This should encourage that don't you think? I can see a small cluster of accompanying tall buildings growing near this. Maybe some kind of economies of scale thing?

Yep, a "small building" to bring any sort of balance to such a cluster would have to be at least 1000 feet.

If you were responding to my post..I did say 'small cluster of accompanying tall buildings'..but yes I agree they would have to be tall to bring balance. But I don't think 800, 900, or 1000 feet would be unrealistic for Las Vegas? Sometimes it is best to go ahead and build something that may seem out of scale, as with time future buildings will bring it into scale. Also any future development could be done to complement and take into consideration the main existing building.

With the additional renderings of this project(rather than the initial ones when it was first announced on here as the Milan/Milam tower), I really like the design and look of this and think it would look very good.

they are thinking about adding anttennas to the stratosphere by ripping down the bigshot (that would suck), but for now its all in the mountains.

Most everything is on Black Mountain or Mt. Potosi.

Just noticed on the thread title that it says "LTV", when it should say "LVT" instead. Maybe a moderator can edit that?

Or did they change the name to Las Tower Vegas? :D

that would suck, the big shot is one of the coolest things in Vegas.

don't tear it down yettt!!! i haven't been on it yet!!!

Where did you hear that? That doesn’t make any sense. They could add antennas on top without tearing down the big shot, but I think it would make more sense to build it on top of a mountain (which is common in every western city), which would be much higher and probably cheaper in the long run.

There is a radio station on top of the Stratosphere. I’ve seen it, but I don’t know who uses it.

Back to the topic. I don't think the LVT will look out of place. Yes it’s very tall and futuristic, but there is so much planned and under construction, you can’t imagine what Vegas will look like in even ten years. Especially the north Strip which is quite sparse right now. Plus, if this gets built, in 20 or 30 years we may have numerous supertalls.

COOL :yes:

Just playing with you :D

Press-Enterprise

Tall Tower Proposed

Monday, January 8, 2007
Anthony Curtis

The Las Vegas new year began with yet another big idea, though this one's a bit bigger than most.

A Texas developer has proposed building a $4.8 billion 5,000-room 1,888-foot-tall obelisk-shaped condo-hotel-casino on the north Strip on the site of the old Wet 'n Wild water park.

If built, the 142-story tower would be the second-tallest building in the world (about 800 feet shorter than the Dubai Tower, which is under construction) and the tallest in the U.S. (the Freedom Tower, on the World Trade Center site, will be 1,776 feet tall).

The Clark County Commission is scheduled to consider the application in March, though it will face opposition from McCarran Airport, the Federal Aviation Administration and Nellis Air Force Base.

"The Clark County Commission is scheduled to consider the application in March, though it will face opposition from McCarran Airport, the Federal Aviation Administration and Nellis Air Force Base. "

- Hate to say it, but I see a drastic height reduction in the works...

What's the tallest skyscraper in Vegas anyway? (not counting Stratosphere). Haven't been up on it...

Currently Wynn is the tallest at about 615 ft., but developments like trump and palazzo which are currently under construction will both top out at around 650 ft.

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/ci/bu/s...t=2&ht=2&sro=1

test
 

just seeing if this works

This type of attitude is exactly why spires should not be counted in building heights. A spire in no way fits in this design and its a meaningless distraction.

Yup. If they staggered the towers they might get more support, and it actually might help the design look less like a balloon animal from Dubai.

Didnt Stratosphere get drastically reduced in height by the FAA?

This proposed is still a pretty nice looking tower though.

I know we have a few pilots on here. How much of a hazard would this thing be if built? I know it sits just outside whatever FAA height restriction zone exists so is this just a knee-jerk reaction by aviation authorities and the military or is there a genuine concern over something this tall being built? Obviously if it poses a genuine hazard it should be reduced in height (although again is there a significant difference between 1900ft and 1500ft or 1300ft?).

i love the design and location, both nationally and locally, it would be a waste to reduce the height...

I know this was originally planned as 200 floors, but shrank down to what it is now before it was released to the public. Hopefully it isn't reduced again.