PHILADELPHIA | American Commerce Center | 1,510' Pinnacle / 1,210' Roof | 63 FLOORS

[Swinefeld]

I agree with skyscraper on this one. Fox29 is always looking for a "versus" angle to sell a story. It's not worth reporting if the story isn't tinged with controversy. Can't they just be happy that such a massive project took another significant step forward?

Also note that the channel 6 story stated that there was an existing city ordinance that limited Center City buildings to 125'. Sheesh.

[BigDan35]

So where exactly does this building go from here? I heard something about it has to get a final approval that could be in a week or so? But even if it does get that, it still has to clear more hurdles before it will get built correct? I hope more than anything this building gets built but I'm still trying not to get too excited because if it doesn't I'll be crushed.

[cubanChris]

^^ i think those details are in teh article posted here this morning - to sum it up for you though...

Next Thurs Council will vote on FINAL aproval (yesterday was preliminary)...

The next step would be the developers submitting a plan of development (earliest estimated to be next spring)

The city would then review it and approve/suggest changes...(earliest would be sometime late 2009)

The developer could then break ground if approved (so we're looking at lat 09, early 2010 as best case scenario)

After next thurs (with a YES vote), talks with potential clients could (would?) become more serious as the major zoning hurdles had been cleared. So keep your fingers crossed the rumored tenant talks are more than just fabrications dressed up as tangible leads!

[skyscraper]

Also note that the channel 6 story stated that there was an existing city ordinance that limited Center City buildings to 125'. Sheesh.

at least that's factual, for that site. fox had to invent, or at least embellish, the facts to report it their way.

[shakman]

at least that's factual, for that site. fox had to invent, or at least embellish, the facts to report it their way.

Welcome to the world of media. :cheers:

[Philly-Drew]

I am liking this building more and more as new designs come out. I think it is HOT! I would love to see more exciting retail and dining establishments in that area. It would become part of my routine. Having a ball room up near the top of the hotel would also be fantastic. I love the ballroom in the Bellevue but it couldn't match the views of the American Commerce Center.

Speaking of dining in that area, I went to dinner at Table 31 in the Comcast building. The service and the food was superb, really superb. the menu was simple but executed very well. I would recommend it to anyone who really enjoys going out to fine dining establishments. :tup:

[SJPhillyBoy]

EDIT: I've been kinda remiss about updating the front page of this bad boy...so I want you guys to tell me what pics you want on their or if there's any info u think needs to be up there...
I would please like to see every rendering posted in this thread, in order of appearance, on the first post. In a sense, you have volunteered to do it and it is you responsibility as the thread starter, especially on this building. This is history. (Thank you)

[Swinefeld]

at least that's factual, for that site.
That was a major detail left out of the story.

Nice to hear from you, Drew. I was wondering where you got to.

[Ninjawho]

I would please like to see every rendering posted in this thread, in order of appearance, on the first post. In a sense, you have volunteered to do it and it is you responsibility as the thread starter, especially on this building. This is history. (Thank you)

Yes, I have been slack in that and I apologize. I'll get on it this weekend. Do you want EVERY rendering, (even the size comparisons done amateurly), or just the professional ones from the developer?

[Eigenwelt]

In some of the older philly construction threads, it was nice to have the official renderings first, then a section clearly marked as member created images where the pics made by Sasso or williamphila went.

also, this diagram from Philly.com wuld be a nice addition.

http://media.philly.com/images/515*410/12032008commercetower1.jpg

[CrazyFinger]

hell yeah!

the plus is that city council is moving swiftly. and they seem to be all for it!

build it! i assure that once its in the works anchor tenants will come. this is the only skyscraper in the entire northeast that is of NYC magnitude


Well, that might have something to do with the fact Philly is the only other city in The Entire Northeast, that even comes close to a NYC magnitude.:haha: :tup:

[bryson662001]

Welcome to the world of media. :cheers:

The so called "news media" is like a cancer that is trying desperately to drag this country down. They should all be rounded up and sent to Guantanamo.

[Jes44]

Gentlemen- there is an article on today's Philly.com where good old Inga makes fun of the people (guys) who hold signs supporting ACC and likens us to women who are swooning over the star of Twillight. What a jerk she is, she doesnt have a clue.

[Eigenwelt]

As a general supporter of Inga's columns and the role of critics at large, I will not stoop the hypocrasy of bitching when that criticism is turned on me. She is only calling a spade a spade and I will freely admit to being guilty of boosterism.

The problem is not Nimbyism or Yimbyism, but rather the reasons behind why those stances were taken. In regards to ACC I am a YIMBY... and I believe my reasons for being so justify it. But that doesn't mean I bitch when called out on it, especially not when there are actual listed and arguable points made by the opposition.

So instead of whining that she called us pre-pubescent girls (when whining would only prove her case for her), let's take those criticisms and see if we can refute them.

I'll start: Her point that this tower will turn the colonial era Arch street into a canyon of shadows.

I'd point out that from 18th east to the Parkway it already is. Another block is not a huge loss, especially when buildings like KH and Mellon already cast their shadow on the block in question much of the year. Also, that close to JFK and Market street where taller buildings can be built their shadow would still fall on Arch, and futhermore both of those wider, new york-style avenues are shadowbound despite their width.

In conclusion relocating or shorting this tower won't save this stretch of Arch street, and the positives of this location far outweight that negative.

You're up, whiners.


Edit: Decided to add this piece of crap I made the other night after looking at Brad's amazing Lovecopter update on Phillyskyline.com.

http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k287/Eigenwelt/Philly/ACCrendSM.jpg
Photo credit: Phillyskyline.com
Modification: Me

I still don't have access to my desktop, so I am without Photoshop. I did this with Paint in windows so I know it's crappy. Neverless I think it still came out cool.

[Phillydude]

Hey folks. Been a while since I've been here. Last time I posted I dissed this building. Didn't like it. But I've been keeping an eye on the goings on with this project and I just want to say for the record -- if I could diss this building anymore than I already have, I would. Its ugly. Period. I've never, since I've been a resident of Philadelphia (30 years now), said I didn't want a building to go up. This includes all the ugly buildings this city has (1 Liberty, Blue Cross, I could go on and on). But this one -- CAN IT. Its an unimagintive atrocity. When will they every get an architect around here to design a truly nice building. All these glass wall buildings -- come on.

[Swinefeld]

Gentlemen- there is an article on today's Philly.com where good old Inga makes fun of the people (guys) who hold signs supporting ACC and likens us to women who are swooning over the star of Twillight. What a jerk she is, she doesnt have a clue.
Inga can blow it out her ear. In the first paragraph she sounded like she was channeling Vince Fumo with that teenager comment. Not smart to plagiarize a crook like Fumo. There were a few other inane things in the article, but I'll leave it there. What she didn't say was more telling. No mention of the extension of the underground concourse. No mention of the 2,000 construction jobs and nearly 7,000 permanent jobs once the tower is complete. Just deride those who support the tower as mindless teenagers.

It almost sounds like she was channeling the blue hairs at Kennedy House.

