COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON RULES - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, December 3, 2008 9:15 a.m. - - - PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA, CHAIR COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN WILLIAM GREENLEE COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN BILL 080588 - An ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Arch Street, 18th Street, Cuthbert Street, and 19th Street... - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2
Good morning, everyone. This is a public hearing of the Rules Committee. I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 080588. MR. McPHERSON: An ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Arch Street, 18th Street, Cuthbert Street and 19th Street by amending Section 14-305 of the Zoning Code, entitled "C-4" Commercial and "C-5" Commercial District and by amending Section 14-1611 of the Zoning Code, entitled "Benjamin Franklin Parkway Controls," under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you, Madam President. Good morning. Madam President, thank you for giving me an opportunity to 3 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 make a brief statement prior to us proceeding on this particular legislation. Madam President, just to give you a real quick history of this particular issue, it actually relates to an earlier version of an overlay that actually started with the Parkway when there was a proposal to build a high-rise, I think, at 22nd and the Parkway, Pennsylvania Avenue, and the thought was at that time there were significant developments -- and unfortunately, it was in the time when development in the City of Philadelphia was quite hefty. As a result of that, there was concern that a number of significantly sized buildings were being proposed for the Parkway in the area adjacent to the Parkway. So as a result of that, working with the community and members of this Committee and members of this Council, we put in place a zoning overlay that essentially established a 4 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 height overlay around the Parkway and around those adjacent communities. At the time, we had some voices of concerns from developers and actually from the Administration at the time, because it was believed that that could possibly stymie development opportunities, but we made sure that everyone knew that there was a temporary measure, and essentially what we wanted to do was to get a handle on the development process, because things were popping up in various proposals because of the antiquated zoning mapping of those particular areas. The Logan Square Community Association had actually concurrent to that process started a planning initiative, essentially working with the Planning Commission to do a remapping of the entire area south of the Parkway. I understand that that particular process is still taking place. At the time when I talked to 5 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 residents and developers and the Administration, I made it clear this was a temporary measure. It gave us an opportunity to review various proposals in a very detailed manner. Today, we obviously have a proposal, and I must admit, I did not think it would be this significant a proposal at the time when we implemented the 125 height limit, but I made it clear that we would be able to look at these in a case-by-case basis as a result of the height overlay. I understand and understood early on when this particular development came to us actually early this year and we shared it with the Administration and introduced an ordinance in late spring, hopefully giving people enough time to review the process, review the proposal and get some consensus on what ultimately will be built. I want to say publicly I understand that those discussions are 6 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 ongoing. There are a number of concerns that still are outstanding as it relates to some of the adjacent residents. As a District Councilperson, I will deal with that particular aspect of those concerns by those residents primarily, and hopefully have the support of this Committee as we move ahead. While I will be asking for support for this particular bill in this public hearing, I want to acknowledge that there are still some outstanding issues that we hope will be resolved at the conclusion of this process as it relates to both the final passage of the bill and the Plan of Development as established by the Planning Commission. So I'm going to ask for the support, but I do want to make sure that people understand that there still needs to be some work done as it relates to the operations of the building and some of the adjacent issues relating to the immediately impacted residents in the 7 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 perimeter of this particular development. So with that, I'll finish up that conclusion, and I'm sure we'll have more to say during the course of the proceedings.
Our first witness? MR. McPHERSON: Alan Greenberger, Philadelphia City Planning Commission. (Witness approached witness table.)
Good morning. Kindly identify yourself for the record and proceed your testimony.
Good morning, Council President Verna and members of the Rules Committee. I'm Alan Greenberger, the Executive Director of the Philadelphia City Planning 8 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Commission. I'm here to testify on Bill 3 No. 080588, which was introduced in City Council on June 19, 2008. Let me give you a summary of the provisions of this bill and then I'll give you the Planning Commission's analysis. The purpose of this bill is to permit a matter-of-right zoning for the development known as the American Commerce Center, located in the block bounded by Arch Street, 18th Street, Cuthbert Street and 19th Street. To accomplish this, a number of changes in both the Zoning Code and Zoning Maps are required and are the subject of Bill 18 080588. These changes include: The area bounded by Arch Street, 19th Street, Cuthbert Street and 18th Street will be rezoned from a zoning designation currently of "C-4" Commercial to a new designation of "C-5" Commercial, which, by the way, is our densest commercial 9 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 development under the current Zoning Code. The height control of 125 feet, established by a section of the Code known as the "Benjamin Franklin Parkway Controls" -- and Councilman Clarke was just referring to that -- shall be lifted for this site only. 5 percent for buildings over 700 feet in height, which this one is. This bill includes the area on the south side of Arch Street between 18th and 19th Street to the areas that are permitted to receive incentive floor area bonuses. I apologize that this is where we get into the more technical part of the Zoning Code, but just bear with me. 10 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Additionally, it increases, for this block only, the amount of incentive gross floor area possible from 400 percent, four times the site area of the lot, to 750 percent of the lot area by establishing new, what are called, exceptional public benefits, and they're enumerated in the next paragraph. This bill adds a number of items to the list of exceptional public benefits which would permit a development to gain the incentive floor area that's noted above, and these include the following two that are in this proposal: Construction of a new extension to the Public Transit Concourse. This would permit a developer to gain an incentive gross floor area of 380 percent of the lot area. And, number two, sustainable development features would also be added to the list of exceptional public benefits. This would enable a development, if it incorporated all of 11 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 the sustainable items on the list, to receive an extra 200 percent FAR incentive gross floor area. The features which would be included are specifically listed in the bill. Additionally, in order to receive the bonuses, language included in the Plan of Development, as approved by the Planning Commission, must indicate that the development will earn at least a LEED Gold rating or equivalent. I can answer questions about LEED if you need them at the end of the testimony. Bill No. 080588 requires that the applicant have an approved Plan of Development from the City Planning Commission, as well as an Economic Opportunity Plan in conformance with Chapter 17-1600 of The Philadelphia Code. The ordinance will not take effect until this Plan of Development is approved by the City Planning Commission. This certification will go to the Department 12 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 of Licenses and Inspections and the Chief Clerk of City Council. Finally, the provisions of this ordinance shall lapse on January 1, 2011, under certain terms and conditions. City Planning Commission may grant an extension of one year upon a determination that the applicant is making substantial progress toward completion of the approved Plan of Development. That's what's in the bill. Now let me talk about our recommendations.
The City Planning Commission recommends changes to the Philadelphia Zoning Maps and text changes to the "C-5" Commercial District for this block in an effort to permit the majority of the density and mixed uses proposed for the American Commerce Center. Contrary to plans and zoning established over 20 years ago, we see clearly that the established pattern of growth for dense, downtown development as defined by "C-5" 13 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 zoning is not following the West Market Street and JFK Boulevard corridors, but rather is following the connection to the Public Transit Concourse that links development with a single node that includes regional rail, city subways and subsurface lines; in other words, the Suburban Station area. Development patterns are also consistent with establishing a presence at or near the Benjamin Franklin Parkway. This can be seen in projects such as the Comcast Center, the Bell Atlantic Tower and One and Two Logan Circle. In short, we believe that our most dense Central Business District now includes this site. Having established that, however, we also recognize that the next block immediately to the west, the 1900 block of Arch Street, is the natural transition zone between the density of the Central Business District and the Logan Square neighborhood, which west of 20th street is characterized by 14 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 smaller-scale residential and commercial structures. In order to protect this area, we have stated that the "C-4" zoning that currently exists on those transitional blocks should be maintained and further examined in detail with the community. We have also suggested that parts of the Logan Square neighborhood may want to be organized as a Neighborhood Conservation District to afford greater protections, and that's something that the Commission staff will make itself available to do if that's of interest to the community. The City Planning Commission does have concerns regarding the text changes in the proposed bill regarding new exceptional public benefits that are offered as incentive gross floor area. While recognizing a need to update this section of the Zoning Code, as evidenced by the fact that since its adoption these provisions, the incentive gross floor area based on exceptional 15 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 bonuses, these provisions have not been used in any development. The Planning Commission believes that such updating of the Code should be done comprehensively rather than incrementally. We believe that such changes to this section of the Code should benefit many properties located in the "C-4" and "C-5" Commercial Districts, not just this development. We do believe that the proposed incentives are worthy of consideration and represent true exceptional public benefits. For example, we believe that it is appropriate to provide an additional bonus to a development that would extend the City's underground concourse, just as it may be beneficial to provide an additional bonus for creating a new transit stop along Market Street. Similarly, we believe that the achievement of exceptionally high LEED sustainability ratings is in the interest of the City. It is for these reasons that 16 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 the Planning Commission recommends that the portion of the bill dealing with new exceptional benefits be stricken and that an alternative, more comprehensive approach be undertaken by the Planning Commission in coordination with Councilmembers. Therefore, at its meeting on November 18, 2008, the Planning Commission considered Bill 080588 and recommended that the bill be approved, with the striking of the provisions for new exceptional public benefits. A copy of the proposed amendments have been discussed with Councilman Clarke, the sponsor of this bill, and are attached to this testimony for your consideration. That is the conclusion of my testimony. I'll be happy to take any questions you may have.
Thank you very much. In your testimony you state that the ordinance will lapse on January 17 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 1, 2011 unless certain terms and conditions are met. However, the bill 4 before us states it shall lapse in June 2010 unless these conditions are satisfied. What is the correct date?
As stated in the bill, you are correct and I'm wrong in my testimony. There's a suggestion to extend that additional six months and I was sort of recognizing it before the bill had been changed. So I apologize for that. The correct date in the bill 14 is the June date. We are suggesting that the date be changed to January, simply because these are tough times and people need a little more time.
So the bill would have to be amended; would it not?
Yes. That is 18 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 a suggested amendment.
The bill provides that the ordinances shall not take effect until the Commission certifies that it has approved a Plan of Development for the parcel. Does City Council need to approve that plan?
The bill also provides that the ordinance 16 will sunset on June 16, 2010. Is that a correct date?
That's the correct date as provided in the original bill, and we're suggesting that date be moved.
That's also in the recommendations, that's right. 19 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588
And it does state also "this date may be corrected," as it apparently is, "unless a building permit has been issued and has not expired due to failure to construct or the Planning Commission grants an extension of up to one year if it determines that the applicant is making substantial progress toward completion." Can you tell us what would you consider to be substantial progress?
I think there will probably be many indications of that. The primary one is that they're having success in finding tenants and that they are having success in finding financing; in other words, that the project looks like it's for real and they simply need more time to work through the process to get it to that point. That would probably be the major determinant.
Can you tell us in your opinion what does the term "failure to construct" mean? 20 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588
Well, it literally means failure to get the financing, the tenancy and ultimately the permits necessary to do the job. Certainly our assumption is that once all those three things are in line, they're in construction and construction sometimes runs on schedule and sometimes runs behind, but we're not as concerned about that as we are that the basic underlying fundamentals of the job are set up and permits have been achieved.
Can you tell us what the projected cost of this project is?
No, but if I can turn to the developer, who is behind me, he probably can. I'm told it's 1.1 billion.
Thank 21 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 you. Are there any questions from members of the Committee? The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Greenberger, I just wanted to clarify the question with respect to the Council approval of the Plan of Development. That's not my understanding.
Unless you want that to happen. I mean, I'm sure we'll be happy to do that.
That's fine with me. We have set this up with Plan of Developments in other projects, Stamper's Square. The ordinance that deals with the proposed casino also has that in it. It does require Council approval. We're quite happy to have that happen. We have no objections to it 22 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 whatsoever. If the bill doesn't do that, that's really -- as far as I'm concerned, that's your call to either make it happen or not. But we certainly are happy to have that happen.
Well, I guess the question is, the Planning Commission is obviously independent of the City Council of Philadelphia, so if the Planning Commission approves a Plan of Development, from my perspective, they've done their job and they don't, frankly speaking, need the approval of City Council for the Plan of Development.
So that would have to be something that the Planning Commission would request in their process, that this Plan of 23 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Development will be effective upon the approval of Council.
I think that's fine. I think that's entirely your call, and we're happy with it either way.
We were actually working on an amendment that would kind of go a different direction but have the ultimate --
Yeah. Because it's going to come up again and again. I think in the interim period during which the Zoning Code is being rewritten, it's likely that other proposals will come up that will want to come this route with a Plan of Development. So we actually should have a conversation about that and sort of decide whether there are circumstances 24 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 where we do want it, where we don't want it or whether we just want to create a blanket policy about that. I'll be happy to talk to you about that.
Okay. Good. I'm glad to hear that. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. Any other questions? The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.
Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I represent a district where we don't build buildings like this.
