If the city really wanted a high-quality, urban-friendly development at Broadway Commons, then they should've scrapped the idea of putting a casino there and built something else, like housing with a strong retail component. Jake is right: look at every casino that's ever been built in Atlantic City or Detroit. Expecting a casino to be urban-friendly is like expecting an oil refinery to be LEED-certified.

I'd also like to state that the ballot language doesn't appear to me to exempt the casino from local zoning laws and regulations, it just says that those laws and regulations can't prevent the casino from being built or operating.  So while it could be that since "casino" wasn't in any of the local zoning codes then it's given carte blanche, that doesn't mean it couldn't still have been regulated. 

City didn't really have a choice regarding housing vs. casino. As soon as casino passed it would go there.

I do not think the casino will "be drive in drive out" if you mean people will only come to the casino visit nothing else in the city then leave (some will yes).

 

I think the casino will benefit many business throughout downtown and OTR. It will bring many people into the city that would have never come in the first place. People will make a weekend of it. Go to out to a nice dinner, then go to the casino, get a hotel room, maybe do a little shopping, go to a museum, etc.... Go to a baseball game then held up to the casino, go to the club, then casino, go the a show, then casino. Birthday parties, bachelor parties, bachelor-ette parties, the list goes on.

 

Is it perfect no? But it will certainly help the city as a whole and Pendleton i am sure will benefit as well.

I agree with atlas.

 

Without naming names or getting specific, there is a push to emphasize/watch/change some members of the planning commission.

The best part of the casino is that it doesn't have a hotel. In 5 years when they build it the city better push hard that it is VERY fancy and has only about 150-200 rooms. That will ensure most people/regular people probably stay in other parts of downtown and travel to the casino.

The best part of the casino is that it doesn't have a hotel. In 5 years when they build it the city better push hard that it is VERY fancy and has only about 150-200 rooms. That will ensure most people/regular people probably stay in other parts of downtown and travel to the casino.

 

I hear what you are saying (and tend to agree) but even on a visit to LV one will venture throughout the city to experience other attractions.  At least that's my experience...I usually drive the 30 or so miles to visit Hoover or Red Rocks every time I am there.  The arching question being: Is the casino the primary driver for a visit by a Louisvillian, Daytonian, Lexingtonian, etc.  Most often not, I presume.  It will become a facet of in/out of town bachelor/ette and adult weekends.

 

Way upthread I observed that it's probably fortuitous that the site is where it is because it will require visitors to traverse most/all of CBD in order to visit the attractions at the other end of the Casino-Banks bookends...its planning/design swing-and-miss notwithstanding.

Bobby's Burger Palace (Bobby Flay) will be the other third party restaurant in addition to previously announced Margartiaville.  This should make some of you feel better about the Reading Road fortress.

 

The landscaping on Reading won't help much from what I've seen. 

^ Solid addition.  I have heard good things about this place.  I think that the nearest location is in DC.

Compare Las Vegas and Atlantic City.  In one place the casinos collaborated on making the city the attraction and the gambling ancillary.  In Atlantic City it was the reverse.  The casinos are in a row along the ocean but the casinos did not work to make the road that runs along them something like the Las Vegas Strip.  Instead it's bombed-out with pawn shops and little else.

 

There is no other place in the country where casinos are grouped side-by-side.  Detroit messed up by separating its three casinos, there are about two miles between each one.  If they had been in one group integrated with the downtown they could have made a difference. 

Bobby's Burger Palace (Bobby Flay) will be the other third party restaurant in addition to previously announced Margartiaville.  This should make some of you feel better about the Reading Road fortress.

 

The landscaping on Reading won't help much from what I've seen. 

 

ah, so that is why he was in Cincinnati this past week.

 

There is no other place in the country where casinos are grouped side-by-side. 

 

Tunica, MS?

Well on the bright side at least Cincinnati's casino isn't as terrible as Toledo's which looks like a giant suburban movie theatre complex.

It is hard to compare any of the Ohio casinos to AC or LV. AC adopted casinos as a last ditch effort to restore its place as a preeminent tourist attraction on the Jersey Shore and Vegas was where a bunch of Newport gangsters relocated to escape the watchful and expensive eye of the changing midwest.

The fact that Kentucky has no casinos is going to benefit Horseshoe Cincinnati unlike no other casino in Ohio.  What Southern Indiana gaming doesn't have is an exciting community to call home.  The energy and myriad of options downtown Cincinnati offers will pull in gamblers and patrons from Louisville.