Enough of her. The Philly Trib (http://www.phillytrib.com/tribune/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1352:towerjobs-1a-120508doc&catid=2:the-philadelphia-tribune&Itemid=3) has a cover story on ACC. I hope they contacted Brad about the photo. :sly:

[cubanChris]

Hey folks. Been a while since I've been here. Last time I posted I dissed this building. Didn't like it. But I've been keeping an eye on the goings on with this project and I just want to say for the record -- if I could diss this building anymore than I already have, I would. Its ugly. Period. I've never, since I've been a resident of Philadelphia (30 years now), said I didn't want a building to go up. This includes all the ugly buildings this city has (1 Liberty, Blue Cross, I could go on and on). But this one -- CAN IT. Its an unimagintive atrocity. When will they every get an architect around here to design a truly nice building. All these glass wall buildings -- come on.

Really? I like the blue cross building personally...

I can see critiques on the design of it - but I would say that the way the building greets the street alleviates the major problems and concerns most people have with 'glass wall buildings' Ah well, to each their own.

[SSBMEXPERT]

There was one other thing that kinda bothered me about Inga's article, anybody think know what she was talking about here?


"...the object of their affection is a fat, hulking copycat."

"...you can't make an icon by copying someone else's design."


You don't think she was talking about... Well, you know... That tower were not supposed to mention in this thread that just so happened to have a similar design? :uhh:

[DIESELPOLO]

Actually, what i got from the article is that the building is going to cause overcrowding. Overcrowding and density are completely different things, and she makes a substantial case with the Time Warner center in ny (jeez, if thats not the go-to case study when it comes to mixed-used developments...). Putting roughly the same amount of space (ACC's 2.2 million to TWC 2.8million) on half the acreage (1.2 to 3.4), I can't see how one can refute the concern that there would be too many people on a given site. If that's something we know tho, i think it can empower the planning commission to make it better (which i hope they do).

And as far as the design goes, that's everybody's opinion, but I don't like it that much. It is hulking and the combination of forms doesn't quite come together in a cohesive way. So yeh, I want them to build it, but i think it should be edited more.

[NYguy]

You don't think she was talking about... Well, you know... That tower were not supposed to mention in this thread that just so happened to have a similar design? :uhh:

I read that article:

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/home_design/20081205_Changing_Skyline__Arch_St__s_a_bad_place_for_ultra-tall_and_dense_tower.html
Since presenting the design, KPF has significantly improved the detailing of the glass curtain wall, which now has some much-needed texture. But the design is still a compendium of borrowed architectural moves - the crown from Daniel Libeskind's Freedom Tower in New York, the hotel bridge and giant opening from Rem Koolhaas' CCTV headquarters in Beijing.

It doesn't matter, especially since that version of the Freedom Tower won't be built, and most people don't know what the CCTV headquarters looks like anyway.

[hammersklavier]

So Eigenwelt dispatched the "OMG!!!!! It'll turn the street into a canyon!" argument and NYguy got rid of the "unoriginal" argument. What else was left?

1. AHHH!!!!! It's too congested!
2. Arch Street will be turned into an urban canyon! (BUSTED BY EIGENWELT)
3. It's trying to get too many bonuses!
4. Nobody will want to go up to the sixth-story public park! (Actually, that looks like a good place to spend an afternoon, IMHO; besides, unlikely as it is according to Jacobean thought, the Schuylkill Banks--another somewhat-difficult-to-access park--thrives)
5. It's too fat! (Aesthetics)
6. It's unoriginal! (BUSTED BY NYGUY)

IMO only the first and third arguments have any real credence. Inga's aesthetics are atrocious. Skirkanich's brickwork is the gentle greeny touch of puke.

[Eigenwelt]

Good point on number 4.

[Jayayess1190]

Some images (some already seen) (http://www.philly.com/inquirer/gallery/Tallest_skyscraper_wins_preliminary_City_Council_vote.html?index=1#photo)

Too bad when its finally built I'll be in college in another city. :(

[Don098]

Here are my notes from the City Council Rule's Committee meeting last Wednesday. From the perspective of the committee and the entrance to the chamber in City Hall, I was sitting on the left hand side in the front row next all of the opposition from Kennedy House. I also ended up sitting next to Thom Nickels, a reporter for The Bulletin whose article "Why Not Philadelphia?" was posted on here by Swinefeld back in the middle of November (pg. 51, post #1015 on 11/17/08). He's a really nice, gentle man that I was happy to have met. We ate lunch afterward and exchanged a lot of ideas about Philadelphia, etc. Hopefully he'll continue to add some valuable insight to this project as this development process moves forward. I noticed that he ended up taking notes at many of the same times that I turned to my notepad, so I guess I was on to something!

Anyway, onto the notes and my observations of the meeting. I've highlighted the most important stuff in bold for those of you that don't have time to read this exorbitantly long post!

THE SETTING
It started a little bit late just like the PCPC meeting did a few weeks ago. This time the meeting was held in front of the City Council Rules Committee on the fourth floor of City Hall. The ornate decor and soaring ceilings of this chamber were certainly a welcome upgrade from the musty, unwelcoming theater of the school the planning commission used last time, thank god! The council chair is at the front of the room with the council-member seating in the middle of the room away from the sides facing towards the council chair. These were largely vacant which puzzled me for a while until I learned that the people leading the meeting were only a subcommittee (rules committee of the larger city council that were not present, hence the later "full" vote). Darryl Clarke was there; man is he an articulate, educated man. Anyway, the public sat along the right and left-hand sides of the chamber as well as in the back along the wall. The latter is where the development team, along with virtually all of the public supporters, sat. They took up that entire section of the room. The left-hand side was populated by the opponents with a few supporters mixed in. Again, I can't get over the disparity between the largely heterogeneous demographics of the supporters and the homogeneity of the opposition. They all represent the old Philadelphia, in dress, mannerisms, and ideology. I can't tell you how many grumblings they had whenever anyone reference New York City.

Now here is the most interesting part of the attendants to this particular meeting. There was a number of predominantly white men who looked incredibly weathered and tough that lined the right-hand side of the chamber as well as the balcony above them. I had not seen them before at the last PCPC meeting, and I was trying to figure out who these people were. Suddenly it dawned on me and I turned to Mr. Nickels and said, "Are they out-of-work construction workers?" To which he replied, "Yes I think you're right." I'm paraphrasing but you get the idea. It was incredible to see so many union workers there, and it gave the proponents some needed muscle. None of them gave testimony, nor were they vocal, but their sheer presence was certainly felt. They, too, had "Build It" signs with them, and I was amused by their faces of disgust everytime an old person grumbled something from my section. Very, very funny.

THE TESTIMONY

1) Alan Greenberger, the former architect and chair of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission that Mayor Nutter appointed in April, spoke first.

He formally announced the PCPC's recommendation of the ACC to the council subcommittee and listed his reasons. There were a few questions from the rules committee, but the exchange was always cordial and positive whenever they address any discrepancies or disagreements. This is when I began to get the feeling that this meeting was going to be a waste of time and that the bill was going to pass. One incredibly important note about this zoning ordinance change which will help us put a deadline on the viability of the project in case things slow down: June 16, 2010 was the day that this zoning ordinance would lapse if the developer "failed to construct" or show "signficant progress" by this point, but Alan Greenberger presented an amendment to extend this deadline to 1/1/2011 because, "these are tough times." The council subcommittee then asked what Greenberger what he meant by "significant progress", and he responded by saying that a lead tenant and financing are the most important elements for construction. He also went on to say that both of these seem to be in place. More on that later.

