HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects > Cancelled Project Threads Archive


    Crown Las Vegas in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Las Vegas Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location

 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #121  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2007, 12:47 AM
DUBAI2015's Avatar
DUBAI2015 DUBAI2015 is offline
Yippie Ka Yay!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Medford Oregon, US of A
Posts: 514
so they building it or not?
__________________
Game Show question: Why do women rub their eyes when they first wake up?

Contestant's answer: Because they have no balls to scratch?
     
     
  #122  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2007, 1:05 AM
LMich's Avatar
LMich LMich is offline
Midwest Moderator - Editor
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Big Mitten
Posts: 31,744
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD_Phil View Post
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?).
Well, Mr. Milam has said that the FAA usually objects to any supertall structures out of just common practice, I guess.
__________________
Where the trees are the right height
     
     
  #123  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2007, 4:01 AM
mdiederi's Avatar
mdiederi mdiederi is online now
4
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: JT
Posts: 4,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandemonious View Post
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.
Really? Where'd you hear that?
     
     
  #124  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2007, 4:03 AM
mdiederi's Avatar
mdiederi mdiederi is online now
4
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: JT
Posts: 4,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by DUBAI2015 View Post
so they building it or not?
Last I heard it's supposed to go before the Planning Commission again in March.
     
     
  #125  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2007, 12:28 PM
Canadian Mind's Avatar
Canadian Mind Canadian Mind is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,922
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD_Phil View Post
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?).
knee jerk reaction for the most part, much easier to dodge a 1888 foot tower than a mountain... most problems would be in the short term as maps will need to be updated to display the hazard... although any pilot who actually earned his licence should be able to recognise and avoid such an obstacle beforehand.

I need to review my info, but i don't believe you are allowed to fly lower than 2000 over a city anyways, thats 112 feet of room at minimum. not much by aviations standards, but it should be enough, especially if a pilot sees the thing beforehand. even then, you are also suppost to keep a maximum hieght over an obstacle within a certain radius.

FAA prolley just doesn't want to deal with the inconviniance.
__________________
"you're eating chicken periods" - Vid
"I love eggs, especially the ones with runny yolks" - Me
"EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, you're disgusting!" - Vid
     
     
  #126  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2007, 11:47 PM
gmcclenon gmcclenon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 81
LVT on March 21 agenda

It's on the March 21 agenda as mentioned:
http://dsnet.co.clark.nv.us/dsnetapp...a/P0199112.htm
     
     
  #127  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2007, 2:59 PM
drew11 drew11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: dallas
Posts: 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Mind View Post
knee jerk reaction for the most part, much easier to dodge a 1888 foot tower than a mountain... most problems would be in the short term as maps will need to be updated to display the hazard... although any pilot who actually earned his licence should be able to recognise and avoid such an obstacle beforehand.

I need to review my info, but i don't believe you are allowed to fly lower than 2000 over a city anyways, thats 112 feet of room at minimum. not much by aviations standards, but it should be enough, especially if a pilot sees the thing beforehand. even then, you are also suppost to keep a maximum hieght over an obstacle within a certain radius.

FAA prolley just doesn't want to deal with the inconviniance.
the in flight altitude over the site is 2800-3100. the faa is kinda of to not let this get built, love it.
     
     
  #128  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2007, 10:36 PM
mdiederi's Avatar
mdiederi mdiederi is online now
4
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: JT
Posts: 4,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmcclenon View Post
It's on the March 21 agenda as mentioned:
http://dsnet.co.clark.nv.us/dsnetapp...a/P0199112.htm
Those seem like the old opinions of the commission in that sheet, so I wonder if the developer is going to present new info from the FAA, and others, next Wednesday? If the developer knew they didn't get the FAA's blessing they would have submitted revised plans for review, but I don't see anything new in that agenda sheet.
     
     
  #129  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2007, 2:37 AM
CoolCzech's Avatar
CoolCzech CoolCzech is offline
Frigidus Maximus
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,617
They might be concerned that the tower could interfere with communications and/or radar.

You have to remember: bureaucrats are scared little men. If nothing ever goes wrong with an 1,800 foot tower, they'll get no credit for approving it. If an airplane by some freak accident crashes into it, they'll get blamed for approving the tower. That's the risk calculation that runs thru their heads... you do the math.
__________________
http://tinyurl.com/2acxb5t


I ❤️ NY

Last edited by CoolCzech; Mar 16, 2007 at 2:52 AM.
     
