Speak Out: Where do you think a casino would be built?

Replies (16)

• Hello PackRat, I agree with you on the N.Main St. location as it could be approached without driving on Broadway. Ray

  -- Posted by SunRay on Sun, Aug 8, 2010, at 6:25 PM

• I don't understand the questions!

  I believe a Casino can be built anywhere and there should be no limit on how many. It would of course have to meet all building regulations and obtain all the required permits. Other than that,

  a casino in Cape should be built south of the bridge in the area around Standley batch and the dry dock. There should be a trolley system built much like Cape had in the early 1900s available to transport patrons to downtown Cape. JMO

  -- Posted by GREYWOLF on Sun, Aug 8, 2010, at 6:37 PM

• Hi Grey Wolf. I was wondering when I would hear from you. Sorry if I'm unclear. The gist of my question is, given the current rules and regulations, whether you agree with them or not, and given the current applications that have been submitted,where do you predict it will be built. Also, if a casino is built in Cape, which of the three locations actually mentioned by the competing companies will win out with the gaming commission and local officials.

  -- Posted by CapeNewsPackRat on Sun, Aug 8, 2010, at 7:12 PM

• Well it seems if Cape voters VOTE YES on the casino issue and the gaming commission awards the license to Cape it will probably be built on the property that the two main investors have offered.

  North of broadway on main st. I believe the southern location south of the bridge is best.

  I am not at all prepared to say Cape will pass it or the commission will award it. I am pro casino however.

  -- Posted by GREYWOLF on Mon, Aug 9, 2010, at 5:35 AM

• You may be right Rick but I think a boat in the river is cosmetically ugly and would not offer the venue most folks are looking for not to mention the Commission and the State.

  -- Posted by GREYWOLF on Mon, Aug 9, 2010, at 8:04 AM

• I think the Corps of Engineers isn't particularly fond of the boats on the river, since many of the sights encroach on the navigable waterways. Since the 'boats' no longer cruise, but just stay in place, it no longer makes sense to require them to be in the river, where they are frequently in the way of river commerce. The stopped them from cruising because it was a safety hazard, and no one really went to the boat to see the river, anyway. Most of them don't even have windows to look out of, as each window takes up space that could be hold a revenue-generating one-armed bandit.

  I believe the current law requires them only to be within a set distance, 1/5 or mile or something, of the river.

  -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Aug 9, 2010, at 8:34 AM

• For those interested, here's a link from the Missouri Gaming Commission website for the history of "riverboat" gambling in Missouri, starting with the original 1992 referendum that permitted it.

  http://www.mgc.dps.mo.gov/history_rb.htm

  The text of the most recently passed measure (bottom of the page) permits casinos to be located in "artificial spaces containing water that are within 1000 feet of the closest edge of the main channel" of the Mississippi and Missouri rivers.

  -- Posted by CapeNewsPackRat on Mon, Aug 9, 2010, at 11:47 AM

• When it comes to safety I think, the main navigation channel is located too close to the Cape Girardeau side of the river to have a boat sitting their year round.

  Besides that, why put an ugly boat on the river where it will be shut down numerous times a year because of flooding?

  -- Posted by Red Devil on Mon, Aug 9, 2010, at 6:25 PM

• Rick wrote:

  "no , i don't mean floating up and down the river .

  i mean docked on the Cape riverfront."

  That was what I addressed. Why dock a 'boat' on the riverfront, where facilities have to be built so that it can rise and fall with the river, suffer from floods and barge collisions, and end up high-and-dry in the dry season, when it does not have to be able to move. If it is going to be a permanent, fixed facility, it really does not make sense to impede river traffic with it.

  -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Aug 9, 2010, at 7:17 PM

• We shouldn't gamble with a gambling boat's location.

  -- Posted by Old John on Tue, Aug 10, 2010, at 12:11 AM

• Rumor has it that David Knight has bought some property south of the bridge as well as north main.

  -- Posted by Hookie98 on Tue, Aug 10, 2010, at 4:23 PM

• Since the facade of "Riverboat Gambling" has been stripped away, proximity to any river should no longer be a consideration, lets just call it what it is and put it where it will be most accessible and profitable.

  -- Posted by Red_Rhino on Tue, Aug 10, 2010, at 4:33 PM

• I have heard that the area south of the bridge could also serve as a parking area and shuttle vehicles would be used to transport patrons to the Casino if built on the north main location.

  I would prefer a trolley system but that would certainly be costly. Im sure a few business and land owners down there have been approached by Isle of Capri and perhaps another casino operator.

  -- Posted by GREYWOLF on Wed, Aug 11, 2010, at 7:35 AM

• 2,000-3,000 cars a day spread out over 18 hours is not going to make a big difference.

  There's very little traffic downtown anymore like there used to be in the old days.

  If I were a downtown merchant I would be very worried about the casino going south of downtown.

  Someone builds a few stores down by the casino and no one will have a need to explore downtown.

  -- Posted by Red Devil on Wed, Aug 11, 2010, at 7:45 AM

• red devil,

  you dont understand when someone goes to the casino they do not go shop around they go to the casino and back home they eat at the casino they stay at the casino i dont know where everyone gets there ideas of this helping downtown.

  -- Posted by USER321 on Wed, Aug 11, 2010, at 8:52 AM

• they should build it south of the bridge that is the best place for it

  -- Posted by USER321 on Wed, Aug 11, 2010, at 8:53 AM