The committee also asked him to explain what these confusing incentives written into the zoning code are. Greenberger explained that they're not monetary incentives, and they are not tax breaks for the developer. He talked about the incentive gross floor area for a proposed building which is part of the first level of incentives written into the code. If a certain percentage of a C4-C5 zoned parcel is devoted towards open space, the developer gets an 800% increase in allowable density. He continued to mention that there are a second set of bonuses (incentives) for buildings that add things like train concourses, underground parking, and LEED certifications which have never been awarded since these were written into the code. He said that the planning commission is going to revisit these second sets of incentives when they overhaul the city's zoning code because they haven't been used by developers in Philadelphia yet. "Perhaps they're unrealistic or obsolete," he wondered aloud.

This was the most interesting to me: Greenberger went on to talk about the viability of underground parking from the developer's perspective. (I have been wondering why the ACC team went with such a small number if underground parking spaces. They are only providing roughly the same number of spaces that the current surface parking lot provides which to me is incredibly conservative, even with projections of public transit ridership increases and extra concourses with direct access to the skyscraper.) Anyway, this is what he had to say: It currently costs the developer approximately $20,000 more per parking space to build underground than on the surface in Philadelphia. He explained that this is much higher than in other cities like Washington D.C. because the land value is not nearly high enough in Philadelphia for underground parking to be as economically viable as it is in D.C. He also mentioned that D.C. has city-mandated limits on surface parking downtown which has also encouraged underground parking. (I was just there this past week for an interview and these factors have certainly created a completely different landscape downtown than in Philadelphia.) So I guess I got my answer why the parking deck is currently so shallow. The must increase the number of spaces in the future, or the traffic and parking options are going to be a nightmare. I'm sure this is something the planning commission will address with them, and I bet they wouldn't shy away from providing city funds if it compromises the project in any way.

One other important thing to note: Back in March when this thing was unveiled, the developers projected the cost of this building to be $800 billion. Then it went up to $1 billion over the summer, and Mr. Greenberger said at the meeting that it's now going to cost $1.1 billion. That figure keeps mushrooming.

2) [I]Attorney Peter Kelsen and Philadelphia-native architect Gene Kohn, President of KPF

Mr. Kelsen spoke first; I really like this guy. He clearly knows how to speak. I'm just going to list some stats he presented that were interesting to me:
-They will build an underground concourse to Comcast's current connection to Suburban Station. There was no mention of physically extending the concourse along the tracks two blocks and Inga and others have reported. I think that's pretty self-evident considering that the price hasn't gone up that much since it was unveiled, and there was no mention of this being in their plans at that time.
-30% of the lot will public open space
-LEED gold certification...he hopes to "set the bar" for other development in Philadelphia following the ACC's completion
-The conservative tax revenue estimate from construction is $15 million in total for the city. I've found that these numbers are nearly always exceeded in practice.
-Over the course of the ACC's lifetime, they estimate that the jobs and retail will generate $9 million in tax revenue annually for the City of Philadelphia.

Gene Kohn spoke next. He mentioned that he was born here in Philadelphia, went to Central High and graduated from the University of Pennsylvania. He then launched into the same god-damn presentation he's given at every meeting so far. It's decent, but I'm really getting tired of hearing it up. For a project that he's "the most excited about" from his firm, maybe it's time to spice things up and think of some new ways of presenting the same stuff. The council members definitely got up and walked around, whispered in each other's ear etc. during this presentation in the same way that the PCPC members did, as well as the supporters who had to return to work during the presentation last time. This was something that I liked hearing from him, "The future of cities are in mass transit, not cars. We need to get away from them." Later during the questioning, Mr. Kelsen gave the most incredibly statistic I have ever heard with reference to Philadelphia's lack of development over the past two decades: In the last 20 years, the Philadelphia metro-area has added a total of 30 million square feet of new office space while Philadelphia has only contributed 2 million of them. These are the Cira and Comcast Centers.

The panel asked Gene and Peter about their concerns that this new development would merely shift companies already within the region into the ACC rather than luring big tenants in from elsewhere. They responded by using the Cira Center as an example. Apparently, the Cira Center drew 10 times more people and companies from outside of Philadelphia than ones that simply relocated within Philadelphia's borders.
-> (Interesting digression: At lunch, Mr. Nickels told me that the Cira Center wasn't designed to be taller because of the fears about 911. He also told me that a lot of the current employees in the Cira Center are unhappy because they feel so isolated on that island they're on. Hopefully that'll begin to change in the coming decade, but for now, that has to suck.)

3) Gray Smith (architect and urban planner) and attorney Joseph Beller, both of whom were hired by the Kennedy House

These guys spoke at the last PCPC meeting. Gray Smith certainly was that - grey - in his analysis of what determines the central business district. He seems to have an incredibly tiny scale of analysis with everything he does. He doesn't seem to think regionally, or even outside of the incredibly tiny portion of the city he thinks is the CBD. Anyone who comes to Philadelphia could point out where the center of the city is. Hell, all you have to do is go onto google maps and it's pretty obvious that the ACC site is not on the edge of some district. This guy scoffed at the LEED certification at the last meeting, and any architect worth their salt today knows the importance of designing buildings that are sustainable. At least that's what's drilled down the throats of architecture students at my alma mater... I was snickering about him to Thom and he told me that Mr. Smith is actually the author of the current zoning code! It's his baby! So NO WONDER he opposes this! He took FOREVER to give his testimony which, just like Gene's, was incredibly long. However, the council didn't take it this time, and they interrupted him and told him to finish it up. When he didn't oblige, they grilled him and basically cut him off. The council then absolutely grilled these guys and that's when the fireworks went off. They both became incredibly unprofessional and entered into highly irrational arguments which everyone could tell sounded desperate. This is when I knew the Council was completely on board. These are the things I wrote down during this contentious period:

"Kennedy House guy [Joe Beller]: "our concern is that it's too much density - in fact hurting these areas...too much in a small space...I do not consider myself an expert [on traffic], but it's not the 19th street that I know...There is no reason to change this from C4 to C5."

(Me): NO STATS, NO EVIDENCE, ALL QUALITATIVE PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AND OBSERVATION [from their attorney Mr. Beller]. Their story keeps changing: first they didn't want the building altogether, now "we want development, we like the building, but in another location" - cries from the NIMBYs for 8th and Market - "don't change the code, needs to be smaller"

Gray Smith takes isolated case studies that are completely out of scale and context and applies them to the ACC, e.g. citing that it takes 30 minutes to dock at Superfresh with a 26-foot-wide alley and Cuthbert is only 21 feet wide.

Gray Smith is pissed: "This is a step backward." very jaded and cynical

Funny that these guys love Comcast Center..."it's in a good location" (ME): It's a fucking block away! How is that the center of the CBD and a block away isn't? ....very irrational and defensive...

