Project Approved for Former Riviera Site and It’s Weird
A proposed development project set for a portion of the former Riviera casino site has been approved by the Clark County Zoning Commission. And it’s weird. Which is ground we covered in our headline. Please pay attention.
The “mixed-use” project covers 10 acres (please remember that fun fact for later) and will presumably have a 750-room hotel tower, a condominium building with 425 units, a domed entertainment venue and an amusement ride where people dangle 439 feet in the air.
And that’s not even the weird part.
Don’t just breeze by the Margaritaville sign. Rendering placeholder or done deal? Hold that thought until we get to the thrill ride with a pina colada on top.
Here’s what nobody is talking about: Back in June 2024, it was reported Fontainebleau was set to buy half of this very same 10-acre site from developers Brett Torino and Paul Kanavos, the folks behind Harmon Corner and 63 at The Shops at Crystals.
As we were the first to share, sources said Fontainebleau would use the five acres for high roller accommodations (presumably feeling its suites weren’t drawing foreign whales as hoped). At the time of the announcement, we doubled over in pain, stating publicly we thought the move was batshit crazy and throwing good money after bad given the dire financial situation at Fontainebleau.
Glossed over by our top-notch local media (“Fontainebleau is considering buying”), it appears the Fontainebleau deal isn’t happening. Which is not particularly surprising if you know anything about how bad things are at Fontainebleau. To put it diplomatically, Fontainebleau buying five acres for $112.5 million when it’s losing tens of millions every month would be akin to trying to put out a dumpster fire with buckets of bacon grease.
So, the Torino and Kanavos project (it doesn’t have a name, per se, but the entity involved is “65SLVB”) approved by the Clark County Zoning Commission covers the full 10 acres.
Even without the Fontainebleau boondoggle element, it’s still fairly weird.
Primarily, there’s no casino. Any project without a casino is dead to us.
Beyond that, who the hell builds condominiums on The Strip? It’s not 2005. Yes, condo prices recently hit an all-time high in Las Vegas, but this doesn’t really fit our narrative, so moving on.
One of the more distinctive elements of the approved 65SLVB project is a thrill ride.
You laugh, but Stratosphere probably makes more from its amusement rides than its casino.
The crack reporters at the Las Vegas Review-Journal write, “Developers did not describe the amusement ride or whether it would be a thrill ride or an observation tower.” Oy. Did they take two seconds to look at the plans? It’s a thrill ride.
When you zoom in on the plans, riders will sit in “coconut shell themed swings.” Told you it’s weird, you don’t listen.
These flying swing rides (also known as swing carousels or swingers) are popular at amusement parks and county fairs, but they tend to be 20-30 feet up, not more than 400 feet. The tower is 477 feet tall.
We had to let A.I. take a stab at it.
Worth noting in the drawings, the swing ride has a “Pina Colada Themed Spire.” The base of the attraction is labeled “Pineapple Themed.” That’s a lot of tropical fruit theming. This seems to support the idea Margaritaville could be returning to the Las Vegas Strip? The popular restaurant closed at Flamingo, but the company suggested the brand would be back. Given the lack of foot traffic, it would be a disaster, so it may just be wishful thinking on the part of the developers.
Next up, the 65SLVB project will have a domed performance venue that will have 3,310 seats. In the plans, it’s described as a “3D Ortho Theater.” The theater sits on the eastern part of the site, the part Fontainebleau was reportedly buying.
“Ortho,” of course, comes from the Greek meaning “erect.” So, we’re thinking that should’ve been the name of the thrill ride tower.
No, you grow up.
The structure looks like a slightly deflated mini-Sphere.
The plans show two proposed pedestrian bridges across Elvis Presley Blvd. (the road that runs between Fontainebleau and the project site), which would make the site more accessible to the “theater” and “thrill ride” and “condominiums.” Yes, we’re putting everything in quotation marks. Fontainebleau guests would also have an “easier time” getting to the “Las Vegas Convention Center.” If you don’t like how we use quotation marks, gets your own blog. “Seriously.”
Which all leads us to the inevitable question: Is any of this actually happening?
Our default state tends to be one of skepticism, given how many Las Vegas projects are announced but never actually happen. While this project has whimsical elements, it’s basically retail and rooms. The parties involved have a track record with retail, so the only real obstacle is financing.
“Only.”
Torino and Kanavos paid $125 million for the 10 acre site, so they have some resources. Nobody’s mentioned how much this project will ultimately cost, or where the money’s coming from, but that’s never stopped people from announcing things or submitting renderings or getting things approved by county commissioners. (See also the Sacramento A’s.)
County Commissioner Tick Segerblom is very excited for the project to proceed. Oh, right, he’s the one who was very excited for All Net Resort & Arena to be completed. For a decade. Before the project finally died for having zero financing. Just saying.
We don’t know enough about Brett Torino and Paul Kanavos to assess the likelihood of this project being completed. We rarely regret saying “not happening,” but we’re always ready for a surprise.
If the cheerleaders think this project is indicative of some sort of “north Strip renaissance,” though, they’re drupes.
That’ll teach you to skim our stories.
Update (9/8/24): Las Vegas Locally dug up another rendering of the proposed project. Again, this is just a zoning approval, so it’s not bound to specifics like whether a ride has coconut swings or is a giant flip-flop.
Leave your thoughts on “Project Approved for Former Riviera Site and It’s Weird”
12 Comments