Author Topic: Cincinnati: Pendleton: Horseshoe Casino (Read 144659 times)

The_Cincinnati_Kid · « **Reply #175 on:** November 10, 2009, 01:12:59 PM »

Long time to wait for his horse to come in, hasn't he owned that land since the early 80s? I am sure he has made a ton off of parking in the last 30 years.

Civvik · « **Reply #176 on:** November 10, 2009, 03:29:50 PM »

I wish I could peek forward in time and see how many of these urban planning buzzwords that got dropped in this speech actually come to fruition. I'm not saying they're blowing smoke up the city's ass, but it will be an interesting project.

jmecklenborg · « **Reply #177 on:** November 10, 2009, 03:57:15 PM »

None. He's under no legal obligation to do so because the state amendment explicitly says the casinos will not be subject to local zoning laws, review boards, etc.

oakiehigh · « **Reply #178 on:** November 10, 2009, 04:58:42 PM »

Would some sort of new BC transit center (built similar to Charlotte's) be too redundant in regards to proximity to Government Square and the Riverfront Transit Center?

Could it aid in the building of LESS parking garages?

TheHemroid · « **Reply #179 on:** November 10, 2009, 05:01:31 PM »

^Well what would be sick is if a transit center was next door to the casino. But that won't happen.

Caseyc · « **Reply #180 on:** November 10, 2009, 11:14:09 PM »

rest assured, that casino will have a mammoth, sprawling parking structure attached to it.

LincolnKennedy · « **Reply #181 on:** November 10, 2009, 11:24:51 PM »

They should temporarily move the Greyhound station to the Riverfront Transit Center, if nothing else than to piss off the boondogglers for their next foray.

ProkNo5 · « **Reply #182 on:** November 11, 2009, 02:59:50 AM »

I've been thinking they should move the Greyhound Station to 5th and Plum. The Megabus already stops over there, and it's a straight shot to Government Square. But now that you mention it, I kind of like the idea of moving it to the RTC. That would make it the second nicest Greyhound Station in the country though (behind Milwaukee's of course

). But seriously, how difficult would it be to lease the space to Greyhound and maybe Megabus?

thomasbw · « **Reply #183 on:** November 11, 2009, 03:24:33 AM »

Quote from: ProkNo5 on November 11, 2009, 02:59:50 AM

I've been thinking they should move the Greyhound Station to 5th and Plum. The Megabus already stops over there, and it's a straight shot to Government Square. But now that you mention it, I kind of like the idea of moving it to the RTC. That would make it the second nicest Greyhound Station in the country though (behind Milwaukee's of course ). But seriously, how difficult would it be to lease the space to Greyhound and maybe Megabus?

I would think somewhere over by Union Terminal would be a good location, tie in with Amtrak and future rail service.

so it goes · « **Reply #184 on:** November 11, 2009, 05:00:11 AM »

Quote from: ProkNo5 on November 11, 2009, 02:59:50 AM

But now that you mention it, I kind of like the idea of moving it to the RTC. That would make it the second nicest Greyhound Station in the country though (behind Milwaukee's of course ). But seriously, how difficult would it be to lease the space to Greyhound and maybe Megabus?

Agreed

LincolnKennedy · « **Reply #185 on:** November 11, 2009, 05:27:14 AM »

Quote from: thomasbw on November 11, 2009, 03:24:33 AM

I would think somewhere over by Union Terminal would be a good location, tie in with Amtrak and future rail service.

Right. But so long as the 3C rail will be at Lunken, they should see if they can use the Transit Center, because it would connect directly to the streetcar, and undoggle COAST's arguments by showing what a boon good planning is to the City.

sscincy · « **Reply #186 on:** November 11, 2009, 10:48:04 AM »

This may be a dumb question, but where in the casino amendment language did it say that two casinos will be owned by Dan Gilbert's group and two will be owned by Penn Gaming? I guess I don't understand how it essentially assumed (by the media, citizens and these two groups) that these two groups are automatically the "casino owners" when legislation hasn't even been proposed, let alone passed. Further, the casino commission (who is in charge of casino operator licenses) hasn't even been formed.

