COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA STATED MEETING Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Monday, April 8, 2024 PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBER CINDY BASS COUNCILMEMBER CURTIS JONES, JR. COUNCILMEMBER RUE LANDAU COUNCILMEMBER NICOLAS O'ROURKE COUNCILMEMBER MARK SQUILLA COUNCILMEMBER ISAIAH THOMAS BILLS 240012, 240066, 240159, and 240192 - - 240012, ETC.
Good morning. I want to thank everyone for being here this morning. My apologies for our slightly tardy start. Good morning. This hearing is called to order. Members and guests, please take your seats. And, Madam Clerk, will you please call the -- oh, actually, I'm going to take the roll. And so, I want to recognize that in attendance we have Councilmember Jones, Councilmember Squilla, Councilmember Thomas, and Councilman O'Rourke. And so, a quorum of the committee is present, and this hearing is now called to order. And this is the public hearing of the Committee on Rules regarding bills number 240012, 240066, 240159, and 240192. Madam Clerk, will you please read the title of the bills?
Bill number 240066, "to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Wood Street, 4th Street, Vine Street, and Lawrence street." Bill number 240159, "to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located 240012, ETC. within an area bounded by Sedgwick Street, Ardleigh Street, Upsal Street, Belfield Avenue, and Sprague Street." Bill number 240192, "approving the fifth amendment of the redevelopment proposal for the Tioga Urban Renewal Area, being the area generally bounded by Hunting Park Avenue on the north, Broad Street, Germantown Avenue, Venango Street, 15th Street, Allegheny Avenue and Germantown Avenue on the east, Glenwood Avenue and Lehigh Avenue on the south and 23rd Street, Allegheny Avenue and 22nd Street on the west, including the fifth amendment to the urban Renewal plan, which provides, inter alia, for changes that would make it consistent with the Tioga Redevelopment Area Plan and generally consistent with the most recent Comprehensive Plan approved by the City Planning Commission of the City of Philadelphia." And bill number 240012, "to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain area of land located within an area bounded by Queen Lane, Wissahickon Avenue, Roosevelt Boulevard (extended), and Henry 240012, ETC. Avenue, to amend Section 14-524 of the Philadelphia Code entitled Fourth District Overlay District and make related changes, all under certain terms and conditions."
Thank you. Before we begin, I want to announce for the record that bill number 240192 is being held at the request of the sponsor. That would be me. Madam Clerk, will you first recall the first panel that we have here to testify this morning, starting with bill number 240066?
Madam Clerk, please read the -- or please call forth the witnesses to testify on 240159.
Michael Gall, senior legislative planner, Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Good morning. How are you? Please state your name for the record and proceed.
Morning, Madam Chair, member of the Rules Committee. My name is Michael A. 240012, ETC. Gall. I'm senior legislative planner for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I'm here to testify on bill number 240159, introduced into City Council on March 7th, 2024, by Councilmember Bass. Bill number 240159 corrects the zoning map to reflect existing uses on three blocks near Stenton Station in east Mount Airy. These blocks are developed with semi- detached and attached multifamily buildings. The proposed zoning map amendments changed the base zoning district of these areas to RM-1, residential multifamily. This change is consistent with zoning recommendations from the Philadelphia 2035 Upper Northwest District Plan. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission considered bill number 240159 at its public meeting on March 21st, 2024 and recommended the bill for approval. I'll be happy to answer any of your questions this time.
Thank you for being here and for your testimony today. We're very aware that -- or I am very aware, as the district council person, that these properties really were incorrectly zoned from the very 240012, ETC. beginning when they were first built and really should have had a different zoning designation. So I just want to thank you and the Planning Department for all of your work on this matter. Any questions from any of my colleagues on this matter? No. Well, thank you very much for your testimony.
Madam Clerk, can we please call forward the next bill and witnesses, please?
For 240012, we have Michael Gall, senior legislative planner, Philadelphia City Planning Commission, Randy E. Hayman, water commissioner for the Philadelphia Water Department, Jason Lee --
Real quick. We do see written testimony for 2660. You did that at the last hearing?
Right. For the record, there is a testimony, for the last hearing. 240012, ETC.
First panel for 240012 again, we have Michael Gall, senior legislative planner for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission, Randy E. Hayman, the water commissioner for Philadelphia Water Department, Jason Lee, and Basil Jackson.
Please state your name for the record and begin your testimony.