Joe Beller: "see what a danger this is." (ME): WOW!!!

Pretty amazing stuff if you ask me. It's a good thing that the City Council Rules Committee passed this thing unanimously. They looked so exhausted once they went into the public meeting portion. When it came time to vote, it was incredible how fast the motions were presented and seconded. The whole process took about a minute in a half, often with the council members anticipating the committee chair's lead and almost talking over her. The support was very, very strong.

[Don098]

ACC Plan Clears Another Hurdle
By Thom Nickels, For The Bulletin
12/04/2008

The City Council Rules Committee gave unanimous approval for rezoning changes at 18th and Arch streets for the construction of Philadelphia's tallest building, the American Commerce Center.

Upwards of 400 people, including construction workers in support of the project and Kennedy House tenants opposed to it, packed City Council Chambers to hear the pros and cons of building Philadelphia's first-world class skyscraper.

Alan Greenberger, executive director of the City Planning Commission, began the three-hour session with an overview of Bill 080588, which sought City Council's approval of changes in the zoning code.

The City Planning Commission recommended zoning code changes some weeks ago when it gave its nod of approval to the proposed skyscraper. The zoning code change approved both by the City Planning Commission and yesterday's City Council hearing would allow the American Commerce Center to bypass the 125-foot height limit set by Benjamin Franklin Parkway zoning codes.

Mr. Greenberger told Council that the planned zoning code for the area was established 20 years ago when the idea of development did not include the area of 18th and Arch streets. Mr. Greenberger said that this area is in the city's densest central business district.

Peter Kelsen, an attorney for ACC, emphasized that one benefit of the building would be the extension of the underground concourse from 19th and Arch streets to Suburban Station. Mr. Kelsen also stressed the project's economic benefits and predicted that it would generate thousands of construction jobs as well as generate tax revenues for the city.

The proposed ACC would contain 300,000 square feet of public space. The extended concourse would include retail and encourage pedestrian use of public transportation.

Architect Gene Kohn of Kohn, Pedersen and Fox (New York) told council the American Commerce building would not only have an impact on the skyline, but would "increase the quality of life on the street."

Mr. Kohn gave Council members an illustrated lecture on the building and reminded council that when Philadelphia City Hall was built it was a bold, visionary move for the city. Mr. Kohn seemed to imply that the city needed to recapture that bold, daring vision and build the American Commerce Center.

Mr. Kohn also stated that the building of ACC would set a bar that future development could match.

Speaking on behalf of Kennedy House residents who oppose the project, attorney Grey Smith cautioned that the project had too much density for the location, and that there was "no room to change the zoning from a C-4 to a C-5."

Mr. Grey suggested that the ACC be built near the Cira Center or somewhere on North Broad Street. Kennedy House lawyer Joseph Beller called the proposed skyscraper "an invitation to disaster to people who live in the Kennedy House." Mr. Grey also said that the project was "Too much, too soon," and referred to the building as "a danger."

Before the Rules Committee vote, Councilman William Kenny asked Mr. Grey if there was any site in Center City where a building of this height could be built.

"It wouldn't appear that way to me," Mr. Kenny added. "Based on your arguments as to why this building shouldn't be built - the streets are too narrow, it would cause too much traffic - we would never move from where we are in terms of development unless we make adjustments, and if we don't make adjustments and just go by what the zoning code says, we could never build a world-class city.

"William Penn did a good job when he laid the city out," Mr. Kenny continued, "but that was 300 years ago, but who was thinking of 15-story high rises then?"

Thom Nickels can be reached at ThomNickels1@aol.com

Source: http://www.thebulletin.us/site/index.cfm?newsid=20213286&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=8

[hammersklavier]

Good post.

Mr. Nickels is probably the best architecture critic in Philadelphia currently writing. It's just a shame that the rest of the paper is a lame-arse piece of schist.

[Chriss]

Awesome stuff guys, thanks for the updates!!!

[Ninjawho]

ALRIGHT!


Front page is all updated...if you guys feel there's anything missing please let me know...

[mmikeyphilly]

Front page looks just swell Ninja...bravo!

Couldn't help but wonder though....on a fridgit cold night like tonight...how nice it would be to have a retractable glass roof on that roofdeck garden.. Betcha that would cost some bucks eh?

Again..looks great:tup:
Nice job!

[Jes44]

What front page are you talking about Ninja?

[winxs]

What front page are you talking about Ninja?

The first post (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=3414177&postcount=1)of this thread.

[alasi]

Excellent update. Saw a few images I hadn't seen before. Keep up the good work.

[Pinoy2.0]

very nice update. are we (philly) the only ones that update the first page? it should be mandatory. i think it's just great.

[bryson662001]

I was playing with Google Earth and photo shop and made this. When you look at the other big towers nearby (all be it not quite as tall as ACC) none of them is on a really big lot.

http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k50/bryson662001/ACCsite.jpg

[Don098]

Excellent picture, Bryson. Front page, Ninja?

[We Got Five]

That picture shows two sizeable lots across the street for ACC and of course our beloved grass lot at 19th and Market - all hopeful future development.

Are we still confirmed for the apporval meeting tomorrow?

[Ninjawho]

Excellent picture, Bryson. Front page, Ninja?

huh?

[Don098]

huh?

As in, maybe Bryson's picture would be good to add to the front page.

[DocAwesome]

I must say that standing next to the site I was a little skeptical, but seeing it in Bryson's eagle-eye view it does seem more plausable.
I'd vote for this beast in a minute, even though I think the top half of the building would take away from the more interesting facets of our skyline.

[Ninjawho]

As in, maybe Bryson's picture would be good to add to the front page.

you would be good on the front page!

[Don098]

you would be good on the front page!

huh?

[Ninjawho]

huh?

I did it. for you. because I love you.

[bryson662001]

you would be good on the front page!
If anyone's picture should be on the front page it is Swinefeld's.

[Swinefeld]

If anyone's picture should be on the front page it is Swinefeld's.
Which picture is that?

Tomorrow the ACC Tower goes before the full Council for approval.

[Late1]

Aww... we may have an SSP wedding and a skyscraper approval on the same day! Wouldn't that be special?

[Ninjawho]

Aww... we may have an SSP wedding an a skyscraper approval on the same day! Wouldn't that be special?

Don said no :(

[Don098]

Don said no :(

I was having second thoughts :shrug:

[Swinefeld]

ACC Zoning just passed unanimously in city council!

:cheers:

[hammersklavier]

Nice!

What does that mean, exactly? Doesn't it mean they have the necessary approval to seek out anchor tenants?

[Ninjawho]

I believe that would be a yes :)

[Wheelingman04]

Does this tower have at least a 50% chance of being built.

[Ninjawho]

Does this tower have at least a 50% chance of being built.

