Las Vegas News, Sports, Business, Entertainment and Classifieds

Las Vegas Review-Journal - Business

Friday
Mar 19, 2010
Cloudy
Cloudy 62° Weather Forecast

RECENT EDITIONS
Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri

Business


Obstacles gone for LV tower

County panel approves 1,064-foot Strip hotel

A proposal to build the tallest hotel tower in Las Vegas is no longer flying under the radar.

With the preliminary blessing of the Federal Aviation Administration, Clark County commissioners on Wednesday approved a proposal for a resort with a 1,064-foot tower at the north end of the Strip.


Most Popular Stories
  1. Rumjungle nightclub files for bankruptcy
  2. New Jersey: Asian casino boss has mob ties in China
  3. MGM closes private offering of debt
  4. Official says lenders may renege on promises
  5. Sands unveils green plan
  6. Tax status hurts attracting out-of-state business, Gibbons warns
  7. Indiana surpasses Mississippi in gaming revenues



The approval gives developers of the Crown Las Vegas Resort Hotel & Casino authority to move forward with a scaled-down plan of their original proposal for an 1,888-foot tower, which would have been the tallest building west of the Mississippi.

It's a big step forward for a proposal that's been overshadowed by the planned CityCenter, Echelon and Plaza megaresorts. But it's no less ostentatious in scope.

"I would expect you'll start hearing a lot more about Crown Las Vegas now that this has approval," said Bill Lerner, a Las Vegas-based gaming analyst at Deutsche Bank.

The current proposal calls for what developers say would be the tallest hotel building in the United States. The Stratosphere tower is about 100 feet taller than the proposed Crown tower but doesn't have hotel rooms.

Crown would have as many as 5,000 rooms, a 250,000-square-foot casino, a 3,000-square-foot showroom, meeting space and retail.

Developers say the first phase could open as early as 2011 with another phase in 2013. It would be just south of the Sahara near the intersection of Las Vegas Boulevard and Sahara Avenue on the former Wet 'n Wild site.

The proposed $5 billion project is a joint venture between Texas-based developer Christopher Milam and Australian billionaire James Packer, who has casinos in Macau, Canada and Down Under.

"I think (Packer) wants to do something here in Vegas," said Lerner.

Milam already has an agreement to buy the site for $475 million. Last year Clark County planning commissioners approved the plan for the 1,888-foot tower in concept, but only if the FAA was on board. The taller version didn't fly with officials from the FAA and McCarran International Airport who felt it would conflict with air traffic above Las Vegas. That stifled enthusiasm for the project because it eroded confidence it would ever be built.

With developers and aviation officials in apparent agreement and the Clark County Commission on board, those hurdles are gone, Lerner said.

Concerns from neighbors and doubts about just how the project will proceed remain.

The revised proposal the county approved Wednesday is highlighted by one large tower centrally located on the site. The height restriction, more than 800 feet lower than the original proposal, could prompt developers to want more than one tower.

If so, it would make for a much different look.

"It could be crap. They could change everything," said Harvey Gerber, who lives on the 29th floor of nearby Turnberry Place. "They could have buildings in front of your windows."

Gerber was one of three Turnberry residents who spoke before the county board. None opposed the project outright. But they all said they hoped the developers would do their best to minimize the impact on local residents.

To that end, they sought conditions to prevent overnight construction, study traffic on Paradise Road and ensure Turnberry residents access into and out of their approximately 800-unit, multitower community. The commission attached conditions to their approval to ensure the neighbors' voices are heard.

Las Vegas attorney Christopher Kaempfer, who represented the developers before the commission, said neighbors would have the opportunity to be heard should the proposal undergo changes.

"If we decide to do a second tower, we'd have to come back," Kaempfer said.

Contact reporter Benjamin Spillman at bspillman@reviewjournal.com or (702) 477-3861.

Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

Leave Your Comment 6 Reader Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Current Word Count:

Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

Report abuse

Myrtle wrote on January 04, 2008 10:21 AM: Good point on why the Tower could not be the original height. All I ever heard in RJ articles is that the FAA would not approve it. Why ? Is traffic that close to the strip corridor?


Report abuse

Jordan T. wrote on December 17, 2007 04:32 PM: Question... What's with the ridiculous height limits on high-rise buildings in Las Vegas? Why not become the next Dubai, and build the tallest tower in the world?

That said, I used to live in Las Vegas years ago, and I'm amazed by the sheer scope of what is going up in that town. And I'm also amazed that the FAA wouldn't allow the developers to build the tower taller.


Report abuse

myself wrote on December 06, 2007 07:39 PM: "Doesn't take a genius to recognize the traffic problems that arise when more people are crammed into a smaller area."

Actually, sprawl, unwalkable neighborhoods, and lack of transportation options are what cause traffic. Density is good for Las Vegas and the environment.

As for the nimby's, if you want guaranteed views, buy in an area that is already built out, instead of next to a vacant lot.


Report abuse

bob wrote on December 06, 2007 04:27 PM: roger great post... Welcolm to Vegas? how about stop being such a vegas hater...? How about rewording your post to say "Welcome to ANY CITY in the WORLD!" lol people make me laugh like Vegas is the worst place in the world... your probally someone who blames casinos for everything... once again Blame ANY BIG BUSINESS in the WORLD b4 bashing Vegas Casinos... America is RUN ON MONEY and the abilty to make more... IF you dont like it maybe you should go live in Eurupe where everything is a handout....


Report abuse

Agnes wrote on December 06, 2007 10:33 AM: How could you buy a unit a Turnberry, in a developing hi-rise corridor, and not expect other towers to go up and block your view..... duhhhhhhhhhh


Report abuse

roger wrote on December 06, 2007 09:50 AM: Well all I can say to Turnberry residents is welcome to Las Vegas. This city is totally dependant upon the construction and casino/hotel industry, you can complain all you want but I doubt it will do any good. You might have 'buildings in front of your windows'? When I purchased a home in LV there was still construction going on in the subdivision. I was told quite clearly by the sales agent that one thing they cannot gaurantee was a view. Did someone tell you otherwise? These high rise buildings are going to be the wave of the future for this city. Wasn't there a RV article recently stating that builders and now shifting from single family dwelling to high rise apartments and buildings? Doesn't take a genius to recognize the traffic problems that arise when more people are crammed into a smaller area.