So this is a learning process for me sometimes. But anyway, can you explain what is the incentive gross floor area? What exactly does that mean and what does it do? 25 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588
There's a lot of words flying around, and the confusion is quite understandable. In our Code right now, in the Center City -- what is generally the Center City portion, the two densest parts of the Code, "C-4" and "C-5," we offer -- our Code offers bonuses to get certain public amenities and then in return gives more density. The first set of bonuses are based on -- and that would apply in this project as well and has applied in many projects throughout the City -- are generally offering of public space. So to use an example, the Comcast Center has a very public lobby. It has a public plaza, and if it -- and it did -- if it achieves a certain percentage of the lot in offering that public space, it gets a bonus of eight times, or 800 percent, of the lot area. That's available to every project in "C-4" and "C-5." 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Then on a much narrower group of projects that had historically been defined as Market Street, JFK and I believe parts of Broad Street, we offered additional incentives for special public benefits, and they include things like underground parking, connection to concourse. There's a third one. Public restrooms. And they offer a certain increment on top of the bonuses that are available to every project in "C-4" and "C-5." That's what's being discussed here. They're already achieving the first set of bonuses through the provision of public space. The second set, they're suggesting ideas that are other exceptional public benefits that might be more consistent with the character of the times having to do with sustainability. In this case, having to do not simply with connecting to the concourse, but actually building a pretty extensive 27 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 network of additional concourse. And we think all good things to think about. Those extra special incentive bonuses have never been used in this city, and we need to look at it more comprehensively and decide whether they're not being used because they're unrealistic or they're not relevant, the people are able to achieve what they want to achieve without them. It's probably a combination of factors, and I think it's in the City's interest to look at the thing comprehensively, consider new possible public benefits that might be included and see if there's a way to make that section of the Code more workable.
So the use of a bonus is an actual -- it's not a tax incentive?
It's the opportunity to build more of the kinds of 28 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 spaces that generate the revenues in a project to help underwrite the cost of the exceptional public benefit, which may or may not have a direct relationship to revenue. So, for instance, building underground parking is a great example, because we don't get it that often in the City. Underground parking is very expensive. It costs, by last reading of it, probably $20,000 more per parking space to build underground. So there's not a lot of incentive to do it if the land values are not sufficiently high, as they have historically not been high enough in Philadelphia. Other cities, Washington is a great example, which land values are spectacularly high in downtown. Everybody builds underground parking, because there's a limit to how much you can build above ground and it's silly to build parking above ground. So they just do it. In Philadelphia, we need to incentivize that. It's very expensive. 29 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Either building more office, more commercial, retail, more residential. Whatever drives the revenue base of the project, basically we're offering the developers those opportunities to get that revenue, and in exchange, this is how these benefits are paid for.
Are there any other questions from members of the Committee? The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Greenberger, I had one other question. You touched on it briefly in your statement. As I mentioned earlier, there's been 30 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 significant work done by the Logan Square community in actually working with the Planning Commission, and I understand the plan is probably coming down the pike towards the finish line.
I just wanted to get some clarity. I heard you reference the possibility of having a conservation district established. Would that be in lieu of supporting the Logan Square plan or would that be in addition to supporting the Logan Square plan? Because I think that there -- and I've heard it from a couple of sources -- there were some concerns that the Planning Commission didn't necessarily agree with the entire version of the Logan Square community plan. Can you kind of tell me about that, where we're going on that?
And the reason I ask that, related to this 31 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 particular development, but obviously there are other development sites within the perimeter and further out going towards the western end, and I know that the Logan Square community wanted to have some sense of a buffer, so to speak, as you move towards the river. Can you kind of give me a sense of where you guys are with that?
Sure. Thank you for asking. I'm glad you did. Our community planners have been working with the Logan Square neighborhood since the inception of that plan, and there's a lot of agreement on the fundamental principles as developed by the community and with our concurrence. There are some diversions, however, and they involve some sites within the Logan Square neighborhood. My understanding is, they involve some of the sites on Arch Street further west of this site, as well as, I think, some sites north of Vine where the community 32 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 plan is looking to down zone some of the sites by removing some of the bonuses that might be available. We're not persuaded yet that that's a good idea. We think that probably the options ought to be kept open based on the zoning that's there now. So there is some diversions of a point of view. My last understanding of what they're about to publish is that they'll just acknowledge those, or at least my suggestion has been acknowledge that there are differences and get on with the vast majority of things that are in agreement. One of those sites, I think, is the 1900 block of Arch Street, which is currently zoned "C-4" and has the first round of bonuses available to it, which could increase its floor area ratio from five to 13. That can be a substantial development depending on the way it's done. 33 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Where I think we totally agree with the community is that we believe that that block, to use it as an example, that block is the right transitional block. We do not envision a moment when we would be interested in more dense development on that block, because we think it has to start transitioning in size and density back towards 20th Street and eventually to this much smaller-scale neighborhood. We'd like to keep our options open on how to do that and would wait some proposals from developers. Right now that particular block is not controlled by one developer and probably doesn't have much promise of being controlled by one developer in the foreseeable future. So there are limits to what can be proposed in any case. If that developer who does, I think, control the property from the corner of 19th and, I think, in maybe half of the block or something like that, he doesn't have a proposal, that's a 34 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 serious one on the table at the moment. He has some ideas, but it's not at kind of market where that kind of stuff can be taken too seriously. If he comes with a serious proposal, we want to take it seriously. We want to work with the community and show it to them and talk about it, but I think we would just like to sort of keep options open.
And all of the aforementioned sites both on Arch and in Vine are currently under -- they're within the 125 height limit?
Yes, and they all live within the 125 height limit. So because of that, unless the proposal is under 125 feet, they're going to have to come before something. They're going to have to either come before Council or ZBA or something. So they'll be subjected to the discussion that they need to be. Meanwhile, I think over the next period of time, I would like to see the Planning Commission sort of look at this with the 35 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 community in more detail, but I would like them to sort of wrap up the plan and publish it and sort of get on to the next phase of the discussions.
Thank you. Are there any further questions from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Our next witness? MR. McPHERSON: Is Peter Kelsen, Gene Kohn and Steve Mullin. (Witnesses approached witness 36 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 table.)
Good morning, Council President, members of the Rules Committee.
Peter Kelsen. We thank you for your time and consideration. I wanted to make a brief introduction and then allow the Committee and the public the benefit of a presentation by our architectural firm, Kohn Pedersen Fox -- with me is Gene Kohn -- to illustrate the proposal that is before you in terms of its architecture and public benefits. I will state to the members of the Committee that the plan is historic. It is iconic, and we're extremely proud to bring it to the City of Philadelphia. What I mean by that is that this is a Plan of Development that is unique in the sense that it includes 37 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 public amenities that you've heard about a few moments ago from Mr. Greenberger, and it also includes architecture and uses that are intended to enliven this area, solidify the area and also to perhaps set a bar for which future development can begin to match. And what I mean by that is simple. The plan includes a tremendous number of public benefits that, if constructed, will allow for tremendous use by the public and benefit to the public. And let me give you a brief illustration of what they are, and you will see it in more detail when we make our presentation of the architecture. This plan includes over 300,000 square feet of active commercial space, not only at grade, but below grade and up five levels above grade. And that space is intended to create activity along the streets during the times when these streets may not be occupied because the office occupancies are dropping. 38 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 We are establishing, as Mr. Greenberger said, not only a concourse connection like other buildings have done, we are not located on the concourse and, therefore, we are extending the concourse over two blocks to connect it to the Suburban Station. We are beginning the concourse at 19th Street and Arch and having it run all the way through to the connection, as I said, at Suburban. Extensive amount of infrastructure. But it won't just be a tunnel. It will be a concourse that would be lined with retail uses to encourage people to use that, and it is going to -- it's intended to encourage not only the users of our building, but rather the surrounding area to make their way into that concourse and enhance their ability to use the public transit system. Thirty percent of our lot, 30 percent, will be devoted to open space or public space, and that's the requirement 39 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 that's in the current Zoning Code and that's one of the reasons we get some of the bonuses we do. But that space, as you'll see in a few moments, includes public plazas, public lobbies and amenities so that the public will be encouraged to come into the building and use that building. We are creating upper floor public spaces for which we've taken no 12 bonus and provided that public amenity. These spaces will be used as civic space, green space, public museum space, all located above grade and connected directly to the street level and the concourse, encouraging people to use the building and to occupy it for civic purposes. We're providing public restrooms in the concourse, enclosed off-street loading. All loading will be centralized within the building and will be sealed off from the street way so it doesn't negatively interfere with the 40 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 community or immediate residents. The loading will be accommodated through a service street, which is Cuthbert Street, and we have worked with our traffic engineers, City Planning and Streets Department to make sure that those loading operations are seamless. All the parking is below grade. There will be no visible parking on site. And that parking will be centralized in three levels located directly below the building and accessed off of 19th Street. And, finally, and perhaps most importantly, we are proposing that this building be developed consistent with a LEED environmental certification of Gold.
And I believe it's fair to say that this would be the only major office building, mixed-use development, in the City of Philadelphia that has achieved or will achieve a LEED Gold rating. We make that commitment, and that commitment would be established not only in the legislative process, but as part of the plan of 41 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 design that goes before City Council. And we have a LEED consultant here who will brief the Council if there are any questions about what that means. We think it's extremely meaningful, because, again, it sets the bar to one of the highest levels of LEED and environmental sustainability that you can achieve in this environment. Members of Council, I will ask Steve Mullin to go into detail about the economic benefits. We provided you with a copy of the Econsult report. Let me just give you some numbers, if I can. This project will generate tax revenues during construction of minimum -- and we're using conservative figures -- of $15 million to the City of Philadelphia. The project will take about three years to construct. We'll employ literally thousands of construction and permanent jobs over the course of its use, and those $15 million 42 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 of revenue, as I said, are directly going into the City of Philadelphia's coffers. After construction, the project is anticipated conservatively to generate over $9 million annually in City of Philadelphia taxes. The project will generate literally hundreds of millions of dollars of direct and indirect revenue to the City of Philadelphia over the course of its life. Those numbers clearly in today's environment are meaningful and they're essential, and they go a long way to funding necessary community projects such as libraries, firehouses and recreation centers. 1 billion opportunity to change the skyline and to change the nature and texture of Philadelphia. 43 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Members of Council, I will also indicate that the process that we are bringing to you today or the plan that we're bringing you today reflects a tremendous amount of input from City Planning Commission, from the community, from the Streets Department, from Councilman Clarke. We are committed, as the Councilman said, to continuing to work with immediate residents to allay issues of concern. We've made meaningful progress, and we hope that progress will result in an agreement that we would submit as part of the Plan of Development. We are committed to good community outreach. We began the process in March with community meetings, and as I said, we'll continue that. I also want to point out that the legislation, as well as the amendment that is before you, includes an Equal Opportunity Plan as a requirement. This is a voluntary plan. It is part of the 44 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 legislation. It will be a condition of the Plan of Development. And I'm pleased to say that the plan is already in a substantial draft stage and will include ratios for construction and post construction participation, and we're proud to do that and we're delighted to be able to bring that back to you and Councilman Clarke and the City of Philadelphia when it is complete. With that, members of Council, if I could, I would like to introduce Gene Kohn, principal of the architectural firm Kohn Pedersen Fox, to show you what we've proposed to do.
Thank you, Peter. Madam President and members of the Rules Committee of the City Council of Philadelphia, it's a pleasure to be here. It's a pleasure because I'm very excited today about discussing a project that I think will have enormous impact in a very positive way of not only the skyline, but the quality of life in 45 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Philadelphia, particularly at the street. Now, I was born and raised in Philadelphia, although my office is now in New York. I went to Central High, the University of Pennsylvania, and over a number of years as an architect, have had the pleasure of working in Philadelphia on the -- by the way, I will take a second. Can everybody see that screen? Because, unfortunately, it may be difficult for you, but if you can't, we'll move it further out. But those projects are ones that we have done and several others in Philly, including Children's Hospital, One Logan Square, Two Logan Square, the Mellon Tower, a big building at Wharton, building at 17th and JFK and the Philadelphia Airport, the International Terminal most recently. So I enjoy working in Philadelphia, but I must say, the opportunity to do the American Commerce Center is one that I'm most excited 46 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 about. Now, we're in a fabulous building, the City Hall. It was designed in 1871 and started construction then. It was finished in 1901. It was a truly bold move, because this was the tallest building in the world, and today is still the tallest masonry-bearing building in the world. So it is a distinguished building and we're in a very great space. But Philadelphia was bold when they built this building, and when you realize the context around it was rather small and low, low-scale buildings, but when it was built, other buildings started to follow. The hotel that just disappeared was built in 1904 right there next to City Hall, and many other great buildings started to get built of a different scale. Cities change. This city was designed by William Penn. It didn't remain the way William Penn designed it, because we all wouldn't be here today if it did. Over years, cities grow and 47 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 change, and Philadelphia was very bold. There are two aspects of the slide on the screen now. One is the Benjamin Franklin Parkway back in about 1945 in that film and the Great Chinese Wall that separated the City, bifurcated it from north to south. The City was bold enough to do both of these things. When the proposal for the Parkway was made, many people objected because their houses were in the way or their buildings, and obviously they would be concerned. But just imagine if Philadelphia had not built the Benjamin Franklin Parkway. Think that it's not there. Philadelphia would lose one of the great qualities. The Champs-Elysees of America is that boulevard, and the great cultural institutions of this city are along that. So a major step. The Great Chinese Wall, the railroad coming into the center of the City from 30th Street, in 1950 was taken down. It was a very bold move, and 48 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 people near it had to suffer through that demolition and construction, but out of it with Mayor Clark and I think at the time Bon Mulky (ph) and Ed Bacon and City Planning, they created the new Penn Center. And that Penn Center stood as a major development for many years, until about the 1980s, '86 to be exact, when City Planning lifted the height limit and allowed Philadelphia to breathe, to get greater density and to change the skyline from a tabletop to the skyline that now makes it one of the more exciting cities in America. And that skyline has been changing over years and most recently with Comcast reaching 950 feet. It's amazing cityscape now, working in great conjunction with its context and with City Hall, if you see the difference now between those two. This chart very quickly shows the change in the City in terms of buildings getting taller.
