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
     
     
  #161  
Old Posted Mar 29, 2007, 2:04 AM
Taurus702B Taurus702B is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdiederi View Post
It will go in this cluster of buildings in the skyline. An almost 800 foot tall hotel just started construction next door. The 900 foot Ivana was proposed just a couple buildings to the left and they just got a 2 year extension to try and resurrect that project. Plus, the Allure (the one with the crane next to Stratosphere) has said that their second tower will be "substantially" taller. And of course, the Stratosphere has already had two proposals to extend its height to over 1,800 feet, but Carl Ichan has just recently said it is up for sale now.

Where did you get the information that Carl Ichan is selling the Stratosphere?
     
     
  #162  
Old Posted Mar 29, 2007, 2:09 AM
Urban Sky's Avatar
Urban Sky Urban Sky is offline
skeetskeetskeet
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Miami Previously: San Diego
Posts: 2,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vtown420 View Post
Quick cut and paste to see what it would look like from my house. Of course, it’s facing the wrong direction and you must envision all the new buildings around it (this pic is already way outdated), but you get the idea.



Impressive! I must say I’m starting to love this tower. At ~ 3,930 feet above sea level, this tower would be almost as high as Frenchman Mountain 4,052. Never in my life did I think I would see something this tall in Vegas. I really hope it gets built.
im not sure i like it yet. i think they can do more with it...wait, SHOULD do more with it. esp. since its going to be the tallest in the US.
__________________
Originally Posted by TREPYE "...all you do is kiss this Freedom Tower's ass all the time..."
Originally Posted by kznyc2k " but you just have a really, really huge boner for this tower, D..."
     
     
  #163  
Old Posted Mar 29, 2007, 2:36 AM
mdiederi's Avatar
mdiederi mdiederi is offline
4
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: JT
Posts: 4,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taurus702B View Post
Where did you get the information that Carl Ichan is selling the Stratosphere?
Here. Actually, I read it some place else first, but can't find that now, think it was in print, but now found this citation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BRUCE CAMENGA, The Press-Enterprise
Carl Icahn, owner of several gaming properties in the southern Nevada area, is also shopping his properties. His company recently sold the Atlantic City Sands to Pinnacle Entertainment Group. His local holdings include the Stratosphere Tower, two Arizona Charlie's (Boulder and Decatur), and Laughlin's Aquarius (formerly the Laughlin Hilton.)

Last edited by mdiederi; Mar 29, 2007 at 3:34 AM.
     
     
  #164  
Old Posted Mar 29, 2007, 3:53 PM
BINARY SYSTEM's Avatar
BINARY SYSTEM BINARY SYSTEM is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 119
This bad mamma jamma gonna get built or what...???
     
     
  #165  
Old Posted Mar 29, 2007, 4:37 PM
Canadian_Bacon's Avatar
Canadian_Bacon Canadian_Bacon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 239
I hope this tower gets built. It would give LV one more reason for tourists to come, besides all the gambling etc. I do agree with Urban Sky that they should do more with it, considering it will be the tallest in the US. From that picture, it does not look all that spectacular in design.

Las Vegas is growing fast, this is just the next step in that growth. Las Vegas is known for going all-out in everything it does, so why not this!
__________________
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
- Albert Einstein
     
     
  #166  
Old Posted Mar 29, 2007, 7:29 PM
Empire Builder's Avatar
Empire Builder Empire Builder is offline
deadliner
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Delaware
Posts: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdiederi View Post
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?
I think that's site prep for the Fontainebleau, but not positive
__________________
Go ahead .... make my millennium
     
     
  #167  
Old Posted Mar 29, 2007, 7:40 PM
mdiederi's Avatar
mdiederi mdiederi is offline
4
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: JT
Posts: 4,932
That's the former Wet & Wild site where LVT is proposed. Fontaineblaeiou is back there where the cranes are in that big hole in the first photo. The two sites are side by side. I shot the photos from the top of the Sahara hotel parking garage.
     
     
  #168  
Old Posted Mar 29, 2007, 8:04 PM
Empire Builder's Avatar
Empire Builder Empire Builder is offline
deadliner
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Delaware
Posts: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdiederi View Post
That's the former Wet & Wild site where LVT is proposed. Fontaineblaeiou is back there where the cranes are in that big hole in the first photo. The two sites are side by side. I shot the photos from the top of the Sahara hotel parking garage.

