Well, I think there's supposed to be a new hotel in the Flats East project.

Well, I think there's supposed to be a new hotel in the Flats East project.

Yes, there is a proposed property for the flats.  See my  post (earlier today)  about that property.

Sorry, I didn't see that. I basically agree with you, though. Cleveland is going to need some more nice hotels in the near future. Wasn't there supposed to be a Doubletree near the Carl B Stokes Courthouse?

Doubletree Hotel Cleveland Downtown/Lakeside

1111 Lakeside Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio, United States 44114

 

I believe that it was converted from a Holiday Inn.

Sorry, I didn't see that. I basically agree with you, though. Cleveland is going to need some more nice hotels in the near future. Wasn't there supposed to be a Doubletree near the Carl B Stokes Courthouse?

 

Yes Courthouse Square but that project was canceled.

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,1096.0.html

 

Doubletree Hotel Cleveland Downtown/Lakeside

1111 Lakeside Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio, United States 44114

 

I believe that it was converted from a Holiday Inn.

Two different projects, see above.

Sorry, I didn't see that. I basically agree with you, though. Cleveland is going to need some more nice hotels in the near future. Wasn't there supposed to be a Doubletree near the Carl B Stokes Courthouse?

 

Yes Courthouse Square but that project was canceled.

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,1096.0.html

 

 

You're referring to Courthouse Plaza. The DoubleTree Hotel was proposed to be built by Bruce Felder just west of the Courthouse Square, a red brick building on the northwest corner of Lakeside and West 3rd Street. The old School Belle's school uniform warehouse on Lakeside was demolished to make way for it and then the project died in the recession and travel industry meltdown that followed 9-11.

 

This is not to be confused with the Courthouse Plaza development MTS referenced.

Sorry, I didn't see that. I basically agree with you, though. Cleveland is going to need some more nice hotels in the near future. Wasn't there supposed to be a Doubletree near the Carl B Stokes Courthouse?

 

Yes Courthouse Square but that project was canceled.

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,1096.0.html

 

 

You're referring to Courthouse Plaza. The DoubleTree Hotel was proposed to be built by Bruce Felder just west of the Courthouse Square, a red brick building on the northwest corner of Lakeside and West 3rd Street. The old School Belle's school uniform warehouse on Lakeside was demolished to make way for it and then the project died in the recession and travel industry meltdown that followed 9-11.

 

This is not to be confused with the Courthouse Plaza development MTS referenced.

 

Plaza, smaza, square... hell they were both canceled!  damnit! :whip:

[*]What is the vacancy rate?

[*]What is it compared to other cities?

I feel if we do not build at least two 700 room hotels, we'll have built a convention center for nothing.  It's half stepping.   They need to be strong international brands.

 

So what if a hotel is going into the flats, with the expected uptick in business and convention travel all the extra rooms are needed.  If it's the "planned" hotel one, that will be more like a boutique property not a chain which is needed since they already have

• Brand loyalty (frequent stay programs)
  
• Built in marketing and name recognition for the brand
  
• World class convention services
  

Nobody wants to stay in a hampton inn.  We have a HUGE hole in our hotel offereings.  No Hilton, Doubletree, Conrad, W, Westin, Sheraton, Le Meridien, St. Regis, Grand Hyatt, Park Hyatt, Swiss hotel, Peninsula, Fairmount, Four Seasons.

 

In todays market we need at least a Hilton, Westn & a Sheraton.  To garner the hip crowd we need a W.  We don't one SPG property in the city.  We've only got one luxury property in downtown and two in the region.

 

I'm not saying we need to go luxury crazy, but we need to have OPTIONS and choices and give people a reason to stay in the city.  Right now the Marriott brands control our market.

 

I can't agree w/ you, more.  Anyone to say we don't need any more hotels or or don't need a serious luxury hotel, is crazy... The hotel proposed for the Flats is nice -- a step forward, for sure-- but way too small and isolated from the downtown core to have any serious convention or casino impact.

[*]What is the vacancy rate?

[*]What is it compared to other cities?

 

Vacancy rate for downtown Cleveland hotels is about 43 percent according to this.  This is average, but across the country, occupancy rates at hotels are down...

 

Downtown Cleveland does not have one hotel with 500+ rooms, which is important for conventions.  Again, I have no problem with a convention center hotel -- I think one should be built -- but I don't think we need a casino hotel.