But Philadelphia is no different than New 49 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 York, Chicago, Hong Kong, Shanghai. As cities grow and add population and become more dense, they get taller, because the worst thing for cities is to spread and to use up all the green space. So this is the right way to design a city, is to go taller and more dense and tie it to transportation. Our site happens to be at 18th and Arch in a marvelous location. It is the true new center of the City of Philadelphia, the urban core, the office core. And you can see it in plan, the great squares that William Penn laid out in 1683. He was a genius and did a great job, and that made the City very special as it stretched from the Schuylkill and Delaware. But our site, if you can see it, is in red and it's in the area of the most dense tall buildings now being built and the area that's most served by mass transit. Rather key. And that is shown here. I 50 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 apologize, but in your book, you have this. But Philadelphia is blessed with a wonderful below-grade concourse that ties many of the transportation routes together, going under Walnut, under Market, under Broad Street, et cetera. And our site will be extended and attached to that, as Peter said, through a beautiful concourse with retail and, et cetera, that will make it very enjoyable to go from Suburban Station to our site underground in this wonderful new link. But what's important, most important, is that many people now at Comcast arrive by mass transit, and many on this building, we're proposing, the American Commerce Center, will as well. The future of cities is in mass transit. It is not in more cars. We have got to stop with the cars and use transit, use bikes, use walking for energy conservation and to keep the cities really livable. So this building does that and does it well, much as 51 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 buildings in Hong Kong and Shanghai and others are doing and obviously New York, which is tied to mass transit in a very strong way. If you look at the slide, the skyline -- again, this is in your book -- it shows the change in growth of Philadelphia over many years, and the most recent, up until the Comcast, was in the late '80s. But '86 that height limit had changed, and you see Mellon, which we designed, and many other wonderful buildings on that skyline, and now Comcast, which has taken its spot. But most every one of those buildings is single-use building, either office or residential or it's a hotel. What makes the building we're talking about special, it's mixed use. And as it takes its place on the skyline, it indicates that it's a very special place in Philadelphia where not only office and hotel, but entertainment, retail, food, restaurants all will work together to 52 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 enliven the streets. People have talked about open space, and we'll get to that in a moment, but open space only succeeds when it's next to uses that generate people. If you look at Rockefeller Center in New York, it's tiny. It's minuscule. Yet, it's the most powerful space because of what takes place in it and around it. There are a lot of places in Philadelphia -- and I won't mention the buildings, but many people have -- that are just surrounded by streets with no 15 activity and the buildings just have a lobby. To make public space work, you need activity, and that's what we're trying to generate in this building. The building is really two buildings. They're joined. One is a hotel, one is an office tower, and they're joined by a great bridge and gardens at an upper level and joined at the base through its podium of retail, restaurants, movies with food service, 53 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 gymnasium, spa and below grade a food market. And what's important here -- and I'm very sensitive, you know.
Anybody -- the people in the Sterling obviously are going to be concerned, because their view of the parking lot and beyond to the north is going to be changed, and one understands that. But in any city, wherever you live -- in New York I live in, the next day a building can be built across the street from me, and that's part of being in a city, but if the building contributes to the environment, that's very positive, and this will. But we did something quite special. You'll notice that those two buildings are separated by a big space that's like a great window and that people will be able to see into that space and through that space or by the hotel. So it's not a big block. If we built a building 300 feet high, the full 54 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 length, just as the Sterling is designed, we'd block every window, change their view and we wouldn't have to be very tall. What we're trying to do is to provide wonderful activity, open up the view and give great sense of light and air. Now, this building is to the north of the Sterling. It does not throw any shadows on the Sterling, because there's no sun in the north, and the open space allows air and light to come through as well. This building, we think, will be exciting in day and night, but I'm going to go on and show you. Day and night it will be a very exciting place. And the night is important. If you walk by 18th and Arch today, it's a parking lot. It is dead at night, that whole block from 18th to 19th. That area is quite quiet. With this project, we're going to enliven the streets with retail and restaurants. It will be lit. It 55 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 will be safe. There'll be taxis hours a day serving the hotel, and the hotel is open 24 hours, so there's always concierge service. It's an asset to the neighborhood. I can't read those points from here, but basically it's in your book. We are dealing with -- the retail is rather key at the grade. I think each one of these will tell. First of all, open space. We're designing the open space to relate in scale. This is along 18th. The Sterling is to the far left. Our project, with its great windows, its openings there, you see the open space at grade relates to the scale of the church. We've set it back so it doesn't overpower the church, and there's a transition of spaces that are green all the way through the building, from grade to the third to the sixth level that you see in there. At night it will be alighted and exciting because the hotel lobby, the 56 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 restaurants and other spaces of retail will be active. But not late. Normal retail hours. There's the grade view of the plaza, the entry plaza to this project, and you can see, you see the sky as you see this building, because you look through that big opening, and at that upper level, which is the sixth level, is a 19,000 square foot garden like the MOMA garden, the Museum of Modern Art in New York. And there you see the two great windows that I described, the hotel separated from the office. This is very important. It's not just one monolithic block. It is open to allow light and air and view. And key to this is the retail that will take place along Arch. If you walk along there now is the parking lot. Tomorrow you will have restaurants, food market, retail shops, movie theatres and all of the other amenities and health 57 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 club that I've described. The movie theatres, by the way, are sit-down where you can have dinner, watch a movie in very elegant small theatres, and there are a series of them. We're going to improve the quality of life here dramatically. You're looking up 18th now, and you can see the Sterling and you see that most of that whole chunk of Sterling sees by our building. So its view is not interrupted as it looks down 18th. There's looking down Arch and as the sun is setting in the west, with its retail and et cetera.
This is a difficult drawing to explain, so I'm not going to take time, but what it's trying to show are all the public spaces, those we are counting for our area of 30 percent and the rest, which is basically available space to the public that's not being counted to earn FAR. One of the great enclosed 58 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 spaces to celebrate the Philadelphia Phillies' victory -- I was at the last World Series when they won and it's great to see them win this year. Big fan. This is great public space that takes place at the base of the tower and joins with the concourse below. So you come to that concourse and up those stairs. And you'll see that again in a moment. The concourse that we are extending is critical, and it goes from Comcast across 18th underground around our site. You can enter from the concourse into the building at three different locations. Also we'll see later that public toilets are provided at that lower level. What makes this important is that the restaurants and the retail of Comcast will be energized even more by the traffic that will come to our building -- or from our building when they return to the station. This is the kind of environment 59 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 you walk in. There will be restaurants and retail, good lighting, art, all making this very activated and exciting as one goes through this concourse. Very important that we're using mass transit. The green represents public either open or enclosed space that meets the 30 percent requirement of the area of the site. And part of it is open on 18th. The rest is enclosed. Again, that same view from 18th. When I talked about public space, this is activated public space because of the activities around it to interact with the public. And this is a view from along Arch from 19th looking down to the east. You know, this site sits on the site of two great institutions, the Constitution Building and the Convention Center. So the hotel and all these functions will be helpful to attracting conventions to Philadelphia. 60 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 It's a section that that shows very quickly the parking below grade and the concourse tying one level below, and then it shows the various uses of retail. And then above, it's hard to see, so it's in your book, but you'll see the open space and terraces. The theatres are at that upper level that we described, and above that is the wonderful garden that we're going to see in just a moment. Okay. I think this space, I can promise you, will be one of the great spaces in the world. This is 19,000 square feet at the sixth level of the project. It is where people will gather to view art, to have possibly cocktails or drinks, to have a lunch. And it, by the way, is seen -- if you look through there, you can see the Sterling. The Sterling will look out onto that wonderful space between the two buildings. Look at this. This is the way it will feel. If you've been to MOMA, 61 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 the Museum of Modern Art in New York, this is their garden with reflecting pool, sculpture, landscape. It is crowded like this every day, and it is a wonderful space. We actually developed this ourselves. But it's a great space, and we know it will work beautifully in Philadelphia. And then there are going to be opportunities for weddings, for other events of family, just enjoying the open space at these garden levels. The concourse provides, when we come into our building, public toilets, which we think are very important in this area. And then we have the enclosed service that Peter mentioned. We have six loading docks. We could take the 18-wheelers. And we know it works. We've tested the street for the trucks. And there you can see it. LEED was referred to. We won't go through this, but we have a whole menu 62 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 of things that we can do, but let me say that one of the most important things in achieving LEED Gold is the connection to mass transit.
And we will not go into the detail, but exterior wall will be of high quality, high performance. Green spaces, gathering of water for conservation and the use of bikes that we believe is important. Finally, the connection to SEPTA and other forms of transportation. So just in summary, this building is going to contribute greatly to the City of Philadelphia, both in the quality of life and economically, and we believe in attracting major tenants to the City. Day or night it will be an important skyline, important image to the City. Thank you.
If the Committee has any questions of Mr. Kohn, we'd be happy to answer them. 63 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588
Thank you. Any questions from members of the Committee? The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Kelsen or maybe Mr. Mullin could answer this question. I recognize this is a significant investment in construction and employment and potential. Could you talk a little bit about how more significant it is in this environment.
Because I'm just wondering, this is kind of a very interesting and exciting project in this economy and I'm wondering how much more significant it is as a result of what's going on in the world.
Absolutely. Let me introduce Steve Mullin, and I'm going 64 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 to ask Steve to go through that analysis, Councilman. I will say one thing. It's a very exciting project, and we're committed to doing it even in these very exciting -- I'm not sure pleasant, but very exciting -- times. Go ahead, Steve.
Yes. Good morning. My name is Steve Mullin. I'm a principal with Econsult Corporation. And to address your question, Councilman Kenney, first, we think the timing of this is the most important with regard to the current economy. There is a development time associated with this that will essentially allow Philadelphia for something that hasn't had an opportunity to do before with downturns and upturns, and, that is, to start early on the upturn, on the next business cycle upturn, and accommodate growth and there as opposed to being -- Philadelphia has had a tradition of sort of going down -- 65 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 and not unique to Philadelphia, but older American cities -- go down first and recover later, and this gives an opportunity to do exactly the opposite, combined with the advantages and efficiencies and attractiveness of Center City that's been the result of City policies and the recent, say, the last ten years plus of economic growth and policies for the City. So on that, I'll come back to that in a couple of minutes, if I may go ahead and --
Yes. I think if the Committee would like, we could go right into Mr. Mullin's testimony.
Thank you, Madam President. Just a question on something you said, Mr. Kelsen, not to interrupt Mr. Mullin there, but you had referenced 66 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 over these last few months conversations with the community and I'm sure Councilman Clarke. Could you just briefly kind of highlight what changes you made, accommodations, whatever word you want to use --
Absolutely. Councilman Greenlee, what we have done by way of example, the plan that is before you today includes changes to the building design. We champered, we cut back corners to ensure and enhance views from the Kennedy House. Now, the Kennedy House, as you remember, is a block away. They're across 19th Street. Sterling is directly behind us. So what we have done is in an attempt to allay any potential concerns, we've actually designed the building so as not to intrude into that visual space. We've ensured that the 67 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 truck-loading operations, not only in terms of getting them into the property work well, but also in terms of operations, we've closed the loading docks, sealed them after deliveries. We had committed to the community that we would enter into an operational agreement that would set forth the hours of operation for deliveries, set standards for noise for mechanical equipment. We would set forth a development agreement that during the construction period would give a level of comfort that construction activities would not be intrusive to the immediate residents, and we were fully -- we are fully committed to that. Other examples are extending the concourse. By extending it to 19th Street, while that was not requested by Kennedy House, we are doing it, because we believe that by extending it and making access points along the street way along Arch Street, 19th and 18th, the residents of the area and the occupants 68 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 of the buildings in the area will be encouraged to use the public transit system and the concourse and keep people off the sidewalk and keep levels of service at an acceptable level. Other accommodations we've made include rerunning our traffic studies and having Dick Orth -- and you have a benefit of the report in front of you -- having Dick Orth rerun them, making sure that our parking counts are appropriate, that there's adequate capacity for parking in the area, making sure that the truck-loading operations and levels of service for pedestrians on the sidewalk are not only acceptable but well within tolerance, and we've done that. In fact, the traffic studies have been vetted not only by Dick Orth but also by Planning Commission and, most significantly, Streets Department, and they're satisfied with it and they think that these studies are valid. So those are just some examples 69 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 of things that we've talked about. We've done sun and shadow studies for the community to ensure, as Gene said a few moments ago, that not only would shadow not be thrown on the Sterling or the immediate buildings, but it would not extend across the street to Kennedy House, and we are confident that that will not occur. So there will not be any shadow thrown by this very monumental building.
