Editorial: Safe airport vs. tall obelisk

Wednesday, Dec. 13, 2006 | 7:09 a.m.

Twelve years after a heated controversy over the height of the Stratosphere tower near Sahara Avenue and Las Vegas Boulevard, another proposal has come along for an even higher tower, one that would be the second-tallest building in the world if approved.

Texas developer Christopher Milam is proposing a tower somewhat resembling the Washington Monument for an area just south of the Sahara Hotel, at the site of a former water park. While the Washington Monument stands at just more than 555 feet, Milam's casino tower would stand more than three times as high, coming in at a staggering 1,888 feet.

When Clark County Aviation Director Randy Walker told Las Vegas Sun reporter Liz Benston that Milam's proposed tower would be a danger to aircraft, it brought back memories of the fight in 1994 over the Stratosphere.

This tower was originally approved in 1990 at 1,012 feet. But the Las Vegas Planning Commission in April 1994 approved a request to add another 813 feet. This set off a battle that pitted the city against Clark County, the Federal Aviation Administration, Nellis Air Force Base and the Las Vegas Convention and Visitor's Authority.

Those arrayed against the new height of the Stratosphere argued that to guard against the danger of collisions with the tower, flight patterns would have to be radically adjusted, risking safety. The convention authority also argued that those adjustments would delay departures and arrivals at McCarran International Airport, costing airlines tens of millions of dollars - money that would be passed on to passengers, risking a loss in tourism.

Ultimately, the Stratosphere was approved at 1,149 feet, a height that quieted criticism but that was still considered unwise by aviation officials.

The Clark County Commission will review Milam's plan in March. Given the county's strong opposition to the Stratosphere's extended height 12 years ago, we anticipate that it will have little chance of approval.

Nevertheless, there are sure to be arguments for it, leading quite possibly to another prolonged controversy. Milam says he sees his proposed development as bringing forth an "iconic building" for Las Vegas. In our view, Las Vegas needs a safe airport more than it needs this iconic building.