Lumiere Place

MattDropsTheH · PostDec 23, 2004#12004-12-23T05:09+00:00

Hello everyone. First post.

I was wondering, where exactly will the Pinnacle Casino be situated? I've heard it's on North First Street, but where exactly on the street?

The reason I ask is because I have heard a rumor that Mississippi Nights will be torn down to make room for the Casino complex. Is this just a rumor or is this actually in the works? And, should it be true, will Mississippi Nights relocate to somewhere else on the Landing?

Thanks to anyone who can answer my questions!

--Matt

(By the way, my screen name is an inside joke about my going from SLU High to SLU, so I "dropped the H," but "Dropped" wouldn't fit on AIM, so I had to use "drops". There you go. If you cared.

)

MattnSTL · PostDec 23, 2004#22004-12-23T05:19+00:00

Here is a rendering. I am searching the forum for the one that is further out. Mississippi Nights is not touched by this proposal, but Columbia Sussex, the new owners of the President want to clear it for condos, but the land was promised to Pinnacle.

BTW, my name is Matt too (obviously), and I also go to SLU. I am a Freshman majoring in Urban Affairs. I went to St. Mary's though.

matt drops the h · PostDec 23, 2004#32004-12-23T05:24+00:00

Thanks so much for the quick reply.

I love Mississippi Nights and someone I work with was bashing the City for what she thought was Mississippi Nights's imminent demise. I just wanted to confirm that, as of now, it's safe. I know it could change, but, come on, Mississippi Nights is a relic and cannot be lost.

thewayofthearch · PostJan 04, 2005#42005-01-04T19:56+00:00

Unfortunately, I think Mississippi nights is on the chopping block regardless of which casino gets it. All those buildings are owned by the city, they're just operating until given notice. It could be six months, could be a couple years, but with all the interest I wouldn't expect MN to remain an institution.

matt drops the h · PostJan 06, 2005#52005-01-06T05:27+00:00

TheWayoftheArch wrote:Unfortunately, I think Mississippi nights is on the chopping block regardless of which casino gets it. All those buildings are owned by the city, they're just operating until given notice. It could be six months, could be a couple years, but with all the interest I wouldn't expect MN to remain an institution.

Really? Why would Pinnacle need to take up more land? Why would the city let such a large portion of Laclede's Landing be dominated by a casino?

thewayofthearch · PostJan 06, 2005#62005-01-06T08:07+00:00

From what I understand not only is Pinnacle doing the casino/hotel/condo tower, but they also just bought the Embassy suites down there and have rights on that land on 1st street. They may be a casino, but they also are looking at developing the area with other retail/housing. The condo tower isnt even a must, it just has to be 50 mil of residential, no matter the form. Anyway, it also may have been part of the deal to hem in any competition after they got shot down bidding on the President. As you may have heard Colombia Sussex wants that land and was planning three condo towers, but since pinnacle seems to have the rights from the city they may be backing out. It just seems like pinnacle doesn't want anyone else there, with buying the hotel and claiming the space, but with C S's proposal on the table they will have to do something to keep their claim to it. If they give it up Colombia Sussex will build there, if they keep it I think they'll build there, what with it being right next to Embassy and their new spot...

that was long...

matt drops the h · PostJan 07, 2005#72005-01-07T05:09+00:00

Okay...here's another question. Why all of this casino hype when the President is the least successful of the St. Louis area casinos? Granted I've heard the President is really shoddy and service is bad, but does anyone really expect this new casino to attract that many more people than the President did? Are they relying upon the accompanying residential developments and their residents?

ibleedlou · PostJan 07, 2005#82005-01-07T08:24+00:00

If the President was respectable whatsoever it would probably double its' current business!

thewayofthearch · PostJan 10, 2005#92005-01-10T04:40+00:00

Really, a quality establishve friends from thment would draw a lot more people. I have friends in the city, Ucity, Webster that would rather drive a half an hour to Ameristar than go to the Admiral or Queen. The Admiral is SMALL, limited in capacity and has a less than friendly ambience. I think a top level casino would bring in big bucks...

matt drops the h · PostJan 10, 2005#102005-01-10T06:23+00:00

Does anyone really think the casino is good for downtown? And, as far as the business aspect goes, won't this new Pinnacle casino share a substantial portion of its business with the Lemay casino development (which will also feature a movie theater and a whole bunch of bells and whistles)?

comandantecero · PostJan 10, 2005#112005-01-10T07:14+00:00

i'm sure it'll do business and bring in some tax revenue. But in terms of helping downtown's character or attractiveness as a unique and imagination sparking place it doesn't do much at all in my opinion. I'd much rather see the city hand that land over to someone like Bob Cassilly and have him develop an innovative project for that land that somehow reconnects the city to the river its history and the bike path, all at the same time that it brings business and residences down there (maybe a cool ecofriendly neighborhood extension of Laclede's Landing that does something dramatic with regards to the river.....((imagination's the limit with what could be done in that respect, although maybe a riverside park/promenade with crazy sculptures and fountains that interact with the river would be cool))). But oh well........ a casino it will be........

matt drops the h · PostJan 10, 2005#122005-01-10T07:26+00:00

ComandanteCero wrote:i'm sure it'll do business and bring in some tax revenue. But in terms of helping downtown's character or attractiveness as a unique and imagination sparking place it doesn't do much at all in my opinion. I'd much rather see the city hand that land over to someone like Bob Cassilly and have him develop an innovative project for that land that somehow reconnects the city to the river its history and the bike path, all at the same time that it brings business and residences down there (maybe a cool ecofriendly neighborhood extension of Laclede's Landing that does something dramatic with regards to the river.....((imagination's the limit with what could be done in that respect, although maybe a riverside park/promenade with crazy sculptures and fountains that interact with the river would be cool))). But oh well........ a casino it will be........

