My vote would be for a structure to be built across from the arena at the corner of Huron and Ontario, extending the city grid.

Indications for the Cleveland Casino site are evident in this article that provides details on the Cincinnati Casino.

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100415/BIZ01/4160358/1055/NEWS/Casino%20details%20emerging

 

----------

Local business

Cincinnati.Com » Local business

Last Updated: 1:56 pm | Thursday, April 15, 2010

Casino details emerging

 

The developers of the downtown Cincinnati casino closed Thursday on the 20-acre site, paying $35 million - or more than double the market value of $14 million.

Meanwhile, developer Rock Ventures also revealed other planned details for the casino, including:

 

About four restaurants and about four to six retailers will be built along the sidewalks of Reading Road, Broadway and East Court streets.

 

The casino itself will be behind the restaurants and shops.

----------

 

continued at above link.

Hey Guv, your pm's are full!!!

 

p.s. more on topic, I really hope they can integrate the Cleveland casino into the urban fabric city. I'm scared to death this will be a tacky Vegas/A.C. style purple monstrosity....think Tiffany's Caberet on steroids lol.

 

Indications for the Cleveland Casino site are evident in this article that provides details on the Cincinnati Casino.

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100415/BIZ01/4160358/1055/NEWS/Casino%20details%20emerging

 

----------

Local business

Cincinnati.Com » Local business

Last Updated: 1:56 pm | Thursday, April 15, 2010

Casino details emerging

 

The developers of the downtown Cincinnati casino closed Thursday on the 20-acre site, paying $35 million - or more than double the market value of $14 million.

Meanwhile, developer Rock Ventures also revealed other planned details for the casino, including:

 

About four restaurants and about four to six retailers will be built along the sidewalks of Reading Road, Broadway and East Court streets.

 

The casino itself will be behind the restaurants and shops.

----------

 

continued at above link.

I'm all for seeing this go forward for the benefit of the city, but it still makes me want to puke when I think back to Gilbert's comment last year when someone asked him when construction would actually begin.  His response "we can start breaking ground the next day!" was classic bullshit and most people probably bought it.  We now know they don't have a site selected in Cleveland, still arguing about a site in Columbus, and ground probably won't be broken by this fall, 1 year after the measure passed.

 

So my enthusiasm for these casinos quickly fades when you consider it was crammed down voters throats as a tool for creating jobs in a down economy.  By the time the damned things are actually built, the economy could be racing along again.  Why aren't they talking about opening up in a temporary space, like they did in Detroit, until the new permanent sites were built?  At least then we could capture the revenue leaving to gamble at other states, create casino jobs, and bring more visitors downtown...

Gottaplan is about to start chanting: "Polebarn!  Polebarn!  Polebarn!"

 

You answered your own question when you said it was "crammed down voters throats as a tool for creating jobs in a down economy."  The puppeteers behind this measure don't care about Cleveland.  And you can bet if Dan Gilbert could throw up a polebarn to start lining his pockets he would.  Thankfully there is still some measured debate on the issue...

I don't believe that they can do anything until the state legislators finalize the casino legislation in early June, so I think you need to chill out a lil

Gottaplan.. Gettaclue, I don't live in Ohio but I know this issue has been on the Ohio plate of voting issues for Years so not sure where you're coming from that it was crammed down anyone's throat. I think the voting public had a long enough time to think this through and don't just blame it on a tough ecomony.

sfbob - I guess I shouldn't say the issue was "crammed down voters throats" but the casino issue was put to a vote in Ohio 3 times before and voted down each time.  I think most would agree that it wouldn't have passed this last time either if the economy hadn't been struggling.  I know alot of friends & family that were against the issue on every other occasion that finally voted for it because they felt the economy needed a jolt of any kind.  The biggest selling point of all those ads was jobs jobs jobs.  The point of my post was to say that the economy will be back on it's feet & rolling by the time any jobs are created by these casinos.  It just seems very ironic.