You do realize Louisville has a casino right across the river (I believe it's a Horseshoe brand) in New Albany, right?  I agree that it'll pull in folks from Northern Kentucky and perhaps Lexington but I don't think it'll affect Louisville too much.

You do realize Louisville has a casino right across the river (I believe it's a Horseshoe brand) in New Albany, right?  I agree that it'll pull in folks from Northern Kentucky and perhaps Lexington but I don't think it'll affect Louisville too much.

 

Have you ever been out there?  The excitement Horseshoe Cincinnati will offer runs laps around the New Albany locale.  What I said in my previous post still stands.  Mt. Adams, downtown, OTR and the riverfront makes weekend planning an easy choice if you're someone from Louisville and you really want to gamble and have a good time doing other things.  The locals that still just want to gamble and go home will mozy on down to New Albany.  Louisville contributes greatly to Cincinnati tourism, and the casino will be a big selling point, guaranteed.

You do realize Louisville has a casino right across the river (I believe it's a Horseshoe brand) in New Albany, right?  I agree that it'll pull in folks from Northern Kentucky and perhaps Lexington but I don't think it'll affect Louisville too much.

 

Have you ever been out there?  The excitement Horseshoe Cincinnati will offer runs laps around the New Albany locale.  What I said in my previous post still stands.  Mt. Adams, downtown, OTR and the riverfront makes weekend planning an easy choice if you're someone from Louisville and you really want to gamble and have a good time doing other things.  The locals that still just want to gamble and go home will mozy on down to New Albany.  Louisville contributes greatly to Cincinnati tourism, and the casino will be a big selling point, guaranteed.

 

+1

Have you ever been out there?

 

Yes, but it was called Caesar's when I went.

 

The excitement Horseshoe Cincinnati will offer runs laps around the New Albany locale.

 

Aside from local biases, I don't think so.  They are casinos after all.  They offer live entertainment, buffets, and roulette wheels.  Cincinnati's would offer a bit more but overall it's a wash.

 

Mt. Adams, downtown, OTR and the riverfront makes weekend planning an easy choice if you're someone from Louisville and you really want to gamble and have a good time doing other things.  The locals that still just want to gamble and go home will mozy on down to New Albany.  Louisville contributes greatly to Cincinnati tourism, and the casino will be a big selling point, guaranteed.

 

I don't know about all that.  I agree that Louisville certainly contributes to Cincinnati's tourism but I don't think the casino would be the selling point as they already have one.  Cincinnati offers unique neighborhoods for Louisvillians to enjoy; the casino does not offer something unique to them.  I'm sure some will check it out since they'd already be in town anyway but I don't buy they'd come to Cincinnati for a greater casino experience.

But ColDayMan, this casino will be a truly urban casino with giant windowless facades facing the street! Urbanism at its finest!!

Yes, because I'm sure Darlene from St. Matthews is looking for urban-orientation to the street as she gets off I-71 and enters the parking garage of doom!

The real question is whether or not the hipsters on Main street will walk the four blocks to eat at Margaritaville?

 

Back to seriousness though. Casinos all offer the same basic things (gambling, drinks, live entertainment, hotel (eventually)) so it will be up to Horseshoe to be competitive against Hollywood, Belterra and so on in addition to the regional casinos surrounding Cincinnati. From what I've seen so far, they are making no distinction, at least in the form of the building that will make it stand out from the others. Yes its in the city, but suburbanites around here don't like the city and avoid it as often as they can. That's why there's a giant parking garage. Go in, gamble get out. This delusion people are having that somehow tons of people are going to make a day of downtown by going to the casino is absurd. The folks that do that are in the minority and the impact will be insignificant. Tourists coming here for a convention visit will likely make a stop there but that's about it.

 

And another thing. We need to get over this delusion that the casino will help improve the surrounding neighborhoods such as Pendleton. As long as the casino is built as an island unto itself, ignoring even windows along Reading, there will be no benefit to the folks living across the street.

The real question is whether or not the hipsters on Main street will walk the four blocks to eat at Margaritaville?

