Committee Hearing, November 16, 2006

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON RULES - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thursday, November 16, 2006 1:25 p.m. - - - PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN BILLS 060637, 060732, 060740, 060743, 060762 and 060797 - - - 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

Could I have your attention, please. Thank you. This is a public hearing of the Committee on Rules, and I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 060740. 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 Tacony Creek, Rising Sun Avenue, Adams Avenue, West Hill Creek Drive, Hill Creek Circle, South Hill Creek Drive, Adams Avenue and Bingham Street.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Kramer. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon, Madam President and members of the Rules Committee. My name is William Kramer. I 3 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. am the Senior Zoning Planner in the Development Planning Division of the City Planning Commission. I am here today to testify on Bill No. 060740, which was introduced by Councilmember Tasco on October 5th of this year. This bill rezones a 2.1-acre parcel of land located in an area adjacent to the Tacony Creek and Rising Sun Avenue from a zoning designation of R-9 Residential to a zoning designation of C-3 Commercial. It is a response to the continued growth of an industrial use within the City. This bill rezones a portion of land to allow for the construction of a surface parking lot containing 258 spaces for use by employees of Cardone Industries. Cardone Industries has a plant located on the opposite side of Rising Sun Avenue from this site and has insufficient parking for all its employees. This leads to many employees parking in the surrounding densely 4 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. populated residential community, which not only adds to the parking congestion for the existing residents but also represents a significant safety risk for the Cardone employees as they then must walk in the street to get to work. A surface parking lot on this parcel that is designated C-3 Commercial will require a certificate from the Zoning Board of Adjustment at a minimum. This classification was used in this matter because currently the Zoning Code contains no zoning classification that permits a parking lot as a matter of right. The proposal calls for the use of a porous parking surface to be used at this site and will be designed so as to limit the environmental impact of the lot and work in harmony with the natural environment in order to enhance the surrounding public areas. The City Planning Commission at its meeting of November 14, 2006 5 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. considered Bill No. 060740 and recommended that it be approved. The Commission believes that this proposal will improve the quality of life for the existing residential community, as well as affording an opportunity for growth for one of the City's major industrial companies. I would be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Kramer. Can you tell us for the record how many off-street parking spaces will be available as a result of this rezoning?

The plans currently call for 258 parking spaces to be created.

And do I understand that all of these spaces will be for the exclusive use for employees from the Cardone Industries?

Yes, ma'am, that is correct. 6 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC.

Thank you. Do we have any other questions from members of the Committee? (No response.)

Seeing none, I would ask Mr. McPherson to please call our next witness. MR. McPHERSON: Vincent Dougherty.

Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair.

Good afternoon.

And members of the Committee on Rules. My name is Vincent Dougherty. I'm the Assistant Director of Commerce and the Director of the Mayor's Business Action Team for the City of Philadelphia. 7 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. I'm here today to express the Commerce Department's strong support of Bill No. 060740, a bill which will change the zoning of an area generally bounded by Rising Sun Avenue, Adams Avenue, Tacony Creek and Bingham Street. This rezoning will allow Cardone Industries, the City's largest and arguably the fastest growing manufacturing firm, to acquire the property across from the company's Rising Sun facility in order to build a much-needed secure parking lot for its employees. The proposed site for this parking lot is a vacant lot owned by the Philadelphia Housing Authority. The property, while part of the Hill Creek Development, sits well below the development itself and is effectively a separate parcel from the development. The site has been unused for years and has been a maintenance and security property for PHA. Cardone Industries is in great 8 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. need of secure off-street parking. Presently most of Cardone's employees are forced to park along a mile-long stretch of busy Rising Sun Avenue or in spaces leased by Cardone at shopping centers a block away. This situation not only creates a very dangerous traffic problem along this section of highway, but also puts Cardone employees at risk as they walk up to a half a mile to their cars. The Commerce Department, in conjunction with the Mayor's Office of Transportation, Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation, the Streets Department and Councilwoman Tasco's office, have worked with Cardone over the last ten years to resolve this parking problem. Many options to alleviate this problem have been tried during that time. These include carpooling, shuttle service from other Cardone sites. We have searched for alternate sites within the vicinity that may be acquired and developed for parking. They looked into 9 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. building a multi-story parking lot, parking garage, on site, and also leasing, as I mentioned before, spaces at local shopping centers. Unfortunately, none of these options satisfactorily and permanently resolved the problem. The parking facility at this site is a major step in permanently resolving this parking problem and is extremely important to Cardone and its employees. Resolving Cardone's parking problem at that plant is a critical piece of the Commerce Department's ongoing efforts to assure Cardone Industries remains and grows here in the City. It is for this reason that the Commerce Department strongly supports this project and this legislation. This concludes my prepared testimony and I'd be more than happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Dougherty. Your testimony is that this will become a, quote, secure 10 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. parking lot, end of quote. What security is proposed to be provided?

From my understanding, it will be fenced and they will have a security gate at the front, a security guard positioned right on Rising Sun at the front of the parking lot.

Thank you. Are there any questions from members of the Committee? (No response.)

Thank you very much. Our next witness, Mr. McPherson. MR. McPHERSON: Philip Grutzmacher.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. I do have copies of my testimony, if you would care to have them. 11 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Good afternoon. My name is Philip Grutzmacher. I'm a Democratic Committeeman in the 35th Ward, an officer and member of the Zoning Committee of the Lawncrest Community Association, a member of the Friends of Pennypack Park, a member of the Friends of Tacony Creek Park and a volunteer for the Natural Lands Restoration Trust. Today I speak as an interested citizen only. I have come to testify in opposition to Bill No. 060740 that changes the zoning designation in the area boarded by Rising Sun Avenue and Tacony Creek from an R-9 designation to a C-3 designation. My objections to the bill can be summarized as concerns that the bill constitutes bad land use planning and raises serious environmental issues. First, this bill is bad land use planning. This bill constitutes spot zoning which is of questionable legality. Any comprehensive remapping of this area 12 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. would find two area shopping centers at Rising Sun and Adams Avenue, both with current vacancies. More commercially zoned land is not needed in this area. In addition, the area being rezoned is surrounded by residential and park uses, so the C-3 designation is inconsistent with the surrounding uses. Furthermore, the reclassification from R-9 to C-3 designation reduces the protections afforded the neighbors of this property in the future. Any commercial use proposed for this property can be handled as a variance to the R-9 zoning through normal Zoning Board of Adjustment procedures. This process would protect the neighbors in the future from a whole list of potential uses permitted as a matter of right in the C-3 district, including gas stations and fast-food restaurants, which are certificated uses in the C-3 district. As you know, under the certification process, the legal 13 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. burden shifts from the applicant to those who would protest the granting of the certificate. Second, the development allowed by this bill raises serious environmental concerns. This proposed change to the Zoning Map would allow development to the edge of Tacony Creek with limited setback requirements. The setbacks required by the Zoning Code are much smaller than those suggested by current best practices to limit storm water runoff. Building upon this or paving this area would exacerbate storm water runoff problems in the Tacony Watershed and increase non-point source pollution, a problem where the Water Department already struggles to meet federal standards. Additionally, building upon or paving this lot reduces the City's open space, a valuable asset in limited supply. The Managing Director's Office is currently in the process of preparing a comprehensive plan for green space in 14 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. the City in recognition of its contribution to the quality of life in the City and the increased property values directly linked to open space. The loss of open space contiguous to a park in this context is unforgivable. It demonstrates a continued attitude on the part of decision-makers who view open space only as a land bank until a better future use comes along. The construction of the High School of the Future on Fairmount Park ground and the current attempt to expand Fox Chase Cancer Center into Burholme Park are two recent examples of this shortsighted view. A superior plan for this plot is its integration into Tacony Creek Park. Finally, while the construction of a parking lot on this plot appears to address a parking problem in the area, that outcome is far from certain. As long as parking on surrounding streets is legal, it will continue. It is a short-term solution at best. Many 15 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. businesses in the City thrive without providing any parking for their employees. I urge the Committee to reject this bill. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Are there any questions from members of the Committee for this witness? (No response.)

Thank you very much, sir. Our next witness. MR. McPHERSON: George Zauflik.

And after George is? MR. McPHERSON: Fred Maurer. Mr. Maurer, if you're here, come to the witness table, please. Good afternoon, sir. Please identify yourself for the record.

Good afternoon. 16 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. My name is George Zauflik. , and Gary Adams, our Director of Government Relations, who is here with me today, and over 4,000 employees here in Philadelphia, we thank you for this opportunity. Our purpose today is to request the City rezone a vacant parcel of land across the street from one of our main facilities on Rising Sun Avenue in Northeast Philadelphia. This will allow us to expand by providing us with additional area for employees to park. This will improve our ability to hire more employees, and this property is not a part of Fairmount Park. As you will hear today, this land is near a creek, and we are proud to be able to describe for you how our project with this cutting-edge design will enhance and benefit the creek and the environment. We will be including an 17 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. 80-foot setback for our project, and in that setback we will be planting an 80-foot environmental buffer area. I would like to emphasize some overall themes on the outset. This is not a project that will save us money. This is something that we will do at great expense. This is not a project that we want to do, but this is a project that we need to do. This is not a project for management. It's a project for our employees. Cardone Industries is committed to the City of Philadelphia. We started here in 1970 with five employees. We continue to grow and now have over 4,000 employees working here in the City. Over 70 percent of our employees live here in Philadelphia, and our workforce represents over 50 nationalities, speaking over 30 languages. We are under strong pressure to export jobs out of the country. We do have two facilities in Mexico and 18 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Belgium, but Philadelphia is our home and we want to stay. More than that, we want to grow here in Philadelphia. As a result of the change in the industry, our business now has an opportunity to grow substantially, and we need your help. Our employees, especially at our Rising Sun facility, have a shortage of safe parking spaces. We have over 1,600 employees there working two shifts a day. We have tried everything to find parking for them. We have provided incentives to use mass transit, we have leased off-site remote parking in area shopping centers and have run shuttle services, but we still have a shortage of parking. You can see this in the aerial photograph contained in Tab B of your materials. Our people have to park along Rising Sun, which is not safe. They have to park in the residential streets in the area, which is not fair to the community. We have employees that arrive at 4:30 in 19 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. the morning and sleep in their cars until their start time just to get a parking space. Other employees park and then walk through the streets to get to work. Not long ago one of our employees parked his car and while walking to work was struck and killed by a motorist. For our solution, I'd like to direct you to Tab C in your materials. This is a parking area we would like to construct. It will be located on vacant land currently owned by the Philadelphia Housing Authority. PHA has classified this land as excess land and have agreed to sell it to us. On the plan, please notice the large 80-foot-wide planted environmental buffer indicated in green. We recognize that the parking area is near Tacony Creek. We do not take this lightly. Due to our commitment to environmental stewardship, plus the requirements of ISO 1401 and in 2003, Cardone received the Governor's Award for Environmental Excellence, for this 20 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. particular project, we have hired the best environmental consultants in the field. We've asked them to make sure that we don't harm the environment at all. And we are pleased, and we think you will be, too, because what we now have is a design that will enhance and benefit the creek and the environment.

Cahill Associates, one of the country's leading firms in water resource management, designed for us a state-of-the-art, environmentally friendly parking area comprised of a pervious surface that will allow rainwater to soak through the parking lot into the ground below, where there will be a specially constructed subsurface area. Mr. Dan Wible, a professional engineer from Cahill, is here today and will testify as a part of our second panel. The environmental aspects of the design have been reviewed and approved by the Integrated Watershed 21 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Management Program of the Philadelphia Water Department. A letter of approval from the Water Department is attached in your materials at Tab D. As you can see, the Water Department acknowledges that the proposed design will exceed the requirements contained in the City's new storm water regulations, which became effective earlier this year. Because we are adjacent to Fairmount Park, we have provided our plans to the Fairmount Park Commission and asked for their comment. The Commission has confirmed that the land is not Fairmount Park property and it would, therefore, not result in the loss of any parkland. The Commission acknowledged our company in using an environmentally sensitive design for this project and a letter from the Commission is included in your materials at Tab E. We have also hired Dick Orth of the traffic consulting firm of Orth Rogers & Associates here in Philadelphia. 22 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Mr. Orth analyzed both the internal circulation of our proposed parking lot and the flow of traffic signalization and parking capacity along Rising Sun Avenue. He has worked with the Streets Department on this project. Mr. Orth is here today and will be a part of our second panel. Before I close, I would like to give you a road map of other witnesses we have here today. As I mentioned, our second panel will consist of Dan Wible of Cahill Associates and also Dick Orth. Our third panel will consist of Ms. Fatima Carreira, the Vice-President of Service Employees International Union, SEIU, Local 252, as well as Mr. Jesse Dawkins, an employee and Shop Steward. And on our fourth and final panel, we will have Mr. Ray Will, a neighbor and Assistant Block Coordinator, who will present a petition from the neighborhood, and Ms. Jackie Olbrich, a Block Coordinator. Before I hand off the 23 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. microphone, I would like to again thank you for this opportunity. I look forward to continuing to play a leadership role as a part of Philadelphia's manufacturing base, and with your help, we look forward to providing additional jobs. I am pleased to introduce Mr. Paul Deegan of PIDC. Thank you for your time.

You're welcome. Are there any questions from the members of the Committee? (No response.)

Thank you very much, sir.

Thank you.

Are you Mr. Maurer?

I'm Mr. Bonnie. I was going to --

You're not next. Mr. Deegan. 24 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair. My name is Paul Deegan. I represent PIDC. And briefly, I'm here to express the support of our President, Peter Longstreth, and PIDC for this project. I don't think I can improve on Vince Dougherty's testimony. The Commerce Department has been working years and years on this project. But we are particularly pleased to support the rezoning on behalf of Cardone Industries. Cardone is a long-time PIDC client that has met or exceeded -- and usually exceeded -- all our expectations in terms of job growth, economic development and commitment to the community. The property is adjacent or down the street from the company's facility at Rising Sun and Adams and is considered excess by PHA. Cardone's purchase and reuse of the property will benefit the company, the Housing Authority and the surrounding area. For 25 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. all of these reasons, PIDC wholeheartedly supports this bill. Thank you, and I'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you very much, Mr. Deegan. Any questions or comments from members of the Committee? (No response.)

Thank you again.

Thank you.

Mr. Maurer.

