PDA

View Full Version : PHILADELPHIA | American Commerce Center | 1,510' Pinnacle / 1,210' Roof | 63 FLOORS


Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18

Traynor
Jul 22, 2010, 3:20 PM
I know I am coming late to the party, and forgive me for not reading over 80 pages of thread to catch up... But...

Isn't the design of the tower portion just the one of the original designs for the Freedom Tower? You know, the "Giant-Middle-Finger" version that was rejected as too confrontational.

:shrug:

brian.odonnell20
Jul 22, 2010, 3:34 PM
:previous: well, no. not really... people have said before that it looks similar because of the corners shaved of into triangles and the off center spire, but if you look at the first freedom tower design and this, the two are actually very different. the acc design has some features inspired by it, but by no means are they the same.

and you didn't miss much btw... i'm actually really surprised that this got 80 pages of posts; Its just a proposal. I guess it just means a lot to people from philly (including me) to actually have a supertall of this magnitude in the near future.

:frog: -what post could possibly justify the use of this symbol?

teeheee
Jul 22, 2010, 9:06 PM
I like the idea of Philly flipping off the rest of the country.

brian.odonnell20
Jul 22, 2010, 10:09 PM
:previous: why

zuelas
Jul 23, 2010, 9:48 PM
There's no new news on this. The market doesn't call for it. Quit speculating and let it go. This has to be one of the most hollow threads on the board.

Onn
Jul 23, 2010, 10:17 PM
There's no new news on this. The market doesn't call for it. Quit speculating and let it go. This has to be one of the most hollow threads on the board.

They weren't saying that just mere weeks ago. You just don't know, you can't kill something if it's not dead.

The A Train
Jul 24, 2010, 1:51 AM
They weren't saying that just mere weeks ago. You just don't know, you can't kill something if it's not dead.

Actually, you can only kill something if it's not already dead.

Onn
Jul 24, 2010, 2:08 AM
Actually, you can only kill something if it's not already dead.

He can't, he has no control over this project. I said “you”, as in the person killing the thread when the project's not dead. None of us can kill the project, we don't have the authority to make that decision.

Don098
Jul 24, 2010, 2:40 AM
I have yet to see any reports from the developers, architects, the city, or any other stakeholders to suggest this project is dead. Delayed? Absolutely, and that was to be expected as soon as the recession began. Virtually all large-scale construction projects in the country are on hold; I walk by two vacant lots each day that are just waiting for enough capital to execute tremendous proposals. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that it's some of the more promising real estate in the entire country, figuring that these sites are directly above the Rosslyn metro station in Arlington, VA - one of the best places in the entire country (according to a recent report) to find a job. If buildings can't get built here, then I'm not surprised to see the ACC shelved. Buildings of this magnitude rarely get off the ground within the first few years of their proposals. The Comcast Center took 7 years to finish. NY is only now just starting to make noticeable progress on the WTC site nearly a decade after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

I guess the only question is how long will the developers continue to hold onto this land and pay property taxes? That's really their only financial obligation at this point in time, correct? If the developers sell the lot, THEN the project is dead. No news is probably good news.

Am I right or no?

brian.odonnell20
Jul 24, 2010, 3:10 AM
I have yet to see any reports from the developers, architects, the city, or any other stakeholders to suggest this project is dead. Delayed? Absolutely, and that was to be expected as soon as the recession began. Virtually all large-scale construction projects in the country are on hold; I walk by two vacant lots each day that are just waiting for enough capital to execute tremendous proposals. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that it's some of the more promising real estate in the entire country, figuring that these sites are directly above the Rosslyn metro station in Arlington, VA - one of the best places in the entire country (according to a recent report) to find a job. If buildings can't get built here, then I'm not surprised to see the ACC shelved. Buildings of this magnitude rarely get off the ground within the first few years of their proposals. The Comcast Center took 7 years to finish. NY is only now just starting to make noticeable progress on the WTC site nearly a decade after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

I guess the only question is how long will the developers continue to hold onto this land and pay property taxes? That's really their only financial obligation at this point in time, correct? If the developers sell the lot, THEN the project is dead. No news is probably good news.

Am I right or no?

No news is not good news or bad news. It's good that there is no news as far as the developers selling the property goes, but its not like its good that the economy is bad and its still on hold until office space comes back to the market.

And, zuelas, this building has the same status as, if not is further along than, at least 5 skyscrapers in nyc, but I don't see anyone bashing those threads as hollow.

teeheee
Jul 24, 2010, 3:45 AM
:previous: why

Kinda the Philly spirit, right? Especially if the "finger" is pointed toward NYC.

SkyscrapersOfNewYork
Jul 24, 2010, 4:21 AM
Kinda the Philly spirit, right? Especially if the "finger" is pointed toward NYC.

wait i dont get it,why is the finger pointed toward NYC?

brian.odonnell20
Jul 24, 2010, 4:33 AM
wait i dont get it,why is the finger pointed toward NYC?