Thank you, Councilman Kenney and members of the Committee. I appreciate the opportunity to provide some testimony on behalf of the proposed project this morning. We have conducted on behalf of the developer, we've conducted two 70 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 studies. I believe you have both of them. The first was a study taking a look at what's the potential real estate impact around a new investment like this, is there a possibility of increasing property values, decreasing property values. The peculiar and the interesting thing about this is, we have a perfect case study right a block to the east, and that was, we were able to take a look at the impact and isolate the impacts of the Comcast Center on property values in the immediately surrounding and as you go further away from the project itself. And we found those to be not only positive, but positive in extending for many blocks. Now, those positive impacts do dissipate as you move away obviously on that, but a strong net positive there. The second impact is what we were referring -- the second study, we looked at the potential economic and fiscal benefits of the project, first in terms of the construction of the project 71 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 and the investment, the sizable investment, and second in terms of the ongoing operations, businesses moving in there, their activities, the retail activities, the hotel activities there and businesses there. And as Peter mentioned earlier, we found that -- we forecast that -- under-utilizing what we consider to be both reasonable and conservative assumptions, we forecasted fairly significantly increases in economic activity spending, economic earnings of people and the employment associated with that. In addition to that, we find that the real property investment, which would be approximately three percent of Center City's leasable office space now, would be very much in line with sort of very strong and good growth of Center City's office market. In addition, as Peter mentioned too, those additional economic activities, that additional employment 72 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 and earnings also generate fiscal benefits for the City, for the School District and for other funds, including the hotel funds, and in those particular cases, we found those to be significant, too. What I'd like to do is to turn -- I've been saying "significant," and Peter mentioned numbers here. What I'd like to do is sort of explain the conditions that we took a look at and how we were looking at conservative assumptions and how we factored in to our forecasts all of the things that you've heard from both of the previous testifiers here to tell you how we came up with our numbers. The first thing that we took a look at was, we recognized that with a new building or with any kind of new space, you can have -- the real question is, what's the net new growth of office space, not transferring from one location to another. And the net new office space 73 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 could be sourced from three different areas. One is -- or three different components. First, companies moving in or new businesses moving in from outside; second, existing companies expanding beyond what they would have otherwise had they been restricted by space; and the third -- and this is a very important one for cities like Philadelphia -- and that is what sort of generically falls under the import substitution world and, that is, that we have opportunities for businesses that otherwise would have moved out of Philadelphia to have office space inside Philadelphia and having the office market system or office market essentially work. As firms can move into higher-quality space, other firms can move into higher-quality space and so and so on. And we've had -- we're fairly comfortable as we take a look at the last, say, 20 years.
There's been 30-plus million square feet of office space in the metropolitan area, two 74 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 million of it in Center City Philadelphia, and we know the two buildings, basically Cira and Comcast. And both of those have generated -- if you think about that import substitution, all the new office space in this metropolitan area for a decade and a half was built outside of Philadelphia, and now we have the two buildings here. And take a look, they sound big, and so does this one sound big, because it is, but we're still talking about something in the single digits in the aggregate, five, six percent, of the commercial office space. So this, we think, will be a very, very strong player and very, very strong impact on the market by allowing the upward growth. I want to know too what we looked at -- we have an experience in recent years of taking a look at what that net new might be, and what we did was, we basically took a look at the Cira 75 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Centre and looked at what the net new space there was and applied conservative assumptions associated with the Cira Centre experience to this to say that, yes, there will be some movement of existing office space. We didn't talk about and we didn't look at the next round where there are possibilities of new firms moving into the office space that others have been moved into.
Mr. Mullin, in that regard, when we were debating the Cira Centre financing and approval, there was a lot of concern about the effect it would have on existing office space, and I believe -- and maybe you can confirm it -- that that was in fact untrue, that the opposite was in fact true, that the office rates and the space was actually improved as opposed to degraded.
The overall market absorption turned out to be ten times over the several years in the mid 2000's 76 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 here, but ten times what people were anticipating back in the early 2000's.
Because there was a lot of consternation in the room at the time on Cira, not on Comcast but on Cira, about this movement or the emptying out of lesser-quality space. That did not happen.
Yeah. That sort of zero sum picture, if there's something here, it has to come from someplace else, is something that we think has been -- the evidence shows that that has not happened, and, furthermore, we think that this building primarily because of its international market demand that we'll show, internationally iconic and national and international presence, the location and density, the location on the transit system here, for example -- I watch for 77 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 transit-oriented developments all around the world. People are talking about them and looking. It's hard to picture something that would be more of a case study, a positive case study, for transit-oriented development. As I mentioned before, 30 million square feet of office space built in the metropolitan area, all out and around. Here we're talking about a million and a half plus right smack dab on the center of -- the nerve center in the most used hub of the regional transit. And one thing that we have found in newer buildings and rehabbed buildings along here is that the initial anticipation of how many of the tenants and workers in the tenants will use public transit have always been too conservative. We've sort of understated that there, and I think that's -- there's two things going on there. One, there's a macro story with gas prices and energy, but the other thing is that people sort 78 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 of discount people's adaptability, and when they see the convenience of transit and alternative methods to getting to work, they really do switch. So that's one of -- when I talk about the positives on this when we made our estimates, that location and the transit orientation here is a very, very strong note. I also wanted to note too that this space -- or remark, I guess, as opposed to note -- this amount of space will be built in the metropolitan area in the next three to four years, one and a half million square feet in the next three to four years, some place. And two fronts. One is, on the sustainability and the green and the right location, this is the right location relative to any other place. And, number two, the second question is, why not in Center City Philadelphia as opposed to someplace else. And I'm not trying to crumb on other places there, but I think this 79 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 space will be built, and this could be very, very advantageous to Philadelphia. I mentioned too the highest quality international marketing opportunities for -- national and international marketing expands the market. I think that expansion of the market is key for Philadelphia's growth here. And I think, as I mentioned before in response to Councilman Kenney's question, the building on the improvements made to Philadelphia as an attractive place to locate and Center City Philadelphia as an attractive place for more than just regional companies is something that would be very, very positive. Another key point, as Councilman Kenney pointed out, the timing. In a downturn now, being prepared for the upturn to be in the ground and have opportunities as opposed to having to wait until the next upturn and have other places in the world take 80 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 advantage of that. By the way, that's the operations. Certainly the infrastructure of the building of the building generates employment. And I know that we had governors six or seven blocks to the east of here and the President-Elect talking about infrastructure. This is part of the City's infrastructure. As has been pointed out, we tend to think of roads or bridges and things. Commercial office space is part of the infrastructure of a central city, and it's an incredibly important component of that there.
So I think on those, when we take those into account and take the conservative assumptions about potential movement within the existing tenants there, we still believe that there are substantial -- that there will be substantial economic impacts, substantial employment gains long term and substantial increases in taxes for the City, the School District and other 81 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 taxing jurisdictions.
Members of the Committee, if I could put two statistics out to you, I think they're compelling. But for Comcast and Cira, the next round of office buildings that were constructed were constructed years ago, 20 years 9 ago. So you have two buildings, which 10 represent less than five percent of our 11 office supply in Philadelphia, that were 12 built within the last three years. The 13 rest are 20-plus years old. 14 In order for Center City and 15 the City of Philadelphia to remain 16 competitive, just to remain competitive 17 in this office market and environment, 18 and to do as Steve said, to discourage 19 movement outside of Philadelphia into the 20 suburbs and other jurisdictions and keep them local, keep them here, we need to build the equivalent of an American Commerce Center in terms of the square footage of 1.3 million square feet every 18 months. We haven't done that. Now is 82 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 an opportunity to do that. The amount of job creation from construction to permanent, the amount of investment that this developer is willing to place into the City of Philadelphia at this time and the amount of tax ratables that will be generated, construction and post construction, in the literally hundreds of millions of dollars compels us to take action to make this an opportunity that we can grasp. We thank you for that consideration. If there are further questions of Mr. Mullin, be happy to answer them.
Are there any other questions from members of the Committee? Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you 83 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 for this extraordinary presentation. What I know is that no 4 businessman looks into a crystal ball and says this is something we want to do without doing some very strategic, analytical, insightful, thoughtful, look-see into how you could ultimately make this a business deal that works. And don't violate a confidence if you simply don't do that. I'm curious to know, in view of the statistics you just provided us where in the last years 14 there have only been two, do you have 15 prospective tenants that will ensure that 16 you ultimately make the deal work? 17
Councilwoman, let 18 me answer it this way, and, again, 19 without -- 20
While we cannot say to you that we have leases signed because the project has not been approved and, therefore, it's a chicken and egg 84 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 situation, I can tell you that there are a number of significant opportunities in the office component of the building with headquarter-type users that have expressed an interest, not only in this building, but in this location. And this is an opportunity for the City to make available to those type users the location and a project that they can potentially lease and occupy. We have also had expressions of interest from entities that are outside of Philadelphia that have indicated that they would be interested in relocating from Blue Bell, from New Jersey into Philadelphia. And we're talking several hundred thousand square feet of office space. In terms of the retail, we feel very comfortable that these retailers that we've identified would be interested, as well as the hotel operator. So the brief answer is, we went 85 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 in there with our eyes wide open, especially in this economic situation that we're facing, and we feel very comfortable that if there is an approval out there, that there is a very good possibility of attracting the tenancies necessary to begin construction of this project.
Are there any other questions from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Madam Chair, I would say that we have available Mr. Orth from Dick Orth's firm of Orth-Rogers. However, you have the written report, and I can tell you in summary that we have analyzed the traffic, as I mentioned a little earlier in my testimony. There 86 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 would not be a negative impact on traffic, whether it's parking, truck loading, car traffic or pedestrian traffic, as a result of this. And, again, that report has been reviewed and approved by the Streets Department.
Our next witness? MR. McPHERSON: Joe Beller. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Sorry for the delay. Butterfingers. I have with me Gray Smith, who also represents Kennedy House. I'm Joseph Beller. I guess I'll take a book out of Mr. Kohn's discussion of his past. I was born in Philadelphia. I went to George Wood (ph) School at 81st and Lyons, graduated from Overbrook High 87 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 School, Temple University, University of Pennsylvania, and my office is here in Philadelphia. And I had the distinct pleasure of having actually worked in this Chambers for several years while some of you were not yet around. I don't even know if you were voting in those days, but it was in the early '60s. And I, therefore, understand the daunting task before you, because we all want development and we all want it to be done properly. So let me make it first clear. Number one, we are not here on behalf of Kennedy House to ask you not to ever approve construction at this site. We do want construction at this site. Our suggestion to you, however, is that you already have "C-4." It would allow construction. It would allow the type of construction, but without the density. You've heard a lot today about incentives, and you know that although "C-4" starts out at 500, in this case 88 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 with the incentives that have been discussed, it would go to 17. Our last discussion with the developer, they were up to 27. Our concern is that this is just too much density for this area. There is no question that it's a wonderful location, but this is not a very large plot and it is not large enough to accommodate this kind of construction without in fact hurting the surrounding areas. Now, let me give you the good news. Mr. Kelsen is quite right. With the help of Logan Square Neighborhood Association as facilitators, the encouragement of Councilman Clarke, we have met on more than one occasion. Mr. Kelsen has been quite gracious. We have talked about a number of accommodations. We have not yet arrived at that, and I think there's been good faith on both sides. Because we keep coming back to the brick wall of too much 89 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 in a small space. And with all due respect to the comments about traffic, I don't -- I reviewed the traffic studies, and I don't consider myself an expert. I've been doing it for a long time, but I can tell you this, that the 19th Street that they looked at is not the 19th Street that I know, and I recommend that every member of Council, before they even think about passing this bill, at sometime between 8:15 and quarter to 9:00, try to go from the Parkway to Market Street and -- (Applause.)