I do have some written testimony for the Clerk's use. It looks to me like I have to modify a lot of it because of what's happening presently. Before I begin my written part of it, let me point out that I came here in response to the legal notice and the bill that's before us. I did not come here to talk about Cardone. And I see 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Cardone came here with all their big guns, with all their friendships to overwhelm us at this hearing. This is not a hearing about Cardone. This is a zoning hearing about zoning, is it a permissible zoning item for this thing. I think the zoning committee of the Rules Committee is supposed to hear zoning, not whine for Cardone and their pleasures. If we want to talk environment and parking and Cardone, I think it should be done in a forum that's before. Since this was not in the bill, in the heading of the bill about Cardone, we came totally unprepared to talk about Cardone. I came here to talk about zoning, and I think, in essence, that's what I want. I have to modify a little bit, because now I see my friend here from the license commission came here. I may have to modify a little bit. However, if I drift away, it's because my testimony is 27 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. designed to handle the question that you presented before me, what is the zoning for this area. My name is Fred Maurer. I recall my Councilwoman Tasco said to me once that if you see a zoning notice, then immediately appear, because once the deal is done, the community damage is permanent. So I am using her advice. This proposed ordinance, zoning plan, is to change public housing uses of green space, open space into a private commercial use that will harm the surrounding residential communities and a public park. This is a gross example of spot zoning, and I'm sure it looks like a pay-to-play motive with all these people that are attesting on their behalf. It is presented as a bland trivial fact in the record, but I think it represents the worst failings of good government intentions for land zoning philosophy. The short bill text reveals 28 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. nothing about the need or purpose for any zoning change and what will it do after the present zoning is changed from Code R-9 to C-3 and the subtitle use. Now, what you've heard here is an aside to these Cardone things. I didn't come here to talk about Cardone. I ask the Committee, what is the legal reason to merit any changes by this bill? I ask, where is the supporting testimony in the Planning Commission? I think what this man presented today may be acceptable, but it should have come before testimony as a document and part of the bill, not to come later on, sneak it in as evidence after the fact. So I don't respect that man for the way he produced that. The Planning Commission is supposed to plan and manage all zoning laws, and their photographers made this exhibit that's in the bill. They are responsible to apply the laws, and the 29 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Rules Committee needs their testimony. What they presented today may be their testimony. I'll read it later whenever I get the transcript made available to me. No one has claimed that this is an ancillary use for Hill Creek's own public housing residents. I question the validity of this zoning. I note there is no real true evidence, findings of fact, to merit this change. What you've heard here was a proposal from the advocates, not from the independent finders. I think Exhibit A, which is part of the bill, exhibits a false picture of the lot that is being zoned before you. It is shown as a horseshoe to connect C-2 zone plots with an inconsistent zone of C-3. In my testimony, I want to use copies of the City Planning Commission maps, and in the back of my testimony for the Clerk, I did provide the maps that are here that are in the order of C, D 30 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. and E.

Instead of a horseshoe that's on the map, the plot is square, with two special wings of only partial zones on its wings. One side is Adams Avenue two blocks long. The other fourth side is Tacony Creek. The whole plot is a single integrated Hill Creek housing project. The two land zonings of R-9 and C-2 that are on the plot were a compromise in an after-the-fact assessment by the Planning Commission, because the project was built with federal funds and well before The Philadelphia Code existed. Now this R-9 zone is dense with cellblock houses. The special C-2 zone wings on there only relate to the support buildings and they are not true commercial zonings on the map. The east wing that's on the map once had a steam generator and incinerator buildings. It is now the rubbish point. So the east wing is not true commercial zoning. 31 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. The west wing C-2 zone was service buildings that was modified for LaSalle University, their medical nursing center for the Hill Creek Project and local residents. It is funded as a charity service now called Rising Sun Medical Service under the Philadelphia Medical Health Corporation, a federally funded non-profit agency. So these west wing buildings are not true commercial zoning. Exhibit A omits a major space. When you look at that map, you'll see there's a hole, the major space that fronts Adams Avenue in a horseshoe crest. I would ask you, how can you determine what are the adjacent zones if you omit the major use that's on the plot? In my testimony I submit three exhibits, C, D and E to show my exhibits. Exhibit C and D demonstrate the whole existing plot. They're the maps that I got from the City. I note that the major land use 32 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. is residential. The official record for 500 Adams Avenue plot at the ZBA says 55 buildings, housing units 335, including a medical center converted from six residential units. I observe that there are no true commercial zones inside this zone plot, and the outside infills are zoned R-9. The real commercial zones are across Adams Avenue in Forman Mills and Rising Sun Plaza where they are truly zoned C-2. I ask, has our City Planning Commission requested more commercial zones are needed in this area? Was there a demographic study of commercial needs? I don't know. It has not been presented in any forum, and I'd like to see those materials, put it in now. I have not been privy to anything that the other departments are doing, but I do know what you put in the bill and I can only talk about that. This bill assigns zoning C-3 to an isolated land island inside of an R-9 33 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. plot with only one slot entrance onto Rising Sun Avenue. When I read the Zoning Code Book for Code C-3, which is a commercial district, its features are, A, self-service laundry; B, self-serve dry cleaning; C, things that are in zone C-2; and, D, a car wash; and, E, a heliport. Now, this reference to a C-3 which refers back to Code C-2, those features are for, one -- Feature is an enclosed building with a roof. Feature is for sales of good at retail. Feature is a rendering of services to the ultimate customer. The text in this bill does not include commercial features such as this Zoning Code mandates. The bill merely gives a code number for non-land use space, not for a commercial retail service in an unclosed building with a roof. If there is no retail or wholesale, commercial ultimate customer, then it is not commercial district C-3 and this bill needs to be denied. 34 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. I present in my Exhibit C a section of the City Planning Commission Zoning Map. The whole plot, excluding C-2, is all R-9 inside the loop that's inside Hill Creek. Outside the loop, Code is on the outside of the Hill Creek loop. It's a large area that needs to be understood.

This Zoning Map has only one fault, because that it connects into Fairmount Park Commission lands and that -- there is a portion of Fairmount Park land that's there that was not coded REC. I don't know why that Zoning Map was not included in Fairmount Park lands. That's part of this boundary. On Exhibit A, it does not show the code REC that I've just talked about. It only shows R-9. But on Exhibit B, that slot that I'm talking about is shown as a vacant slot with no zoning. But I tell you, it is not vacant land, because that slot is Fairmount Park land. Exhibit A and B show the east side is Bingham Street as a borderline. 35 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. That is misleading, because the borderline is the rear property line of private houses facing Bingham Street and a church, and that's zoned R-9. Exhibits A and B do not show the adjacent lands or codes for your study when you examine the bill that was given to you. For clarification, I submit Exhibit D, a section of the City Planning 1973 Land Use Map. This older map gives more accurate boundary lines and shows the structures around the loop, the road loop that's inside Hill Creek. It is very complex, with buildings on both sides of the road loop. It even has cul-de-sac buildings. The boundary lines of Fairmount Park REC is shown as the inlet to the square base. The reason for the large R-9 area outside the loop is clear, that it is adjacent to Tacony Creek Park in the middle and between valley hills. The reason why it was not 36 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. filled up with housing is that the space is unbuildable lands. It is a bottom of a hill slope as riparian lands. The rest of the plot, including Adams Avenue, is the plateau and a portion of the valley slope. The hilly topography of our City decided where to build these houses, and non-buildable riparian lands are supposed to be preserved in watershed parks since the City Planning of 1907. When we looked at the City Planning Commission 1973 Land Use Map, we see the R use is R. That's back to Hill Creek. The R is for recreation use and also a playground. So we have R-9 zoning district located with a recreation use and open space, playground. The plot is not V, vacant lands. This R zone land is the location that the bill proposes to take and convert into a commercial C-3 use. If you study this map, you'll see the Hill Creek landowner is the 37 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. United States Housing Administration. It is federal property. The R use was a federal mandate of open space dedicated and held as recreation open space for its Hill Creek residents. It is a private park. It does not need interior survey lines because it has a natural grade over ten percent to define a building boundary, with a great sledding winter use. The outline of the rectangles that are on the map and closest to the creek is a tennis backboard and a basketball court as recreation fixtures, not buildings. There is one designated residents parking place marked P in an R-9 zone for the residents' needs. If this bill is passed, the tenants R-9 parking needs are displaced. I believe this bill proposes to take the United States Housing Administration's federal lands and convert a portion into a commercial 38 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. district C-3 for a private party user. I question if City Council can pass a zoning bill that mandates the United States to concede or encumber lands by local rezoning. It seems to me that when the City sold this land to the United States Housing Administration with a fee simple deed, that you first have to declare eminent domain and make partitions. I present also my Exhibit D, a 1991 Philadelphia Water Department plan map. It presents the sanitary and storm water infrastructure that is affected in this land change. I think the Water Department has utility rights that this bill hampers.

What is not shown on this map is a very recent ordinance that the City passed to enlarge and replace and improve the Rising Sun Avenue storm water system because of complaints from Cardone Industries. The Exhibit D shows the old 39 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Water Department right-of-way before it was enlarged. It cost the City about a quarter million dollars to replace a small sewer system with more capacity and a new outflow chamber and a new surface right-of-way that was developed with a maintenance gravel path and landscaped with mature trees and half fenced and gated along Rising Sun Avenue. If this bill is adopted, the PWD treasury was wasted, and this violates an existing ordinance and Philadelphia Water Department zone right-of-way improvements. I think this bill takes right-of-way land in conflict with Philadelphia Water Department's superior rights. Now, the material that they presented about the Water Department's letter, I'd like to see that letter, because no one has told me and that's not in the bill, that the Water Department has been consulted, but I'll hold that as 40 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. an aside. We will certainly look at that and see just what the Water Department has committed. Now, I think this bill has major defects. These were not cured --

Mr. Maurer.

I'm at the end.

Okay. As you can see, we have a number of cases scheduled today, and we have --

I have two paragraphs left.

May I finish, please? And we do have a number of witnesses that want to be heard. We want to hear as many witnesses as possible, not only on this bill but all of the other bills, and I have somewhat of a major concern, in that the weather forecast is that we have a tornado watch. So I would like us all to do whatever we have to do at this hearing, and hopefully 41 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. we'll all get home safely. So if you will simply conclude --

I'll allow my written testimony to stand.

-- I would appreciate it. And the stenographer has a copy of your testimony.

Yes. She's going to have to amend it --

Which will be transcribed in full.

I appreciate that. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very much. And that would go for all witnesses, please. Try to make it as brief as possible. You can get your point over very clearly and be brief. Thank you.

Thank you, Council President. My name is Paul Bonnie and 42 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. I'm counsel to Cardone Industries. My purpose here is to try and save the Committee's time just to give you a brief overview of the witnesses that we have, what they would say in one sentence if they were here -- if they had time to testify, and also just to address a couple of comments that were already made by critics of the bill. The first is that this is not spot zoning. There's commercial patches of property all around here. This is something that was carefully considered by the Planning Commission. It was reviewed by the Water Department, by the Fairmount Park Commission. All have provided letters that are in your package, and none of those folks have any problem with this project whatsoever. The other point I'd like to mention is that one of the other speakers said, Well, gee, if we zone this C-3, then Cardone in five, ten years or whenever can put in any C-3 use, a gas 43 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. station or a convenience store or something like that. That is not our intent. That is not our desire. We won't do that. We have worked with the Friends of Tacony Creek and will continue to work with them to put together whatever sort of assurances they need that the only use of this lot would be for a parking lot and that we would have no problem waiving away our rights to any other use that would be allowed by C-3. I wanted to sort of go down the row of our witnesses so that you can see who is here and what they would testify about if they had the time. We would have testify Mr. Daniel Wible. Dan, just raise your hand. Dan is a professional engineer and he is all about the environmental aspects of this project, could talk about the buffer zone, could talk about the under drain system. We also have Mr. Dick Orth, who 44 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. is here, back there, who could talk about all the traffic engineering analysis and review, and indeed the meetings he's had with people from the Streets Department in order to make sure that this is synthesized with Rising Sun Avenue and that there's no problem on that regard. Both of those folks have technical reports that are in your materials and they have testimonies, which I believe we had handed up a few minutes ago. We have two people from our local union. That's SEIU Local 252. Fatima Carreira right here and also Jesse Dawkins. And those folks would tell you how much of a need there is for this parking lot. And indeed this is a project that's very expensive to the company and is not for management.

Sir, may I interrupt for a minute? I just want to ask you, how many employees will be using this parking lot? How many employees do 45 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. you have right now that will be using this parking lot; do you know?

I can get you that answer. If someone can come up and give me that answer, I will be able to provide that to you.

At this facility. I know you have 4,000 employees, but I just wanted to know how many were going to be using --

Well, we have multiple shifts at our plant across the street. There's 258 spots in this lot, but I would think more people would be using it because they'd be using it at different times of day.

What is the current use now?

The current use is a vacant lot.

Vacant lot?

Yeah. It's owned by the Housing Authority and it's 46 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. considered excess, and they've agreed to sell it to us for this purpose.

What would you say, I guess, how it's being maintained? Is it being maintained or used in any recreational way?

No, it's not.

Who is responsible for maintaining it?

The Housing Authority is responsible.

That's enough. Thank you.

Sure. And the last two people that we would have testify is Mr. Ray Will and also Ms. Jackie Olbrich, and they're a Block Coordinator and Assistant Block Coordinator from the immediate surrounding residential area, and they would testify about how Cardone employees at present somewhat have to park in the residential streets and that this would be able to, in effect, give the 47 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. neighborhood back the spots in front of their homes, to a certain degree. So all these folks are available for testimony, if you would like, Council President. I understand the demands on time. If you have any questions about any of it.

We're fine. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. We appreciate you coming in. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)

Seeing no one, I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 22 060637. MR. McPHERSON: An ordinance 24 amending Chapter 14-1400 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Parking and 48 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Loading Facilities," by exempting mechanical access parking garages from certain requirements, all under certain terms and conditions.

Thank you. Mr. Kramer.

Good afternoon, Madam President and members of the Rules Committee. My name is William Kramer. I am the Senior Zoning Planner in the Development Planning Division of the City Planning Commission. I am here today to testify on Bill No. 060673, which was introduced by Councilmember Kelly on September 14th of this year. Bill No. 060637 amends Section 19 1402(9)(a)(.1) and 14-1403(6)(a)(.1) which refer to Driveway and Aisles in both the Residential and Commercial sections of the Zoning Code. The bill 23 removes the requirement that percent 24 of the lot or garage be provided for 25 access drives and aisles in connection 49 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. with a mechanical access parking garage as defined in Section 406.3.2 of the Philadelphia Building Code. These proposed changes to the Code are consistent with parking policies of the Planning Commission. The City Planning Commission at its meeting of October 17, 2006 considered Bill No. 060637 and recommends that it be approved. I would be happy to answer any questions of the Committee. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions from members of the Committee of Mr. Kramer? (No response.)

Seeing none, the Chair recognizes Councilman Kelly.

Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to go on record of why I introduced this legislation. I think, number one, it's 50 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. to bring the parking systems into the 21st century rather than the systems that we use today are from the 19th century. I think that this is not a new system by any means. It's been used extensively throughout Europe and Asia for over to 8 20 years, and I think it's about time 9 that Philadelphia -- it's going to be the 10 first-class city, as what everyone 11 believes, that we're going to be on top 12 of this problem. 13 I think there's many, many good 14 points about this mechanical parking. 15 It's environmentally friendly. I think it increases safety throughout, and I think that what we're going to find is that the parking systems that will have this, it will give the developers a matter of right to put the systems into their plans, and I think this is really a win-win-win situation for Philadelphia. Thank you, Madam Chair.

You're welcome. 51 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Mr. Kramer, as a practical matter, is there some minimum amount of space that should be required to be reserved for access to mechanical parking garages?

