Broadway makes its last stand against Caesars Times Square casino bid
Summary
Caesars Palace’s proposal to convert 1515 Broadway into a $5.4bn casino retrofit reached its second and final public hearing as Broadway stakeholders mounted major opposition. Sponsors SL Green, Caesars Entertainment and Roc Nation argue the Times Square site is ideal because it reuses an office building—reducing construction and housing impacts—and would drive footfall to nearby businesses. Theatre unions, workers and local residents countered that a casino would threaten Broadway’s character, harm theatre-related livelihoods and increase congestion and crime. The project’s community advisory committee (CAC) heard over 12 hours of comment across hearings; it will vote on the proposal on Wednesday at 10am, and needs a two-thirds majority (four of six) to advance to state consideration for a downstate licence.
Key Points
- Caesars proposes a $5.4bn retrofit of the existing 1515 Broadway office building rather than a greenfield development, arguing reduced local disruption.
- The proposal has high-profile partners: SL Green, Caesars Entertainment and Roc Nation; Al Sharpton made the final pitch, highlighting diversity in ownership.
- Broadway theatre workers, unions and many local residents fiercely oppose the plan, citing threats to neighbourhood character and predatory gambling concerns.
- The CAC has already taken more public comment on this bid than any other; a two-thirds vote is required for it to advance to state-level licensing for one of three downstate licences.
- Supporters point to job creation and business overflow benefits, but Caesars’ pledged 3,000 construction jobs is the lowest among competing bids and the plan creates no new housing.
Context and relevance
This vote is a pivotal moment in New York’s competition for downstate casino licences. Times Square is a globally iconic location and a decision here will set a precedent for how the city balances tourism, economic development and the cultural economy of Broadway. Competing Manhattan bids include projects with housing components, which factors into labour and community support. The outcome will influence operators’ strategies in urban casino placement and local stakeholders’ leverage in licensing decisions.
Why should I read this?
Because Broadway just turned up in force — and this isn’t just about glitzy lights. If you care about how casinos are shoe‑horned into dense urban spaces, what trade‑offs are made around jobs versus housing, or how powerful local industries can swing public opinion, this hearing tells you everything you need to know without wading through the full transcripts.
Author style
Punchy: this is a high-stakes local showdown with national implications for casino licensing and urban planning. Read it if you want the short, sharp version of who’s arguing what and why the CAC vote next week really matters.