Certainly. I'm Randy E. Hayman, water commissioner. Good morning, Councilmember Bass and members of the Rules Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. Again, I'm Randy E. Hayman, water commissioner. My team and I are here this morning to provide testimony in support 240012, ETC. of bill number 240012. The bill will correct the zoning designation of one of Philadelphia's critical drinking water treatment facilities. The Queen Lane drinking water treatment plant is currently zone residential, which does not include water treatment facilities as an allowable use. Since its construction in late 1890s, the Philadelphia Water Department has operated the facility as a drinking water treatment plant providing critical, life- sustaining water to Philadelphia for more than a century. Philadelphia Water intends for the facility to remain a drinking water treatment plant for the next generation and beyond. As such, we are seeking this corrective zoning legislation to bring the facility zoning designation in line to its current and future use. We would like to thank Councilmember Curtis Jones Junior for his leadership in introducing this bill to correct the zoning designation of Queen Lane drinking water treatment plant as well as advancing similar 240012, ETC. corrective zoning legislation for the Belmont drinking water treatment plant. As you know, the mission of the Philadelphia Water Department is to provide the greater Philadelphia region with integrated water, wastewater, and stormwater services, as well as provide water for critical Philadelphia Fire Department and commercial needs. Our commitment is to protect public health by always delivering the highest quality of drinking water at an affordable cost and to protect the environment by managing and treating the region's wastewater and stormwater. 6 million Philadelphians. That said, a significant number of major improvements to our infrastructure are needed at this time across the entire drinking water system, including upgrading drinking water treatment plants, pump stations, and storage facilities, as well as replacing miles of water 240012, ETC. mains to prevent breaks and service loss. We will be required to make these improvements while also continuing our typical operation and maintenance activities. In doing our critical work, the improper zoning designation of Queen Lane drinking water treatment plant site creates an impediment in the form of a highly consequential level of uncertainty in the planning process for our system improvements that could result in delay of necessary maintenance, security, and improvement activities at our plants, pipes, and pumping stations, thereby jeopardizing our ability to leverage federal and state funding sources. We have developed a 25-year capital plan that provides for significant upgrades to keep the water system safe, reliable, and resilient. In doing so, we're also meeting the challenge of extending capital spending over decades to keep operations running effectively and water rates affordable for our -- for our residents. PWD water revitalization plan will 240012, ETC. improve system resiliency and increase the reliability of our drinking water supply in emergency situations such as the Trinseo spill into the Delaware and the boil water notice affecting parts of West Philadelphia in 2023. The water revitalization plan's critical path begins with the Schuylkill River crossing, which is a large pipeline that will connect PWD's Belmont drinking water treatment plant in Wynnefield Heights to our Queen Lane drinking water treatment plant in East Falls, providing resilient water supply for the residents who rely on those plants. Without correcting the zoning, the need for immediate variances for early supporting projects such as the Schuylkill River crossing will create costly delays, pose risk to aging infrastructure and water service reliability.
The revitalization plan will culminate with the reconstruction of the Queen Lane drinking water treatment plant anticipated to begin in 2036. Another major part of our commitment to our ratepayers is our Comprehensive Community Engagement Strategy, working with impacted 240012, ETC. residents from the earliest stages of the -- of the projects and collecting their input throughout all project phases. The bill under consideration today is a clear example of our commitment to engagement. PWD worked collaboratively with the Planning Commission for Councilmember Jones to add water treatment facilities to the allowable uses under the special purses -- purpose civic, educational, and medical zoning district in an effort to avoid undesirable zoning designations such as industrial and residential neighborhoods. After multiple meetings with the East Falls Community Council, PWD has further endeavored to restrict the allowable uses of Queen Lane site to exclusively those that support PWD's mission by amending the Fourth District Overlay. Additionally, we have continued meeting with the group, the East Falls Group leadership, to discuss and document our commitment to certain site features and our commitment to working collaboratively with the community during the design phase of the Queen Lane reconstruction 240012, ETC. project. It's important to note that there has been -- there can sometimes be challenges to meeting community asks and requests because, as you know, PWD drinking water facilities are Homeland Security sites, in addition to being subject to local, state, and federal security requirements and regulations. Nonetheless, we consistently listen to concerns and incorporate feedback to the greatest extent that we can. The feedback that we receive will serve a crucial role in the project's design phase. And we'll develop a roadmap at the appropriate time to design the future Queen Lane drinking water treatment plant in a way that integrates seamlessly within the East Fall community. We would like to thank the East Fall community Council for their engagement and collaborative work that they've done throughout the process with us. Correcting the zoning designation to the special purpose, civic, educational, and medical zoning will allow PWD to operate and improve the Queen Lane drinking water treatment 240012, ETC. plant as we have over century as a -- as a right. It does not absolve us of our commitment to be good neighbors, our responsibilities to our taxpayers, or our obligation as a city entity to follow due diligence, including reviews and recommendations by the -- our commission, the Civic Design Review Committee. This corrective action is necessary to responsibly complete work on our infrastructure on schedule, thereby reducing impacts to customer costs and services -- service interruption risk, saving both customers and the city plan -- the city money in the long run. It is a reasonable ask with generational benefits. 6 million people across diverse socio-economic backgrounds. PWD respectfully requests this bill be reported favorably out of this committee and that the rules of council be suspended to allow for first reading of this bill at the next stated 240012, ETC. meeting of the City Council. Thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today. Thank you.