Not within the parking lot itself. The aisles and driveways are superfluous when you have a machine that's basically taking the cars and putting them into cubicles. There's no need for driveways and aisles. The cars are off, which is the benefit of these. They save on pollution in that regard. You don't have running cars. That's why you don't need the driveways or aisles.

Thank you. Any questions of Mr. Kramer from members of the Committee? (No response.)

Thank you. Our next witness? 52 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC.

Good afternoon. My name is James Rappaport. I'm an architect and I'm licensed to practice in Pennsylvania and 32 other states in the United States, and I practice as an urban planner and urban designer, and I'm here in support of this bill. In my practice, working with the Philadelphia zoning ordinance, there is some frustration because the Building Code, the Philadelphia Building Code, allows mechanical parking and the zoning ordinance requires these aisles and access that isn't required for mechanical parking. In terms of raw numbers, you can install a mechanical parking garage in about a third of the cubic volume of space, mostly below-grade parking, as required by the zoning ordinance, when compared to a park-and-lock garage with ramps, and you can do so without the need for mechanical ventilation or elevators or fire stairs, because as it says in the 53 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Building Code, a mechanical parking garage is one where patrons are not allowed in the place where the parked cars are located. And for that reason, the engines are not on and so the ventilation is not required. I did a quick calculation a couple of weeks ago. A 300-car parking garage in mechanical parking would save 80,000 gallons of gasoline a year. So in terms of architect speak, it's a very green design idea. And in terms of construction costs, perhaps a third of the cost of the current ramped park-and-lock kind of parking garage. Additionally, in the post 9/11 era, the mechanical parking garages have algorithms built into them to make them safer. There is a technology for making sure that if you leave your dog or your baby in the back seat, it doesn't take the car. And as you know, every year, unfortunately, here in Philadelphia we read some terrible God forbid story about 54 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. a baby being left in a parking car. So that technology is there. The technology of sniffing for other God forbids is also part of this algorithm, and since no people are in the parking garage, nobody is tinkering with the cars or doing other God forbids. So three God forbids in one sentence I'm sorry for, but safe, secure, energy efficient, cost effective, it is, as the Councilman said, a win-win situation.

Thank you. Any questions from members of the Committee of this witness? (No response.)

Seeing none, please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

My name is Lee Lazarus and I represent an automated parking manufacturer that has numerous installations around the world. These 55 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. worked sufficiently well for many, many years. In addition, I'm also Vice-President of the Automated and Mechanical Parking Trade Association, and we also lend our support behind this bill.

Thank you. Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.

Yes. Good afternoon. My name is Max Wieseff for Parkmatic, and we also represent a number of manufacturers, with systems in South Korea and throughout Asia. And some of the things I'd like to discuss about this proven technology, these systems have been around since the early 1950s and it has been widely used in Europe and Asia where land is at a premium. And there are over 5,000 of these systems operational worldwide. And basically some of the things that we talked about was the security. Since no one enters 56 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. the garage other than vehicles, it virtually eliminates vandalism or theft, and there is also no personal danger of having to walk down dark aisles while looking for your car.

Thank you very much. Any questions from members of the Committee? The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.

Thank you, Madam President. Just one quick question. With respect to the mechanicals on the units, what's the sound? What happened maybe a couple years ago in part of my district, an operator was proposing to do a mechanical parking garage and it was in proximity to a residential community, actually adjacent to the residential community, and when they tried the systems out, you could actually hear the motors in the 57 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. residential unit next door.

Right. The older systems that were constructed in the '60s and '70s, yes, used roller bearings, but now the new technologies, they use like a polyurethane material. So there's virtually --

This was a couple years ago. It wasn't a long time ago. This is a couple of years ago.

Councilman Kelly, can you --

Yes. Councilman Clarke, I just want to inform you that I saw this operation in Washington, DC about a month ago, and it's similar to hitting a button for an elevator. You don't hear anything. There was no noise whatsoever in this building. The people just come in and they swipe a card and the doors go up. They get in their car and drive away. It's similar to just a regular elevator. There's no noise whatsoever that I -- 58 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC.

In that particular system.

In that system.

Well, I guess my question would be, are there going to be certain standards that are required for any of these mechanical systems? Because the one that I looked at, I mean, I stood in the resident's house and I could hear the motor, errr, errr, errr.

If I may, I think what you were talking about is mechanical parking systems. These are a little beyond that. These are automated parking systems. So these are fully enclosed inside buildings. They're more analogous to more mature handling, warehouses.

I understand. This was a fully enclosed parking system. You drive the car in, it lifts it up, places it in a parking space. I'm telling you, the noise you 59 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. can hear next door, and I'm just asking you, are they --

Those are operated hydraulically, though mechanical lifts that you see in New York and such, and those operate by this motor with a pump assembly. These systems are not hydraulically operated. These are similar to elevator motors that are in the buildings. That's how these -- so they're quiet. They're quiet systems. They're not noisy like a hydraulic system would be where you're running a pump and feeding oil into these hydraulic systems.

All right. I hear you. You're not answering my question.

We haven't had any issue with decibel levels outside of our structures, inside the structures also. We've been regulated most jurisdictions as it is. I'm sure the building department of Philadelphia would also be curious, so on a 60 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. project-by-project basis, I'm sure they'll raise the same issue, and if they felt the noise issue has been resolved, I'm sure they would approve a project at that time.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Any questions or comments from members of the Committee of these witnesses? (No response.)

Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)

Seeing no one, I would suggest that Mr. McPherson please read the title of Bill No. 060743. MR. McPHERSON: Bill 060743, an 61 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Master Street, Second Street, Thompson Street and American Street.

Mr. Kramer.

Good afternoon, Madam President and members of the Rules Committee. My name is William Kramer. I am the Senior Zoning Planner in the Development Planning Division of the City Planning Commission. I am here today to testify on Bill No. 060743, which was introduced by Councilmember Clarke October 5th of this year. This bill rezones a two-acre parcel of land located at an area bounded by Master Street, Second Street, Thompson Street and American Street from a zoning designation of G-2 General Industrial to a zoning designation of partly G-2 General Industrial and partly C-3 62 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Commercial. This bill rezones a portion of land to allow for the construction of a residential development consisting of 151 one and two-bedroom apartment condominium units with parking for 155 spaces. The U-shaped building will be a four-story structure along Second and Thompson Streets, with a seven-story wing parallel to Master Street. For the frontage on American Street, two one-story industrial buildings will offer commercial artist/craftsperson studio space with dedicated parking. This site was formerly the ABSCO Steel site, which was a scrap metal recycling facility. The use resulted in major contamination of this site, which the current owners are in the process of mitigating under Pennsylvania Act 2 provisions. The proposed cleanup of the site will greatly enhance the surrounding neighborhood and the existing storm water conditions. Additionally, the proposed 63 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. building will be a green LEED-certified structure. The City Planning Commission at its meeting of November 14, 2006 considered Bill No. 060743 and recommended that it be approved to allow for an appropriate residential reuse of former industrial land in this block. I would be happy to answer any questions of the Committee.

Thank you, Mr. Kramer. Who are the current owners of the property and can you tell us if they're also going to be the developers, and, if not, who is?

The current owners is a Canus Corporation -- no. I stand corrected. It's still ABSCO Steel at this point, but this development proposal came in from Canus Corporation. So that deal must be in the works. They are the proposed owners.

Could you tell us what the overall cost of the 64 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. project is?

I do not have that information.

So I'm sure you don't know the source of funding either, do you?

I know that the only portion of the funding I'm aware of is, they have requested money from the PENNVEST Corporation in order to help with the remediation costs, somewhere in the vicinity of $7 million in cleanup costs. I was just by the site this particular week and I know that the site is currently covered with tarps over most of it, but there are still fairly large piles of scrap steel left on the site. And it's basically surrounded by, I'm going to say, eight-foot-high steel fencing around the entire site.

Do you have any indication as to what the dwelling units will cost upon completion?

I do not know, but 65 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. I know the architect for the project is in the room.

Okay. Any questions of Mr. Kramer from members of the Committee? (No response.)

Thank you, Mr. Kramer. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon. Ronald Patterson with the law firm of Klehr Harrison, 260 South Broad Street, Philadelphia, PA 19102, on behalf of Canus Corporation, which is the equitable owner of the property, meaning that they have it under agreement of sale. I have some boards I would like to show you just to get you acclimated. The first board is a picture of the existing condition. It was a steel 66 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. salvage yard. It is contaminated with PCBs, and as Mr. Kramer said, it will be undergoing an environmental cleanup beyond what is required by the PADEP and EPA for residential standards. The property is located along the American Street corridor. It's currently zoned G-2. The southern portion, though, fronts on residential. The northern portion, of course, fronts on American, which is industrial. And this zoning request would split the property into two, allowing for the southern portion to be residential and the northern portion to be industrial. What we're showing here is the site plan showing the layout of the building and also showing that there is a significant buffer between the buildings and the American Street corridor. Our next exhibit shows what we had initially proposed, and after meeting probably nine or ten times with Kensington South NAC, we were able to 67 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. massage the building into a form which is the next exhibit of what we're really proposing to do, which keeps with the streetscape on Second Street a four-story building with condominium flats and also with a seven-story building set more towards Martin Street -- Master. I'm sorry. Proposed now is 160 units and 160 parking spaces on site.

Thank you.

We've also offered up to the Committee my letter dated November 16th. If you'd like another copy, I'd be happy to approach the bench. This letter we promise -- and I would ask the Committee to make part of the record -- is our representation to address the community group's concerns, one being that the project will be built as condominium and will remain owner occupied. And so we're offering for the record that we will create residential 68 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. units as a condominium unit as opposed to an apartment complex, and that we will put a restriction in our condominium association documents to limit any rental by an owner to nothing less than one year. In addition, because this bill 9 was really meant specifically for this project and to avoid any possibility that if we happen to walk away, it would remain C-3 and another development would go in here, we're asking that Council take action to invalidate the ordinance 15 by whatever means, putting it back to G-2 should this project or a version materially different not be developed, which would protect development of that project on the property.

Thank you, Mr. Patterson.

Thank you.

Are there any questions from members of the Committee? 69 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. (No response.)

Seeing none, thank you.

Thank you.

Do you have anyone else to testify on this bill?

If I may.

Madam President, Councilman Clarke, members of the Rules Committee, thank you. I'm Sharon Barr with Canus Corporation, the equitable owners of the property. I don't have a lot to add from what's already been stated by Mr. Kramer and Mr. Patterson. We're very excited about this opportunity to reclaim a contaminated site, clean it up and create a vibrant new residential complex, together with industrial units at such time as that is possible. I wanted to respond to your question about the funding, just the cost and the funding. We currently estimate 70 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. that the overall project will be approximately $50 million. We have not finalized the construction financing yet, but as Mr. Patterson pointed out, we have applied for -- I'm sorry; it was Mr. Kramer -- to the Pennsylvania Infrastructure Investment Authority for funding for the remediation, the cleanup of the site, basically removal of PCBs. And we've received the support of PIDC for that application, and we're very pleased with that support.

Thank you very much.

That's on the PENNVEST loan. We haven't finalized the financing for the construction yet.

The Chair recognizes Councilman O'Neill.

Yes. Approximately how much would the units be marketed for?

They are almost all between $230,000 and $370,000. We're 71 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. really trying to target the middle range market in Philadelphia, not the luxury market, trying to make it as consistent as we can with the community. And by the way, we have, as Ron mentioned, we've been meeting since November of last year with the Kensington South Community and have received their enthusiastic support. We're very proud of that. And, in fact, we've refined the design to both meet the needs of the residents as well as a result of meetings with the Commerce Department and the American Street business owners.

Mr. Patterson mentioned an agreement not to go forward with the zoning change if this project doesn't happen.

Right.

There was a project in Councilman DiCicco's district before us about two weeks ago that's been continued to later in November, but there was a deed 72 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. restriction in that case that pretty much did the same thing. Is there a deed restriction involved in this?

No, there isn't, but we're happy to entertain any agreement.

That's up to the community and you. It just was the first time I had heard it and I thought it was really --

That's frankly where I got the idea, was from Councilman DiCicco.

He's full of ideas.

He's a proponent of that.

Okay. Thank you. That's all.

So it just protects the neighborhood in case the project doesn't go forward.

Right. Thank you. 73 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC.

Thank you. Any other questions or comments from members of the Committee? (No response.)

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Please approach the witness table, identify yourself and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon, Chairwoman, members of the Rules Committee. My name is Tom Forkin. I'm the President of the American Street Erie Avenue Business Association. I'm here today, along with several business owners and concerned citizens, to testify against the proposed rezoning ordinance 23 for the parcel of land bounded by Master Street, Second Street, Thompson Street and American Street. 74 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Now, I would like to preface my remarks by saying that just a few minutes ago I was talking to Mr. Patterson. We're attempting to work out some details. So I want to be fair and say that we do share the common goal of eliminating the ABSCO Steel scrap yard site. It's a blight on the community. It's a blight with the area businesses. We applaud redoing this site in some form or fashion. We do have serious concerns about some of the details of this project, but I want to be clear and say that it sounds like the developers and their attorney are willing to try to work some things out with us, which I was just made aware of. So I want to temper my remarks by saying that. We want to be fair. We want to meet them halfway, but we still have some philosophical concerns about the project, and I'd just like to quickly enumerate them, because I know you've been through a long day. 75 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Number one, the rezoning does run contrary to a number of previous studies and recommendations, including the 2002 American Street Industrial Urban Renewal Plan and the American Street Industrial Urban Renewal Area Plan, both of which Kensington South participated in. Number two, the rezoning eliminates valuable job-producing industrial land, for the most part. I mean, there's a dearth of industrial land in the City of Philadelphia right now and we're losing more of it. Number three, unlike the variance process, we really have not had an opportunity to vet this project. I commend the developers for meeting with Kensington South. However, we're not Kensington South. We're the business association. I'll take my share of the blame if there hasn't been adequate communication, but there hasn't been adequate communication. So the 76 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. agreements that Ron Patterson talked about were not hammered out with this business association. They were hammered out with the community group. And I'm not sure the Councilman was fully aware of that until today. So I will take my share of responsibility for that to be fair, but we are not Kensington South. There's a very active business association in that corridor that dates back to the mid 1960s. There are business owners here today with me that represent several hundred neighborhood jobs, and they're concerned about this development. I think their concerns are legitimate. They may have gotten a little emotional at times. Maybe we didn't phrase things the way we should have, but there are legitimate concerns about changing a gateway parcel into the American Street industrial area to a C-3 commercially zoned site. Ron Ramstead, who runs EG Emil's, which is a turkey processing 77 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. plant directly across the street, really fears that he may have to relocate once this project is up. You heard Sharon say that these condo units are going to go for $300,000 or more. If someone buys a condo for $300,000, are they going to want to be across the street from Ron's plant? I think the answer is no. 10 So, I mean, these are fair concerns that the business association has that we have not really had an opportunity to vet, and we would like that opportunity to vet, and I applaud Mr. Patterson for indicating he'd be willing to do that half an hour or 17 minutes ago. 18 Just to continue very quickly, 19 we believe the rezoning could create a 20 myriad of traffic, safety, parking issues with adjacent and heavy industrial businesses. Once rezoned, although I just saw Mr.

