurants, entertainment venue, hotel), but that's a matter of broken promises and economic downturn - evidenced by the push by Bluhm to scale back the number of slot machines in the next expansion.

Godwin was basically a Nazi.

dan

chuckles wrote:
Big Brother is watching what you write on this site and deleting it. Be careful.

What the heck are you babbling about?

Godwin was basically a Nazi.

Ken Milano's picture

Kuishimbo wrote:
TheSomers wrote:

It kinda sucks with all of the delays given to Sugarhouse which caused what it is there now to be a far contrast to what was originally proposed. What was originally proposed was pretty impressive but the community groups which stalled it for 2 years or longer and caused the delays for all those jobs was a major catalyst to what is there now. (and of course delayed reform to the BPT and NPT as a result) It is what it is. All of the traffic and crime concerns did not come into play at all... just a lot of fear that caused the delays.

At least they are rethinking the expansion. It would be great if there were some nice restaurants in there which could bring in some more patrons besides just gamblers.

If you are planning on building a casino in a residential area, you can expect protests by the community. If you are building any large complex in a residential area, you can expect protests. Sugarhouse should have been prepared for that. It's their fault that place is a crap hole. They still could have designed a nice looking building even though it was smaller than originally planned.

SugarHouse knew full well that there would be opposition to the Casino, probably knew it way before any construction started to take place, knew back before they even put a bid in for a license. It was a ploy on their part, to make it look like opposition was slowing down their project, to help stem the tide against them, it worked too! The archaeological dig was also blamed for slowing them down, blab blah blah, that was a bunch of crap, period!

They would have to have some pretty dim witted people (which might actually be true) running the show not to see opposition coming and plan for it, nor to see that they would be getting the Fed involved (Army Corps Engineers) with the Preservation Act being trotted in when they wanted to reconfigure the shore line, plus the fact that they would be building on several acres of illegally made land (done by one of the former owners). The screaming and shouting was just a way for the casino to try and win favor, just a stunt, nothing more.

It was also really dim witted idea for casino supportors to say that this "empty lot eyesore" was sitting vacant for all these years...blah blah blah and folks are trying to stop developement. This was done without mentioning the fact that this lot was sitting empty all those years because the owners wanted it to sit empty until enough legislators were bought to bring gambling casinos to Philly and they could unload it on interested parties, which they did.

I viewed the original plans, they were crap, always was a big box store, architectural style easily interchangeable with HomeDepot, Walmart, Kmart, etc etc....crap crap crap! And did I mention, it was Crap!

steveeboy's picture

and we agree. and we would also argue that like so many developers--cough, ahem, cough, BLATSTEIN--what we had with sugarhouse was the old "bait and switch."

They propose all these extras to get approval and once they get it, all of the sudden that stuff gets dropped once they don't have to run it by the neighbors.

used to see this in Florida all the time.

in the zoning meeting you have the nice landscaping, the extra sidewalks, the fine trim and gutters, the historical colors, etc. Then they throw up the cheapest piece of crap they can get away with and find it much easier to deal with the degradation of the "plans" once all those pesky neighbors no longer have a say in the process.

Has sugarhouse ever once released even the most basic statistics vis-a-vis how many local jobs they created? How many people from the 19125 and 19134 are working there?

heck, they oppose providing a monthly statement to their suckers--er, "clients"--so that they might see how much they are spending in there on a monthly basis.

But, once again I note that the board's real estate agent/shill was all for sugarhouse.

sdm's picture

I enjoyed being able to sit out back, marginally close to the water. Now if only I could make it from the entrance to the back without dropping $300 on the tables.

Neatly chiseled, well groomed, drop dead handsome face.

milkbox's picture

We finally went into Sugar House in July and lasted exactly an hour.

There were a lot of people lugging around 'free' toasters and looking lost.

I put 5 dollars into some kind of machine while we were eating dinner at the Asian-Fusion bar and it gave me the message "You Lose!" after about 10 seconds. I don't think I even pushed any buttons.

I always go into a casino hoping for 1) a James Bond movie or 2) an animated Disney ride, and I am almost always let down. Perhaps if I were a gambler it would have been more fun. There just wasn't enough to look at.

Drinks at the Handle Bar afterward, however, were totally my speed.

Sugarhouse has simply joined the list of 'places not to go' in the area. Not exactly enlightening commentary, but my two cents, for what it's worth.

Kenzo's picture

sdm wrote:
I enjoyed being able to sit out back, marginally close to the water. Now if only I could make it from the entrance to the back without dropping $300 on the tables.

So tough when you hit aces on blackjack and you got $15 sitting on the bonus.

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

himdaddy's picture

I HAVE not read one complaint from the people that go there to play, you think they care what the place looks like, The casino is makeing tons of money. The city is rakeing in on taxes and it is what it is. Did you ever think it was gone to be more then it is ( not me )

wilburwood's picture

Sugar House is what it is. A handsome addition to a once blighted lot. If you don't gamble you can still enjoy fairly decent food, a river view and free live or DJ music at times. If Sugar House investors did not step up with the casino proposal, it would still be an unattractive, weeded, rat infested lot with no river access. They are making money, the few crimes reported at opening are no longer occurring, and they will be expanding. Deal with it.....or if you prefer, enjoy it.

Kenzo's picture

himdaddy wrote:
I HAVE not read one complaint from the people that go there to play, you think they care what the place looks like, The casino is makeing tons of money. The city is rakeing in on taxes and it is what it is. Did you ever think it was gone to be more then it is ( not me )

When Vince Fumo got the Gaming Act passed under the cover of darkness (literally), I was hoping for a resort-destination casino. Fewer need to drive all the way to AC to go see a good act. More big-names showing up and staying in Philly to do their shows. That sort of business.

When I heard that it was going to be geriatric slots barns I was deeply disappointed almost to the point of being anti-casino. I was mostly thinking of how crappy Dover Downs is and Delaware Park pre-renovation.

I'm OK with the slots box but it just doesn't want to keep me there for more than a couple hours. It's cheezy but not "fun cheezy" like dive casinos in Vegas are.

And Sugarhouse isn't even really a "gambler's casino".

Hell... if it was a replica of O'Sheas in Las Vegas (the most famous dive casino... RIP), I would have been 100% for it. Every time I go to Las Vegas the first place I would always go to was O'Sheas. Beer pong, cheapest tables on the Strip, very young crowd, GOOD live music and the poker tables are almost practically on the pavement and plenty of tables for its size. Part of its downfall is that few folks like playing slots there, but they would be chintzy and never remove the slot machines and just go all-out tables like they should have.

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.