View Single Post
Old Posted Dec 8, 2006, 2:32 PM
vegasrain84's Avatar
vegasrain84 vegasrain84 is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 118
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.

If you look at the Clark County page, it does say that several aspects of the project have been approved. From the website:

"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?
"Dream as if you will live forever, Live as if you will die tomorrow."- James Dean