I think the consensus on the boards here...and with those of us closely following the project that it definitely has at least a 50% chance of being built. When it will be built is another story. The recession is going to make construction cheap and the initially financing is already in place...so money doesn't seem to be an issue. The developer also seems to be hinting that there is serious interest in the project on the tenant side of things. If this thing gets a major tenant for the office part soon I think chances go up drastically from even what its at now, (at least 50%), like baring a disaster it will go up...


who knows for sure tho...we'll just have to wait and see :)

[SSBMEXPERT]

:previous: I'm gonna say 100% just to be hopeful and positive :D ... But yea, I guess we'll just have to see... Here's a little something from Philly.com on the recent approval...


American Commerce Center is a go

City Council wrapped up 2008 yesterday with one piece of legislation sure to make the building-trades unions happy and another bill that's already raising concerns.
Council unanimously approved zoning changes needed to build the American Commerce Center, a 1,510-foot tower planned for 18th and Arch streets. The $1.1 billion skyscraper is expected to generate $15 million for the city in taxes on construction work.

Councilman Darrell Clarke also introduced legislation that would allow builders to use PVC pipe in all construction. The plastic pipe, which is cheaper in material and labor to install than metal pipe, can now only be used in new residential construction of buildings with three stories or less.

Peter Kelsen, an attorney for the American Commerce Center, yesterday acknowledged a "challenging" economy might make it difficult for the developers to build the skyscraper. The developer has already spent millions to plan the structure, he added.

"We feel cautiously optimistic that even with these economic times we can bring to bear this project and we have the resources to do so," Kelsen said.

The project calls for a 1,210-foot office tower topped with a 300-foot spire and a 477-foot hotel attached by a sky bridge.

Clarke said he is seeking to expand the use of PVC pipe in all residential and commercial construction because builders have repeatedly complained about the cost of using metal pipe. He has met with leaders of the Plumbers Union, Local 690, which has opposed the use of PVC pipe in city construction because it requires fewer workers.

"We know this is near and dear to their heart," said Clarke, who is working to tailor the legislation's language to ease concerns.

John Kane, Local 690's business manager, said his union opposes the legislation but will work on it with Clarke and others in the plumbing industry.

"I think there's a possibility that we might be able to amend it," Kane said. "We're hoping we can compromise."

Council members, now on a holiday break for more than a month, will deal with Clarke's bill when they return in January. *


Link: http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20081212_American_Commerce_Center_is_a_go.html

[We Got Five]

Peter Kelsen, an attorney for the American Commerce Center, yesterday acknowledged a "challenging" economy might make it difficult for the developers to build the skyscraper. The developer has already spent millions to plan the structure, he added.

"We feel cautiously optimistic that even with these economic times we can bring to bear this project and we have the resources to do so," Kelsen said.

"might make it difficult to build the skyscraper..." I would of loved to have read "we're full steam ahead" or something along those lines.

Keep your fingers crossed.

[Swinefeld]

Does this tower have at least a 50% chance of being built.
I'm definitely seeing this glass as half full.

[skellergroup]

I'm definitely seeing this glass as half full.

so does Russell Crowe..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWghFMSo-uE&feature=related

[Pennsgrant]

Peter Kelsen, an attorney for the American Commerce Center, yesterday acknowledged a "challenging" economy might make it difficult for the developers to build the skyscraper. The developer has already spent millions to plan the structure, he added.

"might make it difficult to build the skyscraper..." I would of loved to have read "we're full steam ahead" or something along those lines.




Yes. Obviously hoping for the best but its a bit disconcerting when the developer is lamenting the fact of having already invested a couple million dollars? Huh this is a 1.2 B dollar project and you are mentioning a measly couple million bucks? Thats not good.

Thats like you or I buying a $2 M dollar house and freaking out over having to pay an inspector $500 bucks. If I'm worrying about $500 bucks I probably shouldnt be considering investing in a $2 M house.

[We Got Five]

Pennsgrant - exactly my point.

I don't want to sound the alarm, it's way to premature. But I was taken back by the tone. The rumors will start to fly January through April regarding potential tenant. Let's hope for the best.

And from the PBJ -

Phila. council OKs American Commerce Center skyscraper
Philadelphia Business Journal

City Council unanimously approved the zoning change and plans for the American Commerce Center, a skyscraper proposed by Hill International Real Estate Partners for 18th and Arch streets in Philadelphia.

It would be the tallest building in Philadelphia. It would have 2.2 million square feet with a mix of office, retail, hotel and public spaces. The next step is for the proposal to go through the plan development review process before the city's planning commission, which could take two to three months, according to Peter Kelsen, an attorney representing the builder. The developer continues to actively pursue an anchor tenant that would kick off the office portion of the project.

[BigDan35]

Damnit, this building better get built

[Late1]

Yes. Obviously hoping for the best but its a bit disconcerting when the developer is lamenting the fact of having already invested a couple million dollars? Huh this is a 1.2 B dollar project and you are mentioning a measly couple million bucks? Thats not good.

Thats like you or I buying a $2 M dollar house and freaking out over having to pay an inspector $500 bucks. If I'm worrying about $500 bucks I probably shouldnt be considering investing in a $2 M house.I didn't take it as lamenting, especially since the attorney added that the developer has the resources to get this project done despite the ailing economy. I think the attorney mentioned the millions they've already spent as a way of saying "we're serious about this proposal".

[Ninjawho]

I didn't take it as lamenting, especially since the attorney added that the developer has the resources to get this project done despite the ailing economy. I think the attorney mentioned the millions they've already spent as a way of saying "we're serious about this proposal".

That's exactly how I took it. But maybe that's just because we're blinded in our love for the project :p

[hammersklavier]

I hope so, Late.

If the anchor's signed quickly, then this project has all the momentum of a pair of colliding continents; if not, then the economy may actually snipe back.

[KillerIman]

i'm wondering why they rushed to get the zoning approvals before the end of the year though?


and didn't councilman clark mention something about potential tenants that are interested?

hmmm

[Don098]

I didn't take it as lamenting, especially since the attorney added that the developer has the resources to get this project done despite the ailing economy. I think the attorney mentioned the millions they've already spent as a way of saying "we're serious about this proposal".

Yea, this rhetoric is nothing new. They've been saying this every time, and the intention has always been to show their commitment and seriousness about the project. About the tenants; if you go back through my minutes from the meetings, you'll see some inside information that certainly points to several tenants waiting...both were reliable. One was on the development team and the other is a journalist who can call Garrett "any time".

[Castle]

I don't post often but I visit here almost every day. I have heard from two different, reliable sources this weekend of two potential anchor tenants that are apparently extremely interested in leasing considerable space in the ACC. Both potential tenants are very well known here and nationally. One is already located in Philly (rumors a few years back had them potentially building a signature tower on Vine St. *hint-hint), while the other is HQ'd outside Philly but has their primary business rival HQ'd in Philly's current tallest.

Take this info for what it's worth. I know I'm not giving you much definitively here, but after speaking to these two people, one of which works for the potential tenant, I am very confident that ACC will be built.:cool: :D

[therealdawk]

I don't post often but I visit here almost every day. I have heard from two different, reliable sources this weekend of two potential anchor tenants that are apparently extremely interested in leasing considerable space in the ACC. Both potential tenants are very well known here and nationally. One is already located in Philly (rumors a few years back had them potentially building a signature tower on Vine St. *hint-hint), while the other is HQ'd outside Philly but has their primary business rival HQ'd in Philly's current tallest.