Thank you for your testimony. Any questions from the panel? Councilman Jones. Chair recognizes Councilman Jones.
Thank you, Madam. Thank you -- thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you, Commissioner, for your testimony. If I could, for benefit of the committee members and people in the chambers and those who might be listening, can you further describe what this project is? So first of all, I wanted to -- things that we discussed up here is that it is an operating water treatment plant as we speak. Correct?
Can you -- can you tell us how big, how many acres? What, what are we talking about by way of scope?
For that, I will ask Jesse Debes to step up. He's our engineering supervisor, Drinking Water Facility Planning. He 240012, ETC. will give you details.
My name is Jesse Debes. I work for the Philadelphia Water Department.
Can you -- can you pull the microphone closer so we can hear you better?
Thank you. I'm Jesse Debes. I work for the Philadelphia Water Department as an engineer. The Queen Lane facility treats about 60 million gallons per day of drinking water and can treat up to 140 million gallons per day. In terms of physical size of the facility, I don't have a number off the top of my head, but it's bounded by US Fox Street, Queen Lane, and Henry Avenue, if you can imagine the size of that parcel.
And in that time, whoever the elected officials were of that time did not see fit to zone it for anything other than residential?
I would probably defer to someone from the Planning Commission, but it may predate zoning code.
I think. Planning Department. Yeah. You want to come forward? Please state your name again for the record and proceed.
Michael Gall for the City -- Philadelphia City Planning Commission. At the time, the -- Philadelphia didn't have a zoning code. So this predates Philadelphia zoning laws.
Oh, I had -- if you wanted me to read my whole testimony, I could. 240012, ETC.
Thank you. That -- it's on the record. Can you further, commissioner, describe the nature of this project, the duration of this project, the cost of this project for, for the record?
I'll have Jesse come back. I want to start off by saying that the water revitalization plan -- I'll talk in totality because --
-- this is just one piece of the puzzle. The water revitalization plan, $2.5 billion over years, it would be 400 18 projects. And they have to be done sequentially. 19 Okay. So we can't be haphazard in how we line it 20 up. And we have to be able to receive the 21 funding. We're,. we're seeking to receive 22 federal loan, low interest loans. 23 And our failure to give them confidence 24 that we can do the project and that we have 25 everything lined up to go forward jeopardizes our 240012, ETC. ability to get the loans. If we lose the loans, we're looking at rising rates for customers. But the Queen Lane project is $763 million by itself. And then also, the Schuylkill River crossing is $260 million.
Didn't you have a diagram showing, illustrating the work to be done? I kind of remember seeing that. And if not, can you describe what we're talking about? It's mammoth.
Oh, it's, it's mammoth. As far as the Schuylkill River is going to go underground from Belmont to the other side of the shore and then up through Eastmont to the Queen Lane plant. And so, it is a massive project. And the Queen Lane plant design, I think, begins, --or actually, I mean to say the Schuylkill River starts in 2036?
The design phase for the Schuylkill River crossing is beginning this year. And the design phase for the Queen lane drinking water treatment plant reconstruction is anticipated to begin in 2030 or 2031.
And do you have 240012, ETC. specifics as to what will be redesigned, reconstructed at the plant for the record. Like what types of projects? You mentioned how many projects, the total processes?
Can you give us some, not all 400 but a general understanding. And I, I don't want to say this so that -- the impacts potentially to the community. What, what will they be experiencing during this project?
So the projects and revitalization plan are primarily focused on our drinking water facilities. It includes reconstruction of storage reservoirs, pump stations, treatment plants, expansion of treatment plans, new treatment processes, essentially modernizing our, our drinking water facilities.
Okay. All right. 240012, ETC. And so, if I understood you correctly, you have - - you, you have the burden of providing this water treatment plant for the benefit of the City of Philadelphia. It is a total reconstruction that will not only deal with the plant on the surface but underground, a mile down, under the water up to the City Avenue treatment site in order to provide valve systems and safeguards and -- for the treatment of the water. Correct?
-- we were to have a chemical spill, we could pull water from either the Delaware or the Schuylkill, which is a great benefit.
which I didn't totally appreciate until the water advisory happened and the complexity of what happened and understanding, then, then it took on a different priority. Drinking water is essential, but, however, and nevertheless, the immediate community -- and we'll hear from them -- is concerned that this project -- what is it? 10 years or will it start in 10 years? 240012, ETC.
