LAS VEGAS | Boom Project Rundown! 2.0

[mdiederi]

Originally Posted by solstadwest

cosmo looks like its moving along. Does anyone know if they are on time?! Originally they were pouring concrete next month Dec 06.

I think they are close to the original schedule which said it would take about a year to dig that hole.

[sky-of-webs]

Interesting that a hotel tower on the strip, in a dense hi-rise tower area would be denied a height of only two and a half times that of its nearest neighbors was considered incompatible, when a hospital at twelve times the height of its neighbors in a non hi-rise area is completely acceptable. They should just stick to the FAA as a reason for height denial and not spotlight how inconsistant they are.

(Sorry, the hospital in the N.W. corner of town is in the city limits, and maybe only 9 stories. But Spanish view towers are county and they are eighteen times their neighbors height!)

The FAA will probably give an OK to around 950 tops.
I sure would love to see some renderings of this proposal. And it is really sad that it won't be allowed to be built.

[BruceH]

The proposed project for the former Wet & Wild land should not be taller than the adjacent buildings and the Fontainebleau. This area of the North Strip is fast becoming the residential corridor with Sky, Turnberry Place, Palazzo, Allure and Turnberry Towers all being residential condos. Trump so far is the only exception in this area and Fontainebleau will have a limited number of condo-hotel units. As a future Sky resident, I will be loudly protesting the proposed height of this building. I am sure the nearby residents in Turnberry Place and future Turnberry Tower owners will be out in mass against this project in its currently proposed form. They should build it at a lower height on the Harmon Corridor or near City Center where the bulk of condo-hotel units are being concentrated at this time. The good news is the Zoning Commissioners are now requiring adjacent "master plan" property impact studies rather than approving these projects in isolation. That's the right thing to do in this case for sure.

[williasj]

I am confused, are you against the project because of its proposed heighth, or that it is a condo hotel with a casino component? If you are arguing that the North Strip is becoming a residential area I beg to differ. Not only as a future resident of Sky are you planning on living right next door to Circus Circus, the Riveria, Sahara, Wynn, New Frontier, Stratosphere, and the Palazzo (not a condo hotel, but a casino resort), but the strip has always been and should always remain a gmaing resort area with a residential component, not the other way around. If you believed the north strip to be a residential neigborhood you are mistaken. Actually I am kinda on a rant, so what are your concerns about this building, because I personally think it would be great.

[BruceH]

Of course there are casino hotels all over the Strip, that was not my point. Immersed amongst those casino hotels however on the North Strip are many residential towers unlike the Harmon Corridor. Keeping the trend of residential and something not so extreme as 142 stories was also a point. If the developer wants something close to the height of Fontainebleau that's fine but something so outrageous that it's higher than the Stratosphere amongst residential and casino hotels that otherwise are similar in height doesn't make any sense. The Strip is going to change a lot over the next 5 years and the residential component while new is going to create a more balanced view to be taken into consideration by the Planning Commission than in the past. The owners in the residential towers will begin to create voice the Strip is not use to having. This already has already happened with the Fontainbleau project as Turnberry Place owner protests resulted in changes to the project.

[mdiederi]

Be sure and post some pictures of the view from Sky when you get up there.
I'm jealous, I like that building, it's tall.

[williasj]

I now see the point that you were making, congrats on you purchase at sky! And i seriously doubt that the planning commission will approve the project at that height. For one 1800', while awesome, is unbelivebly tall for vegas, I figure they will probably get approval in the 850-1200' (very liberal guess). Which would actually be a pretty good adition to the skyline as a counterbalance to the lonely strat.

[mdiederi]

Originally Posted by MsuMix

Cosmo... Need pics

Here's a couple of more up to date pictures of the Cosmopolitan progress that I shot on Saturday.

They've finally started adding concrete in the bottom of that big hole in the back of the lot where the main tower will rise and they've brough in a couple of cranes.
Should start progressing a lot faster now.


It's difficult to get a good shot of the front of the lot, but here you can see a convoy of trucks moving dirt.

[sky-of-webs]

Originally Posted by BruceH

Of course there are casino hotels all over the Strip, that was not my point. Immersed amongst those casino hotels however on the North Strip are many residential towers unlike the Harmon Corridor. Keeping the trend of residential and something not so extreme as 142 stories was also a point. If the developer wants something close to the height of Fontainebleau that's fine but something so outrageous that it's higher than the Stratosphere amongst residential and casino hotels that otherwise are similar in height doesn't make any sense. The Strip is going to change a lot over the next 5 years and the residential component while new is going to create a more balanced view to be taken into consideration by the Planning Commission than in the past. The owners in the residential towers will begin to create voice the Strip is not use to having. This has already happened with the Fontainbleau project as Turnberry Place owner protests resulted in changes to the project.

