Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson endorses Issue 3 casino measure

By Henry J. Gomez, The Plain Dealer

September 23, 2009, 5:07PM

 

Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Mayor Frank Jackson, who is seeking a second term in the Nov. 3 election, also wants voters to approve a statewide ballot measure that would allow Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert to develop a casino in Cleveland.

 

 

http://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/index.ssf/2009/09/mayor_frank_jackson_endorses_i.html

A question for you urban pioneers.  Is a casino behind the terminal tower connected to the Avenue compatible with housing units also behind the TT and connected to the Avenue (if that is what it is called.  I always thought that the back side of the TT facing the Scranton Peninsula was more appropriate for housing than a convention center. 

A question for you urban pioneers. Is a casino behind the terminal tower connected to the Avenue compatible with housing units also behind the TT and connected to the Avenue (if that is what it is called. I always thought that the back side of the TT facing the Scranton Peninsula was more appropriate for housing than a convention center.

 

Is a casino appropriate next to housing per zoning?  If that's the question, my answer is "no", but I suppose anything is game, considering the land is all currently zoned for industry or commercial.  Anything is possible if the area was rezoned.

Hello all, I'm a longtime lurker and now a first-time poster! Very interesting story...

 

Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert unveils drawing of Cleveland casino, won't include hotel yet

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/09/mt-preview-71c3eaf9eb84919b4b9a102ff24de70e420d841d.html

 

 

I don't like that he is planning on putting it on Scranton Peninsula. This is just as isolated as the Detroit casinos--which he says have failed because they are isolated. This would create no spill-over into downtown at all. I originally backed his proposal, but now I'm pretty much against it. If it had been positioned well in downtown, i would support it.

America F YEAH!

I don't like that he is planning on putting it on Scranton Peninsula. This is just as isolated as the Detroit casinos--which he says have failed because they are isolated. This would create no spill-over into downtown at all. I originally backed his proposal, but now I'm pretty much against it. If it had been positioned well in downtown, i would support it.

 

Do we know that it is proposed for Scranton Peninsula?  It just says in the flats across from Quicken.  Although if it was to be on the back of Tower City it would probably say that.  And as of last week the location was undetermined. 

 

I agree Scranton wouldnt benefit downtown much if at all.

The plan is for Scranton Peninsula or behind TC where the Med Mart would have been.

I don't like that he is planning on putting it on Scranton Peninsula. This is just as isolated as the Detroit casinos--which he says have failed because they are isolated. This would create no spill-over into downtown at all. I originally backed his proposal, but now I'm pretty much against it. If it had been positioned well in downtown, i would support it.

 

Do we know that it is proposed for Scranton Peninsula? It just says in the flats across from Quicken. Although if it was to be on the back of Tower City it would probably say that. And as of last week the location was undetermined.

 

I agree Scranton wouldnt benefit downtown much if at all.

 

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/09/mt-preview-71c3eaf9eb84919b4b9a102ff24de70e420d841d.html

 

Here it says that it will be in the Flats.

Here's the link to Yes on Issue 3. There's an aerial photo that shows (albeit rather small) exactly where the casino will be built.

 

http://www.yesonissue3.com/Locations/

At this point, I think it's an assumption the casino would be on Scranton Peninsula.  The space behind the TC north of the river  may have been tight for a convention center, but it's plenty large enough for a reasonable casino...

 

Detroit's a bad comparison for Gilbert's plan.  Detroit has a sprawling downtown with 2 of 3 casinos (save the Greektown) spread wide of the downtown core.  Downtown Detroit is not as interconnected, transit/ped friendly as downtown Cleveland... Gilbert's proposal connecting to the back of TC means the gamblers would be in walking distance of practically all of downtown amenities which is not the case in Detroit.

 

I'm not thrilled about not having a hotel attached -- not in Cleveland, which is starved for a large, major classy hotel -- but I understand Gilbert's (initial, at least) idea of not trapping gambler's in one location discouraging the from checking out the rest of downtown...

 

^^So basically its going to go where the TC Amphitheater is?  If the entrance to the hotel is on grade with Ontario, I think it be a huge addition to the gateway neighborhood.  If you have to get to it through the flats or TC, then there would be no spillover.

renderings!

 

"He said he was willing to forgo the hotel idea because he hopes that customers at his casino will wander the downtown area and boost surrounding businesses. That would differ from the casinos in Detroit, which are busy but surrounded by desolate conditions. "

 

more at Cleveland.com

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/09/mt-preview-71c3eaf9eb84919b4b9a102ff24de70e420d841d.html

Can't tell from that rendering precisely where it's being built.  Behind TC?  Scranton Peninsula?  Scranton, PA?  Tuscon?