Because people from Philly generally hate people from new york, especially the self righteous ones that have the "supertalls can only be built here in the most important city in the us" attitude. Not that I totally think that or anything... :rolleyes:

SkyscrapersOfNewYork
Jul 24, 2010, 4:50 AM
Because people from Philly generally hate people from new york, especially the self righteous ones that have the "supertalls can only be built here in the most important city in the us" attitude. Not that I totally think that or anything... :rolleyes:

ohhhh ok i gotcha, i love Philly but just compare its skyline to NY's...i think NYer's have the bragging right there

brian.odonnell20
Jul 24, 2010, 5:07 AM
:previous: No one's comparing Philly to nyc. The point was that people from places like philly just point and laugh at new yorkers for being so condescending about their city and their buildings, and think it would be pretty funny to have a 1500 foot supertall middle finger to nyc. That was basically summed up in your post; someone makes a point about your city and you point to your skyline and think think its all about bragging rights.
Again, no ones saying that philly will become a new york by building a supertall, which is what everyone from new york seems to think and say. Too bad chicago didn't build the spire... that would've shut up new yorkers for a while.

SkyscrapersOfNewYork
Jul 24, 2010, 5:14 AM
:previous: No one's comparing Philly to nyc. The point was that people from places like philly just point and laugh at new yorkers for being so condescending about their city and their buildings, and think it would be pretty funny to have a 1500 foot supertall middle finger to nyc. That was basically summed up in your post; someone makes a point about your city and you point to your skyline and think think its all about bragging rights.
Again, no ones saying that philly will become a new york by building a supertall, which is what everyone from new york seems to think and say. Too bad chicago didn't build the spire... that would've shut up new yorkers for a while.

no i agree that us NYer's can be quite annoying people when it come to that, though i dont see how the American commerce center is a middle finger to NYC,i mean 1 WTC will be taller than it,for Philly to make that argument is pointless.on a last note,height is not all.Philly has some amazing pieces of architecture even if there are no supertalls.just as New York is much more impressive than Dubai despite Burj Khalifa being in Dubai.

teeheee
Jul 24, 2010, 1:21 PM
Kinda didn't mean to take this thread off on a tangent. Was being mostly facetious re: middle finger. Though I would be amused if the thing was built and that's what the public perception became.

As far as NYC v. Philly, I feel it's more of a sibling rivalry as we stand together in our hatred of LA!

Don098
Jul 24, 2010, 1:31 PM
Kinda didn't mean to take this thread off on a tangent. Was being mostly facetious re: middle finger. Though I would be amused if the thing was built and that's what the public perception became.

As far as NYC v. Philly, I feel it's more of a sibling rivalry as we stand together in our hatred of LA!

Funny that the notion of Philly's public perception comes up days after I wrote this on the development thread:

As much as I hate it, perception is reality and Philadelphia has not been doing itself any favors recently in that department.

Why does this thread always turn into city bashing?

wanderer34
Jul 31, 2010, 8:58 PM
I have no idea why this thread has veered into city bashing (although having the tallest building in America would make NYers blush w/ envy :yes: :haha: :tup: !!!)

But seriously, the ACC (and Cira Centre 2) seem like the only viable projects for CC right now, since they're both multipurpose developments and not just condos or just office buildings. If both buildings cannot start by the end of the year, at least, then I really have no faith in Obama, seriously.

I know the man has been in office for a year and a half, but somethings got to give, especially when out metro is expanding into Berks, Lancaster, and the Lehigh Valley, and I have yet to hear about the start of the SEPTA expansion into those regions (as well as high speed rail connecting Phila w/ Pittsburgh and the rest of the midwest).

All I'm saying is that Obama needs to start creating jobs which will stimulate the economy and not just hand out cash to corporations and the wealthy and stop focusing on the GOP. They're only distracting him.

brian.odonnell20
Jul 31, 2010, 9:25 PM
the only way Obama can create jobs is cut spending and let the business sector gain some trust in the market and invest. We haven't seen any job creation yet because of all the bailouts and stimulus bills (besides the census blowout). But once spending starts to get under control (which it mainly has) and more regulation comes into play (which it is starting to), jobs and commercial demand will slowly come back to the country, and hopefully philly. just be patient.

teeheee
Aug 1, 2010, 3:58 AM
I don't see how politics factors into this discussion. Let's keep this on topic, fellas.

Jonboy1983
Aug 6, 2010, 2:02 AM
I have no idea why this thread has veered into city bashing (although having the tallest building in America would make NYers blush w/ envy :yes: :haha: :tup: !!!)

But seriously, the ACC (and Cira Centre 2) seem like the only viable projects for CC right now, since they're both multipurpose developments and not just condos or just office buildings. If both buildings cannot start by the end of the year, at least, then I really have no faith in Obama, seriously.

I know the man has been in office for a year and a half, but somethings got to give, especially when out metro is expanding into Berks, Lancaster, and the Lehigh Valley, and I have yet to hear about the start of the SEPTA expansion into those regions (as well as high speed rail connecting Phila w/ Pittsburgh and the rest of the midwest).

All I'm saying is that Obama needs to start creating jobs which will stimulate the economy and not just hand out cash to corporations and the wealthy and stop focusing on the GOP. They're only distracting him.

I'm hoping for HSR to finally be extended to Pittsburgh myself, especially considering that that's my birth place and where most of my family is located.

As far as this building is concerned tho, sure, it would be sweet to see something supremely large in Center City, but that's not a priority right now. How much of Comcast Center is fully leased? I hear that the corporate vacancy rate for Center City is pretty high.

Then again, when they built the Twin Towers back in the early 1970s, weren't those mostly empty for at least a decade? Not to mention, all the other buildings that were built around that same time in NYC. Soo...

