Wells Fargo Center Progress

[vtfan18]

I leave town for three days, and look what i miss!! Definitely excited about this project, looks like it'll be a driving force in downtown, and kudos to Norfolk for keeping it under wraps as long as they have. Obviously we all wish for more floors and height, but even if they aren't able to, a 20-25 story tower in the middle of downtown will definitely even out the area. Currently the majority of the towers are at the southern end of downtown, until Granby *fingers crossed* gets built, and the AT&T buildings, but not much else. Having this in the 'middle' of downtown will help give continuity to the area. Also, MacArthur will not be buffered by two towers, Trader at one end and Wachovia on the other, so good news all around.

I'm hoping to be able to attend the State of the City as well, our company is members but we'll see.

One question this raises, how might this affect the Synder lot office building idea? Proposals should have been in three months ago, and no news. We might hear something at SotC, but the argument was there was no office space in downtown. While this doesn't fully take care of the supply end, it does help, especially with taking three tenants already downtown. This might shelve the Synder lot for a few years as a result.

I'm not so sure it'll shelve the Snyder lot. The Wachovia Center building is going to be leased by a majority of tenants already local to the area who are in need of expansion space. Norfolk still needs an officer tower where it can attract outside companies to the area. But it would take a considerably large number of tenants to get the "signature" tower off the ground with financing. I'm excited for this development but again, I'm left wanting more out of the design. Does anyone else feel this way? When is a bold developer going to step up to the plate and give us something inspiring. Doesn't have to be earth shattering, just giving us something other than a large bulky box! Slender, sleek, lots of glass and steel. If I see another Trader or town center red brick design I'm going to be sick.

[Padman]

I'm with you. I find the design lackluster, putting it mildly. Yet the announcement touts this building as the premier office building downtown for the future. That statement has me nervous about the Snyder lot.

[vtfan18]

Another thought...this development is the perfect opportunity for Norfolk to attract some big name restaurants and retailers similar to TC. That is what will bring more people downtown along with the available parking and shift some of the focus away from Granby as far as night life. This is Norfolk's chance to spread out the nightlife scene so it doesn't become like the "block" in VB on Granby. I know some of this crosses over into another topic but I'd really like to see a Maggiano's Little Italy, Chipotle, or Noodle and Co.

[ace707]

One question this raises, how might this affect the Synder lot office building idea? Proposals should have been in three months ago, and no news. We might hear something at SotC, but the argument was there was no office space in downtown. While this doesn't fully take care of the supply end, it does help, especially with taking three tenants already downtown. This might shelve the Synder lot for a few years as a result.

Yeah this project has been worked on way before Snyder was even made public for proposals so obviously Snyder is being developed with Wachovia in mind. That said, I doubt we we'll hear much if anything about the Snyder proposal at the State of the City Address aside from mentioning it and the basic details we all already know. This IS NORFOLK you know so they will be keeping everything in tight wraps until they are ready. We should all be happy they threw us a bone in first place by announcing publicly for proposals lol. As for Wachovia, I'm sure we'll get a bump up in floors and hopefully at the very least they will go for 27 and up just so we can have a new tallest office building in the region (in terms of number of floors) because Dominion Tower has held that title for way too long.

[tomj]

Hello! I want to introduce myself to this forum. My name is Tom Johnson, and I'm a partner at S.L. Nusbaum Realty Co., and I'm primarily responsible for the day to day development work of the Wachovia Center. I decided to join this forum after reading a letter to the editor of Inside Business from Lucan Doan decrying architecture in Hampton Roads in general and of the Wachovia Center specifically.

I am actually tied up the next two days conducting interviews of general contractors for this project. My architect is in town for the interviews, and I will show him that article and pass on to him the comments I have seen on this board, both positive and negative. As you might assume, I personally love the architectural concept of the Wachovia Center, and as we progress on the design, I hope most of you will agree with the forum members who like it so far.

I'll post again soon, particularly to specifically address the desires of some to see much taller buildings, and to see more steel and glass, and why those desires are very difficult to see realized in office buildings.

I really like this forum, and I look forward to discussing this project with all of you.

[vdogg]

Hello! I want to introduce myself to this forum. My name is Tom Johnson, and I'm a partner at S.L. Nusbaum Realty Co., and I'm primarily responsible for the day to day development work of the Wachovia Center. I decided to join this forum after reading a letter to the editor of Inside Business from Lucan Doan decrying architecture in Hampton Roads in general and of the Wachovia Center specifically.