Hmmmm. The rendering of the proposed Cincinnati casino (shown on the Yes on Issue 3 web site) is exactly the same as the rendering of the Cleveland casino! These illustrations must be nearly 100% representative of how the buildings will look if Gilbert says he will break ground immediately upon passage of the issue. How disappointing that they potentially will not be unique to their respective cities.

I don't like that he is planning on putting it on Scranton Peninsula. This is just as isolated as the Detroit casinos--which he says have failed because they are isolated. This would create no spill-over into downtown at all. I originally backed his proposal, but now I'm pretty much against it. If it had been positioned well in downtown, i would support it.

 

That's exactly the point--to bring people in and keep them there.  Casinos aren't designed to spill over.  I wish Dan Gilbert a night of walking around downtown Detroit....

It might spill people over into tower city.  I wonder if there are plans to build a people mover from the arena to the casino.

 

You will never have to go outside!

 

Seriously, how many acres of parking is being proposed?

Can't tell from that rendering precisely where it's being built. Behind TC? Scranton Peninsula? Scranton, PA? Tuscon?

 

This is the same exact renderring that was released for Cincy at Broadway Commons.

^People, this is just a rendering designed to drum up support and get people excited about the possibilities.  I'm sure each site would be uniquely designed.

 

As for the location... the "yes on issue 3" website clearly shows the proposed location of the casino on the proposed convention center site directly behind TC.  This is not the site of the TC ampitheater and would not replace it as has been mentioned.  With that said, I read through the bill and the scranton penninsula is also listed as a possible site, but I'm guessing Gilbert would prefer to put it behind TC if he can come to an agreement with Forest City.  Imagine the spillover traffic the casino would get from baseball, basketball, hockey games, and other gateway events.  I have to think the site behind TC is Gilberts preferred location.

I love it. But only if they keep the name as shown on the rendering. 'Come to CASINO in downtown CLEVELAND! Here you can GAMBLE your MONEY on GAMES OF CHANCE!"

 

I would guess Gilbert would prefer behind TC as well, as you have two indirectly connected hotels as well.

^People, this is just a rendering designed to drum up support and get people excited about the possibilities.  I'm sure each site would be uniquely designed.

 

As for the location... the "yes on issue 3" website clearly shows the proposed location of the casino on the proposed convention center site directly behind TC.  This is not the site of the TC ampitheater and would not replace it as has been mentioned.  With that said, I read through the bill and the scranton penninsula is also listed as a possible site, but I'm guessing Gilbert would prefer to put it behind TC if he can come to an agreement with Forest City.  Imagine the spillover traffic the casino would get from baseball, basketball, hockey games, and other gateway events.  I have to think the site behind TC is Gilberts preferred location.

 

I believe that is what he was speaking of in regards to "clustering" all entertainment within downtown Cleveland for the greatest effect.  Putting it behind Tower City would do just that.  A person could leave the casino, go shopping or to a movie in Tower City, then go to a game at the Q, while being a stone's throw away from Progressive Field.  All of that within a short walk of E. 4th Street, Gateway, and the Warehouse District. 

 

I like the plan.  I just hope that the city is able to market itself properly IF the measure passes as a true tourist destination.

I like the plan. I just hope that the city is able to market itself properly IF the measure passes as a true tourist destination.

 

I don't think we have to worry  about the city marketing itself too much.  If Dan Gilbert is putting down $600 mil, I'm sure he's going to be having a damn good marketing department.  I'm guessing he'll tie it in with what else he already owns downtown: Lake Erie Monsters and the Cleveland Cavaliers.

I am all for it being sited behind TC... so long as it provides a street presence on the south side of Huron like the latest rendering we saw of the CC/MM.

 

Scranton Peninsula would not be the end of the world though.

 

Question: taking Gilbert and his preferences out of the equation, where would be the IDEAL location for a casino in Cleveland?

Good question. I still think that the backside of tower city would be in the running. I wouldn't want it in the warehouse district parking lots or the west bank.

I like the location behind tower city solely for the fact that it could create a very nice foot traffic flow from the MM/CC site through downtown to the casino.  If it was on Scranton peninsula I think you'd get more people taking taking some form of transportation, and lose out on all that potential business for other merchants.