And if you think that traffic study is right after you've done that, then I'll just have to buy it. I think that there are a number of things -- and I'm not going to try to do the technical things, because Gray Smith is here. " You're being asked to do C-5X. You're being asked to do something that has never been done before. We know it's going to be built on. We want it to be built on. We want this City to prosper. To me it is the most livable city, but one of the most livable things about it is that you can have the intermingling of residences and commercial buildings and commercial uses and retail and they fit very nicely. This building reminds me of the first time I ever went to a toy store with one of my daughters when she was very little. It's one of those "I want it," and no kid can resist wanting it. This developer wants the largest, tallest, biggest building in Philadelphia. I know that we've long since passed the day where Willie Penn 91 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 was the top guy, but that doesn't mean that this is the place to stick 1,500 feet up in the air. Just because we've broken the height limit, the unspoken height limit in the old days, this is not the Champs-Elysees. This is not our wonderful Ben Franklin Parkway. This is a huge development which leaves almost no 10 space for the people and which blocks a lot of good, livable space for the people behind it and next to it. And I know Mr. Kelsen didn't mean to say a block away. We are right off of 19th Street just as they are. So it's 19th Street that divides Kennedy House from this development. Let me just make a couple of very brief -- and I promise very brief -- remarks. I've already mentioned that the density is more than we should be able to live with. One of the things -- and I say it again. I think that the traffic study is inadequate. I think that the 92 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 traffic is horrendous there. There has to be a better plan for that. And although it was mentioned about loading, there are questions about the loading. Mr. Kohn again mentioned some of the uses. He mentioned the supermarket and he mentioned some others, and those things bring big trailers at all hours of the day and night, and people live across the street diagonally and directly. And, again, as I say, although it has been very, very cordial and I appreciate that and I express it to you publicly, we have not reached an accommodation, and this may be the kind of thing that will never reach an accommodation because of how big this thing is and what a danger -- and I say danger -- it is. I would love to see buildings filled up and I would love to believe that nobody will lose viability in their buildings because this is the newest and 93 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 prettiest and best. You can build it new. You can build it pretty. You don't have to build it this big, and that is really our press. I'm going to quote somebody, because somebody said it better than I did, and he's a former colleague of yours and he sat right over here, and he's now the Mayor of our City, and what he said, that developers can test the basic tenet of our Zoning Map. Examples include rezoning land to allow for greater density, changing the uses -- and he was talking about different types of uses. And he said, We must not sit back and allow the whims of development to determine our future. Rather than react to development proposals as they are made, it's better to involve the public in creating local plans and stake out our community goals. And that is where I am also frightened, because I heard the City Planning people say today that that study 94 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 that Logan Square, whom I do not represent here, but Logan Square has been working for years closely and now you're going to be given a plan that's going to say, this is a terrific plan, except we don't agree to this one and we don't agree to that one. )
Because the next step, if you can do it for 18th to 19th, why can't you do it for 19th to 20th. You already have a "C-4." Nobody is saying don't build. We're saying build within the confines. You go with all of the extra that you get, all these incentives. There are up to 17. They're not limited to 500 the way it looks in the Code. They're up to 17, and 95 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 that is adequate and it's sufficient. We can't let each project to dictate to you how you change the Code, because that's what they're asking you to do, change the Code and then the next block. What happens to that wonderful master plan? I won't speak for LSNA. They're here to speak for themselves, but I'm terribly concerned that we're getting into a situation -- and while the story is a very pretty story, the question that was asked about tenants, when this bill 15 was first presented to the Councilman -- Councilman, I complimented you and you weren't even in the room. But he took a very active part in trying to get all the parties together. And, again, I just want to say publicly while you're here that the people at the Kennedy House appreciate your concerns for the neighborhood, and I want you to know that. We just think 96 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 this is too much too soon. We were told when this came in that the reason it had to get in when it got in was because there was a prospective major tenant. Now, if that tenant was still viable, you would be hearing about it today. So I'm sure that a great city like Philadelphia will eventually fill up the place, but it doesn't have to be that high, that wide, that deep. You're going to lose part of Arch Street, because that's where the Fed Ex and UPS and all of the others are going to come. The parking that's in there, you may decide it's adequate. I love public transportation, but I'm not a believer that we're all smart enough to use it when we should, and the convenience of the automobile is here and now that gas is down, I notice it's a little tougher to wander around Center City than it used to be when it was $4 a gallon. I pause at that. I ask you to 97 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 use restraint. You've already given it a "C-4." Let it stay "C-4" and let it be built and let it be done and let the construction guys get their jobs and let's get into the ground and let's fill it up. But you don't have to go to the extent that they're asking you to go do it. Mr. Kohn can design a wonderful building which is a little less dense.
Thank you, Madam President and members of the Committee, for letting us speak today. As Mr. Beller said, I am the technical guy, and if you've had a chance to look at my report, which I handed up earlier, which is a longer version than what I intend to say today, you'll see it's loaded with a lot of technical information that has been applied to my analysis of this project and, of course, the zoning ordinance that's before you 98 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 today. My name is Gray Smith. Incidentally, earlier versions of my testimony have been shared with Mr. Kelsen and the developer's team several times, but today and as before, I have been requested by the residents of Kennedy House to provide comments related to this Council bill. Kennedy House is adjacent to the subject property. It is catty-cornered at Cuthbert and 19th Street. It is not a block away. I am an architect and I am an urban planner, and I have examined the bill and the numerous documents related to the American Commerce Center project that is the generator of this bill. In fact, we haven't talked much about the bill today, but we have talked a whole lot about this project. So most of my comments will deal with the nature of this very large project, which has been characterized as tremendous by the 99 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 developer. And by that, the meaning of "tremendous" is also big, large, exceptionally big and large. I have attended several meetings between the developer team and the community. No commentary on this ordinance produced by this developer could be made without commentary on the building project that is proposed by the developer. But let me add that regardless of Mr. Kelsen's earlier comment, quote, "meaningful progress," unquote, has really not been made in all those meetings. This project has not changed in any way in response to the Kennedy House residents or the concerns of the Logan Square Neighborhood Association. The items that Mr. Kelsen listed as changes are not changed at all. They were part of the project in the first place and they continue to be part of the project. There is no Plan B. There has been no Plan B. There's always been Plan 100 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 A, and you've looked at it today. The wording of the ordinance 4 would allow for a substantial increase in height, bulk and floor area over that which is allowed in both the current "C-4" zoning and "C-5" zoning as currently written in the Philadelphia Zoning Code. The developer is seeking bonus floor increases, some of which he's entitled to, some of which are excessive beyond those that are in the current ordinance. He also wants a reduction in some public benefit components, although they are adding some that are unique. However, they're requesting unlimited height primarily through new provisions included in this proposed zoning change ordinance. There is currently a 125 feet building height limitation on this property, which was passed by City Council earlier and is mandated by the Zoning Code. As such, the project's negative impact, since it wants to be ten 101 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 times the height of that limit, the negative impact on the adjacent properties and on Center City is potentially overwhelming. The focus of my testimony is threefold. First, I will describe the numerous defects in the proposed zoning change ordinance. Second, I will discuss several characteristics of the proposed American Commerce Center project that are adverse to the surrounding neighborhood. And, thirdly, I will point out the overall failure of the project and the zoning change to fit into the planning and zoning scheme of Center City Philadelphia. The proposed ordinance has several fundamental defects. I have listed in my report the components of this project and the enormous size of it, and some of that has already been presented by the developer, so I won't repeat them.
But a review of the developer's proposed American Commerce 102 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Center reveals some defects in the ordinance. Number one, the proposed floor area in the project is at least four to five times that which is currently allowed in the basic limits of the Zoning Code and almost twice that which is allowed with incentive floor area bonuses. The proposed ordinance is contradictory and confusing regarding the allowable and proposed floor area ratios. It's a very technical and complex issue dealing with floor area ratios and how you can increase the size of the building on a floor area basis, and I won't go into that, but there are contradictions and conflicts in the zoning ordinance as it's written, particularly as it's compared to the "C-4" and "C-5" section of the Zoning Code and also with respect to the two changes that Mr. Greenberger of the Planning Commission has proposed, which essentially eliminates their most 103 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 important and major floor area incentives. So this project cannot be built as this ordinance is currently written or as amended by the Planning Commission. Number two, there are only six off-street trash storage and loading docks indicated in the proposed project, where the "C-4" and "C-5" zoning would require at least ten for the building's square footage proposed and the uses therein. We have differences of opinion regarding that, but my reading of the Code says you have to have at least ten. They have only six. That can create problems on little bitty Cuthbert Street, which is only feet wide, as a result 20 of this project. 21 Number three, the proposal seeks an incentive floor area bonus of 380 percent for connections and improvements to the transit concourse. Nobody else in the Zoning Code is 104 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 entitled to that. They're only entitled to 200 percent. Number four, the proposal seeks additional incentive floor area bonus of 200 percent for sustainability and energy conservation features -- that's all that LEED Gold stuff they're talking about -- whereas the current Code allows zero percent. Most of those features, however, are already mandated by the Philadelphia Uniform Construction Code and other City, State and federal regulations. On this point, it is questionable whether this sustainability incentive is of exceptional public benefit, as required by the Zoning Code. It certainly will benefit the developer and the owner of the building and certainly the tenants of the project who today would demand a sustainable building with energy conservation, and no 24 developer today would build a building that is not energy efficient. 105 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 There are several components of this project that have an adverse effect on the surrounding neighborhood, and I've talked extensively with the Kennedy House residents on this. And this is a neighborhood which incidentally has a high concentration of residential and educational uses. It is not the center of Center City. It is on the edge of the commercial business district of Philadelphia, in spite of what the developers have been saying. This is not in the absolute center of the dynamic office development of Philadelphia. It is on the edge. Number one, to date, the preliminary parking and traffic study by Orth-Rogers is inadequate and incomplete. I haven't seen what the Streets Department has said in terms of its, quote, "approval" of it, but, frankly, it has serious flaws, even in the October 2008 update, which was said to be done as a result of some of our criticisms. 106 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 The study demonstrates that 369 parking spaces are inadequate to meet the full demand of the project. It admits it. But it relies heavily on other parking facilities in a neighborhood within a 15-minute walk without any analysis of their availability or permanence.
A significant number of those parking spaces are dedicated to monthly parking and to other users and are not available to the users of this building. Without going into detail, my review of the study, the Orth-Rogers study, revealed many key areas where demand for parking was underestimated or simply was left out. Number two with regard to adverse effects, the project will substantially increase the already congested 19th Street southbound traffic. And I got to read this, because you need to know all of the problems with 19th Street which have to do with traffic and 107 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 those that they intend to add. The only entrance and exit to the proposed project's parking garage would be at 19th Street, catty-cornered from the only Kennedy House parking garage entrance and exit right at Cuthbert Street. The entrance point for all truck-loading and unloading traffic for the American Commerce Center and the Sterling Apartments and the Sterling residents' garage will be at the same corner of 19th and Cuthbert Streets. You're going to need a traffic cop there hours a day. 16 A preliminary plan for a 17 parking lot in the 1900 block of Arch 18 Street by Philadelphia Management also 19 includes a vehicular entrance on 19th 20 Street in the same block. There are two 21 SEPTA bus routes, busy, frequent bus 22 routes in this portion of 19th Street, 23 with a bus stop at JFK Boulevard. There 24 are entrances and exits for several multi-block loading areas and three large 108 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 parking garages on 19th Street just south of JFK Boulevard. Again, all you have to do is drive there any time during the day and see how difficult it is today without this building being added. Nineteenth Street is a two-lane street, feet wide, with one parking 10 lane. The traffic study simply has not 11 confronted these conditions, in spite of 12 what they say, in a meaningful way, 13 including an insufficient number of 14 traffic counts. 15 Number three, other than the 16 shadow study and the incomplete parking 17 and traffic study, there are no other 18 studies of the impact of this project. 19 Now, this ordinance asks for some. But 20 these kinds of impacts this project, this 21 large, very large project, would have 22 upon the neighbors are significant. And 23 those would be the impacts of wind, 24 noise, air quality, nighttime interior 25 lighting, solar reflections and glare, 109 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 because this building will face south and will reflect the sun onto the Sterling and the Kennedy House. Transit use, views and vistas, sight lines, interference with telecommunications and utility uses. None of those have been discussed by the developer. Number four, the project contains no indication of the mandated underground garage ventilation system or where it will exhaust to the exterior. Oh, yeah, that's a building code issue, right? It still concerns us now and it should be a zoning issue, and it should be required as part of the testing of this building for this ordinance. Number five, in comparison, the proposed American Commerce Center building is at least twice the size of each of the Comcast and Bell Atlantic high-rise projects. In other words, combine the Comcast building and the Bell Atlantic building and you have this building. But it's on a property that's 110 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 similar in size. Moreover, the proposed project has fewer amenities than those two projects. For example, the public plaza that they proposed at this site is only seven percent of the ground level of the site; whereas, those other two projects, which we all enjoy and appreciate in Philadelphia, have 50 percent of their sites dedicated to public plazas. Number six, revisiting the loading and unloading issue, the response to this function is still inadequate. Cuthbert Street will be only feet 16 wide.