I am actually tied up the next two days conducting interviews of general contractors for this project. My architect is in town for the interviews, and I will show him that article and pass on to him the comments I have seen on this board, both positive and negative. As you might assume, I personally love the architectural concept of the Wachovia Center, and as we progress on the design, I hope most of you will agree with the forum members who like it so far.

I'll post again soon, particularly to specifically address the desires of some to see much taller buildings, and to see more steel and glass, and why those desires are very difficult to see realized in office buildings.

I really like this forum, and I look forward to discussing this project with all of you.

Welcome to the forum, and it is great to have you here. It speaks volumes of a developer and their commitment to a city when they are willing to come out and address public concerns about the style and architecture of their buildings. Whether a critic or a supporter I know I can speak for everyone when I say we appreciate you coming here and look forward to further input.

[NSUREDD]

Welcome Mr. Johnson! Glad to have you aboard and I look forward to having someone on the inside here to give insight on this wonderful project.

[vdogg]

Also, Mr. Johnson, I have your project listed here in the projects and construction thread so if there is anything that I need to add or correct just let me know.

[vtfan18]

Welcome aboard Mr Johnson. Its always nice to have new members onboard!

[Padman]

Welcome to the forum. I hope you contribute many ideas and comments. It's great to have someone from the professional development community on board, and your involvement with the Wachovia project is a real plus.

Regarding the tower and office towers in general. A cursory view of development in most major cities worldwide suggests that glassy towers are not in short supply and that their realization remains common in spite of the high costs of steel and the need to create a generous floor area for workplaces. It's possible to integrate elegant design with many material concepts.

Just speaking for myself (which is what we do here), I think that the Wachovia project has great potential as a mixed use design, and that it transitions beautifully between the residential, commercial and entertainment nodes that it will share. But I don't care for the blocky tower with that huge logo set in the roofline. Nor do I think that the base and lower sections integrate with the tower adequately. A more organic, flowing transition would help it. The hint of setbacks in the tower is a nice feature, and would be even better should you be able to add some more floors. Please bear in mind that many of us feel that norfolk could use a bit more variety in it's plateau-like skyline, and that is why a more vertical look seems desireable. I know you have to deal with basic variables like construction costs and leasable floor space, things that contribute to a broad, rectangular design. Good design works with these realities and doesn't ignore them.

[vtfan18]

Welcome to the forum. I hope you contribute many ideas and comments. It's great to have someone from the professional development community on board, and your involvement with the Wachovia project is a real plus.

Regarding the tower and office towers in general. A cursory view of development in most major cities worldwide suggests that glassy towers are not in short supply and that their realization remains common in spite of the high costs of steel and the need to create a generous floor area for workplaces. It's possible to integrate elegant design with many material concepts.

Just speaking for myself (which is what we do here), I think that the Wachovia project has great potential as a mixed use design, and that it transitions beautifully between the residential, commercial and entertainment nodes that it will share. But I don't care for the blocky tower with that huge logo set in the roofline. Nor do I think that the base and lower sections integrate with the tower adequately. A more organic, flowing transition would help it. The hint of setbacks in the tower is a nice feature, and would be even better should you be able to add some more floors. Please bear in mind that many of us feel that norfolk could use a bit more variety in it's plateau-like skyline, and that is why a more vertical look seems desireable. I know you have to deal with basic variables like construction costs and leasable floor space, things that contribute to a broad, rectangular design. Good design works with these realities and doesn't ignore them.

Well said...I strongly agree with the comment regarding setbacks. I'd actually like to see mutiple setbacks from the tower to help balance out the tower and the parking garage if the building doesn't go more vertical. Surrounding the parking garage with retail and apartments is a start but still doesn't avoid the tower over a box syndrome.

[urbanvb]

Tom, it's great to have you here. Wachovia Center is going to be a very nice infill for Norfolk. I am looking forward to hearing your thoughts about the city and its architecture in particular.

[rusthebuss]

Welcome to the forum. We really appreciate you taking time out of your busy schedule to discuss this with us. Maybe you could elobarate on what it takes or considerations when the building is designed, with the construction costs and tentants. Thanks

[lil-bear]

Hopefully more tenants will come aboard so more floors can be added!!!

[Glassoul]

Let's see if I can't pre-empt some of Mr. Johnson's answers with some speculation of my own. Would like to see your comments on how far off I am.

1: Hampton Roads lacks large white-collar companies that traditionally build in downtown cores. It is not a centre for insurance, investment, banking (outside of regional head offices), large law firms, accounting, or large media, etc. etc.

2: Hampton Roads lacks high-income residents or as in the case of Florida and other famous locales, high-income weekenders. It

[Padman]

All of Glassoul's points are true. A main counter-point is that class A space, and projects that are competing to be a"premier address" must make an extra effort to be attractive, symbolic locations.

