SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/index.php)
-   Cancelled Project Threads Archive (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/forumdisplay.php?f=654)
-   -   LAS VEGAS | Crown Las Vegas | 1,064 FT / 324 M | NEVER BUILT (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=121285)

NYguy Dec 6, 2006 12:38 AM

LAS VEGAS | Crown Las Vegas | 1,064 FT / 324 M | NEVER BUILT
 
Haven't seen this one here. If so, this thread can be deleted...

Las Vegas Business Press

New Strip development is really going vertical

http://www.lvbusinesspress.com/conte...q_11011032.jpg

BY ARNOLD M. KNIGHTLY

The new owner of the dormant Wet 'n Wild land has a tall order in mind for the Strip property -- a 1,888-foot-tall hotel tower.

Texas-based developer Christopher Milam wants to build a 142-story obelisk as the centerpiece of a hotel-resort-casino project, according to plans presented to the Clark County Planning Commission late last month. "It makes sense in Las Vegas," Milam explained. "A 4,000-room hotel on the Las Vegas Strip is just fine whereas, in most non-gaming markets, a 400-room hotel would be plenty large."

The structure would be the tallest building in the Western Hemisphere and the tallest hotel tower in the world. The 1,149-foot-high Stratosphere Casino Hotel & Tower, less than a mile north on Las Vegas Boulevard, is currently the tallest building west of the Mississippi River.


To realize his dream, Milam first has to surmount many regulatory hurdles. His biggest may be persuading the Federal Aviation Administration and Nellis Air Force Base that the project will not be a flight hazard.

Pending a final height-determination study by the FAA, the Planning Commission approved all the use permits and design reviews -- except for the height waiver. The full County Commission will likely review the project at its March 21, 2007 meeting.

The Texas developer may think his project, modeled on the 2,313-foot-tall Burj Dubai pinnacle, is "just fine." But it has already attracted a few powerful opponents upset about its height.

The FAA sent Milam a "Notice Of Presumed Hazard," dated Nov. 4. It began a 60-day period in which Milam must respond, or else the approval process will begin again. A typical study takes one to six months, according to the FAA, although a more complex study can take longer.


"The big problem with the proposed 1,888-foot tower is that it would punch into the airspace that airplanes use while performing instrument arrivals and departures into and out of McCarran," said FAA spokesman Ian Gregor, adding that any height exceeding 708 feet would have an adverse effect on air traffic.

Milam is currently working with Washington, D.C.-based consulting firm JDA Aviation Technology Solutions to develop a response to the FAA's notice. Once a determination becomes final, the decision would have to be appealed to FAA's Airspace & Rules Division. Clark County development code mandates that county officials cannot vary or grant waivers from the final determination of the FAA.

Attending into the wee hours of the Planning Commission meeting -- the item was not heard until after 9:30 p.m. -- was outgoing Clark County Aviation Director Randall Walker, as well as representatives from Nellis.

While Walker would only say he was there to "monitor" the issue and did not speak, his attendance was noted by one of the commissioners.

Col. Timothy Green, Nellis' mission support commander, submitted a letter from 99th Wing Commander Col. Michael Bartley asking that Clark County deny Milam's application. Describing the project as "of significant concern to Nellis," the letter said that the project could result "in a loss of critical aircrew training (and) represents an unnecessary level of risk to the long-term sustainability of Nellis AFB operations."

"You'll find that quote, that exact language, every time this issue comes up for them, whether it's a residential neighborhood close to them or a new retail center outside the base or a building on the Strip," Milam rejoined. "It's a policy they have. Nellis is never going to say, 'We love tall buildings in the valley.' That's never going to happen."

While Milam admits that the project is at the outer reaches of the base's airspace, he is said that he has been in discussions with Nellis and believes that, being eight miles from the base, that the issue can be resolved.

Even if it is, some are skeptical the project can be realized. "We've seen a lot of these out-of-towners come and go," said John Restrepo, principal of Restrepo Consulting Group, a Las Vegas real estate-research firm. "I find it difficult to believe that they can pull off a project like this unless they have financial strength, development experience and a recognizable brand."

Some are even more vehement. "We've filed a complaint with the county on this project," said Bruce Hiatt, owner of Luxury Realty Group, which specializes in high-rise real estate. "It's completely out of character with the neighborhood, and it has an immediate impact on neighboring projects such as Sky Las Vegas, Turnberry Place, and Fontainebleau.