I understand under-the-table agreements, politics, etc. are in play, but how are these two groups already the "casino owners" or "casino operators?" Why couldn't MGM, for example, come in a try to obtain the Cincinnati license?

I'm not trying to be difficult..just trying to understand the assumption of who will own the casinos.

TheHemroid · « **Reply #187 on:** November 11, 2009, 11:31:56 AM »

Wow it's just nice to sit back and actually know whats going in this space now. No more speculation and wishful thinking. This fills in such a huge gap downtown.

jmecklenborg · « **Reply #188 on:** November 11, 2009, 12:03:22 PM »

At the very least large fuel tanks and an enclosed waiting area with restrooms would need to be installed if Greyhound were to occupy the Transit Center. I do think it's an interesting idea to pursue, even if potential lease revenue is minimal.

Civvik · « **Reply #189 on:** November 11, 2009, 01:54:33 PM »

Quote from: sscincy on November 11, 2009, 10:48:04 AM

This may be a dumb question, but where in the casino amendment language did it say that two casinos will be owned by Dan Gilbert's group and two will be owned by Penn Gaming? I guess I don't understand how it essentially assumed (by the media, citizens and these two groups) that these two groups are automatically the "casino owners" when legislation hasn't even been proposed, let alone passed. Further, the casino commission (who is in charge of casino operator licenses) hasn't even been formed.

I understand under-the-table agreements, politics, etc. are in play, but how are these two groups already the "casino owners" or "casino operators?" Why couldn't MGM, for example, come in a try to obtain the Cincinnati license?

I'm not trying to be difficult..just trying to understand the assumption of who will own the casinos.

That's a good question. Does anyone know the answer? Ohio could have made some extra cash auctioning off the licenses, perhaps.

Blue Line · « **Reply #190 on:** November 12, 2009, 01:14:33 AM »

Quote from: jmecklenborg on November 11, 2009, 12:03:22 PM

At the very least large fuel tanks and an enclosed waiting area with restrooms would need to be installed if Greyhound were to occupy the Transit Center. I do think it's an interesting idea to pursue, even if potential lease revenue is minimal.

The problem I see is that if you encourage Greyhound to vacate their current building for RTC, what happens when we want to use RTC for another use (light rail or others)? Would Greyhound then be out to dry, wasting the building that they currently have? In my opinion, that would make it prone to demolition.

Civvik · « **Reply #191 on:** November 12, 2009, 03:24:25 AM »

I have taken greyhound several times before MegaBus started, and the depot in Cincinnati could actually get pretty full with people who were just sitting around. If you have never taken Greyhound before, it's actually quite fascinating, it's like the airline of some shadowy alternate reality. I don't think the RTC was designed for lots of long-term queues. Jmecklenborg you aren't sitting on some blueprints for the RTC, by chance?

Cygnus · « **Reply #192 on:** November 12, 2009, 04:49:39 AM »

Couldn't a portion of the future garages on the south wall of the RTC be used to build a Greyhound terminal?

TheHemroid · « **Reply #193 on:** November 12, 2009, 06:49:15 AM »

Well Blueline, I have a feeling RTC won't be big enough if and when we get the rail. Union Terminal is ideal and I think people see the significance of using that. I have a feeling that when we do get rail, it will completely bypass the riverfront with the exception of 1 stop for the train. The potential in developing the entire area surrounding UT is too much to overlook.

Blue Line · « **Reply #194 on:** November 12, 2009, 07:35:37 AM »

Oh, believe me. I think that there should already be concentrated development around UT. I was only speaking about RTC in terms of a light rail stop in the future...because I see that is being the only other use for that thing, other than what we've been discussing for Greyhound. Not sure if this is corollary, but the Greyhound terminal where it is could be an asset when/if the casino is built at BC. A streetcar connection at BC would also create an interesting linkage. Either there or at RTC, which is already going to happen with Phase I. So, either way.