Some recent studies indicate that telecommuting is losing favor because workers get "cabin fever" at home. I guess that more traffic congestion will balance against that factor soon enough though.

[NorfolkerAtHeart]

Kudos to Tom Johnson from S.L. Nusbaum Realty for being a smart businessman that's going to take the time to listen to public constructive criticism! Very commendable.

I know there are lots of high-rise building fans on this board who would love to see a 40 or 50 story building in downtown Norfolk. I on the other hand, no longer place much emphasis on height when I evaluate what is an exciting urban experience, and I would say that in Norfolk's office market, a 40-50 story building would be detrimental to the continuing effort to make downtown Norfolk a vibrant place. In my experience, the elements that matter most in making a vibrant urban setting - and I think in the end most of the posters here would agree with me - are:

• An exciting and dynamic architectural design
  
• Density
  
• A carefully programmed mix of uses
  

1. In Hampton Roads, everyone will pretty much agree that there is way too much red brick and concrete Colonial-ish design and I know we are all hungering for Norfolk's builders to produce buildings of architectural design that don't mimic or hearken back to Williamsburg. Another common sentiment that is echoed frequently is that the designs of a certain popular architectural firm based in Hampton Roads tend to produce buildings of ungainly proportions and design that are too often sheathed in bland beige pre-cast concrete panels or some unattractive glass curtain walls system (Suntrust Building anyone?). What the urban enthusiasts of us who love Norfolk want to see is a building that doesn't fit any of those characteristics: a building which appears as if some original thought was put into the design as opposed to being a design of components from an architectural grab bin, and which can challenge ever so slightly the existing design paradigm for Hampton Roads buildings. There are some buildings proposed for Norfolk that point in that direction - I put my hat in for the revised design for the proposed Hilton Hotel, and the Brambleton TOD Apartment Tower, just to name two.

2. Tall buildings lend excitement to a city when viewed from far away, but don't necessarily make for an exciting urban experience up close. For Norfolk, I would much prefer that new construction add to the density of the cityscape. Norfolk's mid-20th century leaders demolished so much of the city's downtown urban fabric, that we've had these parking lots sit vacant for so long. It's exciting to see most of them be developed into new construction. However, I would say that a city doesn't necessarily need tall 40-50 story buildings to be perceived as having "arrived". I mean, let's be honest, despite all of the rosy talk of the Va Beach city council, simply having two or three towers pop up in Pembroke doesn't mean that Virginia Beach has arrived as city or that the Town Center has a vibrant urban environment. Take a look at Washington, DC, where buildings are not allowed to be more than 130 feet tall. That city has a very dense urban streetscape downtown and lots of activity during the day and it doesn't need a tall building of 35 stories to say it has "arrived" or that it is a city.

However, isn't the real point of city life the excitement and energy of the activity that occurs in a densely populated environment? Office towers really don't add to that excitement after 5 o'clock. It's more often than not the mixed-use low-rise quarters of a city that offer the true excitement of urban life: Brooklyn where I currently live has skyscrapers in its downtown, but that's not what gives the borough its hip edge among New Yorkers - the creative energy of the people who inhabit the brownstone blocks and loft districts and the small business retail strips are the source of that buzz and those are all low scale areas. Which brings me to my final point.

3. Carefully programming the mix of uses in the Wachovia Center is critically important when you've got such a large parcel to work with. I think Wachovia Center will be much more valuable if the retail uses on the ground floor are maximized and designed to generate as much visual excitement as possible. This means storefronts that allow the stores inside to have a unique presence when viewed from the outside (for bad examples of this in Norfolk, look at the retail space in the ground floor of the Suntrust Building where Todd Jurich's Bistro is now located, or the retail spaces in the base of the Trader Square building - the storefronts are not designed to allow the retail stores to have an individual visual presence that stands out from the larger tower and are thus swallowed by the building). Right now, the Wachovia Center parcel is a peripheral part of downtown. Add some truly viable retail space and you continue to extend the reach of downtown further north.

Would you consider maximizing the amount of retail space in Wachovia Center to allow for larger format retail uses that could complement MacArthur Center, such as a Bed Bath and Beyond, a Gold's Gym or Crate & Barrel? Having substantial retailers like those would add a lot of traffic to this upper portion of Monticello/Granby and will help to draw traffic to the eateries and other businesses located in those blocks. If you want to see an example of what I think is excellent urban infill retail development, check out McCaffery Interests' Market Common at Clarendon development in Arlington County. I think if you followed some of methods of how McCaffery Interests configured this property (but not necessarily the architectural design) then you'll hit a home run for both your firm and for downtown Norfolk.

http://www.mccafferyinterests.com/content/...rket_common.htm

[vdogg]

Kudos to Tom Johnson from S.L. Nusbaum Realty for being a smart businessman that's going to take the time to listen to public constructive criticism! Very commendable.