     
  #130  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2007, 3:48 AM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoolCzech View Post
They might be concerned that the tower could interfere with communications and/or radar.
No, that's not possible, unless someone has some ultra-powerful electronics in their hotel room and an airplane flys by their window, radio interference just isn't possible. This building just isn't big enough to block a signifigant amount of radio waves.

Also, most avation radar scan's the whole sky at most altitudes, so this thing would only create a tiny blip at below 2000'.
     
     
  #131  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2007, 3:49 AM
SLC Projects's Avatar
SLC Projects SLC Projects is offline
Bring out the cranes...
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 6,108
That is big. I'm going to have to move to Vegas now to see this thing get built.
__________________
1. "Wells Fargo Building" 24-stories 422 FT 1998
2. "LDS Church Office Building" 28-stories 420 FT 1973
3. "111 South Main" 24-stories 387 FT 2016
4. "99 West" 30-stories 375 FT 2011
5. "Key Bank Tower" 27-stories 351 FT 1976
     
     
  #132  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2007, 3:53 AM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vtown420 View Post

Is it just me or are cities the world over turning into real life Star War's cities? I mean Dubai, Chicago, Moscow, now Las Vegas?
     
     
  #133  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2007, 8:28 PM
mdiederi's Avatar
mdiederi mdiederi is online now
4
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: JT
Posts: 4,932
Well, well, check this out, in the last few days they started preparing the site.





And it's more than just demolition because it looks like they are getting ready to start assembling some construction offices.



They must be feeling pretty confident about approval, otherwise why would they be spending this money?
     
     
  #134  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2007, 8:41 PM
WonderlandPark's Avatar
WonderlandPark WonderlandPark is offline
Pacific Wonderland
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Bi-Situational, Portland & L.A.
Posts: 4,129
Site prep already? whoa.
__________________
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away"

travel, architecture & photos of the textured world at http://www.pixelmap.com
     
     
  #135  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2007, 11:18 PM
lfc4life's Avatar
lfc4life lfc4life is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 544
I dont know about anyone else here but this is the most exciting project probably in the history of Las Vegas. If LVT does get built it will propel this town into megacity territory and thats what the FAA should be considering first and foremost.

Any timeframe on when construction would start and end if given planning???
     
     
  #136  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2007, 11:39 PM
mdiederi's Avatar
mdiederi mdiederi is online now
4
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: JT
Posts: 4,932
From Milam:
Quote:
Design started on LVT in Jan of 2006 and is currently in advanced SD. DD will be completed by mid-2007 and initial CD packages for the foundation will be issued in the Fall of 2007. Construction of the foundations will start in the 4th quarter of 2007. Completion is expected in the 4th quarter of 2011.
     
     
  #137  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2007, 11:59 PM
AZheat's Avatar
AZheat AZheat is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Nashville, Tn
Posts: 2,164
Could it be that they have a backup design that is much shorter that would definitely be approved and that's why there're doing this prep work? I really hope it does get built because it's just such a bold design and yes it does look like something from a Star Wars city as someone mentioned. Maybe that's why I like it.
__________________
"If this is a blessing, it is certainly very well disguised" Winston Churchill
     
     
  #138  
Old Posted Mar 17, 2007, 1:01 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 41,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZheat View Post
Could it be that they have a backup design that is much shorter that would definitely be approved and that's why there're doing this prep work?
Well, something will get built there, even if not this tower.
__________________
NEW YORK. World's capital.

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #139  
Old Posted Mar 17, 2007, 1:17 AM
DUBAI2015's Avatar
DUBAI2015 DUBAI2015 is offline
Yippie Ka Yay!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Medford Oregon, US of A
Posts: 514
From concept to opening in 6 years? Sound kind of short.
__________________
Game Show question: Why do women rub their eyes when they first wake up?

Contestant's answer: Because they have no balls to scratch?
     
     
  #140  
Old Posted Mar 17, 2007, 2:42 AM
CGII's Avatar
CGII CGII is offline
illwaukee/crooklyn
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: rome
Posts: 8,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by lfc4life View Post
I dont know about anyone else here but this is the most exciting project probably in the history of Las Vegas. If LVT does get built it will propel this town into megacity territory and thats what the FAA should be considering first and foremost.

Any timeframe on when construction would start and end if given planning???
Hate to break your heart, but even with an 1888 foot tower Las Vegas will hardly be 'mega city.'

Hell, it'll probably be imploded for a new one in 20 years.
__________________
disregard women. acquire finances.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects > Cancelled Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:46 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.