Civvik · « **Reply #195 on:** November 12, 2009, 07:44:05 AM »

Alrighty this one's wandering off topic. I'm partly to blame. We can start a thread about relocating the Greyhound station if people are really that into it.

TheHemroid · « **Reply #196 on:** November 12, 2009, 10:51:58 AM »

I think we should all give a toast to BC becoming a complete madhouse;) let the fun begin!

Johio · « **Reply #197 on:** November 12, 2009, 01:41:06 PM »

Guess we're all going to have to find a new piece of real estate for our fantasy arena replacement for Riverfront Coliseum.

Blue Line · « **Reply #198 on:** November 12, 2009, 02:55:10 PM »

Quote from: Civvik on November 12, 2009, 07:44:05 AM

Alrighty this one's wandering off topic. I'm partly to blame. We can start a thread about relocating the Greyhound station if people are really that into it.

I believe I actually mentioned how it would enhance the casino site...

thomasbw · « **Reply #199 on:** November 13, 2009, 12:47:49 AM »

Quote from: Blue Line on November 12, 2009, 02:55:10 PM

Quote from: Civvik on November 12, 2009, 07:44:05 AM
Alrighty this one's wandering off topic. I'm partly to blame. We can start a thread about relocating the Greyhound station if people are really that into it.

I believe I actually mentioned how it would enhance the casino site...

The Mohegan Sun Casino on Connecticut has an onsite arena where their WNBA team plays,

Flyboy41 · « **Reply #200 on:** November 13, 2009, 01:47:18 AM »

Quote from: thomasbw on November 13, 2009, 12:47:49 AM

Quote from: Blue Line on November 12, 2009, 02:55:10 PM
Quote from: Civvik on November 12, 2009, 07:44:05 AM
Alrighty this one's wandering off topic. I'm partly to blame. We can start a thread about relocating the Greyhound station if people are really that into it.

I believe I actually mentioned how it would enhance the casino site...

The Mohegan Sun Casino on Connecticut has an onsite arena where their WNBA team plays,

The Cincy casino would really benefit from a new arena. I believe the MGM Grand in Vegas also has an arena since Bon Jovi was going to be there when I was in Vegas this summer. Build a new 15-18,000 seat arena with the casino and tear down US Bank arena for more development. I think the casino owners could recoup their investment.

DanB · « **Reply #201 on:** November 13, 2009, 01:50:01 AM »

Why build something the same size as current?

jmecklenborg · « **Reply #202 on:** November 13, 2009, 02:07:59 AM »

Luxury boxes. It varies from league to league, but teams typically share revenue from general seating and some media deals but teams get to keep 100% of their own luxury box revenue. The leagues did this on purpose to have leverage to force municipalities to build them new stadiums and get new, much more lucrative leases.

Speaking of which, US Bank arena was a privately built and still is a privately owned building just like Cincinnati Gardens. Cincinnati is not getting an NBA or NHL team until the metro attracts another 500,000-1 million residents, which won't be for another generation, if ever.

Johio · « **Reply #203 on:** November 13, 2009, 03:04:15 AM »

Quote from: jmecklenborg on December 26, 1973, 02:54:47 PM

Speaking of which, US Bank arena was a privately built and still is a privately owned building just like Cincinnati Gardens. Cincinnati is not getting an NBA or NHL team until the metro attracts another 500,000-1 million residents, which won't be for another generation, if ever.

Which is interesting b/c there are 11 metropolitan areas smaller than Cincinnati that already have an NBA team, per 2008 population estimates. However in 6 of those cities, the NBA is the only professional team in town. Only Cleveland supports more than 2 professional teams.

24. Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN MSA 2,155,137
25. Sacramento–Arden-Arcade–Roseville, CA MSA 2,109,832
26. Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH MSA 2,088,291
27. Orlando-Kissimmee, FL MSA 2,054,574
28. San Antonio, TX MSA 2,031,445
33. Indianapolis-Carmel, IN MSA 1,715,459
34. Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC MSA 1,701,799
39. Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI MSA
41. Memphis, TN-MS-AR MSA
44. Oklahoma City, OK MSA
46. New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA MSA
49. Salt Lake City, UT MSA 1,115,692

An attached arena could be an interesting concept. It would allow the casino to draw bigger acts, therefore more customers, than a normal, non-Vegas casino would. This would help differentiate it from the other 3 that will be built in state as well as provide a reason for people who live closer to the out of state casinos to come to Cincinnati instead.