So even though for us, in real time -- yeah. But, but for, for homeowners, this is a ongoing property value potentially altering project. So what we're experiencing here today -- and you'll hear from the community -- is the compelling argument that the department has for all of the city compared to the people who have to, you know, live next to it. And so, what I want to do is get on the record, what the project is and then hear from the community about what their community benefit concerns are, if that's all right, Madam Chair. Thank you, Mr. Hayman.
Absolutely. This sounds like, again, as described, a massive project. And I can't even, you know, begin to figure out, you know, if I lived in a neighborhood, how I would feel about it. Probably not so great. But we want to, you know, take an opportunity to hear from the community and hear 240012, ETC. their thoughts so that we're just not telling them, all right, you got to take one for the team, because it's, it is something, as you said, that was, you know, very important. It's critical for water safety for the entire city, you know. I'm still trying to wrap my head around just how complex this is. Have we ever done anything, even on a -- on a, a smaller scale, anything similar?
-- a rebuilding of an entire plant. And I, I don't believe that has been done before.
Are, are we modeling this off of something that was done somewhere else, another city or municipality that has done this? Is, is -- have we looked around for best practices before we, you know, take on such a huge undertaking or we're just -- you know, this is -- this is something new and -- yeah. Okay.
-- members of council. Nice to see you again. Mark Cammarata, Philadelphia Water Department deputy water commissioner for planning and environmental services. We will be making similar investments at the Belmont treatment plant. So we're not modeling over maybe what others are doing, but we'll be modeling over what we are doing ourselves by making --
We'll be making modifications to Belmont sooner than we will Queen Lane.
Jesse, Jesse had mentioned that the design is going to be initiated in 2030, probably about a four or five- year design process. But the construction of this plant, because of its sheer size, will be many, many years, as the commissioner mentioned, commencement with an $800 million investment, which. -- that number is probably a little bit outdated at this point.
The revitalization plan is 10 major projects, although we're citing 400 projects. There's 10 substantial projects that need to be -- to be -- to be made that are sequential, that allows us to provide this redundancy.
So, so how many years do we expect the project to exist on the Queen Lane side?
Well, at the construction site. Like, once you put your first shovel in the ground, how long will it be --
I mean, I can -- I can get you -- I can get you that number.
-- plus five. It could be plus 10. It could be -- you know.
I'll, I'll get you a, a, a better answer. Again, we're, we're, we're in the planning process, right. These are all estimates. All this stuff will get defined and 240012, ETC. refined as we move into the design process. We can talk about how we'd be doing the staging and, and sequential phasing of what will be, again, a substantial investment. But I'll get you a better number. I, I probably shouldn't even have said five. I have a feeling it'd be a longer duration than that, given -- just given the, the magnitude of it. And just to, to reiterate, I mean, the Schuylkill River crossing, which the commissioner mentioned, is one that's more immediate. We need to be able to have the flexibility to send water back and forth between Belmont and Queen Lane that provides a, a level of, of redundancy and, and risk abatement. The idea, then, is to upsize Belmont so it can serve a larger portion of the city as Queen Lane gets taken out of service for us to make those upgrades. So it, it -- think about it from a risk mitigation standpoint, how quickly -- you know, when you shut down one plant and you're relying on the city with only two plants, there is a level of risk associated with that. So timing is of the essence. And I 240012, ETC. think that's the one thing that needs to be stressed here, is, is scheduling, trying to balance this schedule when you're making the investments that we're talking about here over the next, you know, to, to years or so. 7
Passing this legislation 10 does not give us carte blanche ability to do 11 anything that we wish. We still are bound by 12 being good neighbors with them. We have met with 13 them, and we will continue to meet with them. 14 And we have actually developed an MOU stating 15 very specifically some things that we're willing 16 to do. 17 The difficulty we have is that we're 18 years before we're actually going to have the 19 engineering designs. And so, it's hard for us 20 to, to agree to things before we actually have 21 the design of what we're going to do. And also, 22 technology may change by the -- 23
I'm sure it will. So -- well, Commissioner, let me just say that, you know, like, I work with you quite a lot, you know. I text you probably every day, every other day about something that needs to be addressed. And you have been great to work with and a, a person of your word, you know. But, but this is a long time. So if it was, you know, like a, a 12- month, 18-month project, which is probably like about the standard for Philadelphia projects, I think that, you know, it might be looked at a little bit differently than asking people to endure what's probably going to be a difficult construction site, you know, inconvenience and all those kinds of things for a very long time, you know. It's, it's really going to change, you know, the quality of life for those residents, but --
In this process, they will 240012, ETC. go through other administrative hearings. Okay. You will have the Art Commission, the Historical Commission, the Civic Design Review, and it's gone through -- it will go through Planning Commission. And so, these are all situations where there'll be a ministry of hearing. They'll have a chance to discuss the concerns. We'll discuss --
-- our, our issues. And there will be a chance to come to a meeting of the minds at all three of those. Thank you.