Patterson's letter, if this developer doesn't proceed, you have a C-3 commercially zoned site. Who is to say 78 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. what may go in C-3? C-3 is a very broad category, including penal institutions, dance halls and amusement arcades. There needs to be a recapture provision. And, again, I did not see that until approximately ten minutes ago, so I'm trying to be fair here, but that to us is critical. That's a critical element. Number seven, a precedent will be established whether we like it or not. We know there's a 26-foot buffer, but a precedent will be established on a parcel of ground between Girard and Lehigh, which has been for the last 30-plus years industrial solely. Who is to say, again, we may not creep northward on American Street and say, Oh, there's a parcel at Susquehanna, there's a parcel at Diamond that would be a perfect residential or commercial development? Where do we draw the line? So I just ask you not to rush to judgment. I'd ask this Committee not to rush to judgment. 79 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Would we be similarly comfortable with rezoning PIDC industrial parkland in the Northeast, Councilman O'Neill, or in Eastwick? Would we be similarly comfortable if we were rezoning a two-acre parcel of PIDC and Red Lion South or Byberry East or Byberry West? Because essentially that's the way the business owners feel about this corridor. It's an urban, urban industrial park. It may be a little chaotic. It may be a little dirty, but they see it just as much as PIDC sees their industrial parkland, as there for businesses. So I ask you please not to rush to judgment. We're always willing to meet. I would make myself available to Mr. Patterson at any time to meet with him to try to flesh these concerns out. I thank you for your time.

Thank you very much. Mr. Patterson.

If I may rebut 80 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. briefly. We have taken into account the fact that the property lies between two zoning classifications. Again, the southern portion is along R-9; the northern portion is along G-2. So in our plan, we have looked into the fact that we do have a 25-foot buffer along with another 30 feet between that buffer and the nearest building. That's kind of one of the issues that we need to talk to Mr. Forkin about. But we did take that into account. We left the corridor for residential -- I'm sorry; for industrial. And, John, if you could show the little plan at the bottom. If the street ever gets widened, we have proposed to put a series of buildings that would be used for light industrial use along American Street to keep that use along that corridor.

Thank you, Mr. Patterson. Mr. Forkin, I see you want to 81 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. be recognized.

We're going to try to talk. Twenty-five in a two-acre parcel -- and we've talked to Ron about this -- is not sufficient. These seven or eight vanilla boxes are very speculative. They may become storage.

Well, that's your opinion.

They may become commercial. I mean, they may or may not ever happen. So, I mean, I didn't want to get into this today, but I guess since Ron wants to rebut what I have to say, we're going to get into it. We don't think that's sufficient.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.

Thank you, Madam President. Thank you all for coming today. 82 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Over the last couple of weeks it has become clear to me that there hasn't been adequate communication between the business association and the developer, and I don't know who is at blame or if anyone is at blame, but the reality is that there are some legitimate issues on the table from both sides, and what I'm going to ask today for the Council President to do is to vote the bill out, but I will hold the bill on the Calendar without a rules suspension to allow, at a minimum, a month to resolve those issues. I do have some concerns about a recapture provision, with the understanding that this development may not in fact happen. Unfortunately, that happens more often than not. I'm concerned about the broad level of this particular classification. So I'm not going to move this bill. I'm going to leave it on the Calendar until something adequately can be worked out. I'm going to ask the 83 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Planning Commission and the Commerce Department to be a part of that discussion from the City and someone from my office.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Forkin. Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record. MS. DiDOMENICO: I'm Lois DiDomenico. I'm the Zoning Chair for Kensington South Neighborhood Advisory Council, and I came today on behalf of the organization to voice support for the rezoning of this parcel identified as 060743. As it's been alluded to, this would permit largely residential, with the exception of the strip on American Street. We take our positions from the residents within a two-block area, and we have been working over the past year between design review committee meetings, general community meetings, and the 84 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. residents themselves voted positively on this rezoning bill. And I have had actually some discussions with Mr. Forkin, and it's unfortunate that there seems to have been an animosity developing, but our feeling is, we have nothing against businesses. The residents were very, very well aware that this strip on American Street would be left to accommodate businesses on American Street and that it would be kind of viewed as a transitional block. It's sort of a gateway to the solely industrial parcels which are on American and it would still accommodate the desires of the residents on Second Street, who have lived for many, many years with a hideous scrap yard with all of the dust and mess and environmental concerns. And not to be argumentative, but at that point, I didn't see any business people coming to help out with the residents' concerns, which have been numerous. 85 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. So this was -- you can be sure that this is a bill that was community-based support and we've worked very closely with the developers, and they have come from two large rather unattractive buildings to what you saw today as a result of the residents spending all volunteer time, myself included. So I hope you will view it favorably, and I thank you for the opportunity to support it.

Thank you very much. Any questions or comments from members of the Committee of this witness? (No response.)

Seeing none, do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)

I would now ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 060762. 86 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. MR. McPHERSON: An ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of the following area of the City: area generally bounded by Tomlinson Road extended, a Railroad Right-of-Way, Bennett Road extended to a Railroad Right-of-Way and Roosevelt Boulevard.

Mr. Kramer.

Good afternoon, Madam President and members of the Rules Committee. My name is William Kramer. I am the Senior Zoning Planner in the Development Planning Division of the City Planning Commission. I am here today to testify on Bill 060762, which was introduced by Councilmember O'Neill October 19th of this year. This bill rezones 9.7 acres of land located in the Somerton section of the City on the northerly side of the intersection of Tomlinson Street and Hoff Street from a zoning designation of G-2 87 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. General Industrial to a zoning designation of R-1A Residential. This bill rezones a parcel of land to allow for the construction of 42 detached single-family dwellings on large lots. The lots will exceed the requirements of the R-1A Residential district and are part of a new subdivision that will require the placing of a new City street on the City Plan. The City Planning Commission at its meeting of September 19, 2006 considered and approved a preliminary plat for this site. Accordingly, Bill 16 No. 060762 is consistent with previous policy of the Planning Commission and we recommend that it be approved. I would be happy to answer any questions of the Committee. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Kramer. What is the anticipated market price for these homes?

I heard numbers in the area of $400,000. 88 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC.

Do we have any indication as to when the development would be completed?

I have no idea when they will actually complete that, no, ma'am.

The Chair recognizes Councilman O'Neill.

Yes. Madam Chair, for the record, I'd like to mention that the developer met extensively with the Somerton Civic Association, the area residents and worked out a proposal, along with my office, in terms of density, type of housing. And this is a blighted industrial site that no one seems interested in. Maybe not quite what the last project was, but one where the area neighbors have spoken, and I think it will work out well for everybody, and I'd like to thank the Planning Commission for helping.

Thank 89 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. you. Any other questions or comments from members of the Committee? (No response.)

Thank you, Mr. Kramer. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)

Do we have anyone else to testify on Bill 13 060762? (No response.)

Seeing none, I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 060797. 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 Thompson Street, Alresford Street, Salmon Street and Juniata Street.

90 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Mr. Kramer.

Good afternoon, Madam President, members of the Rules Committee. My name is William Kramer. I am the Senior Zoning Planner in the Development Planning Division of the City Planning Commission. I am here today to testify on Bill No. 060797, which was introduced by Councilmember Krajewski October 20th of this year. This bill rezones a 5,300-square-foot parcel of land located in an area bounded by Thompson Street, Alresford Street, Salmon Street and Juniata Street from a zoning designation of L-4 Limited Industrial to a zoning designation of R-10A Residential. This bill rezones a portion of land to allow for the development of three additional single-family residential units fronting on Juniata Street. These will be in addition to the 20 units of single-family residential development under construction in this 91 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. block. The rezoning is consistent with Bill No. 050463, which was previously approved on July 8th of 2005. The City Planning Commission at its meeting of November 14, 2006 considered Bill No. 060797 and recommended that it be approved in order to allow for continued single-family residential development in this block. I would be happy to answer any questions of the Committee.

Mr. Kramer, the surrounding property is zoned L-4; is it not?

Yes, ma'am. It's actually -- the bill has a slight error in it, in that the initial bill had not been updated on some of our maps. The actual zoning classification is R-10A in the northerly portion of this block. The southerly -- or I should say the westerly portion of the block, the portion that is -- let me make sure I have the street right. 92 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. The portion of this block at Thompson Street is currently R-10A Residential, and this would just continue that 10A Residential for a parking lot, actually. It has been sold to the developer, who is BK Enterprises, and it has been sold to them, and so they've requested that this additional 5,300 square feet be rezoned R-10A so that they can add three more units into their development.

So it's the same developer?

Yes, ma'am.

Okay. Any questions or comments from members of the Committee? (No response.)

Thank you, Mr. Kramer. I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 060732. MR. McPHERSON: An ordinance 25 amending Title 14 of The Philadelphia 93 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Code, entitled "Zoning and Planning," by adding a new Chapter establishing inclusionary affordable housing, by requiring that certain developments consisting of a certain number of dwelling units, provide a certain percentage of those units for affordable housing or provide other options for affordable housing, all under certain terms and conditions.

Thank you. MR. McPHERSON: And the first panel consists of the Administration and PHA.

We're going to recess and go into a public meeting and then we will come back to the public hearing again regarding this bill. That being said, this will conclude our public hearing and go into our public meeting, and the Chair at this time recognizes Councilman Clarke regarding Bill No. 060637. 94 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill 060637 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. (Duly seconded.)

It has --

Madam President, I move that Bill 060673 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and a request for rules suspension as to allow reading at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 18 060673 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation; further, that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Council session. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)

Those 95 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke regarding Bill No. 060740.

Madam President, I move that Bill 060740 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and rules suspension as to allow reading at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 17 060740 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation; further, that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? 96 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke for a motion on Bill No. 060743.

Madam Chair, I move that Bill No. 060743 be reported out of Committee, without rules suspension. (Duly seconded.)

It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 14 060743 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke regarding Bill 060762.

Madam 97 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. President, I move that Bill 060762 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and a request for a rules suspension as to allow reading at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 10 060762 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation; further, that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. All in flavor will indicate by saying aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. Again, the Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke regarding Bill No. 25 060797. 98 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC.

Madam President, I move that Bill 060797 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and a request for rules suspension as to allow reading at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 11 060797 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation; further, that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. We will now return to our public hearing regarding Bill No. 060732. The Chair recognizes Councilman 99 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Clarke.

Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, I'd just like to make a brief statement before we have our hearing today on this seemingly very controversial bill. This particular bill was introduced with the intention of bringing to light an issue that I think all people view as a problem. The level of affordable housing in the City is quite severe in terms of unavailability of affordable housing. When we crafted this bill, we were looking at a narrowly tailored bill 18 that is not a cure-all to all the social ills as it relates to affordable housing. That was not the intent of the bill. The bill initially attempted to look at a category of individuals who did not qualify for affordable housing because they made too much money but not nearly enough -- and they didn't make enough 100 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. money to afford the high-end housing that was being produced at a record pace in the City of Philadelphia. So the intent was to address that individual who could possibly be a family of four, individuals who could possibly be a police officer and a school teacher, want to live in the City, want to purchase a new home, but there was not adequate product being built. As we moved ahead during this process, it became increasingly clear that on both sides of the issue that people have some concerns that this bill 16 didn't go low enough as it related to the median income and this bill may not necessarily have been high enough as it related to the development community. So I have the distinct position and the pleasure, I guess, in this particular case of having everybody angry at me for a bill that I thought was trying to do the right thing. And I'm okay with that, because I am battle tested and I believe 101 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. in getting involved in an issue that I think is the right thing to do. If it requires a level of discord, that I'm okay with that, because I think it is the right thing to do, to craft something that gives people an opportunity to have affordable housing, not only in North Philadelphia, not only in West Philadelphia, not only in Kensington, but to be able to have some level of affordability on the waterfront and other areas throughout the City of Philadelphia. As a member of this particular Rules Committee, I have sat here on a consistent basis time after time and I've seen developments come through this particular Committee and there's no 20 discussion about affordability and we pass the bill because that's not a requirement, and I thought crafting this bill would get us to the level of discussion that we could hopefully have people buy into this whole issue about 102 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. having inclusionary housing throughout the City of Philadelphia, not in just these specific geographical areas. Now, understanding the nature of concern and the discussion that I've had with members on both sides of the issue, I'm still looking for somebody who agrees with me 100 percent, and I haven't found that person yet, and that's okay. I'm going to keep looking. I understand that this is a very complicated issue. It is a very serious issue. It is an issue that is going to require a substantial amount of discussion from all parties. The only thing that I ask that people do in the discussion both in here and in the subsequent discussion -- because it's not going to be resolved today, it's just that complicated -- that we be civil, that we listen to people's ideas, we listen to people's concerns, and hopefully at the end of the day, we can craft something that we can all feel good 103 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. about. It is not going to be something that everybody is going to be 100 percent happy with, because that just doesn't happen in this world.

So at the end of the day, I hope we can have a reasonable discussion and, in the subsequent discussions, we can have people who are willing to work, who are serious about this issue, so we can come up with something that works, and then at the end of the day, we'll be in a position to get at a minimum nine members of Council and I will hope members of Council to 16 support this very important initiative 17 from my perspective. So I just want to say that today.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. Mr. Hanna.

Good afternoon, 104 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Council President Verna, other members of City Council. My name is Kevin Hanna. I serve as the Secretary of Housing for the City of Philadelphia. I'm here today to testify on behalf of the Administration on Bill No. 060732. This bill 8 establishes inclusionary zoning by requiring developments of a certain number of living units to provide a percentage for affordable housing. With me today are Carl Greene, Executive Director of the Philadelphia Housing Authority. Eva Gladstein is also here, the Director of NTI. The Administration supports the concept of inclusionary zoning as a means of creating and sustaining mixed-income communities by providing additional affordable housing opportunities in the City of Philadelphia. However, there are some serious concerns with this particular bill, 060732, as it has been presented. In particular, the Law Department has raised legal concerns 105 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. about the authority of City Council to direct the executive branch of government on how it is to enter into contracts or use its property. In addition to concerns about the legality of the bill, as written, the Office of Housing and Community Development has the following concerns: Number one, the income range to be assisted. It is recommended that the income range to be assisted be modified and the range lowered. Households with higher incomes will be served through the private market without public intervention. Two, number of living units in the development to which this bill 18 applies. It is recommended that the number of living units in a development to which this bill applies be increased from 20. Developments with as few as 20 units will find it prohibitively expensive to include an affordable component to their project without significant outside; that is, City, 106 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. subsidy. Number three, payment in lieu of participation. It is recommended a provision be created for a payment into an affordable housing fund in lieu of participation. The existing Pilot Mortgage Program may be appropriate, as it provides a mechanism for downpayment assistance to middle-income home buyers. A sliding scale of payments may be created based upon the number of affordable units created and/or the income group served. Number four, incentives for participation. It is recommended that the incentives for participation by developers be added to this bill. The appropriate incentives need to be crafted thoughtfully, after consultation and negotiation with the stakeholders, including housing developers, both for profit and non-profit, and labor. Incentives may include creating a density bonus, relaxing certain parking 107 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. requirements or modifying construction practices. And number five, the removal of the ordinance from the Zoning Code. It is recommended the ordinance be removed from the Zoning Code. OHCD should be; that is, the Office to Housing and Community Development, should be given responsibility for the implementation of the ordinance through plan reviews. In order to achieve the best possible inclusionary zone bill for the City, it is important to take the time to consult and discuss the issues with the effective parties and groups. The bill 17 needs to provide the right mix of flexibility for "in lieu of" payments and incentives for participation. This dialogue cannot be rushed, ought not be rushed. Therefore, the Administration respectfully requests and agrees with the Councilman's recommendation that the bill 24 be held in Committee to allow time to pursue these discussions. 108 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I and my colleagues would be more than happy to answer any questions you might have of us.