Having it behind Tower City leaves the Scranton Peninsula vacant for "future" development.  As much as Forest City has been holding that land as a carrot in front of the city for big projects, I don't know if they could get anything bigger than having a casino directly behind Tower City.  That would have to be the highest and "best" use of land for them as land owners/developers. 

With the tunnel connection from the Q to Tower City, it makes so much sense for Gilbert to want to put it behind Tower City.

Can't tell from that rendering precisely where it's being built.  Behind TC?  Scranton Peninsula?  Scranton, PA?  Tuscon?

 

The website has a star directly behind Tower City, where parking lots are now.  I think it's the best location downtown.

 

Here's a Google map of the spot: http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&ll=41.497393,-81.692619&spn=0.016489,0.041327&t=h&z=15&msid=111073887364519458387.0004746991616e1d6ae70

 

Hopefully they'll build it at street level w/parking garage directly underneath the structure.  That way they won't have to cannibalize any more land for parking.

Question: taking Gilbert and his preferences out of the equation, where would be the IDEAL location for a casino in Cleveland?

 

If I had my way, we wouldn't have 1 large casino, but several smaller casinos, each just a casino- no restaurant/hotel/concert hall/shopping.  They could sell passed drinks and hors d'oeurves.  Limit the slots and make them focus on table games, as those are more likely to attract high rollers, less likely to take grandma's rent money.  Think maybe something a little larger than a restaurant, maybe the size of the Corner Alley on East 4th.  Allow up to one each in Gateway, the Warehouse District, Tower City, the Flats, Playhouse Square or on the waterfront.  Basically they could be used as an anchor anywhere we decide through the planning process that we want to have an entertainment district.

 

If we're going with one large one, I'd like to see it close to, but not on, Public Square.  The May Company building, or the Warehouse District lots at Superior/W. 3rd would be best, imo.  That could help close the gap between the WD, TC, the new CC/MM, and Gateway.  Behind TC is acceptable, but not great.  Scranton Peninsula is a planning disaster.

 

Of course, considering the limits of the approach we're going with there's no use taking Gilbert's preference out of the equation.  He will by law be the only one allowed to have a casino in Cleveland.  That's one mighty useful law for him!

"Imagine the spillover traffic the casino would get from baseball, basketball, hockey games, and other gateway events.  I have to think the site behind TC is Gilberts preferred location."

 

McCleveland are the gateway business owners worried about this?

 

 

I'd say as a whole they are generally supportive.  Though that is not to say there aren't some opposed to it.  I think it really depends on the implementation of the casino.  My only problem is that there is only one person who will get a say in what this casino is and where it's built.

IMHO it's a mistake not to incorporate a hotel at this time; however if Gilbert and the others feel they must make this concession to get the support of those that could turn the tide against them, oh well. This does make it even more important to locate it centered behind TC. This will have greater appeal to the type of patrons that would make a long weekend kind of trip since you have attached hotels, and I believe they're the ones you build this for. Several reasons for my opinion: These folks typically have more expendable income which means more likely to venture out to shopping (TC Avenue being attached helps this along), see a play, investigate the Warehouse District and 4th st, maybe go see the RRHOF etc. These folks don't need to, or want to spend all there time in the casino. Here in Vegas there are millions of sq ft of retail and they stay fairly busy and have become key reasons for people to visit the different properties. I believe if your primary reason for coming to Cleveland for a getaway is the casino, your gonna want to stay at the casino and then decide where you want to venture; I know I would.

 

Keep in mind the day trippers don't care where you put it, they won't be visiting anything other then the casino.

 

 

"Imagine the spillover traffic the casino would get from baseball, basketball, hockey games, and other gateway events.  I have to think the site behind TC is Gilbert's preferred location."

 

McCleveland are the gateway business owners worried about this?

 

 

 

This is a legitimate concern, all the more reason not to have this at the east end of the TC site rather centered. Let folks spill out to 4th st. before stumbling over to the casino

If the casino is proposed to go where the Med Mart/CC would have gone, I would support that location. If it is proposed to go on Scranton Peninsula, I think that's a terrible location for it to interact with downtown.

 

I don't know how tall a casino should or shouldn't be as I've never been in one (and have no desire to change that) so I don't know if it would fit on the big surface parking lot bounded by Huron, East Fourth and Prospect. If it could go there and still offer the kind of floorplates a casino should have, then I think that could a tremendous location to interact with downdown's other assets.