Thank you, commissioner. Chair recognizes Councilman Squilla.
Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you for your testimony. And as this goes, it seems like the design is going to be taking place in 2030, '31. So you really don't know the full extent of it. But if you look at your construction site and staging, would staging be off your site or be on your site? You, you have no idea at this point. Correct? 240012, ETC.
And that's something that would be -- you could agree to?
Yeah. Again, we're very early on, but these are the discussions we, we want to have with the community, we've had, had with the community. And, and we'd like to, to just consider, to keep them engaged, to hear input, to be able to share information as it comes in. You know, I wouldn't even say we're in the planning process. We're in the conceptual process for the Queen Lane site --
-- as we move advanced planning into design. As information comes to light, we absolutely will share that. We've set up a stakeholder advisory group. We have a commitment to meaningful, inclusive community engagement, not just for this project, for every 240012, ETC. project we do. And the idea is to, to meet early, to meet often, to share information, to share ideas, to gather community input because we want to continue to be a good neighbor, again, not just for this project but for the investments we make in every community in the city.
Yeah. And I agree, and I think you guys do a great job of that. But sometimes when you have other aspects of other meetings, CDR or advisory, other things, sometimes the community wants some more concrete --
-- something that they, they could rely on in the future. This is going to be -- I don't know if any of us will be here when this starts, so -- maybe Cindy or me.
No. We got -- Isaiah is young enough to be here. But, you know, it's just important to make sure that those concerns are met in some type of way that would 240012, ETC. make people feel comfortable. And so, hopefully that could happen during this process.
We've met with those -- We've talked with, I think, about a year and a half as far as the, the community. And we've met with them and, and worked with them in the last two weeks. And we have an MOU, that on -- the Philadelphia water side has some very specific things that we're able to do. And so, we're willing to do those things. Our concern is that this isn't just a, a house that's going up or just an office building that's going up. It's a water treatment. And as a result, it's part of Homeland Security. And so, we have those rules and regulations that we're -- we have to act upon. So there's security issues and all. So we're limited in some of the things that we're able to give.
Is there certain funding requirements? Are you receiving money, that you need certain things to be in place?
We need certain things to be in place so that when you apply for the loan, 240012, ETC. there's an understanding that we're, we're capable of actually finishing the project. Okay. They're not going to give us the funds if it appears that we don't have everything in a row, which makes sense. And so, it's imperative that, since it is sequential, that we line up what needs to be done and that we're able to show with confidence that we're ready to move forward.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for your work on this issue. I have to leave the meeting to attend other council business, but I would like to be recorded as voting aye on all bills and resolutions coming before the committee today. Thank, thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you -- thank you, Councilman. Okay. Unless there's no other questions from the panel, we will have our next - - I'll have the clerk call the next panel of witnesses up. Thank you. 240012, ETC.
From the East Falls Community Council, we have Hilary Langer, Paul Elia, Paul Boney, and Charles Hines.
My apologies. We missed the administration. Please begin your testimony. We can have the other folks come forward. You can sit, like, right along the front here.
Good morning, members of the Rules Committee. My name is Michael A. Gall. I'm the senior legislative planner with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I'm here to testify on bill number 240012, introduced into City Council on January 25th, 2024 by Councilmember Jones. Bill number 240012 amends the Philadelphia Zoning Code and maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Queen Lane, Wissahickon Avenue, Roosevelt Boulevard, (extended), and Henry Avenue and to amend section 25 14-1 -- 524 of the Philadelphia Code entitled the 240012, ETC. Fourth District -- Fourth District Overlay District in the East Falls neighborhood of the Lower Northwest planning district. This bill will remap the Queen Lane water treatment plant from RSA-2 residential single-family attached to SPC, special purpose, civic, educational, and medical. The current use as a water treatment plant is not permitted in RSA-2. And water treatment facilities are a permitted use in the SPC district. This remapping will enable the Philadelphia Water Department to move forward with improvement projects to the treatment plant without needing a use variance. The proposed text amendments create a subarea within the Fourth District Overlay for the Queen Lane water treatment plant that will limit the permitted uses to water treatment facilities and accessory uses to that. These text amendments result from meetings between the community and the Water Department to protect the neighborhood from undesired uses on the site. This bill also places restrictions on wireless service 240012, ETC. facilities. Since the bill's introduction, PWD and the community have agreed to proposed amendment further restricting on-site wireless service facilities to building mounted antennas for municipal use. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission considered bill number 240012 at its public meeting on February 15th, 2024 and considered it as an item in accord with previous policy that the bill be approved. I'll be happy to answer any, any of your questions at this time.