Thank you, Mr. Hanna. Are there any questions of Mr. Hanna? The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, Mr. Hanna.

Good afternoon.

I had a couple of quick questions with respect to your testimony. This bill may not necessarily end up in the Zoning Code, but when we looked at other models, some of the other models were actually inclusionary zoning housing. That can change, and I understand the concerns about that. One of the issues I had is the 109 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. OHCD being the monitoring entity, and this was some discussion from your staff. If it is not affordable housing or housing that is funded through HUD or the state or any other affordable housing program, is it legal for your staff to work on projects that are not funded through an affordable housing component?

Yes, it would be. The statute that directs the programs and initiatives on which we can work speaks to really two things, those projects for which federal dollars are in fact earmarked or people who are paid with federal dollars working on those particular issues. And given the fact that federal dollars will be paid to me and members of my staff to work on it and given the fact that the targeted market we're talking about gets squarely into HUD CDBG guidelines, I don't see that as being a problem.

So if they fit the guidelines in spite of the fact 110 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. that there's no direct federal subsidy, you will still be qualified to work on that?

That's correct.

Okay. You indicated earlier that the City would recommend some changes with respect to the median family income and possibly some lower on both sides of the scale. Did you take into account that the necessary subsidy that will potentially be required by the developer or the City or whomever?

Yeah. That is in fact one of the reasons we'd like to go back and have some discussions, particularly with the developers. We don't at this point have a specific point or range that we feel strongly recommending. I'd like to go back and take a look at how other cities are doing it to the extent that we can gather empirical evidence to back up whatever recommendation we might make. I'd like 111 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. also the opportunity to go back and do that. But at this point, all we can say, generally speaking, is that we'd like to see the range lowered from 80 to 150, which I think is the way it's written right now, to some range that starts lower and caps out lower.

One other issue in your testimony. We have circulated among the members of this Committee an amendment that will create a third option, that in lieu of building of the affordable housing on site or off site, the developer will have an option of committing to a fund that can be used for affordable housing. So we'll be doing that amendment today.

Okay.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

Councilwoman.

I just 112 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. want to revisit the topic of income, median income. It's your suggestion to lower, to modify the 50 percent. Can you say what that is in dollar amount?

Thirty percent of AMI for a household of four would be an annual income of $21,650. Fifty percent of AMI -- again, all of these numbers are for a household of four -- would be $36,050. Eighty percent of AMI would be $57,700. And without boring you with many more details, 150 percent of median income would be $108,165.

Thank you.

Are there any other questions or comments from members of the Committee?

I do. I have one.

Councilwoman Miller.

Well, I can wait if -- are you going to stay, 113 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Kevin?

Yes.

Because I'm not sure. Probably either you or either Carl Greene could answer this question, but are either one of you familiar with this Boston model? Someone gave us this, but there's no name on it. So I have no idea who submitted this.

Councilwoman, that's actually information from the folks in Boston. When we looked at this inclusionary housing initiative, we tried to find a city that was regionally in proximity to the City of Philadelphia, and the Boston model had the three options, so we somewhat adapted their particular version in this bill. There has been an update from the Boston model where they've actually changed their AMI and I think they are actually using the city's median income as opposed to the AMI, but their housing market is somewhat different. They've 114 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. actually changed the numbers recently. They've actually changed the numbers upwards. So we're not looking to do that. We're looking at possibly taking into account the lower income individuals and possibly do that. But this is the Boston folks. They were actually trying to get down here to testify, but I think at the last minute, they heard about the weather and opted not to come down. But hopefully they will be a part of the discussion. I understand that contingent from the City of Philadelphia is going to go to New York possibly and talk to some of the people in New York that are administering an inclusionary housing program.

The hope is that we'll take a trip to New York and to Boston, among others, in order to get a feel for what other cities are doing. But to answer your question, Councilwoman, I have not seen that piece of paper. 115 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC.

Thank you.

You're welcome. Any other questions or comments? (No response.)

Seeing none, Mr. Hanna, thank you. Mr. Greene, please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Hi. I'm Carl Greene, Executive Director of Philadelphia Housing Authority. Good afternoon. I'm here today to give my support to this bill under consideration to provide for inclusionary housing in the City of Philadelphia. We certainly have seen a tremendous growth in the property values here in the City, both in the Center City and the neighborhoods. I think that's great news for the City, but one of the 116 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. things that we've experienced in the Martin Luther King homes development where we had a lot of teachers and we had a lot of police officers, nurses, laborers, construction workers, people whose income didn't quite qualify traditionally for our program, in that particular program we went a little higher. We went to like 115 percent of median. So we were able to sell to some of those individuals. So I think that a more balanced housing delivery system is certainly needed, and I think this bill is certainly a good bill with respect to addressing the needs of the workforce housing, because I think that the working-class folks here in the City are sort of left out of the movement toward the development of new housing that's occurring both at the low end and what we're building and most of the other CDCs and tax credit suppliers are building, and at the same time, the high end, of 117 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. course, is taking care of itself. I think that certainly set-aside provisions where developers will contribute a certain amount to a housing fund would also help, provided those funds were made available to developers of affordable housing. Certainly the Philadelphia Housing would like to be able to certainly participate. I think that middle-class, middle-income families are certainly at risk of leaving the City, because there's not a targeted program to address their needs. If you visit the Martin Luther King home site at 13th and Fitzwater in Councilman DiCicco's district in South Philadelphia, you'll see that we sold a lot of those houses to teachers. Teachers, firemen, police officers, nurses, janitors, laborers and other folks who are living paycheck to paycheck. So while these individuals may not qualify for our traditional programs, there's an overwhelming need to keep 118 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. quality workers in the City to support the businesses that are in the City. We are certainly in complete agreement with the housing advocates who argue that we need more funding for low-income housing. We have -- (Applause.)

We have tens of thousands of people on our waiting list, and the federal government has been slashing funds to public housing over the past several years. Nationally our program has been reduced from 7.1 billion to 5.6 billion over the last five years. In spite of rising costs of utilities, healthcare and other related costs, including wage rates, we have had a significant decrease, and that means there's not enough housing to serve all of the low-income housing individuals that really need housing. Yet, at the same time, I believe that this particular bill serves a critical part of the market that's not 119 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. being served. Certainly no one is really looking out for teachers and maintaining teachers in the City, maintaining police officers and firemen and other municipal workers and other professionals in the City. I know that there's a lot of complex issues that Kevin covered, and certainly we don't want to scare off developers and discourage developers from wanting to do business here in the City. I'm really here to give my testimony because of the experiences that we have at the Housing Authority. We've sold over 300 houses this year and we've seen that there's a need to address those people who are the working-class professionals who really need support. And a couple developments we've done and the one at Schuylkill Falls, we're building 28 affordable, which are targeted toward people between 30 to 60 percent of median income. What John Westrum is building, 128 market-rate 120 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. units. Of those 128 market-rate units, he set aside six of those units to be targeted toward people below 150 percent of median income. I think that the 28 and the six units that he set aside, while they don't quite represent as much affordable housing as we'd like to see, it's just important that we have a balanced housing delivery system. It's important that while we have residency requirements and while we have a growing City, that the workers who are necessary for our economy to thrive need a place in the local community to live. So I think that all the support we can get to increase the dollars for affordable housing for the very, very low income, for accessible housing for the disabled, and for elderly housing for the elderly is very needed. And that is contrary with my position about this bill, but I do think that the workers in our City, the municipal workers, the 121 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. nurses, the laborers, the construction workers and people we want to keep in the City so they can spend their money in the City, do not have an advocate and have not had an advocate to this point and have not had an ample supply of new housing to this point. So I'm certainly in favor of both positions. We need more housing for the very, very poor and the disabled and the elderly. (Applause.)

But I also support the middle-class families and the working families in our communities. I know that teachers in the City start off at $33,000 or $34,000 a year and we'd like to keep them living near the schools and keep them living in the neighborhoods, and firemen and police officers and the like. And I think there are a lot of complexities, as certainly was covered by Kevin Hanna. I think that I'm not familiar with all those complexities, but 122 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. I do want to say that the buyers who come up to our site and want to buy houses, a lot of them are workers who want to really reside and stay in the City. Therefore, I support the objectives of this bill. Thank you. (Applause.)

The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.

Thank you, Mr. Greene. Mr. Greene, I just want to thank you for all the wonderful housing that you're doing in my Councilmanic District, and I know you're doing some in other Councilmanic Districts, particularly my friend and colleague over there, Councilwoman Blackwell. And I agree with you, that I get calls all the time from people who all of the sudden have rediscovered North Philadelphia and want to come back to North Philadelphia because things are changing dramatically, but, unfortunately, in a number of the 123 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. developments, that they're just over income. Not a lot over income; just marginally over income. So I'm trying to provide a way and all of us are trying to figure out a way to make sure that people have an opportunity to be throughout the City of Philadelphia and not just geographically tied to a particular area that's doing affordable housing. So I want to thank you for the wonderful work you've been doing.

Thank you, Councilman.

Thank you very much. Gentlemen, thank you. Hi, Deborah.

Thank you.

Council President?

Yes. Councilwoman.

I 124 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. likewise would like to say thank you as well. We're trying to catch up with Darrell Clarke, and this is always what we go through and his plan and ability to get PHA housing and affordable housing in his district. But certainly we agree, and we agree with Mr. Greene and feel that our City is large enough to accommodate all points of view. We have to have it all in order to survive. That's what it's about. It's very, very important today to hear the various points of view and it is very, very important -- those of us people, like me, who want to take care of the person on the grate who doesn't know where he is, as well as people who are working in our City and people who want to move up -- (Applause.)

-- obviously have a right to be considered. So we thank them both.

Thank you. 125 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Any other comments or questions from members of the Committee? (No response.)

Seeing none, I would ask Mr. McPherson to please call the first panel. MR. McPHERSON: The next panel would be representatives of the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice. (Applause.)

We want to hear from everyone. May I suggest you be as brief as possible, as I said. Again, I'm being told about the tornado watch, and I think I'd like to see us all get home safely. Please identify yourself for the record. I don't want to time you, but I'm asking you respectfully to please be as brief as possible.

My name is James Thompson with Philadelphia ACORN.

Pull 126 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. the microphone closer to you, please.

My name is James Thompson with Philadelphia ACORN, one of the organizations in the Philadelphia Coalition for Housing Justice. Thank you, Councilman Clarke, for starting the discussion on inclusionary housing. Thanks to all Councilmen and Councilwomen for being here today taking the time to be part of this discussion. Before my colleagues address the actual bill, I want to take a few minutes to talk a little bit about Philadelphia Coalition of Housing Justice. Last spring, a coalition of housing advocates, labor unions, congregations and social justice organizations came together to discuss the current crisis of affordable housing. As housing prices soar, many people, including those who provide core services to Philadelphia, such as police officers, 127 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. firefighters, teachers and healthcare providers, discover that they simply cannot afford to purchase a home here. Over 300 cities across the country have addressed similar crises by passing laws requiring developers of large-scale market-rate developments to set aside some portion of developments for affordable housing. We believe the time is right for Philadelphia to enact similar policies. Although we are composed of a diverse group of organizations, we have come together as the Philadelphia Campaign of Housing Justice around several key beliefs. The most important shared belief of Philadelphia Campaign of Housing Justice has been that any inclusionary housing legislation needs to provide housing for people who earn far less than $55,000 a year. Programs in other cities have required buildings at different income tiers. For instance, units targeted to 80 percent AMI, 128 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. $55,000; 50 percent AMI, $34,000; and under 30 percent AMI, $21,000. We believe in all beneficiaries of any inclusionary housing policy below and for moderate-income families, with the majority going to low income below 50,000 of area median income with set-asides for 30,000 of area median income and disabled persons. Finally, we're excited to be here today. The Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice believes that offering quality housing for low and moderate-income families is possible and is affordable and enriches and strengthens our communities. Our current housing boom is a result of specific policy choices, and we can continue to enact policy that enables all Philadelphians to benefit from the housing boom.

Thank you for your testimony.

Good afternoon. 129 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. My name is Jennine Miller and I'm with Project HOME and also with the Philadelphia Housing Justice Coalition. We're excited today to come before you to say that we want to see housing not only for the higher income Philadelphians, but we also want to work together with Council to make sure that the housing needs of lower income Philadelphians and the developers' needs are both met. We want to work together in a compromise to make sure that all Philadelphians have their housing needs met. For more than years, Project 17 HOME has been active in the issues of 18 affordable housing in Philadelphia. 19 We've witnessed tremendous progress in 20 our City. Community development efforts have helped to revitalize our communities. Our local economy is strong. But we must also face the stark reality that our housing crisis remains severe. 130 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Every day staff at Project HOME talk to hard-working Philadelphians who are desperately struggling to obtain housing. Last year in the Daily News columnist Dan Garinger recounted the plight of an immigrant woman who tragically lost two children and her husband in a house fire. She and her surviving child went to every agency around town, every realtor and tried to find housing within her price range, but struggled to do so. Despite working two jobs and trying to find housing, she was unable to find a decent place for herself and her child. That family isn't alone. The stats are pretty clear and shameful for our City. Philadelphia needs more than 60,000 units of affordable housing more than we have already. More than 10,000 children spend time in our shelters each year. 15 per hour, but our housing wage, the amount that a family would need to 131 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. earn a two-bedroom rental, is at $18 an hour. 15 an hour. The public, as Carl Greene mentioned, public and subsidized housing units have declined significantly over the past decade. And the combined Section 8 and public housing waiting list, as he alluded to, is quite long, over 20,000 families. A third of Philadelphians earn less than $20,000 per year, but the median income of our area is 70,000. Philadelphia's median income is less than half of that. Many of the numbers that we use actually take into account the entire region, but the majority of residents of every Council District earn less than the $55,000 cutoff for this inclusionary housing bill. National trends such as the growing wage and housing cost gap are in part to blame. Local measures can do a great deal to really remedy the 132 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. situation. The City's Neighborhood Transformation Initiative has made progress in removing blight from many of our neighborhoods, abandoned buildings, cars, years of trash and other eyesores. New homeownership initiatives are dotting the landscape, but we need to do more. The good news is that we can do more in the form of effective inclusionary housing legislation. There are currently more than 300 localities around the country that have enacted inclusionary zoning legislation. Cities, as we mentioned already, Boston, Brooklyn, New York is doing some really creative things with inclusionary zoning right now, and Sacramento. An effective inclusionary housing ordinance would also complement another City program, the special needs homeless set-aside within the Consolidated Plan that would ensure when people are ready for fully independent 133 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. living that it's available to them. Under the leadership of the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice, with the support of Project HOME and 28 other organizations, many of whom are in the room today, the concept of inclusionary housing has garnered a lot of public support from City Council and also the Administration.