The street behind the Super Fresh 17 on South Street where trucks take 30 18 minutes, large trucks, take 30 minutes to 19 get into the dock is 26 feet wide. This 20 is only 21 feet wide, and this is not 21 just a simple Super Fresh. This is a building with almost two million square feet. The configuration of the building inadequately addresses its 111 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 neighbors, and I get into a little bit of urban design issues there, but, frankly, the plaza is simply not big enough to give appropriate backdrop to the church across the street. Number four, the project contains no -- I'm sorry. Next page. Number eight, should this project be built as designed, it will -- and this is, I think, important for you to think about, because they start talking about the 1900 block of Arch Street as being the transition area. Well, should this project be built and designed, it will encourage every landowner in this quadrant of Center City to claim the same large-scale development rights and privileges that they want you to grant to this property, which is an unacceptable precedent. Again, out of context, developer driven, not planning driven. The proposed American Commerce Center project and its companion 112 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 ordinance fly in the face of the great Philadelphia tradition of planning principles and zoning responses to those principles. I was one of the many who participated in the rewarding public process years ago that resulted in the 9 Center City Plan and the subsequent urban 10 design-driven rewrite of the "C-4," "C-5" 11 and "RC" sections of the Zoning Code. 12 Those are the highlights, the best part 13 of the Philadelphia Zoning Code even 14 today. They are urban-design driven. 15 They're extremely thoughtful. They are 16 complex, but they allow for all the 17 benefits for developers and the community 18 and Center City to achieve. 19 It is, therefore, disheartening 20 for a project so alien to those principles to be presented as somehow an appropriate future step in that process. In fact, this project represents major steps backwards, in my view. The project is contrary to the 113 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 goals of the Center City Plan. Moreover, it occurs at a time when this very portion of Center City is undergoing a yet unfulfilled commendable public master plan process by the Logan Square Neighborhood Association. This project so far cannot fit into that master plan either as it's currently allowed. That plan still calls for "C-4" zoning on this property. I would also be remiss if I did not note that the proposed zoning change ordinance, although purported to be a modification of the "C-5" section of the Zoning Code, is actually a substantial departure from the "C-5" section. The proposed adjustments are numerous and they are contrary to the purpose of the "C-5" zoning classification. And I'd like to just refer to Mr. Greenberger's comment from the City Planning Commission. He says that he would like to revise zoning in Philadelphia comprehensively, quote, 114 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 "comprehensively, not incrementally," unquote. This ordinance does the exact opposite of that. This ordinance calls for an incremental change in the zoning, not a comprehensive change in the zoning. It is further noted that the "C-4" and "C-5" section of the Zoning Code applies different requirements on properties located on larger streets, like Market, JFK and Broad Street, versus smaller streets, Walnut, Sansom and Chestnut. If you read the Code, it differentiates between those areas with respect to certain public benefits that are required and certain other opportunities that have to be included in a project. This project does the absolute opposite. Arch Street and Cuthbert Streets are similar smaller streets. They're like Walnut, Sansom and Chestnut.
Yet, the proposed ordinance 23 sinks even a greater floor area ratio and less amenities than that that is required for the largest streets in the "C-4" and 115 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 "C-5" areas. That's a significant contradiction. It absolutely is backwards. And here are several examples that are in the Zoning Code now that this project conflicts with. Again, geographically some of these things don't apply to this particular site. It sort of got left out of those requirements, but nevertheless, the large majority of "C-4" and "C-5" properties have these requirements. Whereas virtually all other high-rise developments in other "C-4" and "C-5" zoned areas are required to have five foot setbacks on the numbered streets, this project has no setback on 19th Street and it has only a 12-foot-wide sidewalk. Whereas virtually all other high-rise developments in "C-4" and "C-5" cannot place their buildings within 75 feet of any building across the street at 116 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 any point higher than 65 feet, the proposed project is only 40 feet away from the Sterling at the west end and 70 feet away from the Sterling for all the rest of the building, for the full length of the project. There is no setback proposed on Cuthbert Street. We actually asked for one, but they said absolutely no. 11 With regard to building width, this building is 380 feet in width. " I think it's important to read what I believe is -- although it's repeated several times in the "C-4," "C-5" section of the Zoning Code, what I feel is the portion which is the heart and soul of that section of the Code, and here's what it says. It's in -- it says -- and it's a preamble to the incentive floor area bonuses section, and it says, quote, "In order to permit buildings of the appropriate scale and 117 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 density while recognizing that high-density buildings place additional burdens on public space, particularly the public sidewalk, minimum performance standards for such buildings are needed. These standards are created as a method of ensuring that the impact of high-density buildings is appropriately mitigated. These performance standards are needed because of increased pedestrian and vehicular traffic generated by the occupants, customers, service providers and visitors to these buildings, as well as by the service, loading and parking needs of such buildings. "High-density buildings can also impact upon the light and air reaching public spaces and sidewalks. " This statement, although it's repeated several times in "C-4" and "C-5," is the heart and soul of "C-4" and "C-5" zoning. Now, when you explore the proposed American Commerce Center design to find any of the amenities that "C-4" and "C-5" asks for or demands, it comes up wanting. Details as to its compliance with the public art requirements of the Zoning Code have really not been provided. Just lip service. " No mention has been made of cultural programming for the site. Only 20 to 30 percent of the proposed retail space is at ground floor, second floor 119 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 and concourse levels, failing the incentive test, which requires 75 percent of that space to be there. I'm almost done, so don't worry. " Yet, there are no through block pedestrian walkways, no transfer of development rights for historic preservation, no contributions to the Housing Trust Fund. Maybe you ought to try to squeeze some of that out of them. No improvements to or construction of publicly owned facilities, except where their subway concourse connection connects to the one that is already there. Generally, in conclusion, the prospect of an exceptionally large project of the American Commerce Center 120 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 type for Philadelphia is admittedly enticing. As an architect, I have a lot of admiration for some of the components of this building.
Unfortunately, the 1800 block of Arch and Cuthbert Street is simply the wrong place for it, for all the reasons stated above and some that I didn't mention. Projects of this size and type are better suited for much larger sites, such as those projected in the Penn Praxis Delaware waterfront plan. On North Broad Street, please, or adjacent to the Penn campus and the Schuylkill riverfront, such as the Cira 2 project. Moreover, amenities of exceptional public benefit, which are minimum performance standards in the Code, should not be left out of such projects. In my opinion, it is incumbent upon City Council to consider all of the defects, inconsistencies and contradictions in this ordinance 25 vis-a-vis Philadelphia's precious 121 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 planning and zoning framework. On a final note, as a planner and an architect, it is my objective opinion that any zoning classification for the 1800 Arch property that is more intense than "C-4" is wrong. "C-4" itself, with a few updated adjustments, is still somewhat overbuilding for that site. However, it is a reasonable transitional classification. "C-4" was intended to be a transitional classification from high-density business area to lower-density residential commercial area. "C-4" signals the transition from offices to residential, from Central Business District to Logan Square neighborhood.
Mr. Smith, excuse me. I know you said you would not be much longer.
Well, we do have a copy of your testimony. If you think you're going to be longer than 122 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 you said --
Well, we're going to time you, because we do have -- (Applause.)
We have a Committee of the Whole that had a public hearing scheduled at 10 o'clock. We will have that public hearing immediately after this hearing. So, Mr. Smith, please proceed, and, again, I would ask you to be extremely brief.
Again, "C-4" signals the transition -- "C-4" is what that property is currently zoned. It signals a transition from offices to residential, from Central Business District to the Logan Square neighborhood, and from big to small. This is the nature of that location. This property is on the edge of the business district, not in the middle. No matter how much the developer team 123 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 tries to say it's in the middle or the center, it's not. It's on the edge. A "C-4" development even with all of the floor area bonuses but with the public amenities that go with them that go far to mitigate its impact is the right approach for this property. I would, therefore, urge the City Council to reject the change to "C-5," particularly with all of the bloated requests for this project, and stay with "C-4" for this important transitional site. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco. (Applause.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Beller, are you --
No. I'm all 124 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 right. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I'm sorry.
I was just waiting. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I think, Mr. Smith, you probably answered partially one of my questions. If we adhere to all of the conditions in the Code as it relates to "C-4" -- and we deal with this on a number of occasions any time there's development that requires an amendment to change the classification to a greater level -- in your estimation -- you did answer some of this, because I was going to ask you where could we build a building of this size anywhere in the City of Philadelphia but for central Delaware waterfront, North Broad Street, but in the core of Center City, is there any site location in the core of Center City where a building of this height can be built? It doesn't appear that way to me based on the arguments as to why it 125 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 shouldn't be built. The streets aren't wide enough, access to or traffic congestion, which exists today, and I don't think anyone would deny that. My point is, we never move from where we are in terms of development unless we make adjustments. And if we don't make adjustments and we just go by what the Code says, we never build our city to be a world-class city. And I think when these decisions were made, I mean, William Penn did a great job when he laid out the grid for this City, but that was 300 years ago, and I'm not meaning that sarcastically, but who was thinking about 15-story high-rises 300 years ago? A typical building was three -- maybe a five-story building was considered a high-rise. So we're faced with this position of having to make decisions on what we think are the best uses not only for today but also going forward. So my question again is, is there a site in 126 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Center City where a building of this nature would be acceptable, would work? Because the streets are all basically the same.
If you take a look and it was reversed -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Mr. Beller, if you would --
If you take a look at the Comcast building, that runs from Kennedy to Arch. It's double the size. So there was recently a spot where you could get it. You're absolutely right, we need development and we need the right kind of development. You can have an absolutely beautiful building, and with a 17 number and maybe another incentive or two, you could have on this spot a building that would be great and modern and big and take care of all of the 127 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 problems. It's just a question of too much in one small space. You wouldn't have to limit -- I wouldn't want to limit construction in this City. I want to encourage it. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I'm not suggesting that you are.
The point is that when you take a look at what Comcast did -- and, by the way, what Comcast is back on that first floor and that attracts thousands of people to come look at that beautiful two, three, four, five-story thing, you had all the way from Kennedy through to Arch. You've got Cuthbert Street. Forget the width of 18 when they fix it up. Cuthbert Street is 19 12 feet wide on the City Map right now. 20 You've got Arch Street, which is not the 21 largest street. So what happens is, I don't know exactly where else you could put it, but I can tell you this, you can't put it here and not suffer the consequences. 128 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: But we do --
That's the problem. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: My point is, we have narrow streets behind tall buildings everywhere in this City, behind Liberty Place.
Yeah, so what some people do is, they set the building back further. That's not being done here enough to accommodate that problem. It is a nightmare at 19th Street at Cuthbert in the morning now. What is it going to be when you do that? There's your problem. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I understand that, and that is a challenge. I guess for me -- I don't live at 19th and JFK or Arch Street, but I drive by that often. Our city is a great city, but it is really a very dull city after a certain time of the night. And density to me, density to me offers opportunities 129 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 for people to want to live in this City, to offer opportunities -- my oldest son moved to New York, much to my dismay. He moved to Manhattan, and I've been spending a lot more time in Manhattan now than I've done for years, and it is a very interesting city, with some small streets and very tall buildings, as we know. But there's a synergy, there's a liveliness about New York on every street for that matter, not just in certain areas, because of, I think, density. Density is what puts people on the street. So we don't live in a perfect world. If we had a clean map and there was no development in the City and this was one big swath of vacant land, maybe we could have planned better, but we have to deal with current conditions, and I think sometimes we have to make those exceptions, where we just can't have it exactly the way we all would like it to, and some people may say that that 130 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 building -- I guess maybe people even at Kennedy House -- I'm not speaking for them. There's various differences of opinion as to how high the building should be, because you're never going to have a definitive number by 100 percent of the people. And, as you know, I have dealt with a number of these issues in my district. You know, what is the magic number in height? Is it 50 foot? Is it 60 foot? You get various types of responses from everybody who live close by. So it is a challenge for us, and I understand there are going to be some traffic conditions and others that we will have to deal with, but in the interest of development and in the interest of creating an environment where the City and our Center City becomes a more vibrant place, I think we have to make those decisions and move forward with large development.
I suggest to you -- and I respect what you just said, but I suggest to you that you can have your cake and eat it too by keeping it "C-4." They could start tomorrow. You get 1700 -- as a number, which is more 9 dense than you should have, but we back 10 off of that. You could get everything 11 you want and get a beautiful building and 12 get all of the uses and get it with the 13 17, and you could fill it up and you 14 could start tomorrow, and he would be 15 allowed to do that under the "C-4." 16 That's what you ought to have. 17
Let me ask you a question about other sites. Yesterday I was over at the area around 13th and Vine. There's a whole series of parking lots over there. They're well used as parking lots, but they're underdeveloped. There's a whole series of one- and two-story buildings there that are unused. If you combined 132 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 all of those sites together, you could build a building almost bigger than this at that location. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: But, Mr. Smith, I'm talking about Center City, because you're saying --
13th and Vine. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: But you're saying Arch Street is the edge of the commercial district. Now, if you go to Vine Street, you're out of that. I'm using your definition of where the edge of the district is.