 

 

I'm not voting for a pole barn at all either, but there are a dozen suitable spaces within 10 blocks of public square that could house a temporary casino.  I also know that when Detroit decided to open up 3 casinos downtown, they had them open & operating in their temporary locations within a year...  Get the casino open, get the tax revenue flowing, and continue discussions on location & design of permanent facilities.

 

ogibbigo - what exactly is in this casino legislation and why must it wait till early June, so long after the original measure was passed approving the new casinos?  All I'm saying is that if this is the wonderful economic engine it was touted to be for creating casino jobs, construction, and stopping the flow of money to out of state casinos, why hasn't there been more progress?  I'm sure there is alot of redtape to sort out but that isn't being communicated to the public at all.

sfbob - the casino issue was put to a vote in Ohio 3 times before and voted down each time. Get a clue yourself.

 

That's sfbob's point I think. This issue has been in front of the voting public for many years. It's not like they looked at the Casino issue on the ballot and said "What's this? Casinos in Ohio? I've never heard of such a proposal."

 

The fact that it was voted down 3 times previously may have simply been because they were bad proposals. The voting public approved the most recent proposal and I don't think it was because it was "jammed" down our throats, nor do I think we were mislead.

 

I'm not voting for a pole barn at all either, but there are a dozen suitable spaces within 10 blocks of public square that could house a temporary casino.

 

Name them.

The last casino vote was laughable: Wilmington, Ohio because the city lost its largest employer, DHL. Along Interstate 71, in the cornfields between Cincinnati and Columbus.

Well certainly the state of the economy was used to oversell the supposed benefits, which in actuality have been found to be highly exaggerated.  But that's what a good salesman does, and that would be Dan Gilbert.

 

There are alot of details that are in the process of being worked out with the actual legislation of operating, that's why you are not hearing much currently, but the intention is actually to open a temporary casino which we had talked about previously, most likely in the bottom of the Higbee building. 

 

They only recently narrowed down their search for a casino operator which was publicised. 

 

If they get the operating rules in order, and negotiations pan out with Forest City, we should be seeing that. 

I'm not voting for a pole barn at all either, but there are a dozen suitable spaces within 10 blocks of public square that could house a temporary casino.

 

Name them.

 

I would like to answer my own question if you don't mind.  Public Auditorium.  I know they've talked about using the Higbee building, but I sure would love to see Gilbert invest some money to upgrade Public Auditorium and use that as a temporary casino.  Kill two birds with one $20 million stone.

Looks like at least 2013.....

 

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2010/04/cleveland_casino_opening_pushe.html

I'm not voting for a pole barn at all either, but there are a dozen suitable spaces within 10 blocks of public square that could house a temporary casino.

 

Name them.

 

I would like to answer my own question if you don't mind. Public Auditorium. I know they've talked about using the Higbee building, but I sure would love to see Gilbert invest some money to upgrade Public Auditorium and use that as a temporary casino. Kill two birds with one $20 million stone.

 

I think you have a different image in mind then I do for what that temporary casino space could be, but I am familiar with what Detroit did with theirs: Greektown went into the old Trappers Alley space which was similar to any of the spaces along E. 4th, only much less developed back then.  Motor City went into a vacant bread factory.  MGM opened up in an what I believe was a vacant office space.  I think we have plenty of vacant storefronts, warehouses, and office spaces in downtown Cleveland that could fit the bill. 

 

Take a walk down Euclid Avenue from Public Square and see how many spaces you find before you get to CSU/Playhouse Square.  Then try the same along Prospect, Chester, Superior & St Clair.  How about space in Tyler Village?  How about the vacant/underutilized buildings on Old River Road on East Bank of the Flats?  How about the building at W.9th & St. Clair?  Would tie in nicely with existing Warehouse district traffic.  How about the vacant multi-story warehouse at the corner of E. 26th & Superior?  That could be a great location right along the highway, plenty of exposure.  What about a location along W.25th between Detroit & Lorain?  Could easily run shuttles back & forth to downtown hotels....

^I'm obviously thinking that a temporary casino would require a much larger contiguous space than you seem to think it would.  But I am not familiar with what other cities like Detroit have done for temporary casino spaces.