We're delighted that City Council has agreed to take on this task of looking to see how we can get inclusionary housing for our City. Specifically, I want to say several of the strengths of the bill. One, we think it's great that it will impact most new residential development in Philadelphia. Two, it offers the developers flexibility of building either on site or off site. And, three, that we think it's vital that the units are comparable in size and quality to the other units. In just a second, Jeff Hornstein from SEIU is going to examine 134 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. the parts of the bill that we hope to strengthen. As a City, we can be proud of the accomplishments we've made, but we look forward to working together with you in partnership on this critical issue. Thank you. )

Thank you for your testimony. Please proceed. State your name for the record. Please proceed.

Good afternoon. My name is Jeff Hornstein. I'm the Organizing Coordinator for Philadelphia for SEIU Local 32BJ. Local 32BJ represents over 85,000 building service workers in six states, in Washington, DC, including about 5,000 members here in Philadelphia. On behalf of the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice and on behalf of Local 32BJ's leadership, our District Chairman Wayne Macmaniman, our 135 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. President Mike Fishman, I wanted to thank City Council, particularly Councilman Clarke, for your efforts to address a real serious problem of affordable housing in the City. We're grateful that the political will to address this problem seems to be coming together. We want to work with you to make this a bill 10 we can all be proud of. Our typical member in Local 32BJ makes about $28,000 a year, which is about 39 percent of area median income. It's about 88 percent of the City median income. So you can see the real disparity between those two income figures. Our typical member owns her own home, which she probably bought more than five years ago, probably more than ten years ago before the current real estate boom. Our typical member lives in Frankford, Juniata, Grays Ferry, West Philadelphia, North Philadelphia or Mayfair. Our typical member can pay her 136 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. bills and can get by on her salary of $12 to $14 an hour. She's got medical coverage and some retirement security. However, a slight life change like a death in the family, as you will hear a little bit later from one of our members, can send a stable working family into a real financial tailspin, and finding decent affordable housing in the neighborhoods where our members live is becoming increasingly difficult, if not impossible. As high-end development occurs in lower North Philly, Fishtown, Northern Liberties, University City and parts of Grays Ferry, now called Center City South by some realtors, costs on the edges of these neighborhoods are rapidly rising. I was talking to a member just yesterday, a man in his early 30's who has worked his tail off in a union janitorial job for ten years. He's got two kids, lives in Mayfair in a house he and his wife have owned for five years. 137 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. They're going through a divorce right now and he's trying to figure out how to stay in the neighborhood near his kids. Housing costs have risen so dramatically in Mayfair that his house has more than doubled in value in five years. They can sell the house, pay off the mortgage and each walk away with some cash, but neither of them will be able to afford something to buy in the neighborhood. I hear this story frequently. Our members work hard. They play by the rules and want their piece of the American dream. They want and deserve quality affordable housing in decent neighborhoods. So let me just talk very quickly about a few of the things the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice would like to see changed in this bill. And I know we've had this discussion with Councilman Clarke, so I won't bore everyone completely with the details and 138 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. other things will be in the record. First, on the target income levels, according to the target income in the current ordinance, approximately 70 percent of the City's population will not qualify, as you can see visually represented behind us. So we would like to propose that the majority of housing created through this bill will benefit households that are at or below 50 percent AMI, with a set-aside for households at or below 30 percent AMI. Other cities have used a range; for example, Minneapolis where housing is built for people under 80 percent, under 50 percent and under 30 percent.

Right now -- and this is important, and this speaks to the Administration's position on making sure this is done right rather than done quick -- that we are currently researching the financial feasibility of creating the maximum number of inclusionary units in the Philadelphia 139 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. market and will have a recommendation concerning the percentage of units on site, off site. And we're pleased to hear Councilman Clarke say today that he's proposing the in lieu funds, so we'll have the research to back up these claims from market-rate developers. Second, the in lieu fee, again, we're grateful that Councilman Clarke is putting that in the bill. So I'll skip over that. Incentives, we need to create a win-win. We've heard some of those options. We know that Philadelphia has a Zoning Code that is also considered to be -- my friends in New York are kind of shocked when they hear that over 90 percent of what's built in Philadelphia needs a variance. It's exactly the opposite in New York City. So some way of streamlining that might be an incentive that would be useful. Duration of affordability I haven't heard anyone speak to today, so 140 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. I'll mention that specifically. Affordable units generated by this ordinance should be made affordable for a longer period of time than the ten years that's currently in the bill. Other cities, Boston, have a 99-year affordability. Boulder, Colorado has permanent. Somerville, Massachusetts, in perpetuity. So we've got the information on all these other bills, and I think we can do better than ten years. The project trigger, I was a little disturbed to hear the Administration arguing for a higher project trigger. We think the project trigger should actually be lower, because much of what's built in Philadelphia is in the 10 to 20-unit range. From our point of view speaking here sort of on behalf of organized labor, we want to make sure the area standard wages are maintained. And there's no provision in this ordinance 25 for ensuring that new jobs created by 141 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. development do not undermine existing wage and benefit standards for either construction or building service employees. And, finally, on a research point, we are, as we said, conducting a financial feasibility study and we will share that with everyone when it's finished. So just to summarize, we have a number of concerns with this bill. It needs to create housing that benefits a broad range of working families in the City, which is a City of working families, the members of SEIU, the members of AFSCME, the laborers, United Food and Commercial Workers, the Fraternal Order of Police, the Firefighters Union, the many other unions in Philadelphia that make up the backbone of our City's stable working families. On their behalf, we need you to make sure that this inclusionary housing bill is done right rather than done 142 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. quick. A bill that benefits only those making $57,000 to $100,000 is exclusionary rather than inclusionary. We want this bill to create more opportunity for development and not less. Our union has a long history of working with commercial real estate owners and developers and contractors to create win-win situations for our City's economy and for working families. Make sure the developers have the incentives they need to keep building. Let's not throw the baby out with the proverbial bath water. And, finally, and most important from our point of view, is that every job that's created by new development be a good family-sustaining job that ensures that area standard wages and benefits are maintained. We believe that when the City confers tax exemptions, it has an interest in ensuring that those benefits do not undermine the City's existing tax base. 143 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC.

In particular, we believe that the City has an interest in ensuring that the new jobs created by development do not undermine existing wage standards. If building service workers like security officers, desk attendants, housekeepers, porters, gardeners, et cetera, can't earn decent wages, our City suffers. So I thank you again for your time on behalf of the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice, the leadership and membership of our union. I urge you all to create an inclusionary affordable housing law that works for all Philadelphians, and I thank you very much for your patience. )

I would just like to thank you all, and I look forward to working with you on this very, very important initiative.

Absolutely. Thank you for your leadership.

You're 144 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. welcome. MR. McPHERSON: The next panel is the Building Industry Association. Representatives from the Building Industry Association, they're next.

Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Councilman Clarke, other distinguished members of the Rules Committee. My name is Bill Reddish. I am President of the Building Industry Association of Philadelphia. The BIA represents the residential building industry in the City of Philadelphia. I come before you today to speak on behalf of and in support of the development of workforce and affordable housing and, specifically, about the proposed inclusionary affordable housing ordinance being discussed today. The BIA believes strongly that there is a large 145 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. need for this type of housing in the City and welcomes the opportunity to participate in a dialogue about how best to serve this market. Over the past several years, Philadelphia has benefited from the creation of thousands of new market-rate housing units after decades of virtually no private housing production. How has Philadelphia benefited? Through increased jobs, increased wages and substantial increases in the real estate property transfer tax. All of these benefits have resulted in a direct positive impact to Philadelphia's bottom line. Any policies put in place that would prohibit the continued growth of this type of housing production would have a direct impact on Philadelphia's budget coffers. Currently, Philadelphia, as well as the rest of the nation, is experiencing a flattening of the housing market. The cost of production continues 146 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. to rise, but sales prices are leveling off and even dropping in some areas. Rather than seeing a new project announced on a regular basis, we are now hearing of projects being delayed, deferred or pulled offline for good. In other words, even with the current incentives that we have, the market conditions still are suffering. This is a tenuous time for change in housing policy and it must be informed by good data. Rather than rush to implement the proposed ordinance, the best course of action is to take the time to get a clear, factual picture of the housing market, determine what portions of the housing market are not being met, and then determine how the public and private markets can work together to best meet those needs. The BIA welcomes the opportunity to participate in these important policy discussions. The BIA understands how critical workforce housing is to the City 147 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. and that middle-class housing opportunities are essential to growing the City's economy. We believe Philadelphia needs and deserves to have the best policy possible to promote workforce housing development. Therefore, we applaud Councilman Clarke's efforts to put this issue at the forefront of policy discussions currently taking place in Philadelphia. We look forward to working with him, the Administration and other housing advocates on a broader policy discussion that takes a comprehensive look at the spectrum of issues involved in putting forth productive housing policy. The best approach to increasing workforce housing in the City will be to examine policies which reduce the cost of producing housing rather than increasing those costs. This bill in its current form would increase the cost of housing production. There may be markets in the City that could support such an increase. 148 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. However, the critical advancement made under Mayor Street's Neighborhood Transformation Initiative; namely, private capital investment in neighborhoods long neglected by the capital markets, would come to a virtual standstill with the adoption of this bill. Therefore, without additional critical and analytical investigation, the BIA cannot support this bill. We are, however, very interested in continuing the dialogue that has been started by Councilman Clarke. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Are there any questions of this witness? (Applause.) (No response.)

Seeing none, good afternoon, sir. Please identify yourself. 149 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC.

My name is Lawrence Rust. I'm past President of the Building and Industry Association, and simply what I would like to add to Bill's excellent testimony is that there's a very extreme complexity in balancing the needs of affordable housing in the City of Philadelphia and then asking builders to pay for that affordable housing. There's a major necessity that we create more affordable housing. BIA is supportive of this. My company, in which I'm a partner, New Urban Ventures, and Mr. Westrum's company have also done developments where out of pocket we have produced affordable housing in conjunction with market-rate housing. But the issue, as Bill 20 explained, quite frankly, is extremely complex, economically a balancing act, and needs to be studied and worked on, and we would like to continue to participate with Councilman Clarke and Council in achieving that balance. 150 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Mr. Westrum.

I think I'm out of turn a little bit here, and I know there's a tornado watch out there, so I'm really just going to echo Mr. Reddish's comments and just say that while Westrum Development Company supports legislation such as this to be analyzed and reviewed, we just want to make sure that we don't adopt a Band-aid fix to something that is too important for the future planning and developing in the City of Philadelphia. We feel that instead the Administration should form a small group of City leaders to look into this and other aspects of planning, zoning, community negotiations and other incentives prior to adopting anything that will have long-term lasting effects on the shape of the City for the next 50 years. 151 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Through unified negotiations with all parties, we believe we can create a win-win situation that not only provides housing that people can afford and for the workforce, but also increases real estate investment, a feasible and vital step necessary to advance economic growth in this great City. We feel that there's a real need to do something and we feel it has to be done positively. We just feel that the current bill as drafted could become a tax that will drive away investment in the City. So we look forward to working with the City and Council and Councilman Clarke to do something very positive. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Any questions? (No response.)

Thank you. Thank you, gentlemen. 152 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC.

Thank you. MR. McPHERSON: The next panel consists of representatives from ACORN, Project HOME and Community Legal Services.

May I just make an announcement, please. I understand we're supposed to be bracing for a strong storm, and as a precaution, the City has activated its Emergency Operations Center, and the Philadelphia School District cancelled all after-school activities, including Power Hour. The Emergency Operations Center will be open through 11:00 p.m. tonight or later, depending on weather conditions. So I just felt compelled to make that announcement, because we very seldom get notices like this. Okay. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

My name is Ken 153 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Jones. I'm a member of Philadelphia ACORN, residents of Philadelphia. I'd like to thank Councilman Darrell Clarke for getting a discussion rolling on this issue and other Councilmen and Councilwomen for taking the time to be here today. ACORN, as you know, is a grassroot community organizer of working families to make positive change in the community. ACORN is currently organized in ten cities in Pennsylvania and 99 cities cross the country. We have over 10,000 due-paying members right here in Philadelphia. Our members care deeply about our neighborhoods and believe that every Philadelphian deserves to live in a safe, clean neighborhood in quality housing that they can afford. With equal access to City services and quality schools across the country, from California to Washington, DC, ACORN has been involved in the creation of inclusionary zoning 154 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. legislation. ACORN supports inclusionary zoning, but before I go into inclusionary zoning, I want to talk a little about exclusionary zoning. As a long-time resident of North Philadelphia, 35 years to be exact, in Darrell Clarke's district, small business owner and active member of my community, along with ACORN, people find me to be the type of person that they can trust, get advice from and talk to about certain issues and problems that exist in our neighborhoods. As you probably already can figure out, one of the bigger problems they express to me, of course, is crime and law enforcement, but even more lately, I found myself into conversations with people who are talking in regards to the housing boom and development that's going in various parts of North Philadelphia and other sections of the City. What I found that most people, 155 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. especially the elderly who I've had conversation with, they say one of the four following four statements. " Developments, though, they say is way beyond other means. For example, at 31st and Girard, I happen to have a couple of years ago been driving down Girard Avenue and I see those houses, a big sign up there that says these houses are going for 200,000. Now I hear that they're going for upwards in the mid 300,000's. So I say to myself, How do these people that actually live within this neighborhood actually afford such housing? To me, it seems like extreme 156 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. exclusionary zoning. To even personalize this, my mother, in regards to inclusionary, even to personalize it, my mother became executor of her estate in West Philadelphia on the 4500 block of Sansom Street. The property was condemned abandoned by, I guess, the Redevelopment Authority because it's been literally torched and caught on fire twice, and it kind of discouraged us from moving forward and actually developing that property where we can actually rent those properties to the people who lived within that community. Today that same property is going for approximately $400,000. It's one problem when, number one, to us, we feel, number one, the property has been tooken from us without going through the proper procedures of letting people know that, hey, we're coming through your neighborhood to develop, but the thing that really disturbs me is the fact that you have a 157 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. $400,000 house in a very low-income neighborhood that's being sold in -- $400,000 in a low-income neighborhood. To me, it just clearly states exclusionary zoning. ACORN supports inclusionary zoning. Why? Because it ensures that each new development includes homes that are affordable, provides affordable housing at little or no financial cost to the local government, creates inclusive communities, which allows the equitable distribution of City services and resources, reduces the stigma of affordable housing. While we can't support this bill as it exists in its form, we do have some large concerns about the bill.