Thank you for your testimony. Any questions? Chair recognizes Councilman Jones.
Thank you again, Madam Chair. So, if I understand this correctly, we go from a pre-zoning code use, which was residential, to now a classification that only allows water treatment plans?
Effectively, yes on this site, particularly. The SPC district allows a, a number of civic, educational, and medical uses, but because of the bills changing of the Fourth 240012, ETC. District Overlay, it would restrict this particular site to major utilities and services. Correct.
And it might seem crazy to say, what else could it be used for? But if you look in the 21st Ward, there was literally consideration of our old reservoir for housing because it's a desirable neighborhood. And I can't imagine that East Falls wouldn't continue someday in the future to be that desirable neighborhood that some bright engineer might say, hey, let's build townhomes around the circumference and call the reservoir a lake and -- you know, man made lake or something like that. So this prohibits those types of uses. Correct?
Okay. Is there a reason we cannot have -- I guess I should ask the commissioner his opinion on this too -- the proposed community benefit agreement in the zoning? And that's something I'm going to bring to the Law Department as well, that the concerns 240012, ETC. which we will hear from, from the community be incorporated in the tenants of the zoning. What is your view on that?
To my understanding, that is outside the purview of the zoning code. That is something that the zoning bills cannot do and have be enforceable. That would be something between the Water Department or the Water Department, the Law Department, and the community.
That's outside the purview of, of what we're trying to accomplish with the actual bill itself here.
-- that is the genesis of the concern from the community that 10 years from now, when I'm in the old folks' home, who's going to be enforcing this. And is it going to be more than just a piece of paper, if you follow their concerns? Now, do I believe in the Water Department? Good faith. Yes, I do. But this 240012, ETC. commissioner might not be here as well, you know. And so, what they're looking for is some trust but verify enforceability. And we -- in your mind, this has not been able to be accomplished through a zoning bill?
To my knowledge, this is not something that can be accomplished through a zoning bill.
No additional questions. Okay. Well, thank you for your testimony. Madam Clerk, please recall that last panel of witnesses to testify.
From the East Falls Community Council, I have Hilary Langer, Paul Elia, Paul Boney, and then I have Charles Hines.
And could someone from this panel, if they're willing to read what 240012, ETC. that proposed community benefit agreement, the tenants of it that are in question, somebody from that side?
My name is Hilary Langer. I am the chair of the East Falls Community Council Zoning Committee. East Falls Community Council, on behalf of the community of East Falls, with feedback received from our members since January of 2023, opposes this bill today. East Falls Community Council supports the goal of reconstruction of the water treatment facility and the ultimate rezoning of the site to keep the funding, planning, design, and reconstruction on track. I'm going to repeat that. We support the goal of reconstruction and rezoning of the site. However, it would be irresponsible to do so at this time without sufficient protections for our community. This facility is intimately situated in our neighborhood. And concerns about edge conditions, such as landscape buffers, lighting, 240012, ETC. must be ironed out. Now, I'm going to repeat that again, edge conditions, landscaping buffers, and lighting. We're not redesigning the plant. We're concerned about edge conditions, and these need to be ironed out now before all leverage is lost from this point on. During our yearlong series of meetings with representatives of the Water Department, the mutual understanding and commitment of the Water Department between EFCC and the Water Department is that we will support the rezoning with the simultaneous crafting of an enforceable community agreement. This agreement would contain minimum protections for the community to prevent site lighting, overspill, offensive razor wire, top fencing along public sidewalks, such as exist today on Fox Street, for example, noise control, and would provide buffers at unattractive parking areas, along with much needed improvement of site maintenance and upkeep. The Water Department, throughout this last year, repeatedly agreed that the requirements would be placed into an agreement. 240012, ETC. Indeed, the Water Department, in its PowerPoint presentation to us, stated it would enter into a community agreement with us. That commitment appears to have been withdrawn. Despite recent Water Department assertions that there are sufficient safeguards in place through historic commission and civic design reviews through -- and through political leverage, these are not sufficient for us, and they should not be sufficient for City Council. Any conditions recommended at these reviews, especially the Civic Design Review, are merely optional. For the Queen Lane plant, the Water Department indicates it will not begin the design phase until 2030 or 2031. The reconstruction is expected to run from 2036 to 2042. Notwithstanding that the work is so far away, the Water Department is requesting an ordinance now for -- by right zoning, allowing the Water Department almost free rein. Given the proximity of so many homes, we are concerned. The rezoning requested now, if implemented, would strip the community of all 240012, ETC. this leverage that we currently have with the residential zoning. Over the last year, we have asked for two types of protections before the rezoning bill moves forward. First, we are asking for the Water Department to enter into an enforceable agreement, establish the basic parameters that we already spoke about. Second, we ask that the redevelopment of the facility be required to follow an official master plan that would be prepared by the Water Department and reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council, a process used for other large properties in the city which impact the communities around them. We are currently striving with the Water Department to develop an agreement through meetings, and we are making progress. However, we need more time so we can complete our collaboration. And we request this bill be held by Councilmember Jones until we have a signed agreement by all parties. Further, we ask that Councilmember Jones put more pressure on the Water Department to do the right thing for the community. 240012, ETC. We're making very reasonable requests.
