urbanSTL

Went with some friends last night, and I am extremely unpleased to say that the place is a wreck. They need to get a grip on things QUICKLY. Talked with a bartender for a moment and when asked "How do you like working here?" received the response "It's aweful, the most unorganized place I've ever been." Doesn't sound good. In addition, we were stopped by security officer on the largest power-trip ever, who "refused admittance" to one of the lovely ladies we were with for being "too intoxicated" when asked why he thought that, he turned around and walked away. The officer left at the entrance said he had to go by the other officer's decision. After waiting for 20 minutes (if anything, and under-estimation) for a manager to come down, we were told that the initial officer thought our friend was "extremely drunk" because she hugged the other girl that was with us. He quickly stated that we "looked allright now," however, and allowed us to pass. (She was actually sober the whole time, and was our dd for the evening.) I wanted to leave despite this fact (one of the most obnoxious things i've dealt with in a LONG time) but the ladies convinced us to stay.



NOT HAPPY.

^I have heard several people relate similar stories about not being allowed in, or actually being removed from the premises, for being intoxicated, when they weren't. Not sure how anyone can get intoxicated there when you have to wait 30 min. or more for a drink. Needless to say, most of them said they wouldn't be going back.

I visited the casino for the first time last Saturday afternoon and was pleased with what I saw and experienced. I had no difficulty finding the garage and got a spot right next to the elevator, which dropped me off right at the casino. Try finding that in Vegas!

I had lunch at Asia and it was very good. Service was prompt and I was given a refill on my drink without having to ask. They also presented my bill promptly.

Later, I walked around the casino and was impressed with it. I think it holds up very well to casinos in Vegas and I think it’s central location to the parking ramps and hotels is logical. This isn’t an architectural masterpiece, but it is practical and they’re in the business of making money, not winning awards. The old law school at Wash U won architectural awards but it was a piece of crap and lasted less than 30 years if I remember correctly. Building something for architectural merit only has its downside. I’ll take practicality and convenience when it comes to casinos, thank you.

It is still, bar far, the best looking casino in St. Louis. I hope they get their act together in terms of management or this place will sink fast, right into its own "moat".. geeeeek.....

^^You visited on a Saturday afternoon. I suspect that most of the problems are coming at their busiest times - Friday and Saturday nights, along with events like New Year's Eve. Poor management is poor management. It doesn't matter if your staff can handle the place 90% of the time if they can't handle the really busy times. From everything I have heard and seen, it seems much of the staff at Lumiere is learning on the job.



They also should have set themselves up better to handle the huge lines for MyChoice cards. I've been there several times now, and ended up leaving most of those times because I was with people that didn't have cards and they didn't want to stand in line for half an hour or more.



As far as the casino interior goes, it is laid out well for a casino, and the design is certainly better than any U.S. casino I have visited, outside of Vegas, Atlantic City, and New Orleans, of course. The major problem with layout is the casino being blocked off for everyone without a MyChoice card and the resulting lack of flow, which of course isn't Pinnacle's fault. The restaurants and shops are nice, but again, I just expected more for half a billion dollars.



Anyway, the biggest problem in my opinion, of course, is that the casino, hotel and retail are completely isolated from the Landing, nothing opens to the outside, and you have to walk through the entire casino to get to the Landing whether you are arriving from the parking garage or the pedestrian tunnel. Yes, I KNOW IT IS A CASINO! , but it didn't have to be this way.

On the Thursday after Christmas, I went for a second visit with two friends who wanted to do a "walk through". When a security guard saw me pointing out the change in flooring between terra-firma and the "moat", he chimed in that they had a problem early on when the sewage system accidentally dumped "poo water" into the moat. The whole thing had to be drained and cleaned. He really said "poo water".



This unprovoked disclosure is so wrong on so many levels I don't know where to begin.

Anyway, the biggest problem in my opinion, of course, is that the casino, hotel and retail are completely isolated from the Landing,

actually, you can walk RIGHT OUT the door on the south east side of the casino (next to the burger bar) and right into the heart of the Landing. what are you talking about?