Also Kudos to insidebiz for printing that email and shedding light on an issue that is important to so many of us, It shows that someone in that office thinks it's an important issue as well. I was thinking of actually writing an email to them to thank them for this (perhaps some others can join me as well). Perhaps if they receive a positive response from the community when they give issues like this prominence, we will see more in depth development related articles in the future. We all here want whats best for Norfolk. We may all disagree on the fine points but everyone has seemed to be on the same page when it comes to architecture. I'd rather see a 15-story work of art, than a 50-story box (Though I still want my 50-story tower damnit, it just has to look good) . Due to it's location and it's mix of uses I think Wachovia Center may be even more important to downtown than Granby Tower could ever be. With light rail hopefully completed and some new attractive street level retail Monticello could become as vibrant an urban core as Granby street is currently.

[NorfolkerAtHeart]

5: Over the long-term changing work habits will also affect high rise development. Telecommuting, work splitting, and/or many people who work <40 hour work leaves a lot of unproductive office space, space that is costing a company a lot.

I believe the notion that "telecommuting is going to mark the death of the physical work place" was a late 1990's flash in the pan trend that ignored a basic fact of humans - that we are social creatures. Telecommuting will be an option that workers will use intermittently, but in our post-industrial, intellectual capital economy, a whole lot of our productivity is in fact the interactions with our fellow co-workers and the business lunches with clients. It's rather tough to strike up those major deals or build those inter-company relationships when all you have to strike up the trust and a personal connection is a video conference call. This is why the physical office space and particularly the urban workplace setting is going to remain a viable place for commercial activity. It's basic economics - time is money, and you want to be physically located near your competitors (to keep an eye on them), or near your allies and business partners. If you are physically closer, you are likely to make deals faster or keep up with your industry's trends (through the informal exchange of information) and thus your productivity is up and profit is up.

For downtown Norfolk, Glassoul is correct in stating that Norfolk doesn't necessarily have the white collar Fortune 500 employment base. But, what Norfolk is able to create is an exciting urban environment where workers are so far pleased to come to for all of its activity and amenities. This is why Dominion Enterprise nee Trader, decided to invest in Norfolk. That trend above all is what will keep downtown Norfolk competitive over Greenbrier, Lynnhaven or Pembroke.

[Glassoul]

I believe the notion that "telecommuting is going to mark the death of the physical work place" was a late 1990's flash in the pan trend that ignored a basic fact of humans - that we are social creatures.

Statistics say otherwise:

# of telecommuters in US (in millions):

Year: Employed: Self Employed

1997 ------ 11.6------------- 18.3

1999 -------14.4--------------19.0

2001 -------16.8--------------19.9

2003 -------23.8------------- 23.4

I don't think any ever seriously said that telecommuting would end the need for office space. It will however, introduce a significant factor in the decision process of how large and how extravagant a company chooses to build in the future. Not everyone telecommutes full-time. In fact, most work from home a couple days a week and spend the other 3 days in the office. Part-time telecommuting is popular amongst almost all workplace groups, but is especially so for female employees with children. Over the long-term, employers will look at those empty desks and find ways to minimize the costs of that unproductive space, that means smaller buildings, or as in the case of tech companies, the suburban campus. As broadband continues to penetrate the market, as employees of the knowledge economy enjoy greater work flexibility and demand for their skills continues to increase, and as communication technology continues to improve, telecommuting is only going to continue to INCREASE. As for being social creatures and that being important to the workplace? Keep in mind that until about 150 years ago, the vast majority of people worked alone or with 1-2 others in small shops or farms.

[vdogg]

Keep in mind that until about 150 years ago, the vast majority of people worked alone or with 1-2 others in small shops or farms.

Of course, because the technology didn't exist to permit the type of interaction that we do today. This was pre-car and most of the country was rural at that time and spread out. It was a different time but it does not change the fact that we are primarily social creatures and given the ability to fulfill that need most usually will.

[Glassoul]

Of course, because the technology didn't exist to permit the type of interaction that we do today. This was pre-car and most of the country was rural at that time and spread out. It was a different time but it does not change the fact that we are primarily social creatures and given the ability to fulfill that need most usually will.

I had a long response typed out, but this is getting further off-topic. Suffice to say, I don't disagree with the premise that humans are social creatures, but when given the opportunity we seek to manage and control our social interactions, which does not preclude working from home or seeking out an environment where our physical interactions are limited. I'll stop there.