Ahhhh..... I stand corrected. It was tough to determine the distance from the photo angles and I wasn't sure how big the sites were ..... but it's good to know something's going on there. Nice shots by the way.
__________________
Go ahead .... make my millennium
     
     
  #169  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2007, 12:20 AM
gmcclenon gmcclenon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 81
Looks like they are done covering up the old pools and slides at Wet and Wild. They demolished most of the buildings now. Someone's going to hit a few chucks of concrete under there when they go to dig a foundation.

     
     
  #170  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2007, 5:53 AM
kenratboy kenratboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,011
Jesus - is this serious - are they actually going to do it!?

What about all the air space regulations?
     
     
  #171  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2007, 11:39 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 41,358
Something's going to be built there, one way or another...
__________________
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.
     
     
  #172  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2007, 2:22 PM
mdiederi's Avatar
mdiederi mdiederi is offline
4
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: JT
Posts: 4,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenratboy View Post
What about all the air space regulations?
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmilan
Regarding entitlements, LVT is located just north of the northern limit of the circling approach airspace at McCarran Airport. This airspace is the primary limiter of height along the Strip and does not impact LVT. There are other procedure-segments which are affected but those issues are not material and can be mitigated. LVT is, in a sense, in the zone of the Stratosphere.
     
     
  #173  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2007, 11:59 PM
TheOldMan's Avatar
TheOldMan TheOldMan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Philly/Las Vegas
Posts: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taurus702B View Post
Yeah I really don't like this design and height of this building. It is too tall for a medium sized city. We have to wait a couple more years until Las Vegas gets bigger. Plus it is not fair that LVT gets a higher FAA restirction than the Stratosphere because when they designed the Stratosphere they wanted to go higher. They couldn't because of the hight restriction.
why would u think the building is "too tall" for a medium sized city. who cares about the city's size. furthermore, Las Vegas has a metro area population of about 2 million people. thats pretty good sized, plus we are the fastest growing major city in the country. yeah, its not a groundbreaking design like the Chrysler Building or Empire State Building but for Vegas, it works. I live here and would love to see it built. Vegas would have the tallest building in the Western Hemisphere (assuming Chicago Spire is not built).
__________________
"Individuals Are Smart, People Are Stupid"-the late great George Carlin
     
     
  #174  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 12:10 AM
DJM19 DJM19 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,482
I think its perfect for vegas, because it looks like a gigantic tacky hotel. Sticks out like a sore thumb. It just seems a lot more thought went into making it tall than into actual design.
     
     
  #175  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 4:03 PM
lfc4life's Avatar
lfc4life lfc4life is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taurus702B View Post
Yeah that is what people think outside of Las Vegas but does anyone here think it should be built that lives in Las Vegas for like almost all their life. I personally don't want it built. It is a huge eyesore. The structure has no theme to it while alot of other buildings do have themes. If Taipei 101 was in Las Vegas and it was a Chinese themed hotel/casino/resort then that would be great.
What theme does city center, Palms or Echelon Place have?? Gimmicky themes in las vegas have been killed stone dead by Steve Wynn since he opened his hotel in 2005. The trend is now towards mega five star hotel/condos and will continue so for a while yet. What theme does the 1150ft Stratosphere have by the way???

As for LVT looking ugly and being an eyesore. I seem to remember that the Parisian and French people described a certain Gustave Eiffel creation an "eyesore" about 100 years ago. If the LVT brings in tourists and helps re-generate the north strip, then those against this project will not look on it an an eyesore any more. And correct me if I am wrong but does Vegas not depend on tourists more than any other city on planet earth???
     
     
  #176  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 10:22 PM
Taurus702B Taurus702B is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOldMan View Post
why would u think the building is "too tall" for a medium sized city. who cares about the city's size. furthermore, Las Vegas has a metro area population of about 2 million people. thats pretty good sized, plus we are the fastest growing major city in the country. yeah, its not a groundbreaking design like the Chrysler Building or Empire State Building but for Vegas, it works. I live here and would love to see it built. Vegas would have the tallest building in the Western Hemisphere (assuming Chicago Spire is not built).
Why relieve the height restriction on the LVT and not on the Stratosphere 11 years ago. I think it is not fair that they get to have this advantage especially since air traffic, I would imagine, has increased in Las Vegas.
     