I totally agree with you. I don't think it even needs to be spoken that our usage of the riverfront is a disgrace to its vibrant history and the very foundation of our beloved city.

thewayofthearch · PostJan 10, 2005#132005-01-10T20:28+00:00

Yes, the riverfront in bad shape, but imbracing the mississipi is easier said than done. Since we are the first major city without locks downriver the barge industry has a major stakel here. The river current is too strong for recreational boating, like up north at Marina St. Louis. I think that if the lock and dam proposed for just south of DT had not been scrapped due to loud protestations from the shippers then the riverfront would be well sought after, for development-from residential to marinas and retail. However, the barges, companies and shipyards have real jobs and taxes as well, they just don;t have aesrhetic appeal and the riverfront in mind.

debaliviere · PostJan 12, 2005#142005-01-12T22:04+00:00

New downtown casino gets go-ahead

By Virginia Young

Post-Dispatch Jefferson City Bureau

01/12/2005

JEFFERSON CITY ? A casino proposed for downtown St. Louis is close enough to the Mississippi River to meet requirements in the constitution, state regulators decided Wednesday.

The Missouri Gaming Commission unanimously endorsed the site plan for a $250 million casino and hotel at the top of Laclede?s Landing. Pinnacle Entertainment Inc. wants to build the project directly across from the Edward Jones Dome.

The constitution allows riverboat casinos to be located on moats, so long as the gambling area is located no more than 1,000 feet from the closest edge of the river?s main channel.

The Pinnacle project meets the requirement when the word ?channel? is broadly defined as including the usually dry area that is covered by water when the river is at flood stage. The Gaming Commission used that definition, which was provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

A rival casino company objected to the interpretation. Columbia Sussex Corp., which is buying the bankrupt President Casino on the Admiral in St. Louis, contends the Pinnacle proposal doesn?t pass constitutional muster.

?It?s not on the river in any sense of the word,? said Simon Tonkin, an attorney for Columbia Sussex. ?It?s up a hill. It?s behind buildings. It?s in a developed section of St. Louis?at a completely different elevation than the river. From this site, you can?t see the river.?

Wade Hundley, chief operating officer of Las Vegas-based Pinnacle, said Columbia Sussex was ?trying to eliminate a competitor.? Hundley said the commission?s decision ?allows us to move forward. We were very confident we had satisfied the rules.?

Pinnacle still must secure a license from the gaming commission. That is the final step in the regulatory process and would coincide with opening of the casino, planned for late 2006 or early 2007.

MattnSTL · PostJan 12, 2005#152005-01-12T22:08+00:00

Kind of a stretch, but it's within the rules. I guess that means they' re starting soon.

urbz · PostJan 12, 2005#162005-01-12T22:46+00:00

I can definitely see why C S objected. I would have too.

thewayofthearch · PostJan 13, 2005#172005-01-13T18:20+00:00

If you read the updated story today it says that C S may challenge the ruling in court. I don't see it going anywhere, because as the post states, it would draw into question other casinos, especially one that was built on the other side of a highway from the river.

I don't see this project getting slowed.

matt drops the h · PostJan 14, 2005#182005-01-14T01:38+00:00

Okay...so...apparently, that woman I work with said she saw something on the news with renderings of the new casino and that it would indeed involve demolishing a lot on North First street, including Mississippi Nights.

If this is true, I would strongly object to this casino. It just isn't going to fit stylistically in with the rest of Laclede's Landing and will take up a lot of space which could, in the future, be used for more positive, family-oriented developments.

MattnSTL · PostJan 14, 2005#192005-01-14T01:56+00:00

There is no demolition for what is going to be built right now. In the future there could be. The city controls the property where Mississippi Nights is, and according to a city inspector I know, he inspects all the buildings downtown, it is just a matter of time until that property is built on. Speaking of him, I am trying to get into some of the under construction lofts, so I can post pictures from them here.

matt drops the h · PostJan 14, 2005#202005-01-14T05:03+00:00

MattnSTL wrote:There is no demolition for what is going to be built right now. In the future there could be. The city controls the property where Mississippi Nights is, and according to a city inspector I know, he inspects all the buildings downtown, it is just a matter of time until that property is built on. Speaking of him, I am trying to get into some of the under construction lofts, so I can post pictures from them here.

Residential on Laclede's Landing would be nice, in my opinion. I just see no need for another parking garage, you know?

MattnSTL · PostJan 14, 2005#212005-01-14T05:09+00:00

I can see a need for maybe a small parking garage, but not 1,000 or more spaces like was proposed by Columbia Sussex. What they should do is build a garage from river level up to the general grade of the landing, and then build residential on top. That way, both needs are met.

chesterfieldkid03 · PostAug 25, 2005#222005-08-25T11:45+00:00

Groundbreaking for the new Pinnacle Casino downtown has been set for Sept. 7 according to Martin Van Der Werf.

loftlover · PostAug 25, 2005#232005-08-25T14:27+00:00

ChesterfieldKid03 wrote:Groundbreaking for the new Pinnacle Casino downtown has been set for Sept. 7 according to Martin Van Der Werf.

Was this in print or did you speak with him personally?

urbanstlouis · PostAug 25, 2005#242005-08-25T14:29+00:00

It was the very last line in his <A HREF="http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/busine ... 0F">column today</A>:

And groundbreaking for the new Pinnacle Casino downtown has been set for Sept. 7.

markofucity · PostAug 25, 2005#252005-08-25T16:05+00:00

so are those renderings we all dislike final then?

Lumiere Place

Lumiere Place

Lumiere Place

Choose Display Mode