|
Per the Post, "Executives at Hilton Worldwide are negotiating a deal with developers of CityCenterDC to build a 370-room Conrad hotel downtown, according to sources familiar with the discussions." So the Convention Center might not be cornered by Marriott -- after all, there are three international hotel operators headquartered in town.
Also new since this thread was updated: zoning approval was recently granted and groundbreaking will occur this year on a new 278-room Intercontinental Hotel at the Wharf, on the Southwest Waterfront. (The ANC also just approved an Element and Aloft a block away, but those aren't "luxury.")
Originally Posted by slawecki
(Post 17028230)
the next two items in the national harbor build out is the outlet mall, and then the disney(like in walt) complex.
|
i do not think there is any available land between nat harbor and the beltway. the casino will go south and east of the current development. roscroft interests are trying to get government to buy and convert the raceway to a park. if the gambling competitior to mgm wishes to do nat harb, they will have to unload arundull mills.(only one casino allowed for each entity in md)
|
The proposed MGM development at National Harbor is the "Beltway Parcel," along the Beltway but north of the existing retail.
|
Originally Posted by paytonc
(Post 20254209)
The proposed MGM development at National Harbor is the "Beltway Parcel," along the Beltway but north of the existing retail.
|
Originally Posted by paytonc
(Post 20254209)
The proposed MGM development at National Harbor is the "Beltway Parcel," along the Beltway but north of the existing retail.
|
Originally Posted by brendog
(Post 20258966)
Lovely, a casino complex in scenic PG County. Gamblers can take odds on their chances of being shot or carjacked on the way down... :rolleyes:
|
Originally Posted by silverthief2
(Post 20270253)
Most new casinos in the U.S. are sited in less than desirable places; whether it's because of their constant search for jobs of any type or just the lack of community opposition it turns out to be the path of least resistance for casino developers. Yet I'm not hearing of casinogoers getting shot or carjacked on the way to the casinoes in Cleveland or Columbus or Detroit. This one will probably do just fine too.
Most casinos are done as a tourist alternative catering to an untapped market. One example is the Mississippi coast. You have Florida and Texas so casinos would draw people there. Same with Atlantic ity...with so many beach towns they needed to do something different to set them apart. With niagara falls.. Casino on American side to attract tourist money. |
Originally Posted by paytonc
(Post 20251208)
Disney sold the land back to the developer. The county's new casino will likely (but not definitely) end up at National Harbor, on the land between the Beltway and the existing development. |
Originally Posted by silverthief2
(Post 20270253)
Most new casinos in the U.S. are sited in less than desirable places; whether it's because of their constant search for jobs of any type or just the lack of community opposition it turns out to be the path of least resistance for casino developers. Yet I'm not hearing of casinogoers getting shot or carjacked on the way to the casinoes in Cleveland or Columbus or Detroit. This one will probably do just fine too.
|
Originally Posted by brendog
(Post 20276022)
Cheap land was the only possible rationale I could think of. Nat Harbor is waaaay down in the boonies (i.e., No Metro and separated from the majority of DC by Anacostia), and not in the nicest of areas (PG). There's definitely nothing else around there to draw anyone down that I can think of.
<redacted> |
Originally Posted by brendog
(Post 20276022)
Cheap land was the only possible rationale I could think of. Nat Harbor is waaaay down in the boonies (i.e., No Metro and separated from the majority of DC by Anacostia), and not in the nicest of areas (PG). There's definitely nothing else around there to draw anyone down that I can think of.
|
Originally Posted by brendog
(Post 20276022)
Cheap land was the only possible rationale I could think of. Nat Harbor is waaaay down in the boonies (i.e., No Metro and separated from the majority of DC by Anacostia), and not in the nicest of areas (PG). There's definitely nothing else around there to draw anyone down that I can think of.
|
Originally Posted by drewguy
(Post 20326729)
Cheap land, beltway access, and access to a bunch of convention-goers who don't want to make a lengthy trek into DC all seem like reasons why the location makes sense from a casino-business perspective.
|
Originally Posted by brendog
(Post 20276022)
Cheap land was the only possible rationale I could think of. Nat Harbor is waaaay down in the boonies (i.e., No Metro and separated from the majority of DC by Anacostia), and not in the nicest of areas (PG). There's definitely nothing else around there to draw anyone down that I can think of.
10 min from NH to the capitol. upper Gtown to capitol at mid day takes about 30 min. could just take the metro from Gtown to the capitol???? the one the rich people would not allow. |
Originally Posted by Washingtonian819
(Post 17011072)
But it makes me wonder about where exactly the others plan to build. DC is fast becoming saturated. Perhaps at the new CityCenter site downtown?
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 3:05 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.