     
  #177  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2007, 12:13 AM
TheOldMan's Avatar
TheOldMan TheOldMan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Philly/Las Vegas
Posts: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taurus702B View Post
Why relieve the height restriction on the LVT and not on the Stratosphere 11 years ago. I think it is not fair that they get to have this advantage especially since air traffic, I would imagine, has increased in Las Vegas.
why not relieve the height restriction. this building, like many other things can have a powerful impact on Las Vegas from an economic standpoint. Tourism, already huge , would be even bigger. you cant tell me people would not come to see this thing. Furthermore, the north strip area would especially benefit. for the record, i have no problem with Strat. going higher. Lets hope the Lobbyists that Milam (developer for LVT) hired can get the job done with the FAA. We will find out in early May for sure.

BTW, do you live in Vegas Taurus. you seem unusually opposed to this building for some reason.....
__________________
"Individuals Are Smart, People Are Stupid"-the late great George Carlin
     
     
  #178  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2007, 1:15 AM
The Mad Hatter The Mad Hatter is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 113
Wait let me understand this....were these FAA height restrictions or just city held height restrictions because if they were FAA restrictions i find that completely unfair, miami has been fighting for years with the faa to loosen restrictions over downtown miami with no compromise ever found, although studies have shown that there would be no risk in doing it...which shows how las vegas gets away with anything in this country.
     
     
  #179  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2007, 4:20 AM
mdiederi's Avatar
mdiederi mdiederi is offline
4
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: JT
Posts: 4,932
How the did this turn into a Chicago vs Vegas thread?

Anyway, the FAA has no restrictions in the LVT area but it is right next to a "300 feet of clearance below a flight altitude of 3,020 feet" restricted airport circling area. What they need from the FAA is the FAA's blessing, which actually seems to be more political than logistical and a complicated formality that takes about 120 days to complete for something this tall. They also need the blessing from the Director of McCarran International. Bob Stupak was the political arch enemy of the Director at the airport back when he started building the Strat, so that's where they ran into trouble, not to mention their lack of funds. Also, Stratosphere Tower is within the city limits and their permitting requirements are different than the county, and don't obey the airport's opinion as strictly as the county does. The Airport totally rejected the entire Stratosphere project for political reasons, but the city gave Stupak the permits anyway. They were already planning to go the 1,800 feet, but Stupak didn't have the money to do it. New 1,800 foot plans were introduced after it was complete and had a new owner, but while they were trying to figure out how to pay for it 9/11 shot down those plans. Or at least that's how I understand the history of that.

Last edited by mdiederi; Apr 4, 2007 at 5:02 PM.
     
     
  #180  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2007, 5:00 PM
mdiederi's Avatar
mdiederi mdiederi is offline
4
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: JT
Posts: 4,932
Okay, maybe I over reacted, I'll reduce the size of that type. The same thing happened on SSC a month ago when a bunch of Dubai forumers started pooping all over the LVT thread for no reason at all except petty rivalry.

As for the design, personally, I'm extremely board with the over-sized box shapes of most of the mega hotels in Vegas, which is the usual criticism leveled at us by architecture fans (read the reactions to the Echelon rendering in the Las Vegas thread), and the LVT shape breaks that mold in a very major way without using a hokey themed gimmick. Regardless of what you think of the design, the mechanics of the building are very logical. "The LVT structure is composite steel and concrete for reasons of both speed and cost." "It is a tripod, which is the most efficient structural shape for a super-tall building". With 3,975 rooms and 4.5-million square feet of floor space (including the podium), efficiency is very import. "This shape also maximizes curtain wall area, minimizes view conflicts, and minimizes walking distances for guests." "The sky lobbies, represented by bands around the tower, sit above, and physically adjacent to, the MEP floors. These MEP floors contain the elevator overrides for the stacks below, along with all MEP equipment for the stack." "Each sky lobby serves approximately 60 floors with five lower and five upper-zone single-cab elevators serving approximately 30 floors each. This organization allows the express elevators to drop away above the sky lobby they serve, and for the locals to share the same shafts in each of the three tiers (so there are three tiers, containing two zones each, for a total of six zones). This is an extremely efficient organization which reduces the core size to about 40% of what it would otherwise be."
     
     
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 8:27 PM.

     

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