Well, I'm on the other side of Broad Street. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I wasn't going east or west. I'm talking about core of Center City. I'm using your definition of the edge. I mean --
As far as this property is concerned and Logan Square neighborhood is concerned, this is on -- this property that we're talking about today is on the edge. 133 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I respect their opinion, but if you take it to Vine Street, then why don't we take it to Callowhill Street or Ridge Street. I mean, we just keep going further.
Well, you were asking me for sites, and like I said, yesterday there's at least four blocks of parking lots surrounding 13th and Vine Street, which I went to yesterday, which are right near the Convention Center. There is a large enough site to build a building of this kind. They're zoned "C-4" and "C-5." COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I understand that. I also have in my district at 8th and Market. I'd love for this project to move to 8th and Market.
21st and Market. 21st and Market, there's a site sitting there. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: But I can't talk about that. Thank you. 134 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588
Madam President, I understand the discussion about sites, but there's no other sites in play. I mean, you can say assemble all the sites you want, but if the owners of the properties don't want to sell or don't want to develop them, how do you -- talk about directing development. I mean, this is the site that's in play and this is the discussion we're having. I wasn't here in the '80s in this body, but I'm wondering if you had expressed an opinion over the debate to build above Billy Penn's hat. Where were you on that issue?
I was for it. I was Chairman of the Urban Design Committee of the American Institute of Architects at the time. We had Ed Bacon and Bill Rouse come in and debate in front of us with about 75 people. We deliberated, and we actually ended up supporting it wholeheartedly that it go above Billy Penn. 135 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588
Yes. I was Chairman of the committee that ended up determining from the American Institute of Architects' point of view, and actually the Foundation for Architecture participated in that, too.
In retrospect, I thank you for your foresight. Thanks.
I was 136 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 particularly interested in your testimony where you reference a Center City Plan, and I have a multi-part question related to that. It has already been mentioned in the testimony this morning that the development of commercial office space has recently had new activity, but activity has not been seen since the late '80s. My question is, first and foremost, why do you think that activity has not been seen since the late '80s? Two, to what extent was development in the late '80s attributable to the Center City Plan, and at what point do you think the Center City Plan could have or should have been more effective in developing commercial office space since then?
I don't see anything wrong with the Center City Plan with respect to promoting office space. In fact, what we've talked about today, the "C-4" and "C-5" sections of the 137 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Zoning Code, which are only years old --
Mr. Smith, 5 my first question was -- and I'll repeat 6 them. My first question was, we are 7 experiencing a new period of activity in 8 terms of development of commercial office 9 space that has not been seen since the 10 late '80s. The first question is, why 11 are we just seeing that new period of 12 activity that we haven't seen since the 13 '80s, late '80s? 14 The second question is, to what 15 extent do you attribute that development 16 in the late '80s to the Center City Plan? 17 And then the third part of the 18 question is, how effective has the Center 19 City Plan been or not been since the late 20 '80s in terms of development of commercial office space?
Well, I attribute the new office space that's being developed or being proposed to the fact that we lost a significant amount of 138 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 office space when older office buildings were converted to condominiums and apartments. Thousands of square feet caused that to happen. And also new office space that was built encouraged people who were looking for "A" type space as opposed to "B" type space wanted to move to for prestigious reasons and because they were increasing in their ability to afford that kind of space. I think it's more an economic question, your first question, than it is that, but I think from a physical point of view, that's one of the things that drove the interest in new office space, is the conversion to condominiums.
So while you didn't address yet while there was a dry spell, you did suggest that the reason that there's new activity that there has not been since the late '80s is because of economic interests versus simply a planning vision.
Well, there was a 139 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 lot of office space available in the '80s, particularly in "B" and "C" type office buildings. Much of that office space was taken up by conversions to condominiums and apartments, and so the vacancy rate went down and so you had to build more office buildings or at least initiate building more office buildings in order to create the office space for either the new office or expanding offices. Although it hasn't been terrific compared to Manhattan, but it has been some increase. And I'm sure the Center City District can answer your question a whole lot better than me. With respect to your second question, how did the Center City Plan attribute to this change or this growth or this phenomenon. Well, the Center City Plan is only 20 years old. It essentially was the forerunner at what developed the "C-4" and "C-5" sections of the Zoning Code. And the "C-4" and "C-5" 140 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 sections of the Zoning Code are primarily written for office building development, although they do allow for residential development as part of that. One of the great things about "C-4," "C-5" and the "RC" sections of the Code is that they encouraged mixed use, and that's kind of a new phenomenon in building development in this country today, particularly when you've got an interest, a plan like Center City Plan, which said we want residences and businesses to all live close -- to be close together and to interact like our Center City does. We're very fortunate in Philadelphia as opposed to Atlanta and Houston where we all live and work together. Atlanta and Houston, everything -- although it's changing slightly now, people live out of town and they drive into work. There's nobody lives downtown, except maybe the homeless. Not in Philadelphia. We're very fortunate to have a large 141 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 residential population in downtown Philadelphia, right next to this site incidentally, the Sterling and the Kennedy House and all of Logan Square neighborhood.
Councilman Goode, I think part of the answer to your question is that the "C-4," "C-5" designation encouraged it. Economic development is what fuels it, but the "C-4," "C-5" does not discourage it. In its present form, it encourages it, and that's what we're saying. Four is fine. Five is fine wherever it's been designated as such. It hasn't hurt it. What hurt it or didn't hurt it was the economic -- I think Councilman Kenney was talking about it. Somebody owns a piece of land. If he doesn't want to develop it, there's nothing you can do to force him to do it. But as soon as it became necessary for part of the reasons of what Gray Smith says, building started. And I don't know, by the way, that the latest 142 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 two places are filled yet, but I was told that there's a lot of space in some of the two newer buildings. But we've seen development over the years. The places right on Market Street at 18th, the Mellon building went up, and you've got the Bell Atlantic building. You've got Comcast building. And that is all in "C-4," "C-5." So "C-4," "C-5" has been a driving force to say we are welcoming this, but the developer, the man who is spending the money, has to want to invest it. But, of course, in this case, that doesn't mean you have to give him everything he wants. Give him enough to make him happy, and make the City happy.
Let's not forget the ten-year tax abatement either, because that is probably the most fundamental thing that's driving development in Philadelphia today. I mean, as soon as that was enacted -- thank you, Councilman DiCicco, for 143 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 thinking that up -- everything started to grow at that time, but, fortunately, the Center City Plan was written and the zoning that followed it was written to accommodate that kind of growth.
The last part of the question was, looking at the impact the Center City Plan had or didn't have on the development of commercial office space in the late '80s, how did it impact the lack of development during the '90s, or was it because people were following the Center City Plan, because they weren't following the Center City Plan, because there was no economic interest? At what point, in other words, did the Center City Plan become obsolete, or did it become obsolete at some point?
It's not obsolete. 144 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 I don't believe it's obsolete at all. I think it's a great plan. It does need some tweaking, but it is a great plan.
Well, the reason I ask that question is because you say this project is contrary to the Center City Plan.
So this type of project should not happen at all in Center City?
Not on this site. This site is part of the Center City Plan. The Center City Plan says it should be transitional development, "C-4." This is not a proposal for "C-4" transitional. This is a proposal for twice that size for a project that doesn't fit as a transitional project. And I don't agree that 19th and Arch is a transitional site. I think this is the transitional site. It should stop here. 145 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 It should not -- and because as soon as Philadelphia Management comes on with a plan at 19th and Arch, which is almost as big as this, although he's got a smaller site, then the next block is going to end up being the transitional block, according to the Planning Commission and the developers.
Just very quickly, if the Center City Plan and the "C-4," "C-5" designation gave us what we needed in the late '80s and subsequent development, then perhaps it is time to look again at what might be needed to move the City to build a bit higher. Thank you.
All right, but this is being -- this is happening before that. (Applause.)
That should happen first before this project. That should happen first before this project occurs. That's what planning is. 146 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kelly.
Yes. Thank you, Madam President. I just want to follow up on some comments that Councilman DiCicco made. I couldn't agree with him more, because I have two daughters that live in New York City, and I don't think density is a problem at all. Because whenever I travel to New York City, I feel quite safe that the more people you have on a block, especially at night, I think it makes it much, much safer. Believe me. (Applause.)
I remember in the '80s when we were deliberating a budget and it went well into the night, probably into midnight, but we took a break around 9:30 or so and we went out to get something to eat. There was nothing, nothing in Center City open, 147 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 believe it or not, at 9:30 at night, and it was scary. It was really scary. There is no one on the streets. I think with the more people, again, that you put out there, especially at night, I think it's going to be better not only for the people that are visiting, but I think it's going to be much safer for the people who live around that area. That's all I have to say. Thank you.
You can do that with "C-4." All of that can happen with "C-4." Center City is an exciting place now. I mean, every restaurant is full. It's not like you described it was in those days. But you can do exactly what the Councilman is talking about with a "C-4" development there. It has all those kinds of amenities. It has nightlife. It has people on the streets. 148 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 That's what "C-4" is all about. People on the streets, preserving the public -- the pedestrian way so that it's comfortable for people on the streets, but producing uses so that people are on the streets 18, hours a day. 8
All 9 right. Thank you, Mr. Smith. 10 Any other questions or comments 11 from members of the Committee? 12 (No response.) 13
I 20 would like to remind my colleagues and also the witnesses that will be coming up to testify that we do have four other public hearings that have been scheduled for today. So we would really appreciate your being as brief as possible. I don't 149 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 want to cut anybody off, because I do know this is a very important issue, but at the same time, I think that we have heard just about all of the issues mentioned. Yes?
I just want to close by asking for a suspension of the rules. I don't want to forget that before the end of my testimony.
Your request will be considered at the appropriate time. Thank you.
Thank you, Council President. Thank you, members of the Committee.
Thank you. The next witness? MR. McPHERSON: Our next witness is Marla Quintrone and then after her will be Sarah Maloney.
Would 150 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 they both approach the witness table, please. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Thank you. I'm not the person. They sent me up instead. My name is Erin Young and I'm the Political Director for Unite Here, and thank you, Madam President and members of Council. It's my pleasure to be here today on behalf of our business manager, Lynne Fox. She apologizes. She serves on the SERS Board and is unable to attend today, but wanted me to read a very brief statement on behalf of the Philadelphia Joint Board. Esteemed City Councilors, the Philadelphia Joint Board of Unite Here represents 9,000 hotel, gaming, food service and manufacturing workers in the Philadelphia region, approximately 85 percent of whom live in the City of 151 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Philadelphia. I write today in support of the American Commerce Center. We support this project because it promises to provide quality hospitality jobs. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Lynne Fox.
Thank you very much. Any questions or comments from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Are you going to testify? UNIDENTIFIED WITNESS: I can just stand in support given the time.
Fine. Thank you so much. Mr. McPherson, please call our next witnesses, please. MR. McPHERSON: Michelle Smiley.
Are 152 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 you testifying?
Good afternoon. My name is Sarah Maloney. I'm a resident of Center City and spend a lot of time in Logan Square, and I'm just here to voice my support for the project. First off, I just want to say that the Kennedy House is not the only representatives of Logan Square. There are lots of other people in Logan Square that support this project, and I just urge the Council to remember that as they're deliberating today. I've lived in Chicago, New York, Boston, many other cities as a 153 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 young professional, and this is the type of development that brings me to Philadelphia. I would love to live by a place like this. Grocery store, work, everything. I think the people that are going to be using this building are people like me that are looking to live in areas of excitement in the City. They want to be able to walk to work, not to get in their cars, not create traffic, but walk to work, take public transit, and this is a really exciting building. I just left the financial services industry. This is my final point. Financing is very difficult to come by right now. We had very difficult times in the last few months trying to find financing for projects that I was working on, and this project as it is today, with all the amenities, with the height, with the density, has financing, and I just think that's so important, 154 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 because all these jobs can be created right now and will be ready for the next upturn. So I just really support the project on so many fronts, and I can't wait, and I really hope it's here for people like me and the generations behind me. Thank you.
Mr. McPherson, please call our next witnesses, please. Please come up to the witness table. MR. McPHERSON: Michelle Smiley and then James McManaman.
Please approach the witness table. 155 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Good afternoon. Kindly identify yourself for the record.
Hello. My name is Michelle Smiley. I'm the Property Manager at 2101 Market Street, the Murano. We're a 43-story beautiful high-rise building. I'm here on behalf of the developers of the building and their residents just to let everyone know that we're looking forward to this building being built, one of the most beautiful, unique buildings I've ever seen. I can't wait until it's on our map in this City. I wanted to congratulate the developer, Mr. Miller, for having a dream, a vision and insight to keep his business and everything here. I support it. Thank you.
Thank you. (Applause.) MR. McMANAMAN: Madam 156 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 President, members of the Rules Committee, my name is James McManaman. I own a small business in Center City Philadelphia and I've lived here for four years. I'm also the Founding President of Midtown Village Merchants Association, representing 140 merchants just a few blocks away. It's a fantastic project. It's what Philadelphia needs, particularly now at this time in our economy. So I fully support it and hope that you will, too.