A good casino would only have one floor with high ceilings, but I couldn't give you an actual height.  You might have an area that could be a couple of stories high to accomodate poker rooms, restaurants, bars etc.

i just say go all out and build as many casinos as developers want. I do like the idea of smaller casinos around the city. But i would like to see some competition here for casinos not just 1 casino in cleveland.

::) ::)

Hello all, I'm a longtime lurker and now a first-time poster! Very interesting story...

 

Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert unveils drawing of Cleveland casino, won't include hotel yet

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/09/mt-preview-71c3eaf9eb84919b4b9a102ff24de70e420d841d.html

 

 

 

The caption under this picture says "Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert on Thursday presented this concept drawing for his proposed casino in Cleveland's Flats. "

I thought it was going behind TC?

I think the area behind TC is technically the flats.

 

If I had my way, we wouldn't have 1 large casino, but several smaller casinos, each just a casino- no restaurant/hotel/concert hall/shopping. They could sell passed drinks and hors d'oeurves. Limit the slots and make them focus on table games, as those are more likely to attract high rollers, less likely to take grandma's rent money. Think maybe something a little larger than a restaurant, maybe the size of the Corner Alley on East 4th. Allow up to one each in Gateway, the Warehouse District, Tower City, the Flats, Playhouse Square or on the waterfront. Basically they could be used as an anchor anywhere we decide through the planning process that we want to have an entertainment district.

...

Of course, considering the limits of the approach we're going with there's no use taking Gilbert's preference out of the equation. He will by law be the only one allowed to have a casino in Cleveland. That's one mighty useful law for him!

All very insightful

I applaud the hell out of Dan Gilbert.  He might be our city's finest leader.

What has he done besides buying a basketball team and bringing a few hundred jobs to the city.  Has he done anything that will benefit the community more than himself?

Off the top of my head here are some people who have done more for the city and are better leaders

The Gund family, see the foundation

Peter Lewis with his support of the arts and Case

Toby Cosgrove as the face of the Cleveland Clinic

Michael Symon

Lillian Kuri

Peter Lawson Jones (and I am not even a fan of his)

Price and Corna of Stonebridge and 668 fame

Iris and the late Bert Wolstien

Chris Royanne

HELL, SAM MILLER.....

 

I am sorry if I am jumping down your throat, but I have seen posts like these on cleveland.bomb and I just don't get it.  Either these people work and love working for Gilbert, or they just don't know the caliber of leadership in this town.

 

I have nothing against Dan Gilbert.  But, really, what is there to be for?

 

Here is an example of what I was trying to say.  This is the Gund foundation list of Cleveland initiatives they are funding.

 

Does this mean that Dan Gilbert is a bad guy?  No!  It is just a reminder that he is more business man than messiah.

(And it is a reminder that a lot of poeple who do extrodinary things for this city do not get the recognition they deserve...but that is off topic)

 

Foundation Awards $5.6 Million in September

 

CLEVELAND OH - The George Gund Foundation increased its support to the Fund for Our Economic Future, a collaborative effort to improve Northeast Ohio’s economy, with a three-year $4 million grant.

 

 

The Fund, which was launched six years ago, is a collaborative of more than 60 organizations and individuals that have pooled resources to strengthen regional competitiveness through grantmaking, research and civic engagement. The Foundation’s previous commitment had been $3.1 million over three years.

 

 

“In a time of economic stress it is more important than ever that our region’s leadership and resources pull together,” said David Abbott, Foundation executive director.  “A collaboration such as the Fund, tackling the tough systemic issues we face, is really hard work.  But joining forces makes far more impact than disconnected effort, and our trustees feel strongly that increasing our investment in the Fund signals our strong belief in collaborative action.  Our increased funding also reflects the impact that the Fund has made and the fact that the Fund’s work is critical for the success of the other organizations we support in fields ranging from the arts to education.”

 

The grant was among 50 totaling $5,582,074 made by Foundation Trustees at their September meeting.

 

 

Other grants of interest include:

 

• $100,000 to the Cleveland Heights/University Heights City School District for the First Ring Superintendents Collaborative, a group of 15 school districts.

 

• $40,000 to the Universal Health Care Action Network of Ohio for the Ohio Consumers for Health Coverage coalition.

 

• $50,000 to Ohio Grantmakers Forum for a collaborative project to support strategic restructuring among human service organizations in Cuyahoga County.

 

• $50,000 to the Ohio Environmental Council for a diesel pollution reduction campaign in Cleveland.