 

Back to seriousness though. Casinos all offer the same basic things (gambling, drinks, live entertainment, hotel (eventually)) so it will be up to Horseshoe to be competitive against Hollywood, Belterra and so on in addition to the regional casinos surrounding Cincinnati. From what I've seen so far, they are making no distinction, at least in the form of the building that will make it stand out from the others. Yes its in the city, but suburbanites around here don't like the city and avoid it as often as they can. That's why there's a giant parking garage. Go in, gamble get out. This delusion people are having that somehow tons of people are going to make a day of downtown by going to the casino is absurd. The folks that do that are in the minority and the impact will be insignificant. Tourists coming here for a convention visit will likely make a stop there but that's about it.

 

And another thing. We need to get over this delusion that the casino will help improve the surrounding neighborhoods such as Pendleton. As long as the casino is built as an island unto itself, ignoring even windows along Reading, there will be no benefit to the folks living across the street.

 

"This delusion people are having that somehow tons of people are going to make a day of downtown by going to the casino is absurd. "

 

I disagree 100%.

 

And another thing. We need to get over this delusion that the casino will help improve the surrounding neighborhoods such as Pendleton. As long as the casino is built as an island unto itself, ignoring even windows along Reading, there will be no benefit to the folks living across the street.

 

I think a certain percentage of people that visit the casino will visit Main Street, and perhaps some new businesses will open up in Pendleton to try to capture this crowd. But I predict it will be mostly the younger people, possibly Cincinnati residents, who are visiting the casino as just a fun thing to do. The 80-year-old ladies that just want to sit in front of a slot machine for 6 hours straight won't have any desire to cross the street (or leave the casino for any reason).

The real question is whether or not the hipsters on Main street will walk the four blocks to eat at Margaritaville?

 

Back to seriousness though. Casinos all offer the same basic things (gambling, drinks, live entertainment, hotel (eventually)) so it will be up to Horseshoe to be competitive against Hollywood, Belterra and so on in addition to the regional casinos surrounding Cincinnati. From what I've seen so far, they are making no distinction, at least in the form of the building that will make it stand out from the others. Yes its in the city, but suburbanites around here don't like the city and avoid it as often as they can. That's why there's a giant parking garage. Go in, gamble get out. This delusion people are having that somehow tons of people are going to make a day of downtown by going to the casino is absurd. The folks that do that are in the minority and the impact will be insignificant. Tourists coming here for a convention visit will likely make a stop there but that's about it.

 

And another thing. We need to get over this delusion that the casino will help improve the surrounding neighborhoods such as Pendleton. As long as the casino is built as an island unto itself, ignoring even windows along Reading, there will be no benefit to the folks living across the street.

 

"This delusion people are having that somehow tons of people are going to make a day of downtown by going to the casino is absurd. "

 

I disagree 100%.

 

 

Would love to hear your argument!

The real question is whether or not the hipsters on Main street will walk the four blocks to eat at Margaritaville?

 

Back to seriousness though. Casinos all offer the same basic things (gambling, drinks, live entertainment, hotel (eventually)) so it will be up to Horseshoe to be competitive against Hollywood, Belterra and so on in addition to the regional casinos surrounding Cincinnati. From what I've seen so far, they are making no distinction, at least in the form of the building that will make it stand out from the others. Yes its in the city, but suburbanites around here don't like the city and avoid it as often as they can. That's why there's a giant parking garage. Go in, gamble get out. This delusion people are having that somehow tons of people are going to make a day of downtown by going to the casino is absurd. The folks that do that are in the minority and the impact will be insignificant. Tourists coming here for a convention visit will likely make a stop there but that's about it.

 

And another thing. We need to get over this delusion that the casino will help improve the surrounding neighborhoods such as Pendleton. As long as the casino is built as an island unto itself, ignoring even windows along Reading, there will be no benefit to the folks living across the street.

 

"This delusion people are having that somehow tons of people are going to make a day of downtown by going to the casino is absurd. "

 

I disagree 100%.

 

 

Would love to hear your argument!

 

Theres no way to prove or disprove this, but I can say that naysayers in Cincinnati have a history of being wrong.  People laughed at the notion that Fountain Square would improve and people would start coming there.  Boy were they wrong.  People still laugh at the notion that OTR is a destination for people in town for reds games or whatever, but they are wrong about that as well. (I saw a bunch of reds game people out the last couple of days for dinner after the games were over).  What makes you think people wouldn't want to come to the casino, grab dinner in OTR afterwards, or go shopping or stay at a hotel for the night and make it a fun weekend event?  I know my family would do it in a heart beat.  And when the streetcar starts running all of these things will be easily connected and will make these sort of trips even more likely.  Lots of people (not everyone, but a lot) enjoy going out on the  town occasionally and spending time in the city.  Thats a lot of what cities are for and I have every reason to believe that the casino will enhance those trips tremendously.