Concerning the problem with luring businesses to Philly and encouraging them to grow and expand, how about Philadelphia and Pittsburgh gang up on Harrisburg over their getting away with rape on businesses pretty much (i.e. lower the damned corporate taxes already!) Why else would companies like Alcoa and those mentioned in this thread want to move elsewhere? Kennametal (Pittsburgh-based) came close to moving its corporate HQ to Dallas because of the business climate.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/business/s_693479.html

cubanChris
Aug 6, 2010, 12:43 PM
I'm pretty positive Comcast is 100% leased.


In fact my single cubicle (and almost everyone on my floor now) is operating under double occupancy. I'd say they're actually short on space.

Londonee
Aug 6, 2010, 3:08 PM
As far as this building is concerned tho, sure, it would be sweet to see something supremely large in Center City, but that's not a priority right now. How much of Comcast Center is fully leased? I hear that the corporate vacancy rate for Center City is pretty high.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/business/s_693479.html

Where do you hear this from? People make that fact up consistently, and i'm confused as to where that rumor comes from. Vacancy rate in Center City is around 10%, which is doing far better than the national average, and WAY better than the surrounding suburban submarkets. There's approximately 40mil square ft of space in CC, and 36mil of it is occupied.

We Got Five
Aug 6, 2010, 6:58 PM
Londonee - the CC vacancy rate is creeping up...it's currently 14.7% and rising. We all knew the Verizon Tower would revamp itself and market "large blocks" of space. Look for those tenants seeking 100,000 sf to 125,000 sf to set up shop here.

At the rate we're going we won't see a new office building break ground within the next 5 years. That's not being negative, that's reality.

Infernal_Elf
Aug 7, 2010, 12:11 AM
Sad to hear this proposed building has such an amazing design

OneWorldTradeCenter
Aug 8, 2010, 2:27 PM
Are there images of the site at time?

Swinefeld
Aug 8, 2010, 2:38 PM
Are there images of the site at time?
Right now it's just a surface parking lot. Not much to see at all.

TheBroadStreetBull
Aug 9, 2010, 12:34 PM
So does this mean that we are unlikely to see this thing built any time soon?

Do we have any reference-able info in regards to tenants/possible tenants?

thenbagis
Aug 10, 2010, 4:32 PM
So does this mean that we are unlikely to see this thing built any time soon?

Do we have any reference-able info in regards to tenants/possible tenants?


I posted this article in the Development Thread
http://planphilly.com/development-philly-steady-she-goes

“Relatively speaking, Philadelphia is a stable market,” said Steelman. “They’ve held their own.” But, “there’s more talk about Cira Centre Two than about the American Commerce Center. A lot of that has to do with Cira as a Keystone Opportunity Zone. There are enormous benefits to relocating.”

So... one could assume that until Cira Centre Two gets rolling, the chances of ACC going are slim to none. We can always hope that assumption is wrong, though...

philatonian
Aug 19, 2010, 7:07 PM
I posted this article in the Development Thread
http://planphilly.com/development-philly-steady-she-goes



So... one could assume that until Cira Centre Two gets rolling, the chances of ACC going are slim to none. We can always hope that assumption is wrong, though...

As much as I'd love Philly to have one of the world's tallest, I'd almost rather see Cira Centre South built. More height on the Schuylkill would draw your eye westward, making the city look even bigger.

At the ACC location I'd like to see something, anything, built there. It's disgraceful how many surface parking lots litter Center City. And somehow people still complain about parking.

brian.odonnell20
Aug 19, 2010, 7:37 PM
can't they just take away all the surface parking lots in cc or anywhere and build underground ones under new buildings put there? ...like the acc?

volguus zildrohar
Aug 20, 2010, 2:57 AM
The surface parking lots, like any other non-city owned property, are private. In Philadelphia, these lots are hard to get rid of. In Center City they often occupy well-located real estate and that's exactly the thing - the landowners know they can make a bundle selling it to a developer so they can hold out until they get an offer they like and until then they can charge exorbitant parking rates because they know people will pay them - particularly at a time when Center City is a hot draw.

Underground/garage parking is something you will usually only see with institutions. A plot owner will not go through the expense of building a full scale garage when they intend to sell the land to a developer anyway someday. It also helps not that building anything of significant size is difficult enough in this city - how many of those surface lots would be buildings or plazas now if not for this city's onerous taxes, byzantine building code, difficult/expensive trade unions and the other sad drawbacks to business and residential development here. You'll note that major construction only seems to happen here during nationwide building booms when the tide raises everyone's ships - other major cities generate their own booms or at least have a steady stream.

philatonian
Aug 20, 2010, 5:25 PM
Surface lots also have relatively no overhead. And thus no reason to sell. They operate like slumlords. Most aren't even maintained and are filled with weeds and trash, and uneven asphalt. They're eyesores.