In the same sense as written, this legislation is not actually about inclusionary housing. Too many people are left out. The target income levels, as you know, 80 to 150 percent of AMI, area 158 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. median income, do not accurately represent a large percentage or a good percentage of the people who actually reside and work here in Philadelphia. This excludes at least about 60 to 70 percent, as you know, of the Philadelphians all making under $57,000. We urge City Council to create an inclusionary zoning bill that better reflects the reality of the housing needs in Philadelphia. Also, we'd like to thank, I think, Darrell Clarke who actually supports in lieu options for developers to contribute to an affordable housing fund instead of units. Finally, we ask Council to amend the bill to extend the duration of affordability from ten years to something that will better protect affordability for long term. Inclusionary zoning also represents a huge opportunity for us to tap into the recent housing boom in our 159 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. City. Our members want to work with City Council to craft a bill that works for all Philadelphians. Let's slow down the process and do it right. Thank you. )

At this time, we're going to recess very briefly the public hearing and go into our public meeting, because Councilman Clarke does have amendments that he would like to introduce.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I've circulated the amendments to Bill No. 060732. On , there are just certain technical amendments in the language, and on 3, there's an amendment on Section 1 under 14-2204. We're adding a Section C that reads "in lieu of constructing affordable dwelling units, the applicant shall pay a fee to the City. The method used in determining such fees shall be 160 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. provided by ordinance of Council, and the Director, applying such method, shall determine the cost to the development project. Each year, in the annual operating budget ordinance, Council shall appropriate to the Mayor - Office of Housing and Community Development - Affordable Housing, subject to Section 10 2-300(2)(d) of the Home Rule Charter, an amount equal to an estimate provided by the Director of Finance of total receipts under this subsection in the fiscal year immediately preceding the year of which appropriations are being made." Let me get a layman's version. Currently, under the Home Rule Charter if there's money -- any money from fees associated with anything, be it licensing or in this particular case a fee associated with ability to build a number of houses, that money must go into the General Fund under the current Home Rule Charter. What this amendment does, it ensures that any amount of money that 161 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. comes from the fee generated as a result of this program, that same amount will come out of the General Fund at the time of the budget and then go into a particular program that will provide assistance for affordable housing. So it's just a mathematical way of us moving the money around, but under the Charter, we cannot direct funds directly from a fee directly to a program. It must be meshed in the General Fund and then subsequently taken out of the General Fund to a program. It doesn't make a lot of sense, but I didn't write the Charter, so we're stuck with it. So, Madam President, I'd like to ask for approval of the amendment to Bill No. 060732. I move the adoption of the amendment. (Duly seconded.)

It has been moved and seconded that the amendments be adopted. 162 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. All in favor will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. We will now return to our public hearing. Please identify yourself for record and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon. My name is George Gould. I'm the Managing Attorney of the Housing and Energy Unit at Community Legal Services here in Philadelphia. First, let me thank Councilman Clarke for bringing this issue to the floor. It's a very important issue, and hopefully in the coming weeks and months, we can get together and get a very strong bill out which will help Philadelphia. The introduction of this bill 163 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. is a very important step in the process of creating an inclusionary affordable housing requirement in new development, as has been mentioned by other speakers. There are several very good points to the bill. It allows flexibility with building on site and off site, and now Councilman Clarke has just added an amendment which allows for an in lieu payment, which we think is very important and has been actually very successful in a lot of other jurisdictions. The fact that the bill 15 specifies that the quality of construction for the affordable housing must be similar to the market-rate housing is very important and very good. Thirdly, the program is mandatory. That is critical. In some jurisdictions the program has actually been voluntary. Having said that, however, we believe, as has been mentioned by other speakers, that there are some very 164 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. serious problems with the bill. The first is the income targets. Who is this bill set up to help? Under the bill, the targeted income population is families earning between about 57,000 and 108,000 a year. This is based on the bill being targeted to families between 80 percent and 150 percent of the area median income. The area median income includes the surrounding counties to Philadelphia. The Philadelphia City median income is approximately $37,000, much lower than the area median income, which is $72,000. As mentioned already, under the proposed bill, 70 percent of the City's population is not eligible for this affordable housing. This must change. To be inclusionary, people who are most affected by the housing crisis must be included in the bill. Throughout the country, jurisdictions have used a range where affordable housing is provided for persons under 80 percent, under 50 165 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. percent and under 30 percent of median income. Let me talk about some of the other problems, and they've been mentioned, but I just want to emphasize them. The duration of the affordable housing units. Under the current bill, it's only for ten years. Ten years comes very, very quickly, and what will simply happen, in ten years we will have a crisis. People living in these units won't have the ability, some of them, to stay in the units. Because what will happen is, they will no longer be affordable -- if they're rental units. Obviously for --

Oh, okay. Because when you buy the house, it's your house.

Let me emphasize that I think it's very important that much of what goes on here is for rental, because I think often the rental market 166 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. in Philadelphia gets neglected, and the reality is for many people who can't afford housing, the rental market is really their only alternative. The other point I was going to make, but you've solved that problem it appears, is the contributions in lieu of affordable units. Finally, or another issue, is the trigger requirement for affordable units. The bill at the moment says it only takes place if they're 20, and we strongly suggest that that number be reduced, something in the area of ten, and the obvious impact of that, it will create more affordable units. Throughout the country, numerous cities and other jurisdictions have created inclusionary affordable housing requirements on new development. Virtually all of these programs were created to benefit those undergoing great difficulty in finding affordable housing. We should do no different. 167 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Thanks. (Applause.)

Thank you for your testimony. Just one quick response with respect to the area median income. That's currently what the City uses for its affordable housing program, so that's why we indicated the area median income. All of OHCD and the Redevelopment Authority and PHDC uses area median income.

I understand that. The point I was making, the actual income in the City limits when the median income is substantially less than the area --

We understand that, but I'm saying this is consistent with the current policy. So if we're requiring affordable housing developers to address the area median income, that's why we tried to be consistent with what's currently being done.

Well, it's okay to 168 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. use it, but I think what has to happen then, the percentages have to just go lower.

We've heard that loud and clear. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony.

Thank you.

This is Panel 3, the next panel. Please state your name for the record.

My name is George Smith. Good afternoon, City Councilmembers. Good afternoon to members of the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice and good afternoon to all those who are going to testify this afternoon. Once again, my name is George Smith. I am a former homeless veteran, who is now living at Project HOME. I'm currently working part time for a private school and I'm employed part time by Project HOME. With all that and with my non-service disconnected disability, with 169 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. all that, I'm still earning under $26,000 a year. That is why I am here this afternoon. The other reason is to talk to you about affordable housing. I would like to take this opportunity to thank City Hall for following the citizens' request for the inclusionary housing bill. It is of vital importance that this legislation be passed. However, even though this legislation is a step in the right direction, it needs to go a little further if it is going to be beneficial to all Philadelphians, and it also will encourage further development. The legislative bill that has been introduced would primarily help households earning at the bracket of $60,000 to $100,000 per year. These individuals are clearly not struggling with their housing bills. If you as City Councilmembers stop for a moment and take into consideration individuals such as myself 170 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. who fall into a much lower category of living, you will find that there is no 4 way possible that I could ever afford that price range of housing and continue to pay bills and live a productive life on life terms. The legislation that you are recommending will leave out many working families, senior citizens and people with disabilities, such as myself. And I must mention at this time that we have scores of families in our shelter system who are working individuals who would love to move into their own housing. What is holding them back? Fact one, affordable housing. Fact two, closing those Section 18 8 vouchers. Also take into account that the vast majority of Philadelphians, over 70 percent, people who are firefighters, police officers, child care workers, janitors, housekeepers, elementary school teachers, editors and security guards, will not benefit from this legislation 171 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. that is being proposed, even though I do believe that you as City Councilmembers have worked hard in achieving the legislation that you have come up with. If you would consider this: The legislation would also be revised to include developers to add units to their structure that would be made affordable to individuals in the lower income bracket such as myself. I believe that with more research, more analysis and little more determination, that you could develop a more effective and sound legislative bill. If you can come up with this legislation that benefits all Philadelphians, then we are truly the City of Brotherly Love. Thank you. (Applause.)

Thank you. Thank you.

I agree with the person sitting next to me, George, on a lot of what he said. 172 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen of City Council. My name is Harriet Jaffe and I'm here with the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice. We are here to testify the necessity of inclusionary housing in Philadelphia. I lived at one of Project HOME's temporary residential facilities for a while before I moved into my apartment. A friend of mine lived in the building with me at the facility and we decided to move out. It should not be difficult to get an apartment, but it is. Neither my friend or I wanted to accept the apartments that the case workers wanted to give us. We didn't want to live in bad apartments or in the Northeast or South Philly. We wanted to move in a regular apartment, so we went out and had to find our own. I sort of lucked out, because I had another friend who lived in the building who was on Social Security that 173 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. I moved into. While it was a senior building, it was not a HUD building until the owner and the builder died a couple of years ago. My friend gave us good advice and steered us in a lot of directions. I applied for the apartment around October 31st. By November the 4th, they told me I was accepted and asked me if I could move in right away. But I told them I couldn't, because I needed to give my place two weeks' notice. I moved on November the 26th, 2003. Actually, it was Thanksgiving eve I moved in. I had applied for subsidized housing. It made a difference. I had it when I moved into my apartment. Where I am has market renters and subsidized renters. I'm subsidized. The market rate is, of course, higher than I could afford. Mixed-rate housing works. When I had told the people where I was living that I was -- or I was 174 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. moving into that I was a displaced person, they said fine, because I already had the subsidized housing. There has been a problem with getting subsidized housing in the City for a while. As a matter of fact, I think there was another problem this year. I think Pennsylvania was one of three states to lose some money and Texas was one of three states to gain some money, and I think the State of Pennsylvania is fighting in Congress to get some money back. For my friend, it took her longer than me. She was on a waiting list. It took her three -- UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Excuse me. He's not paying attention.

Excuse me. However, there are a number of Councilmembers here deeply interested in your testimony. The sponsor of this bill 23 is working on matters with one of the staff, so you may proceed.

You want me to just 175 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. go on?

Yes.

Ma'am, I can multi-task. I can read and listen at the same time.

Just go on?

Please proceed.

For my friend, it took her longer than myself, three years, because she had been on a waiting list. She is now in Center City, where I am also. We were so happy and grateful that we were the lucky ones who could find housing. We need more money for affordable housing so other people can find housing, too. Inclusionary housing would enable us to live where we want to live. We would have a larger selection of the kind of apartments that we want. Inclusionary housing would help people get their lives together. (Applause.) 176 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC.

Thank you so much for your testimony. You all live in Project HOME?

I did for a while. I stayed at one of their PRDs.

Do you live in my district?

I live in Project HOME, yes.

All right. Thank you. Please proceed, sir.

My name is Carlos Sinsago (ph). Good afternoon. I'm with Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition and Kensington Welfare Rights Union. I applied for the Housing Authority in 2001 and they gave me somebody else's record, and since that day, they've been giving me the runarounds. They gave me phone numbers that nobody answers. And at the moment, I live under my brother's roof, because housing is taking too long. And all they 177 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. gave us is the runarounds. They give us phone numbers that nobody answers. And Mr. Moore, he gave my brother -- he told him that we had two weeks that he'll find an apartment, and that was the last thing he ever said about that, and we still waiting. We need more affordable houses, not no condos or parking lots. And the Coalition wants to work with this City Council Committee to make sure that there is more affordable housing in the City.

Okay, sir. Sir, if you want to leave your name and your number with my staff person and we'll see if we can get somebody to follow up on your specific problem.

Okay. Thank you very much.

You're welcome. Thank you so much. (Applause.) UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Where are the other Councilmembers that are 178 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. supposed to be here?

Councilmembers could be upstairs listening in their offices to this hearing and this hearing is also televised. UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: They're not supposed to be here?

This is actually a committee, and the Committee does not have all of the members of Council in session, but all members of Council can come to any hearing that they wish.

We have Panel 4 coming up. Women's Community Revitalization Project, United Communities of Southeast Philadelphia and Philadelphia Senior Center and Philadelphia Association for Community Development.

Hello. My name is Nora Lictash and I work with the Women's Community Revitalization Project. WCRP is a proud member of the 179 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice. I'm just going to say that WCRP and Campaign have spent some time raising money to get consultants --

Excuse me. Folks, can we please keep it down so we can hear the testimony.

Thanks, Councilman Clarke. Thank you. We have been working with consultants, which are the national experts in inclusionary housing, and they in fact did the financial feasibility analysis for the New York inclusionary housing bill, and we want to work with you and share that information with you.

Yes. Absolutely.

Cool. Now I want to turn it over to the other women from the Women's Community Revitalization Project.

Hi. My name is 180 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Felicia Bond. I'm a mother of six beautiful, bright children, and I'm a survivor of domestic violence. I'm a member of Women Against Abuse, the Women's Community Revitalization Project and the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice. I am here to let you know today what it is like for a woman to recover from mental and physical abuse, raise six children in a shelter alone and try not to fall to pieces while trying to find affordable housing in the City of Philadelphia. City Councilmembers, I want you to know that I have been abused both mentally and physically over the last seven years by my husband. My husband would beat me when he was frustrated with life, if I complained too much about needing help around the house or simply not doing what he wanted me to do when he wanted me to do it. There were times when he shook me for not getting the children dressed or the house cleaned 181 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. fast enough. Often I would call the police to have him removed from our home, but they wouldn't, simply because he was my husband. My husband made life miserable for me. I thought I had to deal with the abuse because of the children. And so one day, I said the wrong thing to him and he dragged me down the steps, busted my knee and cut my face with a knife. I knew then that I had to escape and leave my husband. I ran. I left all material belongings, things that I worked so hard to get, clothes for my children, furniture. Whatever a house should contain, I left it. I took all six of my children and ran. I thought that I did the right thing. I felt that if I did not leave, he would eventually kill me. Today I live in a shelter. (Ms. Bond in tears.)

I'm sorry. 182 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Today I live in a shelter with my six children. We have been living there since August. It is hard raising six children in a shelter environment. It has taken a toll on them psychologically and emotionally, and it hurts me to see that my children are suffering because I do not have the resources to put them in a home. I make $15,000 a year. What kind of housing can I afford for my family of seven? The average cost for a three-bedroom apartment ranges between $700 to $1,800 per month, and these prices do not include utilities. And we all know the gas prices have skyrocketed. So even if I left the shelter and got into my own place, I would have to choose between eat or heat. City Councilmembers, there's a problem in the City of Philadelphia. Far too many abused women, poor and working-class people are forced to live in housing that do not meet their needs. 183 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. We live in shelters, dilapidated housing and sometimes no housing at all. We are good citizens, working citizens, hurting citizens and forgotten citizens. We need your help. We are not asking for a handout. We are simply asking for someone to pay attention to us. Now, I share my story with you in hope that you will see that we are not all dealt the right cards, but you have the power to help change our hand. Thank you. (Applause.)

Hello. My name is Esperanza Villango. I am 53 years old. I'm a proud mother of three children. I have been living in my neighborhood in North Philadelphia near Juniata Avenue for 47 years. In 1983, I bought a house at 1619 North (unintelligible) through the Gift Property. I have been living there for the last 24 years and were working hard to fix up the house. The people in the 184 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. neighborhood have had their taxes raised. Some have it double. I say to me, I say to me that this will happen to me. I scared because I am a person of low incomes. It's hard for me to prepare my house and also pay the bills. Two months ago I have a meeting at my church where there was (unintelligible). Soon after they came to my house and asking me if I want to sell. I feel that I must move, and many other (unintelligible) in the same situation as I am in. Thank you. (Applause.)