The casino's power resides in its power to attract development to neighboring lots. The benefit to Pendleton would be an increased demand for housing near a major employer. I'm skeptical too but some landlords in Pendleton are offering their apartments at a market-rate for the first time and getting it. This invariably makes the neighborhood more viable. Coupled with the other projects in the neighborhood, casino employees opting for a convenient place to live close to their work could play a major role in the Pendleton's budding transformation.

 

JYP is right to say a minority of visitors will make a day of visiting downtown and as it stands right now the impact will probably be insignificant beyond the borders of the Horseshoe development --- but the potential exists that the casino will attract risk-takers to invest in some of the empty lots/buildings in Pendleton.

 

Overall though the casino replaced an empty lot and will attract a lot of people. The vast majority will gamble and leave but some will hang around and become more familiar with downtown Cincinnati.

 

 

The real challenge is going to be marketing the nearby attractions to visitors - so one-time gamblers or wedding parties or whatever are converted into repeat visitors to the core --- to see a show, try a restaurant, attend an event, etc.

The casino is adding 3,000~(?) jobs to a downtown that already has 60,000+ jobs.  I don't see how this 5%~ increase in total employment becomes a game changer for OTR residential. 

Not a game changer but on the microlevel if only a couple percent choose to live nearby in OTR/Pendleton then that would be a healthy contribution to the neighborhood.

The real question is whether or not the hipsters on Main street will walk the four blocks to eat at Margaritaville?

 

Back to seriousness though. Casinos all offer the same basic things (gambling, drinks, live entertainment, hotel (eventually)) so it will be up to Horseshoe to be competitive against Hollywood, Belterra and so on in addition to the regional casinos surrounding Cincinnati. From what I've seen so far, they are making no distinction, at least in the form of the building that will make it stand out from the others. Yes its in the city, but suburbanites around here don't like the city and avoid it as often as they can. That's why there's a giant parking garage. Go in, gamble get out. This delusion people are having that somehow tons of people are going to make a day of downtown by going to the casino is absurd. The folks that do that are in the minority and the impact will be insignificant. Tourists coming here for a convention visit will likely make a stop there but that's about it.

 

And another thing. We need to get over this delusion that the casino will help improve the surrounding neighborhoods such as Pendleton. As long as the casino is built as an island unto itself, ignoring even windows along Reading, there will be no benefit to the folks living across the street.

 

"This delusion people are having that somehow tons of people are going to make a day of downtown by going to the casino is absurd. "

 

I disagree 100%.

 

 

Would love to hear your argument!

 

I don't want to get into a long debate about the subject. Let's wait and see.

 

Will people pull into the garage and never leave the casino? without a doubt yes.

 

But I believe people will make a day of it and make a weekend of it, especially in the spring, summer, and fall months, winter not as much.

 

Only time will tell.

 

 

 

^We've had this exact discussion 50,000 times here. You are right...only time will tell.  I do know that the casino will be a huge improvement over the surface lot that it replaced. 

The casino is adding 3,000~(?) jobs to a downtown that already has 60,000+ jobs.  I don't see how this 5%~ increase in total employment becomes a game changer for OTR residential. 

 

Actually, a 5% increase is pretty impressive.  That's 5% more people in the area, and that's just the workers.  I don't know how many gamblers are predicted for a given day, but this is all translating into thousands of people that wouldn't even be in the area if the casino didn't exist.  Suppose that just 1% of the workers and patrons stop at a bar or restaurant before/after the casino (during for workers on break).  That's not going to change things overnight, but it would make a big difference to the bottom line of those establishments over time.  Assuming that the casino and associated restaurants don't cannibalize the patrons already coming to downtown, this is a gain for the area, even if the building is ugly and anti-urban.

I live in Columbus and the casino just open on Monday. They saw 25,000 people in the first night. Cincinnati will do better than that

And by better you mean betters.  Or rather by better you mean more people will flush $200 down the toilet. 

Even if only 50 people a day spend money somewhere else downtown, that's a win over what that land was providing.