"There are a whole host of issues that something like this creates including traffic, emergency services, parking, and obstruction of views," Hiatt lamented. "It casts extreme shadows on nearby properties. Would something of this size and scale even sell in a slowing real estate market? I don't know."

______________________________


http://www.lvbusinesspress.com/conte...q_11096974.jpg


http://www.lvbusinesspress.com/conte..._110969742.jpg

NYguy Dec 6, 2006 12:54 AM

quote from the second article, interview with the developer:

Quote:

As far as the height itself, Nellis AFB registers objections to the project as submitted. Also, the FAA says it's notified you of a "presumed hazard." Given those objections, how do you intend to move forward?

Those are two separate issues and we are working with both the FAA and Nellis, and have been for some months. With respect to Nellis, they have a general policy of opposing tall buildings, for obvious reasons, but it's an issue that can be resolved.

As far as the FAA is concerned, any building over 200 feet tall within a five-mile radius of McCarran is determined by regulation to be a hazard to air navigation. So every hotel on the Strip is a Part 77 obstruction, technically. That's why they issued the DNH. Everybody gets issued a DNH. We're in the middle of the process to determine if the building does present a hazard and -- if it does -- how to make it not. We have a consultant in Washington who's working directly with the FAA.

So you're taking it to the top?

No, we're actually working from the bottom up, which is the way you do it. But we haven't yet responded to the obstruction finding because we're doing our homework and then we'll respond formally to the FAA.

So is the 1,888-foot height non-negotiable?

We think that will ultimately be found to not be a hazard and that's where we wanted to be. The reason is that makes it the tallest building in the U.S. The next-tallest building is the Freedom Tower in New York, which was World Trade (Center), which is 1,776 (feet). They're locked into that number for obvious reasons. You don't build a building this tall and make it a little shorter than the one they just built. That's not a good approach to marketing, if you will.


Stratosphere Dec 6, 2006 2:03 AM

Go Vegas! *crossing finger*

Rise To The Top Dec 6, 2006 2:12 AM

the thing looks hideous in my mind, i would hate to see that thing everytime i fly out to vegas, being 4-6 times a year. Lets hope they redesign this 1.

toddguy Dec 6, 2006 4:03 AM

It should not be an obstruction..it is close to the Stratosphere and that is over 1100 feet tall anyways. Build it Vegas!!!! If it would fit in anywhere it would be in Las Vegas. I bet it would end up being spectacular.

HK Chicago Dec 6, 2006 4:09 AM

Quote:

"It's completely out of character with the neighborhood
WTF? Quote of the day...

The title should be "Milam Tower"

BnaBreaker Dec 6, 2006 4:24 AM

In my opinion, it is completely in character for the "neighborhood", which is why I hate the damn thing.

CoolCzech Dec 6, 2006 5:20 AM

What's "modeled on the Burj Dubai" about it? I don't see the resemblance...

Atlas Dec 6, 2006 5:58 AM

:previous: It does bear some resemblence to Al Burj (which used to be called the "Pinnacle")
Quote:

modeled on the 2,313-foot-tall Burj Dubai pinnacle
Just a thought. But since they said Burj Dubai, I don't know how they see a resemblance.

Scruffy Dec 6, 2006 6:26 AM

1. I need more renders to make a judgement but on the whole it doesn't look too exciting.

2. Quote from the first article- "Some are even more vehement. "We've filed a complaint with the county on this project," said Bruce Hiatt, owner of Luxury Realty Group, which specializes in high-rise real estate. "It's completely out of character with the neighborhood, and it has an immediate impact on neighboring projects such as Sky Las Vegas, Turnberry Place, and Fontainebleau." Are you fuckin kidding me. Out of character, its the vegas strip. thats one of the only places on earth where that argument holds no water.

3. Isn't about time they realized that maybe McCarren has outlived its usefulness in its current position. They should relocate to a larger area farther away from the strip. What, they don't have the money? Can you imagine the paycheck the city will receive if they sell that huge swath of ultra prime real estate that is right on the strip and the literally the size of an airport. make financial sense to me. and would encourage more growth in Las Vegas

foxmtbr Dec 6, 2006 6:35 AM

:yuck:

Stratosphere Dec 6, 2006 6:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoolCzech
What's "modeled on the Burj Dubai" about it? I don't see the resemblance...