The first article I was aware of the second thanks. This is why I didn't understand why jborger and whipjacka made the comments they did.

 

My point, we're on par with the country, but when the economy bounces back we'll be left behind because we don't have a diverse group of properties.

 

Just to clarify again...  I believe we should have a new, large hotel attached to the CONVENTION CENTER not attached to the CASINO -- which is what this thread is about.

Dan Gilbert gave us a presentation today on issue 3.  While they would be required to spend $250m one each casino... He is looking to spend more in the neighborhood of $5-600m on the Cleveland Casino.  Guy is sharp.  I don't necessarily agree with everything he has to say, but in the end, he definitely "gets it".

Dan Gilbert gave us a presentation today on issue 3. While they would be required to spend $250m one each casino... He is looking to spend more in the neighborhood of $5-600m on the Cleveland Casino. Guy is sharp. I don't necessarily agree with everything he has to say, but in the end, he definitely "gets it".

 

I sure hope to get a Casino here in Cleveland, but I am really starting to lose faith that this will pass.  For one, I really am leary about what Penn National will do with the license Dan Gilbert will have for the Casino in Cincy and Toledo.  Considering they spent $60 mill to lobby against the one in Wilminton last year due to their Indian intrests, I think they will buy Cincy's license and hold onto it to block Casinos there.  Same goes for Toledo.  I do believe that Gilbert will come through in Cleveland, but the talk down south is that Penn will buy Gilberts license for approx $100 mill to block the development.  This may kill it for the southern vote, but I hope I am wrong.  Sorry to sway off topic.

Dan Gilbert gave us a presentation today on issue 3. While they would be required to spend $250m one each casino... He is looking to spend more in the neighborhood of $5-600m on the Cleveland Casino. Guy is sharp. I don't necessarily agree with everything he has to say, but in the end, he definitely "gets it".

 

$600 million is a lot of dough.  I'm a supporter of this issue, as with a casino connected to Tower City will only bolster the entertainment options available in the center of the city.

^I think Issue 3 is running about 57-39 in support, so I think it has a good chance. In my opinion, it all depends on voter turnout.

I knew it was coming, but I started hearing "No on 3" ads on the radio today.  I expect a full scale assault leading up to election day.

Not living in Cleveland anymore but reading Cleveland.com everyday, it would seem that this is going to pass quite easily.

Not living in Cleveland anymore but reading Cleveland.com everyday, it would seem that this is going to pass quite easily.

 

It will pass by a wide margin in Cleveland and Cuyahoga County... but this is a State issue.

And this is a thread about the project, not Issue 3. Here's the Issue 3 thread.....

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,20859.0.html

Interesting bit of news...not sure what I think of it:

 

Casino backers: locals will get 90 percent of casino jobs

By William Hershey | Tuesday, October 27, 2009, 02:56 PM

 

Backers of the proposed constitutional amendment to allow casinos in Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati and Toledo on Tuesday, Oct. 27, pledged that 90 percent of all jobs in the casinos would go to residents of the four host cities and the surrounding metropolitan areas.

 

That would amount to about 6,750 jobs, according to Bob Tenenbaum, spokesman for the pro-casino Ohio Jobs and Growth Committee.

 

MORE FROM DAYTON: http://www.daytondailynews.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/ohiopolitics/entries/2009/10/27/casino_backers_pledge_local_re.html

 

Today, I went to go hear Len Komoroski, president of the Cavs, speak at the City Club about Issue 3.  Just some more notes on the potential casino development:

 

Dan Gilbert seems to be really focused on urban cores.  Len said that when Penn National first approached Gilbert, they wanted to build casinos around racetracks.  Gilbert wasn't interested.  He only signed to be on board when Penn agreed to build the casinos in downtowns across Ohio.  He's moving his 2,000 Quicken Loan employees in Detroit from the suburbs to a new downtown Detroit headquarters.  He supports entrepreneurs in Detroit financially with the stipulation that they must base their companies downtown...

 

I mention all of this because they really seem to believe this will be a good thing for development in downtown Cleveland.  Yes, he obviously wants to make a profit, but he's far more concerned about downtown Cleveland than the TruthPAC group that's running all of those anti Issue 3 ads...

 

In regards to the site, the casino WILL be built at the corner of Huron and Ontario.  I asked about the land and he said they already have land rights to build there so no more negotiations need to be done in that area.  They want a strong, street level presence.