Take this info for what it's worth. I know I'm not giving you much definitively here, but after speaking to these two people, one of which works for the potential tenant, I am very confident that ACC will be built.:cool: :D


Hmmm...Verizon and ????

[theWatusi]

According to the ACC website, they are proposing to add a station on the MFL line. Does anyone have any details?

[skyscraper]

Hmmm...Verizon and ????

doesn't verizon already have a building?

[cubanChris]

but if their bid for installing fios TV and high speed internet throughout the city goes through... you would think they would want to increase their presence & work force.

is DirecTV too small a company to be considered a rival to comcast?

[Ninjawho]

but if their bid for installing fios TV and high speed internet throughout the city goes through... you would think they would want to increase their presence & work force.

is DirecTV too small a company to be considered a rival to comcast?


Yea i was about to say...was the Vine St. Rumor Verizon? And they're also the other part of that hint as well...

[philadelphiathrives]

The Vine St. rumor was Glaxo. A few years ago, Hillier architects designed a building for a "confidential" client at 16th & Vine. They showed it at the AIA show at Liberty Place, right above the Glaxo HQ in England they designed. If you looked closely at the renderings, you could see the Glaxo logo at the base of the building. :rolleyes:

Verizon is probably the other client, since their rivalry with Comcast is well known. Verizon used to have their world HQ in the chocolate bar building across the street from Comcast's new tower, back when they were known as Bell Atlantic. If they didn't move, the two largest all-around communications companies (those that provide all major communications) would have been headquartered right across the street from each other! ;) So, if they move their world HQ to ACC, then those blocks will be the biggest hub for communications anywhere! :cheers: :D

[hammersklavier]

I don't post often but I visit here almost every day. I have heard from two different, reliable sources this weekend of two potential anchor tenants that are apparently extremely interested in leasing considerable space in the ACC. Both potential tenants are very well known here and nationally. One is already located in Philly (rumors a few years back had them potentially building a signature tower on Vine St. *hint-hint), while the other is HQ'd outside Philly but has their primary business rival HQ'd in Philly's current tallest.

Take this info for what it's worth. I know I'm not giving you much definitively here, but after speaking to these two people, one of which works for the potential tenant, I am very confident that ACC will be built.:cool: :D

GlaxoSmithKline and Verizon? ???

I've heard TD Bank. That would be really cool.

[hammersklavier]

The Vine St. rumor was Glaxo. A few years ago, Hillier architects designed a building for a "confidential" client at 16th & Vine. They showed it at the AIA show at Liberty Place, right above the Glaxo HQ in England they designed. If you looked closely at the renderings, you could see the Glaxo logo at the base of the building. :rolleyes:

Verizon is probably the other client, since their rivalry with Comcast is well known. Verizon used to have their world HQ in the chocolate bar building across the street from Comcast's new tower, back when they were known as Bell Atlantic. If they didn't move, the two largest all-around communications companies (those that provide all major communications) would have been headquartered right across the street from each other! ;) So, if they move their world HQ to ACC, then those blocks will be the biggest hub for communications anywhere! :cheers: :D

Making Philly the international communications hub. Awesome.

[pwp]

Making Philly the international communications hub. Awesome.

Castle is giving speculative information at best. No offense to him but why not be forthcoming and state the potential tenants? Well, regardless I'll keep my fingers crossed.

[Don098]

Castle is giving speculative information at best. No offense to him but why not be forthcoming and state the potential tenants? Well, regardless I'll keep my fingers crossed.

I have heard that GSK is still in play from Thom Nickels... The other ones sound correct as well...none of them sound new to me...old news so I'm almost positive Castle has it right... Thanks for posting, Castle, even if it is speculation...

Honestly, virtually everyone is speculating because the developers aren't legally allowed to state them to anyone. When asked directly by the City Council to name the potential tenants, the development team told them that they had (I believe) "three or four" different possibilities but that they couldn't legally name them yet. Correct me if I'm wrong, anyone...

[Castle]

Castle is giving speculative information at best. No offense to him but why not be forthcoming and state the potential tenants? Well, regardless I'll keep my fingers crossed.


No offense taken. You're absolutely correct - the info I gave is speculative since I can not speak for either potential tenant. Yes, Verizon and GSK are indeed the companies I am referring to. I found it worth posting here because each of my sources brought up their respective info unsolicited by myself, a day apart from each other. One of my sources works within the communications industry and said it is well known within the industry that Verizon is seeking "major space" within the ACC and probably will be seeking naming rights.

A day later, my other source brought up in casual conversation that her employer, Glaxo, was seeking "30+ floors in that new ACC building." She said that their current lease expires in 2013 and they are seeking an "upgrade".

Neither of my sources are skyscraper geeks (like myself) nor wishful thinkers. I don't mind if you don't believe my story or doubt the veracity of their info. I'm not claiming that what I heard guarantees that ACC gets built. I'm simply sharing what I consider credible info from reliable sources who I happen to know very well. I personally feel very confident that this gets built due to the stong interest in leasing major floors. However, I realize that in this current economic atmosphere, anything can happen (or perhaps more appropriately, NOT happen).

[hammersklavier]

No matter how you slice it, this is a good thing. If possible tenants are already fawning all over the space, then that means an anchor will get signed quicker, which means that the building would be built sooner, which in this environment is a good thing.
:banana: :banana: :banana:

[skyscraper]

No matter how you slice it, this is a good thing. If possible tenants are already fawning all over the space, then that means an anchor will get signed quicker, which means that the building would be built sooner, which in this environment is a good thing.
:banana: :banana: :banana:

let's just hope that the design commission doesn't have any major problems with it; remember when they suggested that the bridgeman's view tower explore a 2-tower version, and then went back to recommending the original design. that just wasted time and money.

[Late1]

The Verizon rumor would make sense. When you look at how competitive Verizon and Comcast are with each other, think of the statement it would make for Verizon to trump Comcast Center with a "Verizon Tower" across the street that's half again as tall.

The GSK rumor doesn't make as much sense to me. ACC would've made an incredible international icon for their US HQ, but instead they chose to give sole HQ status to Research Triangle (with Raleigh's one UK flight per day :rolleyes: )

As for the design commission's possible changes: I'd be shocked if they complained about the height (I think they love it) but won't be surprised if they ask the developers to a few feet off of the complex's southern boundary. That would give the Stirling and Kennedy House a little more breathing room while allowing for a wider sidewalk along Cuthbert - isn't that the side where current plans only allow for a 2-foot sidewalk at some point?

[Xeelee]

So this thing is a go?

[Pennsgrant]

The Verizon rumor would make sense. When you look at how competitive Verizon and Comcast are with each other, think of the statement it would make for Verizon to trump Comcast Center with a "Verizon Tower" across the street that's half again as tall.

The GSK rumor doesn't make as much sense to me. ACC would've made an incredible international icon for their US HQ, but instead they chose to give sole HQ status to Research Triangle (with Raleigh's one UK flight per day :rolleyes: )

I thought the same thing. Eventhough GSK has more workers in NC than Philly, using ACC as your US HQ would have made sense to me.Who knows GSK can always change their mnd about changing US HQ's and even if the HQ stays in NC they can still lay claim to the GSK Tower in Philadlephia, they said they are committed to staying in the region.