 

Before The Banks, I'd say that 90 percent of Reds/Bengals fans parked, went to the game and then went immediately home (or to Newport, Covington, elsewhere for entertainment). Few fans came early/stayed late. Now, few fans don't come early or stay late even though the main reason for the visit is baseball/football. So were the Reds not beneficial to downtown before The Banks since few people stayed? That assertion would be ridiculous because they obviously were. There was just little to do.

 

The casino will attract all types, from the grandmas who pump nickels into slots for six hours to the casual guy who drops $20 and moves on - hopefully to OTR, The Banks, Fountain Square, Mount Adams, etc.

 

Horseshoe Cincinnati isn't exactly going to be the Excalibur or have the Caesar's Palace Forum Shops and all the other Vegas-style nonsense to keep people who aren't gambling entertained on-site for hours on end.

The wife an I were stopped at the light at Gilbert and Reedy looking at the back side of the casino.  She was driving, watching for the light and other traffic, slightly distracted.

 

I said, "The design of that casino is so disappointing."

 

She said, "It looks like a prison."  I replied "I think the casino looks worse.  At least the jail there has windows, it's not a featureless beige box."

 

She paused and said, "Oh.  I was looking at the jail.  You're right, the casino is much worse than the jail."

Does anyone like anything anymore? The Banks, U-Square, Clifton developments, Oakley, Mercer, casino ... What hasn't been panned yet?

 

Not sure what people were expecting with the casino. The design of these things is pretty much well-known and accepted as huge, windowless boxes designed exclusively to keep people inside. They weren't going to build a PNC Tower-looking casino there.

Does anyone like anything anymore? The Banks, U-Square, Clifton developments, Oakley, Mercer, casino ... What hasn't been panned yet?

 

Not sure what people were expecting with the casino. The design of these things is pretty much well-known and accepted as huge, windowless boxes designed exclusively to keep people inside. They weren't going to build a PNC Tower-looking casino there.

 

It's no wonder so many projects are so terrible.  With expectations like these, what else would you expect? 

 

Fact: other cities are building far more interesting, contemporary designs than what you see at The Banks, U-Square, the casino, etc.  Cincinnati needs to get some more out of town architects and developers to infuse new ideas and raise the bar locally.  I do like Mercer Commons (more for its problem solving abilities than its design, which I think is appropriate) and I am hopeful for the Dunnhumby site, but the casino is a perfect example of what you get when you have low expectations, and a lack of curiosity of what other places are doing.

^-Agreed.  Though I do like a couple of the buildings that 3CDC has built as well as the new parks the parks board/3CDC have done.

 

I really like 14th and Vine as well as Trinity flats, on the other hand I don't see much that's better than those.

 

Actually the new part of the banks isn't too bad - quite a bit better than the first phase.  Reminds me a lot of a tiny squat version of a few buildings in Chicago being built in and around the loop, though generally not the greatest things in the world but solid and contemporary:

 

K-Station - the residential tower makes me think of this: http://www.chicagoarchitecture.info/CAI/Images/200902/EchelonatKStation-Aug08-002a.jpg

Aqua (Though this building does the water reference in a way more interesting way): http://www.chicagoarchitecture.info/CAI/Images/200805/Aqua-Oct08-018a.jpg

I really like 14th and Vine

 

Agreed. Out of the new OTR buildings, I like it best. It's modern, but also respects the architectural traditions of the neighborhood. It's interesting enough to stand on its own, but still fits in with the existing buildings without drawing too much attention to itself. Is it perfect? No, but I think its a great direction for new OTR infill. So many architects want to throw up a new glass/steel jumble of boxes, or stark parking-garage-esque concrete, which is OK (I guess) but do that in a neighborhood that isn't a national historic district. 3CDC's architects need to look at the traditions of OTR and then *reinterpret* them in a  modern way. That's what the corner of 14th and Vine does.

Have you ever been out there?

 

Yes, but it was called Caesar's when I went.

 

The excitement Horseshoe Cincinnati will offer runs laps around the New Albany locale.

 

Aside from local biases, I don't think so.  They are casinos after all.  They offer live entertainment, buffets, and roulette wheels.  Cincinnati's would offer a bit more but overall it's a wash.