^Hmm, what am I talking about??? I am talking about urban design. I'm talking about:



1 ) Shops, restaurants and bars that open directly to the outside, with sidewalk cafe tables;



2 ) a pedestrian tunnel that leads people to the Landing without having to walk through the casino. Or, even better, they would have spent that money instead on fixing up and lighting up the area beneath I-70 and making it pedestrian-friendly, with crosswalks, traffic-calming devices, landscaping, etc., with perhaps just a short tunnel under Memorial Dr. - or whatever it is called there, if absolutely necessary;



3 ) this pedestrian access could have led to a through east-west street somewhere on the property, ideally toward the south end, lined with shops and restaurants, ideally between the hotel and the casino, with the requisite weather-proof passage underneath the street. Or, failing that, they could have at least created a stepped, terraced east-west outdoor walkway to 2nd Street lined with shops and restaurants;



4 ) switch the hotel to the south side of the property, with the casino on the north;



5 ) beaucoup signage inside the casino directing people to the Landing;



6 ) a thoughtful plan for what the west side of the project will look like if and when I-70 is replaced or buried, instead of making it look like the north side of the Edward Jones Dome, or, worse, actually;



7 ) and a project design that doesn't create yet another giant barrier between downtown and the riverfront, which will be there long after I-70 has been removed or buried;



8 ) an overall project design that isn't some fortress-like, horrific collision between a giant parking garage, an '80s office building, and a suburban mall. Look, I'll admit that the comb-over/glowhawk turned out ok - except for the gross brown color during the day - but as far as I'm concerned, it is tantamount to putting earrings on a pig;



9 ) or, at the very least, a project design that is scaled in proportion to, and respects the architecture of, Laclede's Landing;



10 ) underground parking, or at least partial underground parking;



11 ) utilizing the ground level space in the garage for something other than parking - again, ideally, retail space;



12 ) no freakin' skybridges!



Of course I realize this all would have cost them an extra $100 million or so, and would have cost them much more to maintain and secure, but if they are soooo committed to St. Louis and ostensibly a Phase II, then why wouldn't they have at least considered some of these alternatives. It would have made for a much more attractive and well designed project, if or when Phase II does happen, and would have respected the overall plan for downtown with a focus on greater access between downtown and the riverfront. In any case, some of these ideas could have been incorporated for very little extra $$$ and would have made the project infinitely better.



And of course, anyone with half a clue knows that all Pinnacle really cares about is saving money, minimizing risk, and funneling as many people as possible into their casino, and they really have not decided yet whether or not there will be a Phase II (other than their minimal commitment - which I am sure they just see as a necessary sort of bribe to get their license) unless the loss limits are repealed. They don't really give a damn about St. Louis or the Landing. This is where the city needed to negotiate with Pinnacle and fight for a better design, but noooo, they were dazzled by Pinnacle's promises of a Phase II, and didn't want to rock the boat over the design of Phase I. How very f'n typical...and unfortunately, I expect no better from the city on the final design for Phase II, if it happens, and all phases of Ballpark Village - don't rock that boat! Just bend over and take whatever they want to give us!



Riddle me this Batman, why does a casino have to look like a casino?



By the by, people keep saying that this is the nicest casino in the Midwest. Who cares! It won't be in 5 years anyway after Chicago finishes their at least $1 billion land-based casino, probably in the Loop, or near McCormick Place.



That is what I'm talking about...are we clear now?

Boy, I could really see your point of view…if I owned a business on the Landing. I don’t see any reason, though, why Pinnacle would be interested in doing most of what you’re suggesting. I admire your vision, but you’re absolutely correct: Pinnacle is here to make money for their investors and minimize risk. Sorry that that bothers you, but they’re running a casino, not an urban design business.

I think placing the hotel at the south side of the property as you suggest is not a good idea. There’s already a hotel at that end of the parking structure and to add both at that end would congest that side of the ramp.

As for the skywalks, I see no reason for not having them. People coming to the casino from their hotels don’t want to lug coats along if they can avoid it. Having the skywalks provides a safe and convenient way for them to get to the casino in any weather. I’m as anxious as I assume you are to see the skywalk on Washington come down, but that doesn’t mean skywalks are all bad. There are hundreds of them in Minneapolis which allow people to shop on their lunch breaks and make it a much more shopper friendly city than it would otherwise be in 20 below weather.

If something is going to be done with Hwy. 70, why would you want to plow a ton of money into improving the area under it if it’s not going to be here in this form five years from now?

