Business Plan of Building a Single Supertower in Las Vegas

THE GRAB

The proposed investment opportunity; development of 101 Story, 7 Star Hotel in Las Vegas, provides a strategic option for investment to reserve their money in a promising venture. Based on current industry, the investment will be successful because the 7 Class will be the only of its kind in Western Civilization

PROBLEM/OPPORTUNITY

Las Vegas is a promising city, leading in entertainment culture, as such, there are several tourists who come to the city globally but due to the overbooking, these tourists are forced to go cities such as Reno or Los Angeles for hotel services

SOLUTION/PRODUCT

The 101 Story building provides the right solutions to solve this problem. The Lobby of 5 stories provides varying of amenities, bars, and casinos, as well as shops. Floor 6-65 are for 5 Star class accommodation. Floor 66 provides the second 7 Star facilities such as Jakuzi. From floor 67-101, the hotel provides the only 7 Class facilities in Western Greenwich Meridian.

POTENTIAL RETURN/REVENUE MODEL

The development guarantees potential returns and revenue because of its proximity in the Western USA, and the locality in Las Vegas, the global market leader in entertainment.

COMPETITION

The hotel is faced with huge competition from local, regional and international providers. Locally, in Las Vegas and Reno, there is already international level hotels such as Four Seasons Hotel Las Vegas, JW Marriott Las Vegas, and Skylofts at MGM Grand.

EXECUTION PLAN/GO TO MARKET STRATEGY

There are three stages of executing the plan. The first stage is the Marketing Plan, the second stage is the Financing Stage, the third Stage is the Construction Process and the final stage is the brand management.

FINANCIALS

Already, the architectural works are complete, the next stage involves developing the 3D landscape Model depicting the hotels, accompanies by generating the list of consultancy. The consultancy department provides the overall financial, marketing, hospitality and engineering advice.

THE TEAM/RELEVANT EXPERIENCE

The project implementation committee is currently headed by the Architecture, who is intern aided by the senior marketer and senior financial administration.

THE PLAN:

Build a single supertower in Las Vegas

1.1 Develop model

1.2 Do high-level concept drawings

Figure 1: The Tower

1.3. Locate Site

Figure 2: The Site

2. Explore viability with FAA and Clark County Long

2.1 FAA

Recently the United States Government, through its Federal Aviation Administration sought to reduce the allowable number of buildings near the airports around the airports country wide. This compelled real estate developers to reconsider their plans. As such, tall buildings in cities downturn areas were greatly affected by this move. The FAA banned buildings that exceeded 610 meters. As well, buildings near the airport were required to go only 76m. However, our DC seems to meet this criterion because it is already below 600 meters. The federal government allowance and specification allows the compatible land utility and the environments. This increases the land uses and planning requiring federal workers assigned to Las Vegas to investigate and approve the government. These compatibility problems are driven by the need to promote understanding on land management, as well as the planning aspects.

Besides, the FAA has set a limit on the horizontal locality of the building. Given the choice chosen for this project, the building will be free from possible noise emissions during landing. Although future aircrafts such as 787 apply noise reduction technology, it is worthwhile to note that the building is still the highest towering in Las Vegas; hence it might attract a special kind of noise due to its aerial view. The site has been selected in a way that the building will not near the pilot trajectory when it comes to landing. This is however dependent on the changes on wind. The project leader evaluated the FAA Zoning Policy to determine taking off, flying and landing trajectory. In the zoning policy, it was specified the areas that the building might pose a significant threat if constructed without the necessary commission, inspection, or invalidation.

2.2 Clark County Long Range

The project leader also visited the Clark County operations to determine the construction viability. The leader sought to investigate the countys policies on quality of life that constructions are expected, the economic vitality, public engagement, natural resource conservation as well the impact of the building on the environmental prospects of the building. The Office of Sustainability specifically provided a policy on sustainable framework that provides strong eco-initiative. The office was responsible in cultivating the entities in funding resources, creating a strong a strong sustainable framework for eco-friendly buildings. Based on the manuscript provided, the building is viable because it is eco-friendly, it promotes the economic culture of the people, as well the process promotes strong public engagement, as well as improvises strong natural resource conservation. The office works closely with the Nevada community to see that buildings being developed in cities correspond to the required sustainability requirements.