I guess they both have a tri-petal base design

Lecom Dec 6, 2006 7:14 AM

Nice design, but I'd rather see it at around 1200 feet.

chi-townJay Dec 6, 2006 7:18 AM

is it a west coast thing?
 
what is with you people vegas is getting a tower close too 2,000 ft tall and all i see is alot of negativity c'mon,get mad if you want to and give your cheesy perentages but this is the new GEM of vegas baby.....

Nowhereman1280 Dec 6, 2006 7:18 AM

All I have to say is, 1888' in Vegas? Interesting, very interesting...

LeftCoaster Dec 6, 2006 7:23 AM

the first thing i thought when i saw this design was Dubai! not burj dubai in particular, it just has sort of a dubaiesque look to it. Either way its huge, so bring it on!

mdiederi Dec 6, 2006 8:08 AM

If this is approved, then they should go ahead and allow the Stratosphere tower to proceed with their proposed extension.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...ereTower04.jpg

High Pointer Dec 6, 2006 8:10 AM

The height: awesome! Hope this works out for Vegas, though my gut says this building has a slim chance...

The design: blah. I really hope this one gets a redesign, but keeps the height.

NYguy Dec 6, 2006 2:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atlas
But since they said Burj Dubai, I don't know how they see a resemblance.

I guess based on the layout...

http://www.lvbusinesspress.com/conte...q_11096974.jpg

Very similar, though I don't see why they couldn't be more original.

Quote:

So is the 1,888-foot height non-negotiable?

We think that will ultimately be found to not be a hazard and that's where we wanted to be. The reason is that makes it the tallest building in the U.S. The next-tallest building is the Freedom Tower in New York, which was World Trade (Center), which is 1,776 (feet). They're locked into that number for obvious reasons. You don't build a building this tall and make it a little shorter than the one they just built. That's not a good approach to marketing, if you will.

Also, if they wanted to top Freedom Tower, why not just make it an even 2,000 ft? Though I think this tower has little chance of getting built, its not a surprising proposal. I've always thought of Dubai as an oversized Vegas, so its fitting Vegas tries on Dubai for once.

NYguy Dec 6, 2006 2:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HK Chicago
The title should be "Milam Tower"

That would make more sense, though I took the title from this graphic...

http://www.lvbusinesspress.com/conte...q_11011032.jpg

Thefigman Dec 6, 2006 2:37 PM

This is going to be a fun battle to watch. When's the last time anyone heard of NIMBY issues on the Vegas Strip?!?!?

buildup Dec 6, 2006 2:44 PM

I think the Milan Tower is perfect for LV. If you are going to have 4,000 room you should have a tall tower. I don't like all the fat boxy hotels in these big resorts on the strip.

BANKofMANHATTAN Dec 6, 2006 3:40 PM

Well, if they're gonna build a 1888' sex toy, at least it's in the right place. :haha:

CGII Dec 6, 2006 3:55 PM

I would honestly consider suicide if thewtb was in Vegas.

northbay Dec 6, 2006 4:43 PM

dont know about suicide but...

i like the height, but ya, they couldve been a little more original i think.

forumly_chgoman Dec 6, 2006 5:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BANKofMANHATTAN
Well, if they're gonna build a 1888' sex toy, at least it's in the right place. :haha:

I agree, from that angle .....:haha: .....it looks like a dildo


anyhow tallest in western hemisphere.....I guess you guys haven't heard of the Chicago Spire...formally Fordham Spire at 2000ft:banana: :banana:

NYguy Dec 7, 2006 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by forumly_chgoman
anyhow tallest in western hemisphere.....I guess you guys haven't heard of the Chicago Spire...formally Fordham Spire at 2000ft:banana: :banana:

You mean they put that one up already? Gee, those guys work fast....:rolleyes:

kalmia Dec 7, 2006 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thefigman
This is going to be a fun battle to watch. When's the last time anyone heard of NIMBY issues on the Vegas Strip?!?!?

it'll be lolz

kalmia Dec 7, 2006 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy
You mean they put that one up already? Gee, those guys work fast....:rolleyes:


I think he's thinking that this Vegas building will never catch up to the spire in Chicago. The spire in Chicago is farther along than this.

probably correct

mdiederi Dec 7, 2006 8:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kalmia (Post 2494152)
I think he's thinking that this Vegas building will never catch up to the spire in Chicago. The spire in Chicago is farther along than this.

probably correct

The Milam doesn't have a spire or antenna on top, more like a crown, so they could easily add a 120 foot spire and be taller than the Chicago Spire. Milam already had a higher roof, but now Chicago Spire has just announced that they have eliminated their spire and added condos to the top making their roof higher, and I suppose they could add another spire too if necessary.