[tomj]

Well, there are so many comments here that I hardly know where to begin. First of all, from a philosophical standpoint, I agree with Norfolker at heart about building heights and urban design. The key to a great city is not the height of its office buildings, but the character of its streets and neighborhoods and retail districts. In Manhattan, for instance, the most desirable neighborhoods to live, shop and dine are low-rise and mid-rise neighborhoods such as Soho, Tribeca, the west Village, and the meat packing district. Similarly, in Norfolk, Main Street does not have nearly the vibrant feel of lower-rise Granby Street and low-rise Colley Avenue. In fact, the vibrancy of Granby Street and Monticello, with the restaurants of Granby and the retail in MacArthur, is the primary reason we choose this site to locate the Wachovia Center, and that proximity is why the best office tenants in town are signing up with us.

Continuing on philosophy, some on the forum seem disappointed that local developers seem to have no "vision" and only care about profit. I hope it does not come as a surprise, but all developers, everywhere, care about two main things: profit and risk. If you see a developer building an architectural gem, you can be sure he is doing it not because of "vision", but because he calculates he will get higher rents and higher prices by building a more expensive, more beautiful building.

Now coming to the Wachovia Center, I have specifically hired Davis Carter Scott as the architect for this project because I think their buildings in Washington and Northern Virginia are better than what we have around here. S.L. Nusbaum fully intends the Wachovia Tower to be head and shoulders above any other building in Hampton Roads, by virtue of its location, its architecture, and its incorporation into a vibrant retail and residential community. We will spend more money on things like a 2 story lobby, a finely articulated "skin" for the building, and special construction techniques that will allow the interior floors to have a column-free span of 45 feet from the building exterior, which allows tenants to much more efficiently and flexibly use their space.

But make no mistake, we are spending this extra money not because we are nice guys, but because better architecture will enable us to get the best office tenants, and they will pay us the most rent. And we are also doing it because this will be our company's home for the next 50 years.

Moving on to the desire by many to see 40 or 50 story office towers: This is my opinion, but at this point it's a pretty informed opinion: it will be a long while before we see an office building in Hampton Roads greater than 25 stories. This is because tenants want floorplate sizes of between 20 and 25,000 square feet per floor. That is the size and configuration which allows for the greatest efficiency in the layouts of their offices. So an office building of 250,000 square feet will have 10 to 12 foors of office space. Now when it comes to hotel and condominium space, floorplates are much smaller; it looks to me like the floor plates of the Westin hotel and condos are between 10 and 12,000 square feet. So 250,000 square feet of hotel or condominium space would occupy 20 to 25 floors. So for those who want more tall and slender buildings, your best bet is to buy a condo at Granby Tower! And if you can't afford that, we'd love to rent you one of our 175 luxury apartments in 2010.

Lastly, to those who want to see more retail space, and who gave the example of the Market Common at Clarendon. I was pleased to see that given as an example, because it was one of the places I liked best when I was studying examples of mixed-use projects when planning Wachovia Center. And we did in fact study the possibility of a similar plan to maximize retail frontage. But the bottom line is that the Market Common sits on 17 acres, and this site is 4.5 acres, and we just could not accomodate more retail into the plan given the other needs that the project had to meet. Hopefully, MacArthur Center's third anchor site will be a perfect place for a retail development like Market Common, and we would welcome the addition of that retail focus adjacent to us. And our rendering doesn't do justice to the retail. We are going to attract retailers and retaurants that will be incredible additions to downtown and who will have unique and individual storefronts. When more detailed renderings are available, I hope you'll agree that the Monticello frontage of the Wachovia Center will have a contemporary feel and great architecture.

[rusthebuss]

Thanks for the break down. I think that this area will see more mixed use buildings and maybe this might put some of the buildings close to the 40 story mark one day. What do you think tomj?

[tomj]

Please bear in mind that many of us feel that norfolk could use a bit more variety in it's plateau-like skyline, and that is why a more vertical look seems desireable. I know you have to deal with basic variables like construction costs and leasable floor space, things that contribute to a broad, rectangular design. Good design works with these realities and doesn't ignore them.

On this last point, I quite agree. In this market, office towers will continue to have a blocky form: 20 to 22 stories in height and roughly 120 feet wide by 200 feet long. That is what the tenants in this market need, so that is what we will get from office towers. The trick is to take that basic form and make it as elegant as possible. And that is why we have hired a great architect with the design skill to accomplish this. And why we are in the process of hiring a construction company with whom we will work to ensure the architect's design is economically viable.