I will again say this project will not happen above 900'.
But I find it very disturbing what you just mentioned about residents on The Strip. The Strip has never been a residential corridor and for people to buy on The Strip now and have a say as to what hotel, casino, and condo projects are agreeable is going to be a major negative turn of events.
You have bought a unit on the Strip and now you are playing the NIMBY game. It's okay on Harmon but not by my place.
It is bad enough that all the newcoming residents don't like what vegas is all about and halted neighborhood casino-hotels but now they'll be able to stop them on the Strip as well.!!!
You can't complain about airflights over your house if you buy a new place at the end of a runway that has been there for fifty years, and to complain about a projects on "The Strip in Las Vegas", come on. And if Turnberry residents got The Fontainebleau changed, then the negative effects of residential voice has already begun. GREAT!!!!

[GeorgeLV]

^^ Agree 100%. If you're on the Strip, there are no promises about future heights and density.

[VegasMatt]

^^^ Ditto - On a street where buildings often don't reach there 50th birthday, I've always questioned the sensibility of allowing permanent residential components to The Strip. I believe this will be the first of many foreseeable problems to adding mass residency to the boulevard. Adding residents to resort properties seems even nuttier to me. I’m not sure why all the new resorts are jumping on the bandwagon before someone has tested the waters with this new residential/resort idea. Has anyone this model elsewhere? I mean for a meaningful amount of time???

I suspect future changes to a residential/resort property would be a legal nightmare.

That being said, I don’t hold anything against anybody buying on a condo the strip –it’s a great idea.
I’d get myself one if I could.

[mdiederi]

Originally Posted by VegasMatt

I believe this will be the first of many foreseeable problems to adding mass residency to the boulevard. Adding residents to resort properties seems even nuttier to me. I’m not sure why all the new resorts are jumping on the bandwagon before someone has tested the waters with this new residential/resort idea. Has anyone this model elsewhere? I mean for a meaningful amount of time???

I suspect future changes to a residential/resort property would be a legal nightmare.

Locally, the Jockey Club might be a situation that sets a precedent. It's a time share next door to Bellagio. The Cosmopolitan has to build around it because it was a nightmare to try and negotiate a buyout of the 40,000 different owners. If the Jockey Club were just a hotel it would have been leveled years ago. Of course, the residents aren't permanent, but it is worthy to note that the Cosmo will be many times higher than the existing Jockey Club.


Robbie Knievel jumping the span between the roofs of the two Jockey Club towers. Photo, John Gurzinski
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_ho.../10554232.html

[sky-of-webs]

^^^^^ Great points. And, yeah how could we forget the Jockey Club dilema.

[MsuMix]

Originally Posted by mdiederi

Here's a couple of more up to date pictures of the Cosmopolitan progress that I shot on Saturday.

They've finally started adding concrete in the bottom of that big hole in the back of the lot where the main tower will rise and they've brough in a couple of cranes.
Should start progressing a lot faster now.


It's difficult to get a good shot of the front of the lot, but here you can see a convoy of trucks moving dirt.

Thanks for the pics. I'll be a Project Engineer on Cosmo in January.

[ebatcave]

I'm in a unique situation where I purchased a hotel condo at the Cosmopolitan and I'm also a timeshare owner at the Jockey Club (Bellagio side). My line of thinking is the timeshare value will go up significantly at the Jockey Club (especially for those timeshares that face the Bellagio side) because of the upgrades that are promised with the Jockey Club, such as direct connectivity to the parking lot, casino, tennis courts, etc., upgrading the infrastructure, etc. Since the owners at Cosmo are supposed to be involved with making the exterior of the Jockey Club "more palatable", it would seem that the Jockey Club owners are going to benefit tremendously with the Cosmo connection.

[MsuMix]

Your probably right, however Cosmo is going to literally swallow Jockey Club, so its Bellagio side will be the only side to offer any sort view.

[ScottG]

timeshare does not allow to have a specific unit.

52 owners own each unit- one for each week of the year. when one wants to use their unit they get which ever unit is availble...

[ebatcave]

Actually, Jockey Club owners are assigned an actual unit and an actual week. They can trade it in to the pool if they want, or use the assigned room and week. It's an actual deed of trust.

[LMich]

That's actually the case with MANY timeshares.

[lfc4life]

Vegastodayandtomorrow.com are claiming that Trump is at the 50th floor already and Palazzo at the 35th, is this true??? If that is the case by the time I get back to vegas in late January Trump will be topped out