It's a new battle for the tallest in the states! :cool:

NYC2ATX Dec 8, 2006 1:59 AM

honestly if Las Vegas was going to attempt 1,888 ft., I think this is about as hideous and tastless as it can get, especially when vegas is trying to redefine its image as a classier city, this would be suicide. :dead:

texcolo Dec 8, 2006 2:51 AM

The should name it "The Steely Dan Building"

Pandemonious Dec 8, 2006 7:24 AM

It has a three pronged design in plan, similar to Burj Dubai's.. that is why they compared them. This was originally supposed to be 200 stories, but cut down I heard, and now that is confirmed. This is an S.O.M. design, which I saw develop some over my summer there. Honestly, I wasn't really a fan of this design, but it is really tall...

NYguy Dec 8, 2006 1:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kalmia (Post 2494152)
I think he's thinking that this Vegas building will never catch up to the spire in Chicago. The spire in Chicago is farther along than this.

probably correct

Meanwhile, both are going nowhere fast....:D

But they are exciting proposals, no doubt about that. To think that we would actually be discussing towers that tall here in the US , just 5 years after 9/11....

vegasrain84 Dec 8, 2006 2:32 PM

To propose or not to propose
 
Some have had some questions about whether this is an actual proposal or just a vision, so I wanted to see what you guys thought. Vision or Proposal?

I can tell you a little bit about the owner of the property. Christopher Milam is president of Austin-based IDM Properties, which Hard Rock owner Peter Morton had tapped in October 2005 to build the $1.25 billion condominium project. Las Vegas-based Archon Corp. is in the process of selling the 27-acre site of the former Wet n Wild waterpark to Milam for $450 million. Milam has put down a $5 million non-refundable payment on the property. Milam has built several mixed use project across the country including a $500 million project in Austin Texas. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill and Steelman Design Group are the architects of the tower, which are the architects of some of the worlds tallest buildings, incuding Trump Tower Chicago, Jin Mao Tower, and Burj Dubai. http://www.lvbusinesspress.com/artic...q_11096974.txt


If you look at the Clark County page, it does say that several aspects of the project have been approved. From the website:http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_ho...s/8263203.html

"Approval of use permits #1, #2, #3, #5, #6, and #7, deviations #1, #2, #3, and #4, and design reviews #1, #2, #3, and #4 (based on the reduction of the tower height); and denial of use permit #4. This is a project of regional significance and will be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners on December 20, 2006 for final action."

"Due to the height of the proposed building, the development will penetrate the 100:1 notification airspace surface and the Part 77 airspace surface. Therefore, final action by the Board of County Commissioners on this land-use application cannot occur until written evidence that the FAA has determined whether the proposed structure constitutes a hazard to air navigation has been received and the Department of Aviation has had an opportunity to review the determination."

As the Commision has stated, the height of the building has not been approved pending an FAA study to determine whether the building would be an aviation hazard. That study is not due until after the first of the year, and final approval is not expected until then. It has been approved pending FAA approval, and the property owner has the capital to build it, with a reputable architectural firm. But does that mean its an actual proposal?

mdiederi Dec 8, 2006 3:42 PM

http://www.gemcomm.com/cj/headline_detail.htm?id=6064

LV STRIP TO SEE $4 BILLION CASINO DEVELOPMENT AT WATER PARK SITE


The site of the defunct Wet 'n Wild water theme park on the Las Vegas Strip could soon become home of a $4 billion casino resort. Las Vegas-based Archon Corp., which has held control of the site for several years, said in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing last week that it had agreed to sell the property for $450 million.

The buyer-LVTI-is a limited liability company based in Delaware. Chris Milam, an Austin, Texas-based developer who owns LVTI, told the Las Vegas Review-Journal that the company would use private equity investors to fund the resort. While details of the resort are not finalized, it would include 4,500 suites, a sizeable casino and a retail component.