I thought though that the RDA had some policy that surface lots had to be redeveloped within five years or they had to be sold, or seized by the city, or something? I'm not sure. I heard about it when there was that scuffle over the lot where the Mormon Temple is being built. It is some policy that is in place but they never enforced it until now? If that's true and the RDA does have such a policy, maybe they should be putting a little fire under Sl-EZ Park's butt and getting rid of some of these lots.

volguus zildrohar
Aug 20, 2010, 7:31 PM
philatonian, I believe that was a case of the RDA selling lots it owned to developers and giving them that 5 year window to redevelop it. A lot doesn't become de facto RDA property/jurisdiction by virtue of it being unbuilt upon. That particular case was very strange - I used to pass by that lot every day during middle and high school during the 90s and it was undeveloped long before that, I'm sure. Why suddenly the RDA wanted to take it back when a concrete proposal had been made for it is beyond me.

thenbagis
Aug 24, 2010, 1:53 PM
The city is doing a small part to get rid of these surface lots. There is a new Stormwater Management charge based on the amount of impervious surface. Unless these "slumlords" are planning to repave their lots with higher tech (porous) pavement, the cost of business and thus, incentive to sell, is going up.

http://www.mmwr.com/home/publications/default.aspx?d=2793

Prior to July 1, 2010, stormwater management services were funded from charges levied against a property based solely on the size of the property's water meter, such that those properties that were served by the largest meters were assessed the highest service charges. In addition, those properties that did not have a water meter (such as vacant lots and parking lots that are not connected to the City water supply), were not assessed any service charge at all and thus did not pay any portion of costs incurred by the City for stormwater management services.

Believing that it needed to allocate more equitably the cost of treating stormwater runoff to those properties that contribute most heavily to the volume of water treated, beginning July 1, 2010 the City instituted a separate SWMS Charge based on a property's size and impervious coverage. Over a four-year phase-in period, an increasing portion of the SWMS Charge will be based on the gross area and impervious area of the property (the "Parcel-Based Charge") as opposed to the size of the water meter, if any, serving the property (the "Meter-Based Charge"). For the year beginning July 1, 2010, 75% of the SWMS Charge will be a Meter-Based Charge and 25% of the charge will be a Parcel-Based Charge. For the year beginning July 1, 2011, 50% of the SWMS Charge will be a Meter-Based Charge and 50% will be a Parcel-Based Charge. For the year beginning July 1, 2012, 25% of the SWMS Charge will be a Meter-Based Charge and 75% will be a Parcel-Based Charge, and for years beginning on and after July 1, 2013, the entire SWMS Charge will be a Parcel-Based Charge.

wanderer34
Aug 24, 2010, 7:39 PM
Unless it's green spaces (parks), Philly needs to tack an extra monthly tax on empty lots, abandoned properties, and parking lots. It's ridiculous that a major city would be covered w/ so many empty lots, the city puts it's hand in their pockets rather than do something. The Cira Centre debacle is a great example. How do you just build a garage, when the two towers that are supposed to come with it don't get built. Why couldn't the developers pre-purchase materials than just pay one by one. I was at least looking forward to seeing the constructing of the Cira Centre 2 towers. I can understand why ACC has a delay (no committed tenants), but there was really no excuse for Cira Centre 2 to stop construction of the towers. We could've gotten BlackRock if construction continued, but I'm not completely sure whether Nutter wants to suceed as mayor, I'm just dissapointed in how this is going!!!

hammersklavier
Aug 24, 2010, 7:46 PM
Good.

I still want to see a land-use incentivization, though--more than just a stormwater tax: a tax enforced on lack of density relative to neighboring parcels in a given parcel.

volguus zildrohar
Aug 25, 2010, 2:25 AM
wanderer, the city can levy all the taxes, fines and fees on abandoned property that it wants. One thing that anyone interested in development in this city should be aware of is the fact that many, if not most, of the parcels are owned by people who don't care about the property. They aren't making money off of it, they can't sell it, it isn't worth the expense of building something when you consider where most of the properties are - there's no incentive. The same would apply if the city simply chose to seize those properties. Suppose a lot on East Lehigh Avenue is in arrears for $300,000. Who in their right mind would purchase a lot in that location for that much in addition to the cost of developing it for whatever their purpose is? It's the same case anywhere else you see acres of abandon - the easiest thing for a parcel owner to do is walk away.

thenbagis, I do remember reading about that. I hope the city enforces that new policy with the same fervor with which it fines good homeowners for having 3-inch weeds.

brian.odonnell20
Aug 25, 2010, 2:30 AM
they should have an incentive for the development of abandoned properties instead of a higher taxation upon it.

volguus zildrohar
Aug 25, 2010, 2:50 AM
A lot of these parcels, particularly large ones, would already qualify for certain tax credits. I have to go back and do some homework on exactly what those may be (KOZ-related, I'm sure). Of course, it would still come back to how profitable the plot would be. There's a reason all the rehabs are happening within a 2 mile circle of Center City - there are virtually no other places in Philadelphia appealling to development. Empty, abandoned homes almost automatically become Section 8 housing by right, large post-industrial buildings are too large to rehab or demolish and empty plots often lie in unattractive areas. There are other factors that need to be addressed first or at least in equal measure to developing these slices of brown/green. It took moving heaven and earth to get the Park West development done in Parkside because the real estate was simply not attractive and the same applies to thousands of such parcels across Philadelphia.

aro1419
Sep 8, 2010, 8:17 PM
I just really hope that this building will get built eventually. It would be a great addition to the skyline (with a few other skyscrapers to level it out), and would be a great symbol for the city. I also find that the American Commerce Center would help encourage and inspire the people of Philadelphia during such rough economic times. It would give everyone something to look forward to and would set another landmark in Philadelphia. All I can do now is be patient, and eventually I am sure it will be built.

winterrz
Sep 12, 2010, 3:55 AM
I walked by the site where this is going to be built yesterday, and there's a sign there with a picture of the ACC and it says "This changes everything!"

