Schenectady

Anyone who has dabbled in online dating quickly learns that photos often don't match reality. The person you meet on a first date is sometimes entirely unrecognizable.

I was reminded of that lesson from my single days by, of all things, the casino planned for Schenectady.

The casino we were shown in renderings months ago was a glitzy and glamorous knockout. Man oh man, how could we not be intrigued?

But now we're learning that the reality will likely be something very different. New renderings released by Rush Street Gaming seem to show a casino that looks as ordinary and boring as a shopping plaza.

The knockout of a project has morphed into a plain Jane or, if you prefer, John.

It's hard not to feel a little duped. It's hard not to sense a classic bait-and-switch.

The casino's developers showed us the beautiful design — the one that looked like a modern art museum — when they were wooing us and trying to build the community support that the state gaming commission wanted to see. Now that they've won the competition, they seem to have ditched originality for banality.

Gone is the sleek design that featured big walls of glass. In its place is a nearly windowless brick box neighbored by a parking garage and fronted by a massive parking lot. This is interesting architecture only to someone who's never been to Target. It's boring at best.

The redesign, of course, also looks much less expensive than the original.

Could that be the real reason for the change?

I couldn't get someone from the casino team to talk on the record about the redesign on Monday. David Buicko, chief operating officer for the casino's developer, Rotterdam-based Galesi Group, did not return a request for comment.

Rush Street Gaming head Greg Carlin released a written statement in response to questions.

"Rush Street Gaming develops and operates regionally relevant casinos that are designed to complement the community where they are located," Carlin said in the statement issued Monday. "For the Capital Region, we've collaborated with architects and designers with extensive experience in gaming and entertainment and our local partners to create a design that celebrates Schenectady's industrial heritage, makes great use of the waterfront and will provide a superior customer experience."

It's worth mentioning that not everybody loved the original design. Some found it too modern.

And certainly it's true that the look of a project of this importance and magnitude will never please everybody. Meanwhile, the average gambler probably couldn't care less about the design of the building.

Still, I think many people liked that the original design represented something different for Schenectady. It was unique. It felt significant.

But as the Daily Gazette noted in an editorial objecting to the change, the revised design looks quite a bit like the casino that Rush Street Gaming built in Des Plaines, Ill., outside of Chicago. That makes it seem as though Schenectady is getting just another franchise.

And what's good enough for the Des Plaines site isn't good enough for a Schenectady site of prime importance to the future of the city.

I took a virtual tour of the area around the Illinois casino Monday, thanks to the miracle of Google Streetview. It sits on an anonymous suburban strip of faceless office parks. Unless you're going to the casino, it isn't a destination.

The Schenectady site, by contrast, is riverfront land in the heart of the city. It demands more. The architecture needs to be appealing even to those who will never step foot in the casino.

More Information Contact Chris Churchill at 518-454-5442 or email cchurchill@timesunion.com See More Collapse

Rush Street and Galesi have promised to build a real neighborhood that's lasting and respectful of the Mohawk River. In the face of criticism that a casino would only be about extracting money from the region, they talked a project that would be of value to the entire city and region.

The redesign isn't up to snuff — at least as depicted in the renderings we've seen.

The Schenectady Planning Commission is expected to review the casino's design and layout at its June 17 meeting. Considering the pressure the board is under to get the project under way, it would take considerable courage to tell Rush Street that the design isn't good enough.

In fact, commission would probably approve the casino if it looked like a giant Taco Bell.

But the city should demand better. The casino is a once-in-a-lifetime project and opportunity.

It's too important to get wrong. It should be a knockout.

cchurchill@timesunion.com • 518-454-5442 • @chris_churchill