This whole Verizon Fios entrance into Comcast Country Philly raises some eyebrows. There has to be more to it like an agreement of job relocation into the city, even more than has been previously announced.

[Philly-Drew]

So far all of the recent current events point towards this building getting built. People are excited about it, it passed city council unanimously and the builder is preparing to meet with the design committee. This is all that we could have hoped for up until now. It’s hard for me to give a % of this building being built (or not) but I can say that 100% of the things that needed to happen so far have happened. My guess at this point is that it probably will get built and top out at the earliest in late 2012 but more likely mid 2013.

I mean with today’s economic conditions companies are laying off thousands of people and people are suffering economic hardships all over the world. We in Philadelphia get a company that shows up and says “Hey I want to build a billion dollar+ building in your city that will attract thousands of jobs”. Of course people will listen. Why would anyone be diametrically opposed to this?

Regarding building such a high profile building in tough economic times; I am surprised that no one brought up the fact that the Empire State Building was entirely constructed during the great depression. The great depression was far more devastating then what we have experienced (so far) in this recession.

Thanks for reaching out Swinefeld, I’ll try to touch base a little more often!

Oh and Ninjawho, you’re a F&#%ing Stud bro! great job on the front page! Thank you! :notacrook: :tup: :cheers: :drunk:

[Don098]

Regarding building such a high profile building in tough economic times; I am surprised that no one brought up the fact that the Empire State Building was entirely constructed during the great depression. The great depression was far more devastating then what we have experienced (so far) in this recession.

Actually it's been brought up by myself, swinefeld, and skyscraper quite a bit - not the depression specifically, but that building in an economic downturn has many advantages...It's scattered throughout these pages...up to 60 already, wow!

[GarCastle]

With a name like Castle, how can his credibility even be questioned?! :^)

The irony of Verizon (/absorbed Bell Atlantic) being the name of the tower that will take the spare BAT lot, looking down on Comcast.

As far as GSK, it makes total sense. They have no need for an HQ here. But they will naturally leverage the ACC work against their current and/or any other potential building leases. They may be able to get locked into the ACC as a secondary (but still substantial) tenant at a great rate. They may also feign it just to get better deals elsewhere or even in their existing building. We've certainly seen others feign interest and then stay with their existing building after their slumlord caved in quite a bit - the examples that are eluding me were in NYC.

If VZ does sign on, then GSK gets a bit less of a leverage unless VZ isn't looking for enough space to fully anchor the building on its own. It would be odd to see a Verizon marqueed (sp?) building with some far more subtle GSK logo somewhere on it (maybe below the sign in the lobby that points us to the restrooms?). heh.

[Philly-Drew]

Originally Posted by Don098

Originally Posted by Philly-Drew
Regarding building such a high profile building in tough economic times; I am surprised that no one brought up the fact that the Empire State Building was entirely constructed during the great depression. The great depression was far more devastating then what we have experienced (so far) in this recession.


Actually it's been brought up by myself, swinefeld, and skyscraper quite a bit - not the depression specifically, but that building in an economic downturn has many advantages...It's scattered throughout these pages...up to 60 already, wow!


You are right about the depression not being mentioned but I also don't recall anyone bringing up the Empire State Building in this thread. If so I must have missed it. :( If not, then what are you talking about? It wasn't brought up. I agree with the idea that a project like this is possible under these conditions and I'm citing a great example to support it.

[Wheelingman04]

I don't believe in god, but I am still praying for this project.

[tower]

I don't believe in god, but I am still praying for this project.

god is real we both chilled at the strip club the other day

goofball needed to borrow an extra 10 dollars for his lap dance

...ok back on subject

[Don098]

You are right about the depression not being mentioned but I also don't recall anyone bringing up the Empire State Building in this thread. If so I must have missed it. :( If not, then what are you talking about? It wasn't brought up. I agree with the idea that a project like this is possible under these conditions and I'm citing a great example to support it.

Sigh...i'm sorry, i forgot to say "empire state building". But we're being super specific here...all that needs to be understood is that building skyscrapers in a recession has advantages...it's nothing unique to the empire state building. And actually, I don't think it's the best example because labor and material costs were so obscenely cheap compared to what they are today if you want to be specific... I just bristled when you said that no one had brought up that general notion that building in a recession can be advantageous because it's been talked about nearly every single time this project's viability has been questioned because of the economy. But it's a good thing to remind people about so thanks for bringing it back up! (I'm not being sarcastic)

[Philly-Drew]

Hey Don098, you've read into my example, switched it around and then said it was brought up when it wasn't. I didn't say that building a building during an economic downturn has it's advantages. That has been brought up before. I said that the Empire State Building was built during the great depression. You can have your own opinion and all by my example is an excellent example, as all costs, not just labor costs, but rent, materials and everything else was less, much of it in scale. In fact the entire building cost something like 41 million dollars to build.

Anyway, back at the ranch, the Chrysler building is a decent example of an iconic building being built partly during the depression, although the ground breaking actually occurred during the roaring 20s and finished after the stock market crash.

I am hoping that the ACC becomes another, modern example of the same type of thing.

[bucks native]

Wasn't the PSFS Building - the first in the US in the new International Style - finished during the depression? I'm asking. The date was somewhere around that time. Yes? No?

[Orion1]

Wasn't the PSFS Building - the first in the US in the new International Style - finished during the depression? I'm asking. The date was somewhere around that time. Yes? No?

You are correct, it was completed in 1932. One of many projects started and completed during the great depression.

[Philly-Drew]

Hey Bucks Native, nice one! I should have guessed that building first. Talk about iconic!

Anyway, I hope that ACC gets the same kind of leverage in this economic downturn as those buildings did. Some serious hurtles have been cleared but more remain. I appreciate all of those who have actually attended any meetings and have spoken out in favor of the building. :tup:

[Cro Burnham]

Not to bust anyone's bubble, but I think they started the Empire State Bldg before they had any idea how bad the Depression was going to be. It soon was known as the "Empty State Building". The commercial real estate market was dead until about 1950. I'd hate to think what happened to the original developer of the ESB. Anyone know?

I wouldn't look back to the Empire State Building as a case study backing the probability of ACC getting done.

[Philly-Drew]

Good point Cro, good point. Construction on the ESB started well after the stock market crashed though. And it did wind up being possibly the most famous skyscraper of all time.

[skyscraper]

Not to bust anyone's bubble, but I think they started the Empire State Bldg before they had any idea how bad the Depression was going to be. It soon was known as the "Empty State Building". The commercial real estate market was dead until about 1950. I'd hate to think what happened to the original developer of the ESB. Anyone know?

I wouldn't look back to the Empire State Building as a case study backing the probability of ACC getting done.

one point of distinction between esb and acc: the esb had been from the beginning a speculative office building, meaning that there were no major tenants signed before construction began. they just figured that they would get enough smaller or mid-sized tenants to fill the place, before the bottom dropped out at the stock market crash. acc is not speculative, they are courting major tenants who require large contiguous blocks of space and then infill whatever is left over to smaller tenants. if they don't get major tenants, they won't build it.