 

They're set to get underway right after Issue 3 passes.  The Cleveland casino could open as early as late 2011, but a more realistic date is early 2012.

 

Len said opportunities exist to connect the casino to Tower City, but says it's too early to make any decision on that right now.

 

Len also emphasized that the casino will not have tons of restaurants.  Several times throughout the presentation, he said many casinos that are not in urban cores have 10 restaurants and a hotel and all those types of things because they need them -- there's nothing else around.  This will not be the case with the Cleveland casino.  They want to work with local restauranteurs for the few restaurants the casino will have.  But he said the average person will stay in the casino for 2.5 hours -- similar to someone going to a Cavs game.  They don't want it to be a bunker that traps people inside.

 

Even though the issue says a minimum of $250 million must be spent to develop each casino, Gilbert has committed $500-$600 million for the Cleveland casino.  Len said having a (relatively) smaller licensing fee is allowing them to spend more on development than other casinos across the country.

 

They estimate the Cleveland casino will bring in 8 million visitors a year -- more than double the number of people that watch the Cavs, Indians and Browns combined.

 

They claim that people who book conventions look for cities with casinos so the casino will make Cleveland more appealing to conventions.

 

We were talking about downtown Cleveland occupancy rates earlier in this thread...  Len said our hotel occupancy rate is 48 percent.

 

The Cleveland casino should add 5,000 temporary jobs for construction, plus 4,000 long term jobs.  When someone else pressed Len on that number, he seemed to include jobs that would be directly benefited from the casino -- sign companies, delivery drivers, etc..  The actual number of people on the Cleveland casino payroll would be 2,500-3,000.

 

Tax revenue from the casino for the City of Cleveland alone is estimated to be $30 million a year.

I have read the actual amendment.  It is an interesting read.  Some about the issue and some about the developments themselves.  To keep it on topic, I will only say that the locations of the casinos are very specifically designated in the wording of the issue.  In reality you are not voting to allow casinos in ohio, you are voting to allow casinos on 4 very specific plots (within ohio).  That is how the developer is controlling who gets to build the casinos, since they already have contracts/control on the land authorized.

 

Development is a wonderful thing in most cases, and bringing people into an area, any area, will enhance the area.  Sometimes in unexpected ways, but the local businesses will adapt.

and WHY are people opposing this issue?

Thank you for that very thorough run down jborger!

and WHY are people opposing this issue?

 

People have laid out their concerns here and on several other threads regarding this topic.  Let's not muck that up by being completely asinine about it.

 

 

... For one, I really am leary about what Penn National will do with the license Dan Gilbert will have for the Casino in Cincy and Toledo. Considering they spent $60 mill to lobby against the one in Wilminton last year due to their Indian intrests, I think they will buy Cincy's license and hold onto it to block Casinos there. Same goes for Toledo. ...

That is rather alarming to hear.

Thanks for the summary upthread, JBorger!

In regards to the site, the casino WILL be built at the corner of Huron and Ontario.  I asked about the land and he said they already have land rights to build there so no more negotiations need to be done in that area.  They want a strong, street level presence.

 

It doesn't get much stronger than that intersection...

 

 

 

 

In regards to the site, the casino WILL be built at the corner of Huron and Ontario.  I asked about the land and he said they already have land rights to build there so no more negotiations need to be done in that area.  They want a strong, street level presence.

 

Thats great to hear...I think that will be a great location and remove a large chunk of the chainlink fence on the west side of ontario.  Considering that location, obviously Gilbert is going to want to make it easy to get to the Q from the casino.  I know there is the walkway from TC that he can probable tap into, but if he truly wants a street presence, people will need to go out the front door, right onto Ontario.  Ontario is a pretty scary street to cross, especially right before a cavs game.  What does everyone think of a Las Vegas BLVD-style raised, pedestrian overpass?  Maybe leave the 2nd story of the casino and walk over Ontario and down the stairs , onto the sidewalk right in front of the Q?  It would also make it easier to get to E4th and Gateway from the Casino.

I absolutely love the site selection.  It really was the only site that made sense if Gilbert wanted the Casino woven into our urban fabric.  The only thing I will say is that something will have to be done about making that intersection more pedestrian friendly.