Thank you for your testimony. We will proceed with the next witness.

Good afternoon, City Councilmembers. My name is Shirley Latham and I'm a 61-year-old homemaker and homeowner. I live at 4th and Master and I have been living there for more than 18 years. I am a member of the 185 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Women's Community Revitalization Project and the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice, who are working to create and preserve affordable housing in the City of Philadelphia. I am here today because I want to share my experience with you in regards to the housing in the City of Philadelphia. Before I became a homeowner, I was a woman trying to escape an emotional and very physically violent relationship. I moved across the City with my two daughters more than five times over a period of ten years to escape abuse and preserve my life. And during that time, it was very hard, because every place I lived, I could not afford the rent. Rents were so high I had to choose between eating and having a roof over my family's head. There were plenty of nights where I had to make a sacrifice. I would go without eating so that my children could eat. I often got food from the 186 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. local church and did most of our clothes shopping at the neighborhood thrift store. I want you to know that during that time I was a working woman, but my income was not enough to meet the cost of living. Plus rent, I was pinching and stretching dollars to make a way for my family. That was a challenge that occurred almost years ago, and I was 13 able to overcome it. But everyone is not 14 as fortunate as I am. Rents were high 15 then and they are very high now. Housing 16 costs are going up and people are getting 17 displaced. Major for-profit developments 18 are being built on the borders of our neighborhoods, causing property taxes, rents and home sales to increase. The average cost for a three-bedroom apartment is 756 a month. Homes are selling for more than 300,000 in my neighborhood. Many low-income and working-class families cannot afford 187 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. that. It is imperative that something be done to help the people who cannot afford to rent or buy at market rates. Therefore, I think that it is awesome that inclusionary housing policies are being considered to help combat the housing crisis in the City of Philadelphia. I hope that people who are like me and make less than 20,000 a year will not be forgotten. And may I also say this: We all here, we all vote, and that's one thing that -- that's some power that we do have, and we all must remember that. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Thank you also for your testimony. Next witness.

Good afternoon, City Councilmembers. My name is Yolanda Blakey and --

Could you 188 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. please pull the mike closer to you and tilt it up a little bit. There you go.

I am a 31-year-old wife and mother of five. I've been living at the 2600 block of Front Street for about two years. I am a homemaker and a renter. I have been an advocate for affordable housing for more than 10 years. I am the resident association 11 President of the Kensington Townhomes. 12 I'm a member of the Norris Square Civic 13 Association. I'm a member of Congreso de 14 Latinos Unidos. I'm a member of the 15 Women's Community Revitalization Project 16 and the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing 17 Justice. 18 I am before you today because I 19 want you to understand that poor people 20 and working-class people are having trouble finding affordable housing in the City of Philadelphia. I want to first start by saying that I'm originally from Chicago, Illinois. I moved to Philadelphia almost three years ago, 189 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. because the rents in Chicago for a two-bedroom apartment was $18,000 a month -- I mean $1,800 a month. Excuse me. I have five children, and for five children and two adults to squeeze into a two-bedroom apartment, that's not a pretty picture. Well, my husband and I decided that we needed to do some research and began looking outside of Illinois for a more affordable place to live. We had some friends who were here in Philadelphia and informed us that it would be a good place to move and would be less expensive and a good place to raise our children. So we took everything we owned and moved to Philadelphia, hoping to find affordable housing and a place to live and good jobs. When we arrived here, what we did notice is that the apartments did not cost $1,800 a month, but wasn't far from it. In some neighborhoods in 190 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Philadelphia, a two-bedroom apartment would run you about $1,200 a month. Based on our income, that was not feasible. We could not maintain our family and pay rent. In the City of Philadelphia in order to afford a two-bedroom apartment, a person must make at least $37,880 a year. I like Philadelphia and I want to stay and raise my family here. However, something must be done to meet the needs of the people who make less than $20,000 a year. That's why I'm excited about this inclusionary housing bill being proposed. It gives hope to people like me who live and maintain their neighborhoods the opportunity to stay if they want to. It will not force them to look in other cities or states to find an affordable place to live. I believe that the City of Philadelphia values every citizen, rich or poor. That's why it's called the City of Brotherly Love. And if the City 191 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. desires to keep such a title, it is imperative that you do not forget about the very poor when drafting inclusionary housing legislation. Thank you for taking the time out to hear me and others who could not be here today. (Applause.)

Good afternoon. Next witness.

Good afternoon.

Please speak into the mike.

Good afternoon. Hello. My name is Staci Moore. I'm a single working parent and volunteer for Women's Community Revitalization Project and the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice. I'm here today to testify in favor of changing the currently written inclusionary housing bill so that it will include most of the residents of Philadelphia who need help the most. 192 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. I'm a bit confused, though, so maybe City Council can help me. The most recent data shows that one-third of Philadelphians make less than 20,000 a year and over two-thirds of Philadelphia residents will be excluded from Councilman Clarke's bill as it is written now. Some of the hard-working folks who will still feel the housing crunch would be school teachers, parking lot attendants, child care workers, cashiers, bartenders, guards, retail salespeople, home health aides, janitors, nursing aides, data entry workers, bricklayers, receptionists, library technicians and ambulance drivers and attendants, just to name a few. With the many different groups of workers named and unnamed, why would City Council seemingly go out of its way to create an inclusionary housing bill 23 that doesn't include many hard-working Philadelphia residents? Now, I may not be a 193 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Councilperson, but I think I can see very clearly that this is a piece of policy that could use some retooling. As one of the consistent and passionate voters out of the two-thirds of Philadelphians who will be excluded from this bill, I implore City Council to do the right thing and work with the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice. Together you can make the necessary changes that can turn it into a win-win policy for everyone. Thank you.

Thank you very, very much. (Applause.)

I wish to say thank you to the leadership of the Women's Revitalization Project and Nora Lictash. And to all of the witnesses, three things. One, I salute your strength for being here, and you need to know that you're wonderful role models for your children, and we thank you for 194 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. your voice. Thank you very, very much. (Applause.)

Good afternoon, everyone. Please state your full name for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon.

You'll have to help us by pulling the mike closer to you and speak directly in the mike.

Good afternoon. My name is Ms. Cheryl Martin and I am a citizen and I'm here with the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice. I am a mother. I am a grandmother. I am a great grandmother. I am here today because I am one of the people who is going to be homeless. They are selling my building. I don't have nowhere to go. I am located at 712 South 12th Street at Hawthorne Apartment. It is an apartment building. I live in 195 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. Hawthorne Village. It's hard for me to go to work and come home knowing that I won't have a place to lay my head at night. (Ms. Martin in tears.)

It's hard to sleep. I might go to work and come home one day and I won't have a place to put my head. My stuff is packed up, but I don't have any place to go. I don't have a place to go because there is no 13 affordable housing for me. I don't make enough money for affordable housing. If it wasn't for the grace of God, I wouldn't be here, the grace of God to give me strength, I wouldn't be here today. They are moving us out of our neighborhoods. They are building houses where low-income people can't afford. I want you to pass the bill for affordable housing. Where is the brotherly love? What about love thy neighbor? What about am I your brother's keeper? I thought we are supposed to 196 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. stick together. I thought we were all in this together. I am an American citizen. I vote. I go to church. And I can't afford the rent for the places that are here and that they are building. I've been in Philadelphia all my life. I've been here in South Philly for 54 years. The bill that you pass is not affordable for me. You need to pass the bill for low-income people. I need to be included, not excluded. Please include us in the properties. Thank you for your time and God bless you. (Applause.)

Listen to your heart and make the right decision and pass the bill, and have mercy. Thank you.

Thank you. (Applause.)

I do have a question. Please state again the name 197 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. of the building that is being sold.

It's 712 South 12th Street, Hawthorne Village Apartment.

Are you affiliated with any organization here this evening?

Campaign for Housing Justice.

Okay. I'll have a sidebar with you and a representative from that organization as we move to our next witness. If you would just step to the right and see my staff. Please proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon. My name is Carolyn Walker. I am a Housing Counselor at the Philadelphia Senior Center. The Philadelphia Senior Center is a member of the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice. The Philadelphia Senior Center is the largest senior 198 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. center in Philadelphia serving more than 8,000 members at three branches, Main, Tioga North and the Asian Outreach Program. I am here with Bernice, who is a member of the Philadelphia Senior Center. She was very lucky and one of the lucky and few of the lucky people to obtain senior housing this year. On the cab ride over, she told me, I only had to wait four years, Carolyn, to get into a senior building. Four years is not even typical. We have seniors who are waiting six years or longer. PHA has a current waiting list of six years. As a Housing Counselor, I am seeing an increase in the number of seniors who are losing their housing in South Philadelphia and throughout the City to property owners who are increasing rent, making it impossible for seniors to stay in their apartments, or developers creating million dollar 199 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. condos. On any given day, it is common to see a homeless individual sleeping on a grate near luxury condo construction sites. City Council is moving in the right direction, but moving too quickly to make decisions on inclusionary affordable housing. This bill will help families earning between 80 percent of area median income, which is approximately $55,000 to $103,000 per year. Over one-third of Philadelphians make less than $20,000 per year. That leaves out 70 percent of Philadelphians. This leaves out seniors who are receiving Social Security benefits averaging $484 per month. The inclusionary affordable housing bill can help seniors by greatly reducing the income levels. Every day I see seniors who are homeless or will become homeless. I work with seniors who make difficult choices on a daily basis. Will I have enough money to buy my 200 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. medications? Will I be able to eat a meal today or will I go hungry? Will I be able to pay rent? I urge City Council to work with members of the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice and pass legislation that is truly inclusive, not exclusive. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Thank you. Folks, I'm starting to get a little concerned, both about the weather and the time, because we are only halfway through our panels. We are going to have another hearing. We're going to recess this hearing today and then we're going to come back after structuring some sort of working group and then come back later and have a report of the working group. So if anybody needs to go, because I'm telling you, it's starting to come down now. Based on the reports that I'm getting, it's going to be possible wind gusts of 80 miles an hour. So if 201 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. people need to like figure out a way to get home, they need to -- if everybody decides to stay, I'm going to have to ask people to kind of summarize their testimony, because we might be here throughout the storm, and that may not be a bad thing, given that City Hall is pretty strong. So I'm just a little concerned about time, because we really need to -- because we do get it. We understand. I want everybody to have an opportunity. We can kind of like summarize, or if you have written testimony, we can just give it to the stenographer and have it read into the record. Thank you. (Pause.)

I'm being told now that a number of lights are out in the City in certain places. Okay. I don't want to alarm people, but from all the accounts, this 202 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. is the real deal out there. I'm fortunate enough to have a City car right outside, so it's kind of easy for me. So anyone who is on the list to testify, if you feel you need to go, we'll make sure that you will be the first one up at the subsequent hearing. UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: So are you going to have a subsequent hearing? Is that what I'm hearing?

Absolutely. Let me make it clear while everybody is here. Folks, can I have your attention, please. I just want to make sure everybody hears this. During the last -- actually, even before I started having discussions with people, I clearly understood the complexity in what it was we are attempting to do. We attempted to address an issue and a category of people that we felt weren't adequately given an opportunity for new housing starts in the 203 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. City. When we first started the hearing, I said that this is not going to be a bill that's going to cure all problems. It's not going to cure homelessness. It's not going to cure the lack of affordable housing. It's just simply not going to do that. But what we're attempting to do with this bill is to create more affordability throughout the City of Philadelphia to give us more opportunities. But there's a bigger hurdle that we have to achieve, be it the federal government, because they've been cutting us by tens of millions of dollars, and you heard earlier in testimony the state. But this is a way to allow the private sector to infuse some level of resources on the table to hopefully get us some additional affordable housing. So I say all that to say that this is going to require a lot of work to 204 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. come up with something that we can live with, because I don't think anybody -- I don't think the developers are going to feel 100 percent comfortable with what we come up with. I don't think a lot of you are going to feel comfortable 100 percent with what we come up with, but hopefully we can work on something that allows us to make a dent into this whole affordable housing issue, infusing a number of resources from the private sector and some things that the City needs to do to make it easier to develop housing in the area. So we will say all that to say that there's going to be at least one other hearing, but what I don't want to do is have this process be dependent solely on public hearings, because as good as public hearings are and I believe in them in every sense of the word that gives people an opportunity to air on the record in public what their issues are, at some point you got to sit down with a 205 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. working group and go through the complexities of this issue, looking at data and come up with some solutions, and then we can come back and make those recommendations to the body so we can then hopefully get nine votes in Council to support this issue.

Who is on the working group? I just didn't hear that part.

There has to be a working group. I'm going to ask the City people, Mr. Hanna, the Administration, because I think that they interact with most of you all and have a list of all of the names to kind of pull representatives of every group. And, folks, with all due respect, we can't have 50 people on the working group. So I'm going to kind of ask you all to kind of pull some teams together, the people that you feel comfortable speaking on your behalf, and it will be full reporting and accountability back and 206 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. forth so people will know what's taking place. But at some point, we got to sit down with a group and we got to just like sit down and be prepared to work real hard. Because this is a tough one. I mean, I hear from both sides, developers. I mean, the market is flat now. I mean, that's reality. The cost of materials is going up. The cost of labor is going up. So that's their perspective, but the reality is, you got 60,000 people that need affordable housing. So we got to come up with some kind of strategy. If anybody has written testimony, you can please give that to us now and we'll have it submitted in the record, but I would like for you to come back when we have the subsequent hearings to be able to say on the record what it is in whatever way. I'm just a little concerned about the situation outside. UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Do you 207 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. have a date for another hearing in mind?

You know, I don't want to give you a date, because there has to be a lot of work. The next available Rules Committee hearing is on the 28th, and I don't see any way, in all honesty, we'll be able to get this resolved by the 28th. Because, like I earlier said, we want to do it right. I don't want to just do it quick and it not be the right bill. I want to do it right. Because the best case scenario is that we'd have everybody buying into this and we'll be able -- I think at the end of the day, we'll be able to provide more housing across the board, both market-rate and affordable. UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: What about the property tax for the seniors?

Property tax for the seniors? That's another bill. That's another bill that I have. I haven't had a hearing on that one yet. I'm all over the place. I'm 208 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. trying to effect change in every way. So, I mean, if people are willing to stay, the ones that are, give me some signal, people. UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Recess. Recess.

You want to recess? UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Recess.

All right. If anybody has written testimony that they would like to submit for today, please give it to the Sergeant-At-Arms. We will be in contact with you to start the process of a working group and we will talk about the subsequent hearings, however many it may be, but this is an issue that, as you heard today, everybody supports. Even the market-rate developers said that they support the concept, so it's just a matter of figuring out how we get it done. Folks, I want to thank you all so much. 209 11/16/06 - RULES - BILL 060637, ETC. The Committee on Rules is recessed to the call of the Chair. Thank you so much. (Committee on Rules adjourned at 4:40 p.m.) - - - 210 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 November 16, 2006, 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.)