Construction wouldn't begin for 15 to 16 months, taking about three and a half years to complete, Milam said. One advantage is that the site is already vacant.

"The Wet 'n Wild site was like a gift," Milam said. "There's nothing on it that needs to be torn down, and you get frontage on Las Vegas Boulevard and Paradise Road. Five years ago the north Strip was the lonely child, but now it's where everything is happening."

Milam said LVTI would operate the resort for two years, and then sell it to an established gaming operator. Milam said the company has not been involved in any previous gaming projects. Milam, however, has been tied to a condominium project at the Hard Rock Las Vegas that never came to fruition before the property's recent sale to Morgans Hotel Group.

Milam is president of Austin-based IDM Properties, which Hard Rock owner Peter Morton had tapped in October to build the $1.25 billion condominium project adjacent to the resort.

LVTI has provided Archon with a $5 million refundable deposit. Should the deal clear a due diligence period ending July 24, a second deposit of $40 million will be due. Thirteen months after that deposit, LVTI would have to begin making payments of over $2.19 million per month.

Archon, through its Sahara Las Vegas Corp. subsidiary, has controlled the Wet 'n Wild site since 1995. In 2004 the water park's operators-Palace Entertainment-were asked to vacate the site. Archon had planned to build a 3,250-room megaresort of its own on the site, but development never got off the ground.

-Andy Holtmann

oreoman85 Dec 8, 2006 9:46 PM

Build Itttt!!!!!!!!

vegasrain84 Dec 9, 2006 4:45 PM

I finished the Milam Tower, and uploaded it this morning.. This makes Stratosphere look tiny!!

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/images/43795.gifhttp://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/images/34728.gif

Bergenser Dec 9, 2006 4:51 PM

^ Good drawing. :tup:

vanhenrik Dec 9, 2006 5:01 PM

i hope
 
i hop thats going to be a realety if it is viva las vegas here i kome ! :-)

Pandemonious Dec 9, 2006 5:27 PM

^^^Nice drawing.

JuniorReb Dec 9, 2006 6:05 PM

This new tower looks like a big shiny vibrator. Would hate to see the woman that uses it.

M II A II R II K Dec 9, 2006 6:17 PM

I don't really like the shape, and it could do with a better colour too.

Marcu Dec 9, 2006 7:31 PM

Does this thing have windows or is it solid stainless steel?

MONACO Dec 9, 2006 8:08 PM

I acutally like the design and I think it is perfectly appropriate. I mean where else can you build a 2,000 foot silver dildo except in a state with legalized and regulated prositution? Vegas needs to constantly re-invent itself. This is a great step forward for the gambeling and tourist agencies. How in the hell can anything NOT fit into a neighborhood in Vegas? I mean what do these critics think this structure will do.......clash with 40 storey casino's build in the shapes of pryamids, the NY skyline, a 14th century castle or a marketplace from Venice. Give me a break.....if anything this building would give Vegas some badly needed class.

Jularc Dec 9, 2006 8:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JuniorReb (Post 2499078)
This new tower looks like a big shiny vibrator. Would hate to see the woman that uses it.

http://content.answers.com/main/cont...nt_Women_3.jpg

kalmia Dec 9, 2006 8:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcu (Post 2499210)
Does this thing have windows or is it solid stainless steel?

solid concrete

vegasrain84 Dec 9, 2006 8:42 PM

Its a stainless steel giant sex toy without windows, What do you want from me people! lol.. I distinguished between the floors, and from the drawings I had to work with, it looks as though there aren't any real distinct windows.. I could change it if it would make you happy.. jeesh.. :)

Kngkyle Dec 9, 2006 8:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdiederi (Post 2495324)
The Milam doesn't have a spire or antenna on top, more like a crown, so they could easily add a 120 foot spire and be taller than the Chicago Spire. Milam already had a higher roof, but now Chicago Spire has just announced that they have eliminated their spire and added condos to the top making their roof higher, and I suppose they could add another spire too if necessary.

It's a new battle for the tallest in the states! :cool:

Chicago Spire is 2,000' roof height now yea.

Dale Dec 9, 2006 8:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 2496763)
Meanwhile, both are going nowhere fast....:D

But they are exciting proposals, no doubt about that. To think that we would actually be discussing towers that tall here in the US , just 5 years after 9/11....

Jumping the gun a bit, are we ?


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:49 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.