2.2.1 Approval from the Board of County Commissioners

The project team sought approval from the Board of County Commissioners who evaluated the map of the buildings, the architectural blueprint. The board in particular examined the business, influence and interrelationship with quality, water reduction, water, recycling, energy utility, green building, transportation and land as well as habitat and protection.

2.2.2 Approval by the Conservation District of Southern Nevada

The project sought approval from in writing, as well visiting their offices. The office operates under the Clark County.

3. Generate Construction costs and timeline

To ensure that the DC is successful, a costs and timeline was developed and distributed in a period of the 48-54 months. The construction timeline composed of phases that the project, hence the project team distributed the costs based on the phases the project was assigned to. The construction timeline depicts the stages specified below based on the specified feasibility report.

3.1 Phase One Construction (Structure Development)

First month:- Gazette the site issue a public notice

Second Month-Foundation Development

Second Month Wk4, Foundation Assessment and Approval

Third-Sixth Month- Structure for Floor Layering 1-10

Sixth Month-Engineering allowance for verification

Eight-Eleven Month- Floor Layering 11-30

Month 12 1st week-Engineer verification

Month 12 2nd week- County Clark verification

Month 12 3rd-4th week- Seasonal Break

Month 13-Month 20 Layering Floor 31-60

Month 21-Engineer Verification

Month 22- County Verification

Month 22-33-Floor Layering 60-90

Month 34-35: Engineer Verification

Month 36: County Verification

Month 37-40: Layering Floor 91-100

3.2 Phase Two (Finishing Works)

Month 12-21: Commencing Finishing Works for Floor 1-10

Month-22-30: Commencing Finishing Works for floor 11-30

Month 33-40: Commencing Finishing works for Floor 31-60

Month 41-48: Commencing Finishing work for Floor 61-90

Month 49-54: Commencing and Finishing works for Floor 91-100

3.3 Phase Three (Facing)Month 22-40: Facing floor 1-60

Month 41-48: Facing floor 61-90.

Month 41-48: Toppling out 91-100

3.4 Project Cost Summary

The project team thought it wise to present the average costs estimates for the entire project as this would help stakeholders to determine the validity of the project. The cost summary is a detailed reflection of costs incurred in the project largely by the contractor, aided by engineers and other sub-contractors. Depending on the contractor type, there was 1 architectural firm, to be 1 overall engineer presumably a civil engineer, 1 main civil engineer aiding the main engineer, 1 electrical engineer, 1 plumbing engineer, 1 structural engineer, and 1 environmental engineer. For the purpose of efficient communication, the contractor allowed each of these engineers to head their respective workforce. This makes it easier to manage the engineer. There is also a consultancy engineer, who is the overall engineer reporting back to the staff.

Cost estimates were applied to determine trajectory of the project, in relation to scope and feasibility, as well thresholds. Preparing the estimates involved engaging architects and engineer to ensure the project the financial feasibility for strategic requirements. The requirements involved strategic estimates that would allow the project team to determine the total earnings of the project. As such, the project performance encircles the total time estimates that would be used. The notable tasks included.

4. Estimate building systems

4.1 Square Foot and Cubic Foot Estimates

Project team estimated the building systems based on the possible preliminary and the intermediate budgets that the project would use to engage significantly towards the project trajectory. The use of different types of estimates provides the right plans and preparation for plans as well engaging the right budgetary parameters that are easily analyzed and established. The costs are broken down through various components. Estimating building systems involved measuring and calculating the floor area and the volumes proposed. The floor areas were arrived at by estimating the unit cost of each floor per meter square. The figures were turned around based on the existing database records, as well field research conducted by the researchers and others members enjoined. Through previous database records and current efforts by the group, the group estimated the overall costs based on excel attached alongside this document.