 

Mt. Adams, downtown, OTR and the riverfront makes weekend planning an easy choice if you're someone from Louisville and you really want to gamble and have a good time doing other things.  The locals that still just want to gamble and go home will mozy on down to New Albany.  Louisville contributes greatly to Cincinnati tourism, and the casino will be a big selling point, guaranteed.

 

I don't know about all that.  I agree that Louisville certainly contributes to Cincinnati's tourism but I don't think the casino would be the selling point as they already have one.  Cincinnati offers unique neighborhoods for Louisvillians to enjoy; the casino does not offer something unique to them.  I'm sure some will check it out since they'd already be in town anyway but I don't buy they'd come to Cincinnati for a greater casino experience.

 

It's a simple proposition - if you're in Louisville and you're considering gambling, going to a different town, or both, Cincinnati's Horseshoe Casino may affect the decision of not only a Darlene, who is content with putting her money at risk and heading home, but Alice, who may be looking to see what edge she can gain at a new casino.  Maybe she already likes Cincinnati and she's happy that she can gamble and be in a city she likes partying in, killing two birds with one stone.  So instead of gambling across the river in Indiana this weekend, she saves her money for next weekend when she'll ride up to Cincinnati.

 

Just because Darlene likes her local casino doesn't mean she'll never patronize Cincinnati's one time.  All those Louisville gamblers that'll patronize Reading Road will add up to big dollars, and also people spreading the gospel about Cincinnati's downtown.

It's a simple proposition - if you're in Louisville and you're considering gambling, going to a different town, or both, Cincinnati's Horseshoe Casino may affect the decision of not only a Darlene, who is content with putting her money at risk and heading home, but Alice, who may be looking to see what edge she can gain at a new casino.  Maybe she already likes Cincinnati and she's happy that she can gamble and be in a city she likes partying in, killing two birds with one stone.  So instead of gambling across the river in Indiana this weekend, she saves her money for next weekend when she'll ride up to Cincinnati.

 

That still doesn't answer this:

 

The excitement Horseshoe Cincinnati will offer runs laps around the New Albany locale.

 

My whole point is that it won't be more exciting or running laps around Louisville's Horseshoe as they both offer similar amenities.  That's like me saying Cincinnatians would much rather go to Columbus' newly opened Hollywood Casino over the one in Indiana off I-275 because it's much more exciting, larger, blah blah.

 

You:

Just because Darlene likes her local casino doesn't mean she'll never patronize Cincinnati's one time.

 

Me:

I'm sure some will check it out since they'd already be in town anyway...

 

Again, the casino itself is not a selling point to most Louisvillians.  The city is.

You might complain about the Horseshoe. It has to be better than this

Columbus

Wow, Columbus. That's just brutal.

 

 

You are not there because of how it looks. You are there to gamble.

Theres no way to prove or disprove this, but I can say that naysayers in Cincinnati have a history of being wrong.

 

There's naysaying, and there's legitimate criticism based on facts and expertise. I, for one, get more than a little tired of being lumped in with the COASTers and Enquirer commenters whenever I offer the slightest bit of criticism of anything being built in the urban core, and I'm sure others feel that way as well. It does nothing but stifle healthy discussion here on UrbanOhio and elsewhere.

 

Cincinnati will never be taken seriously as a city until its civic boosters can take their lumps in stride instead of getting defensive at the slightest hint of disagreement. I love Cincinnati dearly and want to see it thrive, which is exactly why I and others critique certain projects when they don't live up to their potential.

 

/rant

You are not there because of how it looks. You are there to gamble.

 

That argument works for just about anything.

 

You're not at Music Hall because of how it looks; you're there to listen to a musical performance. You're not at GABP because of how it looks; you're there to watch a baseball game. In the 40s, you weren't at Union Terminal for its appearance; you were there to catch a train.

Difference is, the architecture of Music Hall and Union Terminal enhance the act of going to a concert or catching a train, respectively, while a nice design for a casino would detract from the casino owner's desire for you to pump more money into a slot machine.

The railroads spent a lot of money building ornate stations, and even union stations (which were co-financed between several railroads, often with little public money), because they recognized that despite often having a monopoly on travel between points a and b, more people would ride if it were perceived as a glamorous activity.  Nicer stations also get people to respect the process. 

 

No doubt this new casino would get more business if they modeled their building after one of the classic casinos in Monte Carlo or some other exotic locale.  But there is a law of diminishing returns, which is why they didn't do it.