[bucks native]

I think that Raleigh was a ruse. The GSK bigwigs don't want to up and move to NC. London, yes, but it's pricey. Philadelphia, on the other hand, is just right; the Brits like it and it's closer to NYC.


from PBJ here: http://philadelphia.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/stories/2008/12/22/newscolumn8.html


December 19, 2008
Commercial Real Estate
Proposal for the tallest skyscraper of them all advances
Philadelphia Business Journal - by Natalie Kostelni

REITs bypass credit crisis
Possible Glaxo move might be a boon for tower project
GlaxoSmithKline, Dynavax agree to $800M drug development deal

In early spring when a developer proposed constructing a building on Arch Street in Center City that would stand taller than the Empire State Building, skeptics were quick to downplay the reality of such a proposition. A 1,500-foot tall mixed-use tower on a parcel that has sat as a surface lot for as long as memory serves … in Philadelphia? No way.

In spite of that, the proposed American Commerce Center by Hill International Real Estate Partners made headway this year with City Council unanimously approving Dec. 11 rezoning the surface lot to make way for the project. The strides the tower has made hasn’t eliminated all of the critical chatter that still pegs the building as a long shot. At 2.2 million square feet with a mix of office, retail, hotel and public spaces, American Commerce Center would create a landmark in the city as well as change the skyline. Though it has political and planning commission support, what it lacks at this point is a major office tenant to sign a long-term lease that would kick off construction.

Negotiations among some prospects, including GlaxoSmithKline, are reportedly under way and if firmed up could set the stage for an announcement as early as spring.

New office tenants, especially large ones, are hard to come by in Center City. The city struggled to firmly secure two major companies this year that would have helped give it a boost.

Though Unisys Corp. signed a lease on 90,000 square feet at Two Liberty Place and planned to move 225 jobs to the city by January, the company still hasn’t fully committed to a downtown office. In August, the Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment ruled the company couldn’t put a sign on the 38th and 39th floors of the building into which it planned to move, prompting it to re-evaluate its decision to move into Two Liberty.

Unsettled, too, is whether Brandywine Realty Trust will snag BlackRock Group as a tenant for Cira South, its building at 30th Street Station. While the real estate investment trust was in negotiations with the investment firm to relocate nearly 1,000 jobs to the city, the financial crisis interfered. Investment firms such as BlackRock are re-evaluating aspects of their business and without an anchor tenant in hand, Brandywine will hold off indefinitely on constructing the building unless next year lines up BlackRock or another tenant to take a significant amount of space.

Regardless of the uncertainty over which new tenants may or may not move into Philadelphia, the resilience of the downtown and suburban office markets was apparent throughout the year. For one, the area’s office market has limited exposure to the meltdown of major financial institutions that is sending shudders throughout Wall Street and around the globe.

That the region’s office market is not expected to suffer as much as New York or North Jersey underscores how the Philadelphia area, which is dominated by educational and medical institutions, has so far managed to shield itself from extreme booms and busts that rock other cities.

The months ahead will be telling ones for the office market. Center City is holding its own, though tenants in Philadelphia and its suburbs have already started to retrench. Many are staying put in their current space when leases come due and signing short-term leases to bide time until clarity in the financial markets emerges.

One submarket is already feeling some pain. King of Prussia has started to deteriorate with more than 400,000 square feet of sublet space swamping the market, pushing the vacancy rate up to 17.4 percent and posting 168,000 square feet of negative absorption.

One key indicator the commercial real estate industry is keeping an eye on is employment. Job losses or gains portend how much office space companies use.

Even though the region is holding its own in the recession, what looms ahead has brokers and commercial lenders on guard.

“We’re tightening our belts for 2009,” said R. Craig Butchenhart, president of NorthMarq Capital at a Grubb & Ellis forecast forum. “We think it’s going to be a rough ride.”

NATALIE KOSTELNI can be reached at nkostelni@bizjournals.com or 215-238-5139.

[bucks native]

same source, earlier article: http://philadelphia.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/stories/2008/10/06/story14.html


While the company could stay where it is at One and Three Franklin Plaza overlooking the Vine Street Expressway, it will likely seek roughly 900,000 square feet of space in a building that has yet to be built, according to several people familiar with the company’s real estate situation.

Such a gargantuan lease would mean a great deal for American Commerce and its developer. At one point, TD Banknorth was eying the building. A GSK lease would take up the majority of the tower’s 1.3 million square feet of office space and enable the developer to secure a construction loan, said a person with knowledge of the project. While it likely would not be able to get a loan from an American bank because of the credit crisis, foreign lenders have already shown an interest in the project, he said.

[SJPhillyBoy]

So far all of the recent current events point towards this building getting built. People are excited about it, it passed city council unanimously and the builder is preparing to meet with the design committee. This is all that we could have hoped for up until now. It’s hard for me to give a % of this building being built (or not) but I can say that 100% of the things that needed to happen so far have happened. My guess at this point is that it probably will get built and top out at the earliest in late 2012 but more likely mid 2013.
I have to agree with you. Everything is progressing exactly how it needs to for this building to happen. It is as if the planets are aligning. From developer to funding to approvals to potential tennants. Things are just getting "clicked off" toward the status of construction. There seems to be a "momentum".

In an attempt to put a scale to this building, I went to the diagrams section of SSP and requested a diagram of all of the world's tallest including the following catagories: Built; Construction; Proposed; and On-Hold. This building, including all of those categories, would be the 26th tallest building on the planet Earth. With 10 of the 25 ahead of ACC as proposed and 3 of the 25 On-Hold, this building would definitely be in the top 15 in the world in height if built.

If you removed the Proposed and On-Hold, it would be the 6th tallest in the world, but really it would be the 8th as it appears the Nakheel Harbour Tower and Shanghai Center are moving from proposed to the construction phase.

It will also take the title of second tallest in the United States behind the Freedom Tower (IMO, there is just as much chance this gets built before the On-Hold Chicago Spire). Who knows, the Chicago Spire could even get scaled back. Philadelphia having the second tallest skyscraper in the USA is something to be very proud of.

The other amazing thing is that it is taller than so many other famous skyscrapers...The Sears Tower, The John Hancock Center, The Petronas Towers, The Empire State Building and Jin Mao Tower. American Commerce Center is in with some serious company

[bucks native]

If I'm not mistaken, the Chicago Spire was meant to be residential.

ACC is meant to be office, retail and hotel. In the current environment, that mix is much more likely to secure tenants than residential construction - anywhere.

[Philly-Drew]

Bucks Native, you hit the nail on the head. The Chicago Spire in it's current form is completely residential. On top of that Chicago has some serious residential units coming on the market soon with the Trump Tower completing. I have to agree with SJPhillyBoy and say that I would be surprised to see that building built in it's proposed form. Too bad though as I really love the design of that building. And yes, it would put this building in the number 2 spot for the countries tallest building if ACC finally gets built.

Oh, and thank you for posting such informative articles in this thread.