Was that sign always there?

Spocket
Sep 12, 2010, 11:49 AM
they should have an incentive for the development of abandoned properties instead of a higher taxation upon it.

That kinda is the incentive . "Build something and you get a tax break."

hammersklavier
Sep 12, 2010, 3:11 PM
I walked by the site where this is going to be built yesterday, and there's a sign there with a picture of the ACC and it says "This changes everything!"

Was that sign always there?
It's been there since late 2008 or early 2009, IIRC.

evanmack
Sep 12, 2010, 9:05 PM
I really hope they build this...

tayser
Sep 16, 2010, 10:44 AM
when I first saw the renders on Page 1, I immediately thought this tower was being built in Shenzen, Guangzhou, Xiamen or Chongqing, not Philadelphia!

regardless, what a beauty.

Philly-Drew
Oct 2, 2010, 12:55 PM
I'd like to see this built, but I'm not holding my breath. I was really excited when this was first proposed and I believe that the developer would do a great job. But considering the length of time since it was proposed, and the economic conditions, the developer may not consider this feasible.

brickhugger
Oct 8, 2010, 2:55 PM
This one will probably get built the same day they build Chicago Spire. :shrug:

cityguy
Oct 9, 2010, 2:25 AM
After almost three years ,I think we can say it's canceled.

thelanetrain17
Oct 9, 2010, 2:39 AM
Yeah philly!!! Going big time finally!! this building looks great! I live 35 minutes outside of philly and this will make that skyline 10 times better!

teeheee
Oct 9, 2010, 3:58 PM
Ugh. Swinefeld, can we close this thread until there's actual news to report?

Onn
Oct 9, 2010, 4:10 PM
Ugh. Swinefeld, can we close this thread until there's actual news to report?

Whoa, don't close something just because there is no news currently. That's a pretty stupid idea. Have you seen the economy lately? Have some patience, knee-jerk reactions are generally wrong. There should be no reason at all people can't discuss the building in the mean time.

teeheee
Oct 9, 2010, 10:02 PM
Whoa, don't close something just because there is no news currently. That's a pretty stupid idea. Have you seen the economy lately? Have some patience, knee-jerk reactions are generally wrong. There should be no reason at all people can't discuss the building in the mean time.

The problem is, there's no discussion going on. It's either, "I can't wait for this to get built," "oh, this will never be built," or "is this going to be built?"

brian.odonnell20
Oct 10, 2010, 6:34 PM
After almost three years ,I think we can say it's canceled.

Oh my god, its not cancelled! this is as far along as 15 penn plaza in nyc. its has city council approval; just needs an anchor tenant to start construction. If it was cancelled, they would have said so you idiot. Its not even on hold. Its been pending construction for this long because the project started right before the recession, and the developers had to wait. As stated at least a billion times before, the funding, as well as government and public approval are all there and have been for years. If 15 penn plaza couldn't find a tenant for 2 years, would you say the same thing? There's no news on it, but to new yorkers its a perfectly viable project, even though it may take longer than acc to find a tenant for.

alasi
Oct 15, 2010, 1:27 AM
The inky had an article about how Hill is shopping for more real estate deals. Seems they are still interested in building, but need an anchor tenant. Said that Liberty Trust tried to buy, but offered a ridiculously low bid. They are willing to keep it a parking lot because it pays for itself.

fastdupree
Oct 15, 2010, 2:57 AM
This baby should get built some other location in downtown Philadelphia anyway. I hate the way Philly keep squeezing skyscrapers together. They need to put this at 8th & Market or even further towards 5th street. Why don't they even build tall buildings in the U of Penn area but at market street. That will make the Cira complex look even better while spreading out the skyline a bit more. Then downtown Philly will become 3rd best skyline in the United States.

Plokoon11
Oct 15, 2010, 6:06 AM
^ Thats because Philly is unique that it has a triangle of buildings with a peak. Instead of the Chicago and NYC way by putting a building here and there.

Onn
Oct 16, 2010, 2:18 AM
The problem is, there's no discussion going on. It's either, "I can't wait for this to get built," "oh, this will never be built," or "is this going to be built?"

Okayy...soo?? Oh and here you go, have some patience would you. Don't be a fool.

Philly tower developer's new fund

Posted by Joseph N. DiStefano
Thursday, October 14, 2010

The people behind the American Commerce Center, the proposed 1,500-foot tower for the site west of Comcast Corp.'s not-quite-1,000-foot Center City headquarters, say they're raising a $100 million-plus development fund to buy more property at today's bargain prices.

"We're three to six months from our first closing," said David Richter, partner with Garrett Miller in Hill Opportunity Real Estate Fund, and boss with his father, Irving Richter, at Hill International Corp., the Marlton-based project management firm that employs 2,600 in Europe, the Americas and the Middle East.

While raising funds from rich people, they're hanging onto the high-rise site, currently a parking lot, co-owned with the Multi Employer Property Trust of Bethesda, Md., that more than pays for itself from parking fees, according to Richter. They've turned down an offer, he says, from Liberty Property Trust, which built the Comcast building: "It was so low as to be laughable."

So the tower's not dead? "It's still in the works, and it'll be in the works until we find an anchor tenant," Miller affirmed.

