"Ain't ... no more" is "am not ... [any more]"?

Solution 1:

Two points to make here:

• Ain't is a dialectal variant and is considered nonstandard, especially in writing.
  Use am not instead in writing.
• Using no more after a negative is also a dialectal variant, with the same written status.
  Written English and most spoken dialects use a Negative Polarity Item, like any more,
  instead of using another negative, like no more, a process that's called Negative Concord.
  Negative concord is very common in many languages, like Spanish -- No tengo nada translates as 'I have nothing' or 'I don't have anything', but literally means "I don't have nothing",
  since no and nada are both negatives. But English prefers NPIs, which are all idiomatic.

Solution 2:

The sentence means I am not going to go to that place anymore. Or I am going to go to that place no more. Or I will not go to that place anymore. Or I will no longer go to that place.

This place should be that place, since the verb is go, not come. The not...no more is more correctly expressed without the double negative, as not...anymore or ...no more.

And since you mean future, use going to go or will go, not going.