Cincinnatus · « **Reply #204 on:** November 13, 2009, 03:14:34 AM »

^ But most do not have MLB or NFL, which are the two most popular sports in the U.S. What, Cleveland is the only city on that list that has NBA, *NFL, and MLB, with a small(er) metro.

*I guess you could not count the Browns.

Cbus and Indy will never get MLB because of Cincinnati and Indy may hurt our chances of NBA. Cbus could hurt our chances of getting NHL, but even the Bluejackets are struggling in Cbus.

Personally, and I've said it before, if we had to choose between NBA or NHL - I'd pick NHL hands down. There's more respect for NHL players and this city seems to appreciate that. (when I say respect, I mean how hard the players play/the $$$ they make)

jmecklenborg · « **Reply #205 on:** November 13, 2009, 03:17:09 AM »

People don't seem to understand that there is a limited amount of money in any particular area, commensurate with that area's major companies and population. Most companies that can afford a luxury box are only going to buy one or two, not one for both stadiums and a new arena.

As for general attendance, I think we're already seeing that the growth of UC's program is hurting Bengals ticket sales. Obviously the games aren't on the same days, but UC is a lot cheaper to see.

thomasbw · « **Reply #206 on:** November 13, 2009, 03:17:35 AM »

No offense to Columbus here, but the Blue Jackets are the only NHL team in the state, located in the state capitol, and have the state flag as the team's logo

Change your name to the Ohio Blue Jackets and broaden your fan base by 9 million people

Cincinnatus · « **Reply #207 on:** November 13, 2009, 03:20:18 AM »

^ Sh!t, I'd love for the Blue Jackets to come to Cincy, to try their financial luck here!

Btw, do you really think the name change would have that large of an impact?

Johio · « **Reply #208 on:** November 13, 2009, 03:22:07 AM »

Quote from: thomasbw on November 13, 2009, 03:17:35 AM

No offense to Columbus here, but the Blue Jackets are the only NHL team in the state, located in the state capitol, and have the state flag as the team's logo

Change your name to the Ohio Blue Jackets and broaden your fan base by 9 million people

Probably not a bad idea. They are struggling financially with their arena lease agreement. They aren't directly threatening to move but they have hinted that it would be a soultion on the table.

Johio · « **Reply #209 on:** November 13, 2009, 03:25:32 AM »

Quote from: Cincinnatus on November 13, 2009, 03:14:34 AM

^ But most do not have MLB or NFL, which are the two most popular sports in the U.S. What, Cleveland is the only city on that list that has NBA, *NFL, and MLB, with a small(er) metro.

*I guess you could not count the Browns.

Cbus and Indy will never get MLB because of Cincinnati and Indy may hurt our chances of NBA. Cbus could hurt our chances of getting NHL, but even the Bluejackets are struggling in Cbus.

Personally, and I've said it before, if we had to choose between NBA or NHL - I'd pick NHL hands down. There's more respect for NHL players and this city seems to appreciate that. (when I say respect, I mean how hard the players play/the $$$ they make)

I agree that Indy will probably never see professional baseball b/c it is sandwiched between so many other existing teams; Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Cincinnati. I'm not sure how much of a market the Pacers have in Cincinnati, though. In fact, I don't think the city has any NBA allegiance whatsoever. The Bearcats and Musketeers apparently fill that void. From that standpoint the NHL probably would be a better fit. From the sounds of it, there are several NHL teams that are in a world of financial hurt. If it ever became abundantly clear that a team was available, it'd be interesting to see if Cincy (or Cleveland) would make a play at them. I don't think the Bluejackets have much interest outside of Central Ohio but I could be wrong.

News:

Author Topic: Cincinnati: Pendleton: Horseshoe Casino (Read 144659 times)