^^^I  find this halarious...of course I have no idea what the negotiations are like and maybe it is true that they are complicated because of the nature of the parcels as stated in the article....but could it be that Forest City is sticking it to Gilbert.  Maybe he is getting a taste of what the Med Mart people were dealing with last year when he blindly threw his weight behind FC for a Tower City site.

^^^I find this halarious...of course I have no idea what the negotiations are like and maybe it is true that they are complicated because of the nature of the parcels as stated in the article....but could it be that Forest City is sticking it to Gilbert. Maybe he is getting a taste of what the Med Mart people were dealing with last year when he blindly threw his weight behind FC for a Tower City site.

 

I don't think Gilbert 'blindly" did anything.  I think he knew what he was doing.  Essentially, he needed a location to get the issue on the ballot and figured he would deal with all of this later. 

^You misunderstood my post.  I was taking about when Gilbert very publicly pushed for and supported FC for the Tower City site when (and I think blindly and with self interest, ignoring many relevant facts) the commissioners were deciding between TC and the Mall. 

Um... what a surprise this is.  When dealing with Forest City, there's hold ups.  Even when the person dealing with Forest City is a billionaire. 

Yeah, youd think Forest City would be bending backwards to cooperate with something that should greatly benefit their mall etc.....  but not Forest City!

There's no incentive for FC to do this easily.  They could cooperate and sell the parcel for 5 million and reap all the positive benefits, or they could be difficult and sell the parcel for 50 million and still reap all the benefits.  I think they're just trying to maximize their profit which is what any smart company tries to do.

Yeah, and normally that would be at the risk of losing the possible tenant to another location (plus there are'nt really alot of prospects for Forest City at this site), but unfortunately, and this is where Gilbert actually sort of fumbled, there are only certain locations built into the amendment, most of which involve Forest City, and unfortunately the only one(s) that make sense involve Foredst City.  Forest City sort of has him by the b@$$s

^Agreed.  Gilbert made a huge mistake by only including FC sites as possibilities IF he didn't already have an agreement in place with FC to purchase one of those sites upon passage of the issue.  When I saw the sites the first time I thought for sure that he had already worked something out with FC, but it appears as though that wasn't the case.

Not trying to minimize this argument, but wherever the casino is built, whatever is paid for the property, is miniscule in the big picture of the operation.  This place will be a giant cash cow when it opens, and arguing over whether to pay $5 mill or $50 mill for the site is almost irrelevant when you take into consideration how much cash this site will make on a daily basis.  I would predict the Cleveland casino will bring in more money than all the others in the state.

 

A friend of mine works for the city operations in Detroit and told me MGM brings in over $1 million per day, double that on busy weekends.  Of course they have operating expenses, salaries, taxes to pay, etc but that is alot of cash in a city with TWO other casinos and Windsor just across the bridge.

 

My point is that any sticking point on purchase price of the land should be very short lived.  I'm sure the casino operators know how much they stand to gain by opening earlier rather than later.  When you consider the amount of possible daily revenue the Cleveland casino should bring in, the amount of revenue lost by waiting till 2013 instead of 2012 is staggering.

$1 Million a day at MGM!  No wonder Detroit is such a beautiful place!  Those multiple casinos are sure turning things around. :-D

Forest City sort of has him by the b@$$s

 

I can't believe anyone would think Forest City would do any differently since the site was specifically named in the casino amendment.  Talk about being in the catbird's seat!  I'm sure FCE will be good civic-minded partners and cut Dan a break.  :roll:

$1 Million a day at MGM! No wonder Detroit is such a beautiful place!   Those multiple casinos are sure turning things around. :-D

$1 Million a day at MGM! No wonder Detroit is such a beautiful place!   Those multiple casinos are sure turning things around. :-D

 

Actually the casinos are generating $50-$60 million a year in taxes for the city.  Every cent is needed right now.

folks let not compare apples to oranges.  Detroit is trying to turn those casinos into a regional industry.  As we know by the numbers it's not working nor helping the immediate neighborhoods.

