Silverstein Properties’ bid for a New York casino license took a significant step forward on a Monday evening, as their Avenir proposal became the first of eight contenders to undergo a second public hearing. Held at the Javits Center, this meeting saw approximately 200 speakers engaging with the community advisory committee (CAC) across nearly five hours. The six-member CAC has now completed its required two hearings and may opt for additional sessions before the September 30 deadline, at which point a binding vote must occur. Four out of the six members must approve for Avenir to advance to consideration by state officials for one of the three available licenses.
The Monday hearing reflected much of what transpired in the first session on August 27 but featured roughly double the number of participants. Attendees were asked not to repeat their previous remarks, although many still reiterated their positions. Situated at 41st Street and 11th Avenue, Avenir—meaning “future” in French—is one of three bids targeting Manhattan. Silverstein, notable for its role as a chief redeveloper of the World Trade Center site, has long owned the Avenir location. The firm argues that a casino would anchor an ambitious $7 billion mixed-use development plan.
The CAC’s forthcoming decision will weigh heavily on public sentiment. Throughout the hearings, support from unions, business groups, and community organizations emerged strongly, yet local residents closest to the proposed site mainly expressed opposition. Thus, the committee faces a challenging task in reflecting the project’s public backing as mandated by state guidelines.
Silverstein Properties has been a dynamic player in the race for New York’s casino opportunities. The company frequently updated its proposal with new design alterations, partner agreements, and increased housing commitments, all while engaging with numerous community groups to distinguish its bid. Manhattan’s status as a tourism and entertainment hub has had proponents arguing that a luxury casino complex could be a beneficial addition to the area.
Dr. Sam Chandan, director of New York University’s Chen Institute for Global Real Estate, highlighted during his testimony the economic rationale behind the Avenir’s mixed-use development. He pointed out the lessons from post-pandemic recovery, indicating that neighborhoods offering a mix of residential, hospitality, cultural, and commercial activities are more resilient and vibrant, generating more stable employment and tax revenues over time.
Avenir’s hearings unfolded at the Javits Center, which is central to the project. Currently, the lack of significant hotels or accommodations nearby limits the potential events and conferences hosted there. Silverstein aims to address this by partnering with Hyatt to manage a 1,000-room hotel at Avenir and by pledging 2,000 housing units, of which around 500 are earmarked as affordable. These developments could increase traffic and economic activity in the vicinity, a point emphasized by several speakers.
“For two decades, we’ve known about this Achilles’ heel and failed to fix it until now,” noted Bryan Sloane, a Community Board 4 member, highlighting the project as a long-awaited solution.
Avenir’s strategy has also heavily focused on community partnerships, working with organizations like Covenant House and Rethink Food. These groups have been active proponents, with Covenant pledging that Avenir will not only provide affordable housing for New York City youth but also create jobs, aiding young people in overcoming homelessness and sustaining their housing.
While unions and trade groups widely back the proposal, as with other casino bids, due to the commitment to union labor, the Avenir’s 8,000 proposed jobs put it in the middle tier among contenders. Santos Rodriguez, chief of staff for the Building & Construction Trades Council of Greater New York, emphasized that developments like Avenir ensure access to good-paying jobs and strengthen the local economy.
However, the project faces considerable opposition from local, unaffiliated residents, particularly those in Manhattan Plaza, a nearby subsidized housing complex. Many of these residents are retirees who view the casino as a threat to the neighborhood improvements they’ve fought for over the years.
“Anyone coming up to speak should be from this neighborhood,” voiced Manhattan Plaza resident Steven Fenning. “If you’re not, you don’t understand and are doing a disservice to Hell’s Kitchen.”
Critics question the necessity of a casino for development, especially given Silverstein’s history as a successful landlord capable of non-gaming projects. Yet, the site remains undeveloped, with Silverstein waiting for favorable political conditions to move forward.
“This site has remained a pit because Silverstein has waited for the political winds to favor him,” argued resident Sally Taylor. “It might be emotional, but when you live in a place, it is emotional.”
Conversely, residents from Silverstein’s Silver Towers and others in favor of the casino emphasize the need for economic advancement. Advocates, often of a younger generation, see midtown Manhattan as an area where development aligns with the city’s bustling nature, arguing that economic opportunities are crucial for the future.
“This is New York City, not Oklahoma,” stated resident Ebony Mackay, after a dissenting speaker. “It’s going to be highly trafficked at all times.”
The appeal for enhanced economic opportunities resonates with many, especially in light of statistics from United Way of New York City showing 50% of working-age households struggle to meet basic needs. For younger residents, multibillion-dollar casino projects, despite potential drawbacks, are attractive prospects.
“I didn’t move here for peace and quiet,” said a resident named Ben. “I came for the fast-paced energy and the possibilities this city represents for anyone, regardless of their economic background.”
The decision now lies with the CAC, whose vote will significantly impact whether Avenir can proceed and potentially transform a long-dormant site into a thriving urban development.
4.4/5