"For the time being, we're in the parking business," added Richter.
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/inq-phillydeals/

OneWorldTradeCenter
Oct 16, 2010, 1:31 PM
:previous: Well, some news are better than no news. But I doubt that this really gets built.. I hope it!

Don098
Oct 16, 2010, 8:31 PM
:previous: Well, some news are better than no news. But I doubt that this really gets built.. I hope it!

You're absolutely right. By my count, this is the first time we've seen the building even mentioned in a news article since January...at least what's been posted on this thread.

Dylan Leblanc
Oct 27, 2010, 6:29 AM
Frankly I don't want this tower to be built. The design is so cheap and amateur, it doesn't deserve to be Philly's tallest. This proposal reminds me of that Miapolis thing.

giantSwan
Jan 2, 2011, 9:41 PM
American Commerce Center Enthusiasts...

just read an article highlighting philly's population decrease and recent increase on www.crackedbellblog.com it mentioned the stagnant ACC

Don098
Jan 2, 2011, 9:57 PM
American Commerce Center Enthusiasts...

just read an article highlighting philly's population decrease and recent increase on www.crackedbellblog.com it mentioned the stagnant ACC

My reaction to this is...yea, so?

That was a very elementary assessment of Philadelphia demography and development. There's nothing there that nearly 100% of the regulars on the Philly development thread already know. Most importantly, this is not news about the ACC's status.

Onn
Jan 2, 2011, 11:48 PM
American Commerce Center Enthusiasts...

just read an article highlighting philly's population decrease and recent increase on www.crackedbellblog.com it mentioned the stagnant ACC

Trying to connect population to an office building? Really? Have you looked at the world lately. :haha:

Tony73
Jan 3, 2011, 10:54 AM
Well, but this tower will be built or not?

pwp
Jan 3, 2011, 2:04 PM
Well, but this tower will be built or not?

I'd say the consensus on this forum is that it will get built, but not this year and possibly be scaled down from the original design. From the little news that's surfaced on the project in the past few months, much has centered on the need and on-going campaign to recruit an anchor tenant to lease up a substantial amount of floor space. As the economy rebounds, we'll hopefully see more noise on this project; however, what's also working against this, in my opinion, is that the major local players (education, pharma, and health care companies) may desire to reside in, or closer to, University City. Possibly the latest Census data will generate some interest from suburban firms to the city? Then again, it's not as though you can't look around and see the progress the city's made in the past 10-years.

Spocket
Jan 3, 2011, 3:36 PM
I'd say the consensus on this forum is that it will get built, ...
Not to be a party pooper here but the only reason that it's the consensus on this forum is because a)a lot of the posters are from the area in question and therefore have a serious desire to view things through rose-tinted glasses , and b) nobody wants to start a city-vs-city .

Of course it's possible that it will be built . Some day I'm sure that something tall and graceful will be put up that gives Philly a signature skyline envied by many . I'm not saying it won't happen because Philly is somehow incapable of seeing something like this built . What I think is a more prudent comment is to say that at the current time the economics of this tower don't make sense . Further , and more importantly , by the time they do , the ACC will be long forgotten . The truth is that we're looking at at least five years and probably closer to a decade before something like this is viable .

Yes , it could be scaled down but the problem isn't just that it's too much space to flood the market with . The simple fact is that there are no large , anchor tenants on the horizon . There are plausible and possible anchor names to throw around but nothing very serious whatsoever . That's just not going to change any time soon .

Unless somebody is willing to build this thing completely on speculation then it's just not going to happen .

And just for the record , I say this as somebody who was practically holding his breath waiting for a shovel to hit the dirt . I mean I really , really wanted this thing to go up and I still do . The cold water dashing the dreams is not a function of baseless negativity .

bryson662001
Jan 3, 2011, 5:36 PM
This building as it is now designed will not be built. There are other developers out there with their own projects and they are all chasing the same elusive tenant. Even if Hill Opportunity were to snare that tenant, they are not going to use 3 year old plans. A new design would be produced, probably reduced in size, which is just as well because that neighborhood is not the best place for this giant building anyway. I agree it is time to close this thread.

Onn
Jan 4, 2011, 5:59 PM
This building as it is now designed will not be built. There are other developers out there with their own projects and they are all chasing the same elusive tenant. Even if Hill Opportunity were to snare that tenant, they are not going to use 3 year old plans. A new design would be produced, probably reduced in size, which is just as well because that neighborhood is not the best place for this giant building anyway. I agree it is time to close this thread.

Projects generally don't get scaled down in such a dramatic way as you purpose, the whole point of the project was building big. Don't go off on a limb like that when you have nothing to support that claim, closing the thread is even more ridiculous when its obvious the plans will not go forward in a down economy. Does that mean it will never happen? Not at all.

Lecom
Jan 4, 2011, 6:12 PM
As the project has not officially been cancelled nor is it old enough to become a definite stale proposal, the thread stays.

Don098
Jan 4, 2011, 6:56 PM
This building as it is now designed will not be built. There are other developers out there with their own projects and they are all chasing the same elusive tenant. Even if Hill Opportunity were to snare that tenant, they are not going to use 3 year old plans. A new design would be produced, probably reduced in size, which is just as well because that neighborhood is not the best place for this giant building anyway. I agree it is time to close this thread.

I chuckle every single time I see your avatar because it so perfectly encapsulates who you are on this forum.

