Times Square — The ambitious $5.4 billion Caesars Palace Times Square casino and the $7 billion Avenir project on Manhattan’s Far West Side were officially rejected on Wednesday by their respective Community Advisory Committees, dealing a significant blow to major casino developers in New York City. The decisions underscore the influence of local residents and Broadway theater owners in shaping the city’s entertainment and real estate landscape.
The Caesars Palace Times Square proposal, backed by Caesars Entertainment, Roc Nation, and some of New York City’s largest real estate developers, had promised thousands of jobs, increased tourism, and significant tax revenue. Despite these projected economic benefits, the project faced staunch opposition from neighborhood groups and the Broadway community, who warned that a casino in the heart of Midtown Manhattan would threaten the area’s character and the livelihoods of the tens of thousands employed in theater and entertainment.
On Wednesday, the Community Advisory Committee voted 4 to 2 against the Caesars Palace plan. Only representatives of Mayor Eric Adams and Governor Kathy Hochul supported the proposal. The committee members who opposed the project included Richard Gottfried, appointed by State Senator Liz Krueger; Matthew Tighe, appointed by State Assemblyman Tony Simone; Chris Carroll, appointed by Manhattan Borough President Mark Levine; and Carl Wilson, the board chair appointed by City Councilman Erik Bottcher.
Similarly, the Avenir casino, a $7 billion project by Silverstein Properties and Rush Street Gaming, was also voted down by a 4 to 2 margin. Committee supporters Nabeela Malik and Angel Vasquez had asked for the vote to be delayed, citing insufficient time to respond to questions submitted by the board. Dino Fusco, Silverstein Properties’ chief operating officer, expressed disappointment that local officials failed to see a path forward for the development.
Following the vote, SL Green CEO Marc Holliday, whose building at 1515 Broadway would have hosted the Caesars casino, sharply criticized the advisory committee, calling their decision “despicable” and warning that the city would miss out on promised economic benefits. Holliday had been in line for a potential $10 million bonus if the project had been approved.
Jason Laks, president of the Broadway League, hailed the decision as a victory for the local theater community. “This was a vote to protect the magic of Broadway for the 100,000 New Yorkers who depend on it for their livelihoods, and for the tens of millions who come from around the world to experience it,” Laks said. His organization had coordinated the No Times Square Casino Coalition, which led the opposition against the Caesars project.
The rejection of these two Manhattan-based casinos narrows the field to six remaining proposals across New York City and its metro area. These include Bally’s Bronx near the Whitestone Bridge; the Coney on Coney Island; Freedom Plaza in Manhattan near the United Nations headquarters; MGM Empire City in Yonkers; Metropolitan Park near Citi Field in Queens; and Resorts World New York City at the Aqueduct Racetrack in Queens. Each of these proposals will undergo evaluation by their respective Community Advisory Committees before advancing to the New York Gaming Facility Location Board, with licenses expected to be awarded by the end of 2025.
While developers highlighted potential upsides, including economic spending, new jobs, and increased tourism, their proposals struggled to overcome the skepticism of local residents and theater owners. The Caesars Palace project, in particular, faced criticism for its potential to disrupt the historic Broadway corridor and its local culture.
The outcome demonstrates that even high-profile developers and entertainment companies like Caesars Entertainment and Roc Nation cannot guarantee approval when neighborhood and community voices mobilize effectively. The decision also highlights the unique role of Community Advisory Committees in balancing economic promises with the preservation of New York City’s cultural and residential fabric.
As the city moves forward with the remaining six proposals, the focus will continue to be on balancing economic growth with the preservation of neighborhood character and local livelihoods. Residents, theater owners, and advocacy groups remain vigilant, signaling that community opposition can play a decisive role in shaping Manhattan’s development trajectory.
The vote against Caesars Palace Times Square and Avenir underscores the growing tension between corporate ambition and community priorities, especially in Manhattan’s most iconic districts. As noted by NYT, the decisions mark a significant win for local voices and Broadway, reinforcing that large-scale projects must navigate both political support and public sentiment to succeed.