So the casino (if issue 3 passes) will be built above the rta tracks leading in and out of tower city and above the walkway connecting the Gund Arena and tower city? Or are we talking about a little further down Huron on the parking lots behind tower city?

I absolutely love the site selection.

 

Sorry, I can't picture what area you are talking about??

Philosophy: Use money from those who don't have it....to help a state that does not have it? Very wise.

So the casino (if issue 3 passes) will be built above the rta tracks leading in and out of tower city and above the walkway connecting the Gund Arena and tower city? Or are we talking about a little further down Huron on the parking lots behind tower city?

 

Good questions.  I thought the CC/MM was supposed to be sited a little further down Huron over the parking lots and large ramp... but that wedge where Huron meets Ontario could be part of the plan.  I don't think it will extend south on Ontario; meaning, the street presence will likely be on Huron.  The only question I have is where does the fountain and turnabout go.  I have never seen a casino without those features (not that I would be opposed to leaving them out).

 

Philosophy: Use money from those who don't have it....to help a state that does not have it? Very wise.

 

See: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,20859.0.html

 

I absolutely love the site selection.

 

Sorry, I can't picture what area you are talking about??

 

Its amazing to me how people sitting at a computer don't know how to use Google!

 

I think that will be a great location and remove a large chunk of the chainlink fence on the west side of ontario. 

 

I am glad someone else notices how horrible that fence looks, all rusted and weed infested and its been that way for year's with just about zero maintenance. I just don't understand how a city official can drive by that eyesore everyday and think its o.k. There is fence like that all around downtown.

 

As far as the location for the Casino I am excited about something going on that corner. This might be our last chance in this economy to do something big there. But as pointed out in other posts, that is going to be a tough intersection to make more 'user friendly'. Hopefully this project can spur some development for the Huron Point(where the Lebron billboard is). And if I was Dan Gilbert I would use some of that development money to clean the fortress looking Landmark Office Tower, just an incredibly cold and uninviting looking building. Not sure what the architect was thinking on that one.

Thanks for the condescending map that shows that the casino will be built on top of the Red Line.

And if I was Dan Gilbert I would use some of that development money to clean the fortress looking Landmark Office Tower, just an incredibly cold and uninviting looking building. Not sure what the architect was thinking on that one.

 

Possibly the architect was thinking - this huge building needs a loading dock somewhere, let's stick it on the back side rather than on Prospect or Ontario.  Granted it's ugly, but I don't know what other access was possible at the time given the multitude of rail tracks below grade.  I believe the Landmark complex was the first American project built on "air rights" rather than owning the land beneath.

 

And why would Dan Gilbert spend development money to clean a building he doesn't own?  (Since Sherwin Williams owns the building, I think it's a bit ironic they don't seem to care about the image their dirty Huron Rd. facade conveys.)

And why would Dan Gilbert spend development money to clean a building he doesn't own?  Since Sherwin Williams owns the building,

 

Of course I understand that, just wishful thinking on my part...

What does everyone think of a Las Vegas BLVD-style raised, pedestrian overpass?  Maybe leave the 2nd story of the casino and walk over Ontario and down the stairs , onto the sidewalk right in front of the Q?  It would also make it easier to get to E4th and Gateway from the Casino.

Could that be what they mean from this language in the amendment, talking about the various pieces of land they want? "All air rights above the approximately 0.87 acre parcel of property situated along and south of Ontario Street in close proximity to the intersection of W. Huron Road and Ontario Street."

So the casino (if issue 3 passes) will be built above the rta tracks leading in and out of tower city and above the walkway connecting the Gund Arena and tower city? Or are we talking about a little further down Huron on the parking lots behind tower city?

I believe Huron and Ontario will be the main entrance.  You can leave The Q and walk across the street to the casino.  It will also be the "middle" of the complex.  It will stretch out west down Huron and southeast towards Tower City Amphitheater.  Len did mention the Time Warner Amphitheater by name when staying where it would be built....  I think they might get rid of it and build something new because he also mentioned "concert venues" at the casino.  You can build a lot with $600 million....

Huron/Ontario can be made a lot more pedestrian friendly without needing a skybridge.  There's just never been a need with so little on the southwest third of the intersection, and really not much on the immediate other sides except the arena. I would rather they use the underpass if they feel the need for a grade seperated connection.