Skyscraper Sebastian
Jan 8, 2011, 10:56 PM
I like the main tower's design, but all the other stuff (hotel, plaza) I don't like. They have to change the design.

volguus zildrohar
Jan 9, 2011, 5:26 AM
The project was a complete shock when it was first proposed. The developer has never built anything on this scale before and there did not appear to be any kind of need or call for something of that size, especially after the recent completion of Comcast Center and the presence of several other substanial proposals.

Since about summer of last year my hopes for this one have faded. I believe that the developers are committed to making this happen, I just firmly do not believe that they can keep to the original program. Other highrises proposed for Philadelphia are more modestly sized (in terms of floor space) and would seem much more appealing to lenders when such money begins flowing again. ACC is the sort of thing that should have been let out of the bag in '03 or '04. Even if a large company wanted contiguous space and were willing to wait there are already people ahead of Hill and ACC in line, practically speaking.

Part of the allure of this one is the fact that it breaks the 1,000 foot barrier here for the first time. The design, while not devoid of merit, needs work and I've never bought the idea that the program can work on the plot for which it is intended, which is easily the most compact for any Philadelphia building of its size - it would be akin to jamming the Empire State Building somewhere on Exchange Place.

markdv
Jan 9, 2011, 7:03 AM
Can't understand Philadelphias self-imposed floor restriction.... I mean, we have the Comcast tower at almost 1000' and 60+ stories, and ACC at >1400' with 60+ stories ??? What's up with that ? Most other towers with these heights have many more stories . I think ACC is beautiful but it doesn't look 975" due to the tall ceilings, rather it looks about 700'. A good building needs a tighter height : floor ratio and just looks better !

Starship Catvern
Jan 9, 2011, 7:05 AM
I really hope this gets built, it will make a great addition to our skyline and Philadelphia deserves a super tall.

wanderer34
Jan 16, 2011, 6:19 PM
I'd say the consensus on this forum is that it will get built, but not this year and possibly be scaled down from the original design. From the little news that's surfaced on the project in the past few months, much has centered on the need and on-going campaign to recruit an anchor tenant to lease up a substantial amount of floor space. As the economy rebounds, we'll hopefully see more noise on this project; however, what's also working against this, in my opinion, is that the major local players (education, pharma, and health care companies) may desire to reside in, or closer to, University City. Possibly the latest Census data will generate some interest from suburban firms to the city? Then again, it's not as though you can't look around and see the progress the city's made in the past 10-years.

If it gets built, then fine, but scaled down is another issue, as the purpose of building the ACC was not just to break to 1000' mark, but to attract a major tenant to the city using the KOZ zone, as well as provide hotel, retail, and residential services. It did generate a lot of media attention as far as the TV stations broadcasting the plans. But I just can't see a scaled down version at the same site. I can see something being built smaller along one of Market St's few large lots from 19th St going west, but 18th and JFK is a major site for this type of tower, and seeing it not get built, even for this economy, or scaled down to another 600' - 700' is not just a huge disappointment for Hill Int'l, but for the city as well. I just hope we get a new mayor because I don't really feel comfortable w/ Nutter running the city, and I mean anybody (Katz, Green, Torsella, Rendell ???).

thenbagis
Jan 27, 2011, 6:34 PM
Checking in on the ACC development
http://planphilly.com/checking-acc-development
By Kellie Patrick Gates

A proposed 1,500-foot skyscraper that would be the city's tallest remains a ground-level parking lot. But the American Commerce Center project “is not scrapped,” the developer's attorney said.

“We're still looking for a tenant,” said attorney Peter Kelsen.

The developers – Hill International Real Estate Partners – are talking to a number of businesses in hopes of finding someone to fill the two-million square feet of space the building would contain, Kelsen said. “But until a large tenant is secured ... we will not build on spec.” he said.

In 2008, the structure designed by Philadelphia native and world-renowned architect Eugene Kohn lit up internet message boards and headlined Philadelphia City Planning Commission and City Council meetings. With its enormous leasing potential and 300-foot communications spire, the tower would have surpassed the Comcast Building as the city's tallest. City planners – including former Deputy Mayor Andy Altman, who is now heading up the planning for London's 2012 Olympic Games – were excited by the prospect. Why? It promised environmentally-conscious construction would extend the SEPTA concourse, allowing those who worked there to connect more easily with public transit. Advocates from the public praised the building as a forward-thinking boost to Philadelphia's skyline. Opponents derided it as “a bigger is better boondoogle" that would cut off other buildings sight lines and air.

Definitely a worthwhile read

brian.odonnell20
Jan 27, 2011, 6:52 PM
So, at this point, this has a better chance of being downsized than built as is or cancelled. From what I took from that article, the developers have expressed no interest in letting go of the project and will downsize it to more modest proportions if the current ones become unfeasible.

Fabb
Jan 27, 2011, 7:28 PM
Can't understand Philadelphias self-imposed floor restriction.... I mean, we have the Comcast tower at almost 1000' and 60+ stories, and ACC at >1400' with 60+ stories ??? What's up with that ? Most other towers with these heights have many more stories . I think ACC is beautiful but it doesn't look 975" due to the tall ceilings, rather it looks about 700'. A good building needs a tighter height : floor ratio and just looks better !

I agree.
Extremely tall ceilings make it look like a hollow box.
Skyscrapers should have more substance.