 

• $80,000 to the Cleveland Housing Network for its work in stabilizing neighborhoods.

 

• $75,000 to Kent State University Foundation for the Cleveland Urban Design Collaborative's work on Re-Imagining a More Sustainable Cleveland and publication of the journal Urban Infill.

 

• $16,000 to CityMusic Cleveland for free concerts in Cleveland neighborhoods.

 

 

The George Gund Foundation was established in 1952 by George Gund, former chairman of the Cleveland Trust Company.  The Foundation funds programs that enhance our understanding of the physical and social environment in which we live and increase our ability to cope with its changing requirements.  Grants are made quarterly in the areas of education, human services, economic and community development, environment and arts.  Foundation commitments to date have totaled almost $534 million.

 

For further information contact:

Deena M. Epstein (216) 241.3114

 

Seems like the Gund Foundation has given more to the City of Cleveland this year than President Obama's stimulus package!

I think there could/should be a large hotel built in the TC complex, just not immediately attached to the Casino/casino floor.  If such hotel is built away from the casino, it would encourage people to wander away from the cocoon of the slots floor.  The TC triangle is a large area, and there are still several 'holes' inside the triangle as well as, obviously, immediately outside of it while still leaving plenty of space for a substantial Gilbert casino.  You'd think FCE would be all over this: more foot traffic for their struggling mall; a gigantic tenant for TC = a win-win for Miller/Ratner.

 

In addition to a possibly new hotel, there's plenty of adjacent-to-Renaissance space to more than double that classic-though-small Cleveland Grand Dame.

Issue 3 will hurt businesses near casinos, group of restaurants, bars says

By Reginald Fields

September 30, 2009, 6:30AM

Columbus -- A study released Tuesday by a statewide bar and restaurant group rips a four-casino proposal for over-promising on jobs and local aid that gambling could bring to Ohio's largest cities, including Cleveland.

 

The Ohio Licensed Beverage Association commissioned the study by four professors from Hiram College to blow holes in Issue 3, the constitutional amendment on the Nov. 3 ballot backed by Cleveland Cavaliers majority owner Dan Gilbert.

 

 

... more at Cleveland.com

Uh... "The Ohio Licensed Beverage Association commissioned the study by four professors from Hiram College TO BLOW HOLES in Issue 3..." pretty much sums up this half-ass story.  The study was commissioned for the sole purpose of dissuading voters, making it blatantly biased.

 

Give me a real study, not one covering only half the story.

Uh... "The Ohio Licensed Beverage Association commissioned the study by four professors from Hiram College TO BLOW HOLES in Issue 3..." pretty much sums up this half-ass story. The study was commissioned for the sole purpose of dissuading voters, making it blatantly biased.

 

Give me a real study, not one covering only half the story.

 

Or it just balances Gilberts inflated "positives" that would come with a casino. 

I'm not sure if I'm buying this story....plus, the 4000 or so employee's of the casino are NOT going to want to eat/drink where they work so I assume they will be venturing out into the city.

^Truth.  There's definitely special interests and politics on both sides of the equation. 

There's definitely special interests and politics on both sides of the equation.

The truth lies somewhere in the middle.  Issue 3 will bring jobs (the exact number is up for discussion) and tax revenue (the exact number is up for discussion).  And they will be Ohio jobs, whether it's current residents (good thing) or "experienced casino workers" that MOVE TO OHIO FOR A JOB (good thing).  Either way, they'll be Ohioans paying Ohio income taxes and spending their money at Ohio businesses.

 

It will also lead to a brand new entertainment complex being built on what is currently a parking lot in downtown Cleveland.  And new construction of this magnitude in urban Ohio is something we normally drool over.

 

This casino will also bring people to downtown Cleveland. (the exact number is up for discussion) Will some of those people just go to the casino and never explore the city?  Yes, but not all.  (the exact number is up for discussion)  Will some people who were going to spend money on East 4th Street on a Friday night decide to spend that money in the casino instead?  Yes.  Will some people lured downtown by the casino end up wandering over to East 4th Street that would have never wandered over there before?  Yes.  (in both of these cases, the exact number is up for discussion...)

 

This is not the end all, be all solution to Cleveland's problems, but it's another piece of making downtown a 24/7 neighborhood with people who live, work, play and stay there.  An environment full of entertainment options not found in the suburbs.  There is no finish line.  The city keeps growing and building off the successes of other projects within its boundaries.

^well stated.

^well stated.

ditto!