Thank you so much. (Applause.) MR. McPHERSON: Our next witnesses are Edward Panek, David Harrison and Rick Slobodian.
I would ask the witnesses to please approach the witness table. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Good 157 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 afternoon, sir. Kindly identify yourself for the record.
My name is David Harrison. I'm a resident of Kennedy House. I'm opposed to the development of the 1800 block of Arch Street as presently proposed. My apartment is in the northeast corner of Kennedy House, so I will not be directly affected by the proposed development, but I believe that the present plans will be bad not only for Logan Square area but for Center City as well. I'm afraid that both the Mayor and this Council are so enamored with the thought of a 1,500-foot tower that they have lost sight of the forest through the trees. You must remember that you have the developers over the barrel. They have paid $30 million for this lot. They will develop it even if they cannot develop it as presently proposed. I understand that the tower has 158 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 a great amount of sex appeal and would be an iconic feature for the City, but it must be moved to the 18th Street side of the block. This is the commercial side of the block and will have less effect on the Logan Square area. It will also serve as a demarcation between the commercial part of Logan Square and the residential part. Having said this, the rest of the proposal is unacceptable. I only have two pages. The proposal will exacerbate an already terrible parking problem in the area. It will result in a net loss of parking spaces. They're building this on a 400-lot parking lot. Since a major justification for the tower depends on its bringing new business to the City, it must generate additional traffic to be successful. The developer's contention that the occupants of the tower will use public transportation ala New York is unrealistic. Philadelphia does not have 159 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 the transportation system that New York City has, and that city's traffic problems are horrendous. At rush hour and before and after, 19th Street and JF Kennedy is gridlocked. With the loss of parking, the traffic will get much worse, discouraging people from coming to Center City unless it's absolutely necessary. And, of course, the development will generate far more traffic on its own. If the traffic from the proposed hotel and shops is added in, the additional strain on parking and traffic will be unbearable. This development crammed into half a city block will be overcrowded. It represents only an exercise of greed by the developer, with no concern for aesthetics. The so-called public areas are an illusion. They will not be used by the public, situate as they are on the upper floors. Greed should not be rewarded. 160 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 The solution is to disallow the hotel, but additional shopping and the movie theatre can be permitted. This will open up the lot. It will bring people into Center City. They will be users. It will answer the questions raised by the Councilpeople. But by doing that, it will substantially reduce traffic, because the hotel is a huge traffic generator. As I said, this will not stop development, but it will better serve the City if we can eliminate the hotel. That's what jams up this lot. That's what makes it so aesthetically wrong, and that's what causes all the parking problems. Thank you. (Applause.)
My name is Ed Panek. I'm here on behalf of Logan Square Neighborhood Association, both as the Chairman of the Zoning Committee and as a member of the Major Projects 161 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Committee, which has been charged by Logan Square to negotiate with the developer and obtain information concerning the development, which is clearly within our boundaries. First, I might say that our President, Rob Stewart, would have liked to have been here today, but he's on jury duty, and the Chair of the Major Projects Committee, Jim McGrath, would have liked to have been here, but he had to be in Florida. And I wonder why it's always somebody else that has to be in Florida and not me. But in any event, I'm here. This is a very important project not only to the developer, not only to this City, not only to the near neighbors, but to the Logan Square Neighborhood Association in its entirety. We have had continuing discussions with the developer, and we intend to continue to facilitate discussions with the developer. A couple things that are going 162 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 to happen as a result of -- if this Council today decides that it is going to pass this or enact this ordinance, it's going to create a situation where there's a lot less incentive for the developer to continue to negotiate. Number two, if you enact this ordinance today without a consideration of what other major projects might be built in the area, without a consideration of our neighborhood development plan, which I think will be issued by the end of December, the beginning of January -- we put $100,000 into this from Kise Straw doing the development plan. We really wish that you would see that final plan before you make a decision on this particular piece of legislation. I know of no compelling reason why this piece of -- this ordinance needs to be enacted today. It can be enacted after you've had a chance to review our neighborhood development plan and after 163 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 you've had an opportunity to consider the fruits of the rest of our negotiations with the developer. What I handed up to you was the last letter that we sent to the developer. It's dated November the 13th. It is not the position of the Logan Square Neighborhood Association per se. It is a list of suggested talking points. The developer has responded to us on that and we've also met with them recently, the Monday of Thanksgiving week, and we intend to continue to do that, not only to try and facilitate getting information concerning issues of major concern to not only the near neighbors but other residents on the Logan Square Neighborhood Association, but also with respect to whether or not there can be any continuing negotiations with respect to this particular project. I must say that with every particular matter that I've ever worked on for Logan Square Neighborhood 164 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Association, our approach, my approach certainly, has always been win-win, and that's where we'd like to get on this particular situation. We're not there yet, and we need some time to finish that, and I see no reason why you need to enact an ordinance today, which I think can inhibit us from getting where we need to go. I also want to thank Councilman Clarke, who has facilitated us in our discussions with the developer and has been supportive and looking out, I think, for everybody's best interest in the whole process. So I thank you. That is my testimony. Any questions?
Thank you. Any questions or comments from the Committee? (No response.)
Thank you. 165 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 Good afternoon. Kindly identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon. My name is Richard Slobodian. I'm a resident of Center City and my family has been here for upwards of 70 years. Myself, clearly I haven't. But my interest is seeing this project happen, not for any financial gain, but because I'm interested in bringing the newest and the best technology, architecture, engineering and science to the City. Both of my sisters are in New York, as many of your siblings and daughters are, and they've bought in Hoboken, in Jersey City and my father has bought in burgeoning White Plains, a city in its own right, and I've always encouraged them to buy here. And why haven't they bought here? Because they're afraid that there's not enough leadership and vision to get something done to make an exciting, vibrant Center City that is stagnated by height 166 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 requirements and other historical impediments. I think it's critical. It has to be built, and I wish I had a financial interest in it being built, but I don't. Just a City resident. So thanks very much.
Thank you. MR. McPHERSON: Our next three witnesses are John Partridge, Anthony Dougdale, Steven Henkelman.
Would all three witnesses please approach the witness table. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Who is the third, Mr. McPherson? MR. McPHERSON: John Partridge, Anthony Dougdale and Steven Henkelman. 167 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588
Good morning, President Verna and Council Rules Committee. My name is John Partridge. I'm an architect, and my business is located in the Bell Atlantic Tower at 1717 Arch Street, making me a close neighbor of the proposed tower and mixed-use development, American Commerce Center at 18th and Arch. By the way, I take the train to work and take full advantage of the tremendous mass transit system that we are lucky enough to have in Philadelphia and is key to our survival in our future as a leading city in the world. I recall when One Logan and the Four Seasons project was developed in 1983 and then Two Logan followed in 1987. At the time, 18th Street was declared by some as a new center of the Central Business District. Then Mellon Bank Center in 1990, Bell Atlantic Tower in 1992 further enhanced 18th Street's claim as the main north-south access in the 168 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 dense core of Philadelphia's Central Business District. Numerous factors contribute to the location of so much of the new development in this area, not the least of which is the direct access to the regional rail lines and its close proximity to the existing office space in the CBD. This site is not the edge of anything. This is the center of the main urban core of Philadelphia. The site of American Commerce Center is the heart of the urban core, surrounded on three sides by dense, high-rise development. It's connected to our vital mass transit hub. And this is the prime development site for a dense building complex in Philadelphia. The notion of locating a dense development site anywhere but in very, very close proximity to mass transit is contrary to the notion of a sustainable city and is something that I'm not sure we're going to get a whole lot of mileage 169 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 out of with any developers. Sustainability is one of those issues that I believe must be of the highest priority as a core value for all of us in the community and in the City. For Philadelphia to be sustainable, we must not only improve the environmental quality of our buildings, our industry and our transportation systems, we must also continue to improve how we compete in both the world economy and in our regional economy. I'm talking about economic sustainability, which is as important to be viable. One of the most exciting aspects of the American Commerce Center project is that it will continue the development trend towards cutting-edge green building technology, which was initiated locally with Liberty Properties' Comcast Center and their projects at the Navy Yard, and it will in fact take it to the next level as we push the design envelope towards ever-more 170 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 energy efficient and environmentally friendly office projects. Planning for the ACC at this point includes many state-of-the-art green building technologies, which were alluded to by the architect. For some, the height of the building, the density of the building, the mixed use quality of the building is its most impressive feature. For others, it's most imposing and even frightening. For me, the height, the density are non-issues. What impresses me most is how well the mixed use aspect of the complex fits into the existing urban fabric and how the state-of-the-art architecture and design technology of the building will provide Philadelphia with a landmark, which will serve us both as a destination and as a premier building address. The ACC will be a great addition to the neighborhood and to the City of Philadelphia, and I urge you to 171 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 approve the current changes necessary to allow it to be built as it's planned.
Thank you, President Verna and ladies and gentlemen. I appreciate the opportunity to speak. My name is Steven Henkelman. I'm an architect in Philadelphia. Unlike Mr. Kohn, I did not have the opportunity to grow up in Philadelphia, but moved here as a young architect. That was over 30 years ago. I have maintained a practice in Center City Philadelphia during that time. I did have the opportunity over those 30 years to see some of the threshold events occur in Philadelphia's evolution, many of which were mentioned by Mr. Kohn in his brief history, two of 172 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 which are pertinent to the proposed development. One certainly was Bill 4 Rouse's vision for what Philadelphia could be when he proposed Liberty Place. The second has been mentioned previously, is the gradual shift to the west of the dense center business district area. As it's moved west, we've seen a culmination -- possibly not even that; it could go further -- of development occurring on the west side of Schuylkill with Cira Centre and what we hopefully will see spawned by that development on the west side. As an architect in Philadelphia, we look very closely at many issues when a development is proposed, two of which I'd like to bring to light, and they've been mentioned before. One is the enhancement of the image of Philadelphia that the development will provide, and the second one is the respect for context in which that development occurs. The former is 173 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 obviously the easy one to discuss. The proposed development would be almost impossible to argue would do anything but enhance Philadelphia's image, both on the national scene and international scene. And as also was mentioned, I think this is critical to Philadelphia's sustainability and its growth. The second certainly is the one that is the greatest controversy: context. First I'd like to say that we have the opportunity and we have in place a body of professionals who look at that very closely, have looked at it for this project. That's the Philadelphia Planning Commission. They have worked closely with the developers and endorsed this project. One of the aspects of context -- and there are many that were mentioned during Mr. Kohn's presentation and how to address some of the concerns of those who are in the immediate 174 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 vicinity, but one of those I'd like to highlight is how the building actually meets the ground. And this is not just a physical plunking of the building onto the streetscape, but it's actually what happens at that level. We've talked a lot about the activity that gets generated on the street level, opening up the street for activities. But in Philadelphia, we've seen over the past where open plazas are windswept and unoccupied, really do very little. In this case, I think the architects -- and here I think the developers are to be well commended -- have looked at the activities that are important, not just the physical setting, but what surrounds those spaces. And I think that what you have seen today and will see as this develops is that you will have a very active area that will extend well beyond the normal office hours. Context is an economic issue too, and I needn't address what it means 175 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 in today's economic means. This is an extraordinary opportunity for Philadelphia. I strongly recommend that the Council endorse this proposal, and I think Philadelphia deserves it and, more importantly, Philadelphians deserve it. Thank you.
That concludes our witness list and also our public hearing. We will now go into our public meeting, and at this time, the Chair -- I'm sorry. Councilman Clarke.
Thanks, Madam President. Real brief, because I know we're running way behind schedule. I just wanted to clarify that the plan of approval that will be done by the City of Philadelphia Planning Commission, there's a commitment -- and I see we still have a representative from the Planning Commission -- that there's a commitment 176 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 that at the approval of the Planning Commission, it will be subject to an approval by City Council. Just kind of shake your head. (Mr. Kramer shaking head in the affirmative.)
So the ultimate plan of approval will be coming back to the City Council for approval, and I'm assuming it will be by resolution. So we can just do it in one day's shot. Thank you.
Thank you. We are now in our public meeting, and, again, the Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, I would like to move for the amendments that have been circulated and briefed on earlier in the public hearing to Bill No. 080588. 177 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588 (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that the amendments as presented to us this morning be adopted. All in favor will indicate by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the amendments are adopted. Again, the Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam President. I move that Bill 080588 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, as amended, and request for a suspension of the rules to allow reading at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.) 178 12/3/08 - RULES - BILL 080588
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 080588 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, as amended; further, that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. All in favor will indicate by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it. The motion carries. And this concludes our public meeting. Thank you all very much. (Applause.) (Committee on Rules adjourned at 12:00 p.m.) - - - 179 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings, evidence and objections are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the foregoing matter on December 3, 2008, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. ______________________________ MICHELE L. MURPHY RPR-Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)