Huron/Ontario can be made a lot more pedestrian friendly without needing a skybridge.  There's just never been a need with so little on the southwest third of the intersection, and really not much on the immediate other sides except the arena. I would rather they use the underpass if they feel the need for a grade seperated connection.

 

There is already a walkway.

 

Why do people feel the need to build overpasses and walkways.  It's a city with a decent street grid.  Walk a few damn blocks. 

 

We always complain that we are "not like" DC, NY, Philly.  Well this is a reason why we dont get/understand urban living.  Get out your damn comfort zone and walk!  Ya Lazy F*cks!

The walkway to the gateway is RIGHT there.  Why would a bridge be needed. 

I walk or ride my bike around that area for Tribe games.

 

It's frightening because even when the police are directing, the traffic there goes way too fast for a walkable downtown. Too many lanes, it's like the daytona 500. You step out onto the crosswalk and it immediately starts flashing "Don't Walk" lol. I'd support the pedestrian bridge unless they can make real changes here.

I walk or ride my bike around that area for Tribe games.

 

It's frightening because even when the police are directing, the traffic there goes way too fast for a walkable downtown. Too many lanes, it's like the daytona 500. You step out onto the crosswalk and it immediately starts flashing "Don't Walk" lol. I'd support the pedestrian bridge unless they can make real changes here.

That is today.  With more buildings and  development on that area, the traffic patterns will be studied and adjusted/corrected so that people can walk the area a safe manner.

 

Even if it stays the same, with more people on the street the vehicular traffic will have to pay more attention to pedestrians.

you hope^

Huron/Ontario can be made a lot more pedestrian friendly without needing a skybridge. There's just never been a need with so little on the southwest third of the intersection, and really not much on the immediate other sides except the arena. I would rather they use the underpass if they feel the need for a grade seperated connection.

 

There is already a walkway.

 

Why do people feel the need to build overpasses and walkways. It's a city with a decent street grid. Walk a few damn blocks.

 

We always complain that we are "not like" DC, NY, Philly. Well this is a reason why we dont get/understand urban living.   Get out your damn comfort zone and walk! Ya Lazy F*cks!

 

AMEN to that.... 

I agree that the walkway is already there and could be reused.  I was just thinking about creating more of a streetlife instead of putting people underground and then directly in the Q.  If the front door of the casino is on Ontario, I don't think you'd ever see anyone coming in or out of it because you'd be facing 8 lanes of traffic.

 

 

I went to see Dan Gilbert speak yesterday at the Q.  He didn't get too much into the design or actual placement (he did say it would be at grade with ontario/huron), but he mentioned that part of the land specified in the amendment is underneath the Higbee building.  Not sure if he meant that the casino just might extend underneath it or if there could be an entrance on that side as well.

I agree that the walkway is already there and could be reused.  I was just thinking about creating more of a streetlife instead of putting people underground and then directly in the Q.  If the front door of the casino is on Ontario, I don't think you'd ever see anyone coming in or out of it because you'd be facing 8 lanes of traffic.

 

 

I went to see Dan Gilbert speak yesterday at the Q.  He didn't get too much into the design or actual placement (he did say it would be at grade with ontario/huron), but he mentioned that part of the land specified in the amendment is underneath the Higbee building.  Not sure if he meant that the casino just might extend underneath it or if there could be an entrance on that side as well.

 

Why would you put it on ontario instead of facing TC?  I don't undersand that.  Putting an entrance on Ontario isn't a bad idea, but the main entrance should face TC.

 

I think once construction starts the walkway will be used.  It gives people options.  I would think people would prefer to walk above ground than under unless the weather is really bad.  I'm not a fan of underground walkways and over passes to be built into new project, but this walkway is already there and I too have used it.  However, when its crowded, it's faster to walk above ground to get to the train.

 

I wonder if he means the Old Higbee's menstore that was on the "prospect level".  That portion of Higbee's was actually on TC property.

Dan Gilbert was on wmji this morning and in talking about the casino location he mentioned that he would work with the city to "take down" the parking structure across from the Q to provide better access to downtown and E 4th st., which he really seems to be focused on. I am assuming he must mean the one that I have highlighted. I really like that idea, I have always hated that structure.

Thats interesting since I think it is one of the more attractive parking garages and was meant to be accompanied by a building, so the site wasnt meant to be an open space. (isnt this where the bike station is to go?) 

Also, Im not sure how this structure impedes access to E 4th and downtown.