 

Our casino is an added entertainment venue in our Downtown.

 

I would also like to add that there are many instances where things happen behind the scenes, which gives the appearance that nothing is taking place, but the project is moving forward.  None of us are at the table.  yes it would be nice to be updated daily, but it's not alway necessary.

Obviously in Cleburgers mind, that isn't good enough.

 

Dan I agree that every city is cash strapped and needs revenue--my opposition is that casinos do nothing for the economy or surrounding areas.  It's just another tax on the poor designed to fill budget gaps. 

 

So when the casino revenue tanks (as has happened nationwide in the last few years) where are the local beancounters going to come up with the cash?

I don't know, but this thread is really about the Casino as a project, not about arguing over how the law was passed, or what the economic benefits are to whom.  We already have other threads about that.  They're still here if you search for them.  So keep this thread to the development of the casino in Cleveland.

  So keep this thread to the development of the casino in Cleveland.

(Or lack thereof) ;)

^Agreed. Gilbert made a huge mistake by only including FC sites as possibilities IF he didn't already have an agreement in place with FC to purchase one of those sites upon passage of the issue. When I saw the sites the first time I thought for sure that he had already worked something out with FC, but it appears as though that wasn't the case.

 

That's what confuses me the most.  I went to a public meeting about the casino at the City Club before election day.  I apologize because I don't remember the guy's name, but he was one of Dan Gilbert's guys, and he was speaking about the casino.  I said, "The land you're looking to build the casino on is currently owned by Forest City.  Do you think that getting the land will be a problem?"  (or something to that extent)  He said, "We have options on the land already."  So I'm not sure what the hold up is.

 

I can imagine that due to the topography of the land, there will be a lot more things to figure out than there would be if they were just building on an empty lot like it sound like they're doing in Cincinnati and Columbus.

 

I also spoke to a Forest City executive about the negotiations at Jump Back Ball and he said he didn't think there would be any problems in getting this deal worked out, so again, not sure what the issues are.  I think it's more than just money.

^Probably len komoroski.

 

Regarding the deal not being done... I'm guessing, like most things of this nature, that statement was little more than "public negotiating", which is just annoying.  I have heard from some people, that "progress" is being made... whatever that means exactly.

 

Regarding, a temporary casino.  Any temporary casino would still have to be in a location approved for casino gaming via the constitution.  Which pretty much means the only legally viable location for a temporary casino would be the higbee building.  They can't open one up anywhere else, legally.  And I don't think we'll really here much about a temporary casino until the legislation is passed in june, since they don't know the paramaters yet under which they would be operating.

 

deep breaths.

Here is another article from Cin re: the development of a casino that melds into the urban fabric.

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2010/05/03/story1.html?b=1272859200^3271941#

Here is another article from Cin re: the development of a casino that melds into the urban fabric.

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2010/05/03/story1.html?b=1272859200^3271941#

 

Maybe im missing something, but why post articles about the cinci casino here?

^I am guessing because they are the same owners so people are trying to give us some idea of what they are thinking about in Cincy, to see if it is a similar vision or philosphy in Cleveland.

i would think that with the cavs games pouring thousands of hungry celebrators onto the streets so often, a temporary casino would (well, COULD) be making lotsa dollas right now.

i would think that with the cavs games pouring thousands of hungry celebrators onto the streets so often, a temporary casino would (well, COULD) be making lotsa dollas right now.

 

The economy has not right sized itself.  You would get more "lookers" than "spenders".  In addition, the CAVS fans are only a small segment of the target audience.

yes but dan gilbert.. cavs.. i just figured his retinas would be dollar symbols. but yea ur right im sure if we havent seen it now, its just not viable quite yet.

i would think that with the cavs games pouring thousands of hungry celebrators onto the streets so often, a temporary casino would (well, COULD) be making lotsa dollas right now.

 

The economy has not right sized itself. You would get more "lookers" than "spenders". In addition, the CAVS fans are only a small segment of the target audience.