If you lived across the street from the facility like we do, you'd be sitting here at the witness table making the same request we're making today. Thank you.
Thank you for your testimony. That's it. Next witness. Please state your name for the record and proceed.
Good morning. My name is Paul Elia. I'm a resident of East Falls. I'm a close neighbor. I live on Queen Lane. I've been an architect for 35 years and a member of the East Falls Community Council Zoning Committee for 10. I'm testifying in opposition to this bill as well. I became aware of this bill back in January when PWD tried to have it passed without any community improvement, January of last year, just to be clear. There was no community involvement, no 21 community outreach. There was no information provided. We heard about the bill in the 11th hour and requested Councilman Jones to pull it and he graciously did. The bill had contained, at that point, uses that were totally 240012, ETC. inappropriate for a residential neighborhood, transit stations, strip malls, medical facilities, and, and, and transmission towers with building heights in excess of five stories. All of that is an aggressive move in a very established, old residential neighborhood. PWD assured us that they would provide us with an agreement that we would find acceptable. Then they changed their mind. We're all in support of the project. But PWD can't and won't provide any assurances as to the handling of -- that this project will not disrupt the quality of life in East Falls, that this project will not become a municipal compound with service trucks and loading docks, that it will not become more of an eyesore than it currently is. We've asked for a master plan to let the residents know what's being planned and how. And we've asked for a simple, enforceable, reasonable agreement, which we drafted in two weeks and asked for reasonable assurances to both requests. The Water Department said, "No," just no. They ignored and 240012, ETC. delayed numerous requests to meet. We provided that agreement back in November. We did not get a response to our agreement until last week. We're asking that this bill be revisited and, and be revised to mandate a city- approved plan and have the PWD enter into an agreement with East Falls before the zoning is changed. Thank you.
Thank you for your testimony. Before we proceed, I'd like to ask the water commissioner to, to return because I really want to hear your response, Commissioner. Say it ain't so -- say it ain't so. I would hate to think that the Water Department would undertake such a massive project without community input or without any assurances or without considering a community benefits agreement that's been being actively worked on.
Please put your mic -- state your name for the record and, and --
I'm sorry. Randy Hayman, water commissioner. We have met with them, with 240012, ETC. the neighborhood for over a year and a half. There have been community meetings that we've attended. Now, they want a written agreement. They want a contract. Okay. And basically, the Planning Commission has said that such an agreement is not required, okay, that that type of agreement would be used for a mixed use entertainment district, a situation where you have people entering the facility. That is inherently not what we have at Queen Lane. This is a fenced-off area that is under Homeland Security. Now, they want a signed agreement that they basically would be able to bring to court. Okay. That's really what they want to do. The problem that we have is, is on a couple of levels. Number one, they are one group. We could very well have another group come up next week that says that they, too, have ideas and differ from what they wish to do. We met. And we were willing to do an MOU, and we have an MOU that outlined in detail some of the things that we were willing to do, including some of the things they mentioned here just a moment ago. 240012, ETC. They wanted to say that they didn't want barbed wire fences. Well, with fences, we said no new permanent cyclone fencing will be installed along the exterior perimeter. Cyclone fencing may be used as a temporary fencing as required by security during the construction. No 8 new barbed wire, which you mentioned, barbed wire. No new barbed wire will be installed along the exterior perimeter, Queen Lane area, stone walls. PWD will preserve and replace the existing exterior. There are over 10 items that we go in very deep -- I can't speak. I'm sorry, specific detail of what we're willing to do with sound. PWD will provide sound attenuation for new generators to not exceed five decibels above background level, measured at the property boundary of the nearest occupied residential property. This shows we are taking consideration the needs and the requests that this -- the community has made. We have over 10 examples of where we, in the MOU, state that we're willing to do this. The problem is, anything beyond this 240012, ETC. MOU would jeopardize the funding opportunities that we could have because what could happen? You could have a situation that you -- the city -- and this is based on what we've been instructed by council, that the city does not want -- or the, the legal team does not want us to enter into a legal contract with them. That's not how these matters are handled in the real estate arena. And as such, we're following the direction we're being given by the legal counsel.