I’m sure the architects at Pinnacle thought of many alternatives for the location of the parking structure, casino and hotel, especially in view of their proposal for Phase II. They may have even thought of some of the same ideas you did, but for valid reasons chose their final design.

It’s fine to have a point of view, but to show such anger over Pinnacle (and the City) not agreeing with you is really kind of lame. I’m sure if you were in charge you’d find out pretty quickly your ideas may be visionary, but not practical in the real world.

Casinos tend to be recycled every 10-15 years - if not before - anyway. Look at how fast the casinos in the St. Louis area were renovated, expanded or reincarnated since casino gambling became legal in Missouri.

Aparently the poker room is where to go if you actually want to win any money .

Opening in Lumiere? I thought the space in Lumiere was effectively taken? Maybe not. A 24 hour liquor permit would be awesome. It was not cool not being able to continue drinking in the casino after the bars closed on the landing. Would this be a first in Missouri? IMO a 24 hour liquor permit would pave the way for an extremely interesting nightlife in StL. I'm in favor for sure.

Guess the glowing mohawk is not enough to identify the new casino. They are putting up a giant sign on the NW face of the building overlooking 70. Looks like a generic script backlight number that will say Lumiere Hotel & Casino.

Re - 24 hour liquor license



if you look at the signage in LP, you will see that the new steak house/lounge/night club called Sleek (not crobar) open till 5am. Who would stay at a night club 2 hrs after last call?

bpe235 wrote:Re - 24 hour liquor license



if you look at the signage in LP, you will see that the new steak house/lounge/night club called Sleek (not crobar) open till 5am. Who would stay at a night club 2 hrs after last call?

Yeah, I thought that was amusing as well.



Re: 24-hour liquor license. That will be hard to swing, maybe they can pass an ordinance making an exception for the casino, but I seriously doubt the BofA will support anything that would allow any establishment to get one. I suppose they could write it in such a way that would put insurmountable obstacles in front of any neighborhood business, e.g a $100,000 license fee. In any case, this is something for which I would gladly stand behind Pinnacle 100%.



Ideally, the BofA would pass a resolution that would allow any establishment within the boundaries of Laclede's Landing to apply for a 24-hour license. That could do wonders for Laclede's Landing, and since there are no residents, yet, who would oppose it, except maybe all of the other downtown liquor peddlers? I am not sure what kind of crowd the Landing would attract if every place could have a 24-hour license, a la Bourbon Street; they would definitely have to beef up security. There is also the slippery-slope argument, which raises the fear that it could never be contained to just the Landing, and would eventually be passed city-wide, which I suspect, most residents would be strongly against. Dunno, but it is something that should be considered. I could see the Landing becoming quite the entertainment Mecca if 24-hour drinking were allowed.

Are the clubs open yet?

Board of Aldermen.



I believe, however, that the city is constrained by statute as to the licenses it can issue. Three o'clock is the latest one can serve alcohol in the state (and I think it only applies to the major urban areas; everyone else--I believe--must close by one or one-thirty).

steve wrote:Board of Aldermen.



I believe, however, that the city is constrained by statute as to the licenses it can issue. Three o'clock is the latest one can serve alcohol in the state (and I think it only applies to the major urban areas; everyone else--I believe--must close by one or one-thirty).

Yes, but what is the earliest one can serve alchohol?



In any case, I was wondering if there might be state legislation involved. You can sell package liquor 24 hours a day, though, so what is to keep Pinnacle from selling single unopened bottles? Er well, I guess there is a "can't be consumed on premises" clause in there somewhere. So, it would require new legislation or an amendment. In that case, it will be a much tougher sell for Pinnacle.



And FYI, there is only one "club" in the casino section of Lumiere - Sleek (and whatever is all included in that; restaurant, club, VIP room, etc.) - and no it does not appear to be close to opening. Oddly enough, they had the VIP party in there on opening day, and it appeared to be finished, but since then they ripped up all of the carpeting and the whole area is encased in plastic. Don't know what the issue was. Maybe they just put everything together temporarily for the party, and they still had a long way to go - not sure how they could have had an occupancy permit for the space if they were that far away, but whatever.

jlblues wrote:
Yes, but what is the earliest one can serve alchohol?

8 a.m. We made it to the opening call sunday morning .

^What were you playing? Poker? Just curious...