We Got Five
Jan 27, 2011, 8:32 PM
The hope is that some businesses will feel confident enough to sign on for a big move to a big, new building, he said.

We've beat this to a pulp. Nobody wants in on this building. I think Hill and co. realize this and they slowly but surely stepping back. The only option was GSK - but that would leave a monster hole in Franklin Plaza. Also - GSK has shown ZERO interest in growing their presence in Philadelphia. Who else is out there that would even fathom the idea of moving to Philadelphia. I thought Teva was a serious contender behind the scenes but they ultimately chose the northeast.

The odds of a company from outside the area coming here are remote at best.

teeheee
Jan 27, 2011, 8:59 PM
We've beat this to a pulp. Nobody wants in on this building. I think Hill and co. realize this and they slowly but surely stepping back. The only option was GSK - but that would leave a monster hole in Franklin Plaza. Also - GSK has shown ZERO interest in growing their presence in Philadelphia. Who else is out there that would even fathom the idea of moving to Philadelphia. I thought Teva was a serious contender behind the scenes but they ultimately chose the northeast.

The odds of a company from outside the area coming here are remote at best.

Wasn't the WTC built without tenants?

Onn
Jan 27, 2011, 10:20 PM
So, at this point, this has a better chance of being downsized than built as is or cancelled. From what I took from that article, the developers have expressed no interest in letting go of the project and will downsize it to more modest proportions if the current ones become unfeasible.

IT DOSEN'T SAY THAT ANYWHERE IN THE ARTICLE. Honestly, why are people putting words in their mouth? That dosen't make a bit of sense!

wwmiv
Jan 28, 2011, 4:16 AM
IT DOSEN'T SAY THAT ANYWHERE IN THE ARTICLE. Honestly, why are people putting words in their mouth? That dosen't make a bit of sense!

Doesn't. Does not. Doesn't.

STR
Jan 28, 2011, 9:10 AM
Wasn't the WTC built without tenants?

The WTC was a government funded urban renewal project. It was filled, initially, with a lot of state offices.

thenbagis
Jan 28, 2011, 1:08 PM
STR reading the ACC thread... A render maybe? ;-)

We Got Five
Jan 28, 2011, 1:50 PM
The last thing we need is more government offices.

Our city is dying for new jobs. Does City Council realize almost 60% of city residents work outside Philadelphia? It's not about building the ACC as much it is bringing jobs to Philadelphia. We can sit back and pump our chest and talk about bringing 200 "green energy" jobs to the Navy Yard but the rest of our downtown core is slowly moving away. I'm not taking a shot at the Green Jobs, beleive me. They are needed.

How many graduates (the ones who try to stay anyway) move to south Philly, Northern Liberties, Manyunk just to name a few only to take a job outside the city i.e. King of Prussia, Horsham, Mt. Laurel and the Mainline.

Something needs to be done. We are definitely at a breaking point. I think members of this forum have a better idea of how to run this city and create jobs then our current council. This forum seems to have a nice mix along the political spectrum and we might be in better position to actually get things done.

pwp
Jan 28, 2011, 2:54 PM
We are definitely at a breaking point.

Yeah I agree. I think we could turn the page and really move in the right direction. If the right decisions are made.

shakman
Apr 8, 2011, 7:18 PM
So?????????????? Anything new?

volguus zildrohar
Apr 8, 2011, 7:33 PM
No.

Doubtful that there will be anything of substance on this one for a while.

rricci
Apr 29, 2011, 10:53 AM
The site for the 1,500-foot tall building, designed by Philadelphia native and world-renowned architect Eugene Kohn, remains a parking lot.

“Is there any status update on the American Commerce building?” asked Commissioner Patrick Eiding.

“Not currently. The developers are actively seeking tenants,” Jastrzab said. “At this point, they continue to do so, but we haven't heard any further word in terms of other activity regarding the project.”



During a phone interview Wednesday morning, attorney Peter Kelsen, who represents the ACC developers, also said his client was continuing to seek tenants, and that there was no further news.

http://planphilly.com/news/notebook/planning-commission-says-state-law-extends-zoning-relief-1500-foot-american-commerce-c

volguus zildrohar
Apr 29, 2011, 4:02 PM
It's going to be a parking lot for a while. The sunset clause, however, I wasn't aware of.

christof
May 8, 2011, 10:36 PM
Time to stick a fork in this idea. :slob:

Plokoon11
May 9, 2011, 1:36 AM
^ No. Never!!!!

blacktrojan3921
May 19, 2011, 2:53 AM
How hard is it really to find tenants? Especially in this recession you guys are in :P

hammersklavier
May 19, 2011, 4:08 AM
When your city council would rather fund a study asking why the job market is declining--even though those questions have already been answered--instead of actively making the city business-friendly? Very.

We Got Five
May 19, 2011, 3:26 PM
The impact on the local economy for this project would be incredible. Unfortunately there is zero support from the local government.

shakman
May 27, 2011, 7:01 PM
I walked past the site on May 14th. The signs and renderings are still there. Also I believe Tishman Construction is the GC for this project. There was a Tishman sign posted onsite.

CassGilbert
May 29, 2011, 1:43 AM
So will this get built or what? I remember being excited about this skyscraper years ago when it was announced.

betawest
May 29, 2011, 3:29 AM
It is outdated design anyways.