http://www.vegaschatter.com/story/2015/2/19/235725/451/vegas-travel/No+Ifs%2C+Ands+Or...+LVCVA+Approves+Purchase+of+Riviera
On May 4th, The Riviera will be the newest addition to the list of long-gone Strip classics. Thus leaving the building of the Sahara (now known as SLS), the Tropicana and the Flamingo (which doesn't even really count since not really any of it's original structure is left, but I digress) as the only pre-1960s or "Rat Pack" era places left.
Okay, I'm going to let everyone know this isn't going to be the most conventional review, but here goes:
The Riviera first opened it's doors on April 20th, 1955 (this year will mark it's 60th anniversary, mere weeks before it's closure). It's notable if only for being the first "high rise" on the strip (with a mere nine stories) and Liberace's personal favorite place to perform and hang out in Vegas. Architecturally speaking, the original facade and older towers (now known as the Mediterranean and San Remo towers) were once fantastic examples of mid-century modern architecture. The expansions over the years didn't really complement them unfortunately, but it was still really nice to always look at The Riviera and be able to imagine the type of aesthetic that most hotels on The Strip went for in the 50s and the 60s.
Okay, for the sake of being unbiased, I will admit that yes, the place has indeed seen better days. I stopped by for a visit about a week ago and here are my observations: The decor of the casino is stuck in the 80s. The club, the entertainment options, the food court and the shops are all strange and unusual at best. Some parts of the place (especially the second floor, the vicinity of the historic Versailles Theater and the shopping arcade that leads toward the convention center) feel really desolate and eerie. The pool area feels plain by today's standards, but I feel with a little tweak it could become a retro-style, Palm Springs-ish paradise. Some would say it's beyond repair, but people were saying the same things about the Tropicana, the Plaza, the El Cortez and the Sahara a few years ago. Take a look at those places now.
What's happening to it? The convention center plans on using the property for an expansion and transit hub. I for one am not holding my breath on that. The people behind the LVCC have been talking about expanding for YEARS and yet they never do. They even had the Landmark imploded only to replace it with a parking lot. Even if they are to be held to their word this time, that still means that for at least a couple of months (if not possibly a year, seeing that they don't plan on finishing this expansion until 2017/2018) that just means another plot of vacant land on the barren wasteland that is the North Strip. And frankly, I'm seriously upset by that. We STILL have yet to see anything built on the former sites of Wet n' Wild or the Frontier. Abandoned construction plots like Echelon and Fontainebleau continue to rot away.
And it's like, it was really only a matter of time before the north strip was going to see action again. The Sahara reopened as the SLS last year. An amphitheater/events center is being built on the long vacant land across the street for Rock In Rio. The former site of the Holy Cow is currently being developed as a mini-mall. I'm not holding my breath on Resorts World, but that's a different discussion for a different day. My point is, why not let this little bit of light continue to shine as the North Strip steadily rebuilds? To me all it feels like is a sabotage of development, however brief it may be. Do people not seriously think that people look at the north side of the Strip and think "WTF happened here?" Because believe me, a lot of us (local and tourist) really do.
The Final Verdict
Pros:
The place is closing either way so does it really matter?
Cons:
See above
Suggestions:
Why not implode the Fontainebleau? Even if the construction project will generate a gain of 6,000 jobs versus a loss of 1,000, there will STILL be job loss. And ideally speaking, it's going to be at least several months before ground is broken. So why not get rid of an actual eyesore that's not doing anyone any favors?
You could also buy the plot of land next to it where Wet n' Wild used to be. With a convention center expansion and transit hub between SLS and the Riviera, there would finally be synergy on the North side of the Strip again!
But oh, that's right, I'm dealing with Vegas developer logic. Tearing down and replacing functioning, older buildings takes priority over building on vacant lots or doing away with something that's actually completely useless like mothballed construction sites.
I suppose they need to get rid of it either way to appease everyone who's oh so offended by the presence of anything built before the 90s. That's that post-1980s Vegas local/transplant/clueless tourist logic.
Return factor: 10/10. Anyone down for some India Masala before May 4th?