 

Because the economy has not "right sized" itself yet, in your opinion, you don't think a casino would do well in Cleveland right now?  That seems silly to me.  The market is obviously there right now or the plans to build the casinos would not be moving forward.  Current casinos in other states may not be doing as well as they have in the past, but that doesn't mean they aren't making money. 

i would think that with the cavs games pouring thousands of hungry celebrators onto the streets so often, a temporary casino would (well, COULD) be making lotsa dollas right now.

 

The economy has not right sized itself.  You would get more "lookers" than "spenders".  In addition, the CAVS fans are only a small segment of the target audience.

 

Because the economy has not "right sized" itself yet, in your opinion, you don't think a casino would do well in Cleveland right now?  That seems silly to me.  The market is obviously there right now or the plans to build the casinos would not be moving forward.  Current casinos in other states may not be doing as well as they have in the past, but that doesn't mean they aren't making money. 

please provide stats.  thanks.

Actually, take the "the economy has/hasn't rightsized itself" to the appropriate thread.

i would think that with the cavs games pouring thousands of hungry celebrators onto the streets so often, a temporary casino would (well, COULD) be making lotsa dollas right now.

 

The economy has not right sized itself.  You would get more "lookers" than "spenders".  In addition, the CAVS fans are only a small segment of the target audience.

 

Because the economy has not "right sized" itself yet, in your opinion, you don't think a casino would do well in Cleveland right now?  That seems silly to me.  The market is obviously there right now or the plans to build the casinos would not be moving forward.  Current casinos in other states may not be doing as well as they have in the past, but that doesn't mean they aren't making money. 

please provide stats.  thanks.

 

Please take your own advice and provide stats for the bolded comment above.  thanks.

 

As for my claim that casinos are still making money through the recession see this Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article from about a year ago.

 

Neither a recession, nor cold, nor snow nor anything else is keeping gamblers away from the casinos, which took in $125.9 million this February compared to $110.2 million the same month the year before. Those figures equate to players' losses in the machines, with the casino retaining 45 percent and the rest claimed by the state for taxes and other designated purposes.

 

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09065/953552-85.stm#ixzz0msMokZS5

 

Detroit casino revenues are holding strong despite the economoy also.

 

http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20100415/FREE/100419933#

 

Sunday morning on the Tom Beres "Between the Lines" portion of the news on WKYC they were talking about the delay of the opening, and they were all pretty sure that the temporary space would be opened ahead of time, and the city is definitely pushing for this.  Their comments were that we would most likely be the first ones out of the gate with this temporary casino and that would be a positive thing.

A temporary casino in the old Higbees space with a main entrance at the corner of Ontario and Prospect could give some more life to that corner. 

A temp casino in Higbee's also makes sense because it's already tied into the Tower City complex and would be advantageous to Gilbert's plans IF he can land a deal with FCE for the land on the most desirable spot (in my mind and his), on the SW corner of Huron and Ontario tying into the Walkway-to-Gateway, the Q, as well as (currently) downtown's greatest concentration of hotel rooms (Renaissance + Ritz) with indoor connections.

and again... just so everyone is clear.  The reason there is no temporary casino is because currently regardless of the november vote... casinos are still illegal in Ohio.  That won't change until the legislation is introduced and passed.  So no matter how badly gilbert may or may not want a temporary casino it's a moot point.  I believe the timetable has that legislation passing sometime in June.  he also needs to have a casino operator before he can open a casino (temporary or otherwise) which i believe was recently said to be taking place in about the next 60 days.  So my guess is once they are able to open a temporary casino... they will.  And yes, it will more than likely be in higbees.  it would have to be at one of the pre approved locations, and that is the only one that makes sense.

 

the land deal at huron and ontario will get done.  It makes the most sense and has the biggest benefits for both parties.

The elegant first floor of Higbees would make for a sophisticated, dressy gambling venue.  Of course the waitresses must walk around passing out frosted malteds.  Some things are sacred!

Okay folks - this thread is for discussion of the actual construction/development of the Cleveland casino, not "here's how I feel about casino gambling". Thanks!