So Commissioner, let me just say this, based on something that you just said, which is that, you know, the City of Philadelphia Water Department is not required -- that we are not required to enter into an MOU or to a community benefits agreement. And even if it's not legally required, I think that we in government have to ask ourselves, is it the right thing to do? And knowing, as we all said, this project is massive, this project is going to be an inconvenience to the neighbors. There needs to be some, some consideration that some of their ass are not just, you know, dismissed, especially 240012, ETC. because we know that they're really going to be inconvenienced as a -- really, as a service to the entire City of Philadelphia. You know, there's no doubt in my mind, at least -- and I -- you know, I'm going to let Councilman Jones take over this. But there's no 8 doubt in my mind that there's going to be an impact of property values as a result of this construction project, at least during the term of the project. And so, you know, if, if I was intending to sell my home or buy a home, you know, like, I might be waiting for this project if I'm interested in buying because maybe the markets -- it's very likely it's going to come down or if I'm interested in selling, let me get out now or I'm going to have to hold my position for at least five years, five, five plus years. So, you know, like, the idea that we don't, you know, we don't have to do it, so we're not going to do it, to me is not the right approach. And like I said, you know, like, we've worked together a lot. You know, I, I have the utmost respect for you and the department, but I 240012, ETC. think, in my opinion, we're just wrong on our approach on this. That's my opinion. I want to turn it over -- Chair recognizes Councilman Jones.
So sometimes up here, we have to be Solomon without the wisdom. So what I am thinking of is -- what you said was that we aren't required, and that, that was the phrase used. So I want to ask the Planning Commission, can we incorporate that, though, into the agreement somehow? And I -- and I want to -- I want to -- I want to raise that. First of all, did we submit the proposed agreement for the record, the --
Okay. Well, I want us to do that so that there is some record that these are the things that the community and the Water Department, in theory, felt were okay. And is that true, on behalf of the community, that other than the enforceability of that 240012, ETC. agreement, there's some consensus about the tenets of the agreement? Is that correct?
The, the original agreement that we put together and provided to the Water Department back in November was returned only last week, which I have not had an opportunity to review. I read it through quickly, and it was pretty much gutted. Many of the options that we had put in our version were, were commented on to be considered by the Water Department. It was not an agreement. And a memorandum of understanding has no commitment value. So we can submit our version as well, if you would like to see the difference between the two.
If you could provide that to the chair. And what I'd like to do is then give us a pause for a week to work with the Law Department to see, if it can't be in this, how do we amend so that it is to a degree enforceable? Because the reality is you're going to go on and run some utility in the private sector and make millions and millions of dollars. And I want you still to return my call when you 240012, ETC. do.
I want to -- I want to state one -- well, finish, please, sir.
Let me finish -- let me finish -- let me finish, Commissioner. And then that community -- all of us are going to be kind of gone. And then 2030 and '31, the owners of those properties or their heirs are, are going to be faced with -- what did they agree to shake hands about? And other than what's in this record, they need to be able to fall back on, well, you said, you know, you weren't going to do five decibels of sound. And here we are at seven. And what is the recourse of that? And even if it's just in the record so that there's some civil suit that can happen, I think it's worth memorializing. And I understand the compelling interests of the department to want to move this project because we have money on the line. We have service of water on the line. And I, I totally get that, but I want to move it out of committee, Madam Chair. Give us a week to work with the Water Department planning 240012, ETC. Commission to figure what pieces we can put in place to give this community a little bit of a leg to stand on. And if -- that's, that's just my opinion. Speaker F: If I may --
I believe some of what I said may have been inartful in this respect. It's not that we don't have to do it. What the engineers are telling me is that it's too early in the process. We don't even have -- we have a conceptual design of what's going on. And so, for us to be tied to a legal document that says, you must do X where we're still at the conceptual design stage, is premature. And I think it will -- it will hamstring the engineers as far as what we're able to do. But nevertheless, I do go back to the fact that we have the MOU, and we have 10 items. I didn't go in great detail on what they were, but they were -- the ones I showed you were very specific. We are willing to listen to them. And 240012, ETC. we've had very specific things we're willing to do in the MOU. So we have those items. The other 5 thing is, the MOU has strength in this respect. 6 We are sitting in a public forum today. This is 7 documented, that the city -- the, the, the water 8 commissioner, the Water Department is willing to 9 do these 10 things. And we're willing to have an 10 MOU. And we're willing to continue to speak. And we understand that the agreement -- I mean, the change of the legislation does not give us carte blanche to do just anything, that we have to be good neighbors. And we will continue to walk that path with them. So I wouldn't defend - -
Can you read into the record those 10 things, please?
Sure, sure. Just -- it'll be lengthy, but give me a moment, please.