COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING AND PUBLIC MEETING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON STREETS AND SERVICES - - - Room 400 City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wed., 10/18/00, 2:25 p.m. - - - BILL 000506 - Relocate southerly curb of Erie Ave. BILL 000508 - Held till call of Chair. BILL 000510 - Re towing zone locations, hours. BILL 000511 - Extend time period to strike Sharswood Street from City Plan. BILL 000512 - Withdrawn at request of sponsor. BILL 000513 - Placing Parrish Street on City Plan. BILL 000538 - Authorizing K. Osuala to construct, use, maintain one-story garage addition. BILL 000542 - No motor home parking Bennington St. BILL 000547 - Right turns on Chestnut. Held till call of Chair. BILL 000582 - Extend time period to legally abandon right-of-way in former Annin Street Plan. BILL 000584 - Extend time period to allow for development of shopping center along 52nd Street BILL 000589 - Eliminate portion of Chang Street. BILL 000604 - Authorizing water mains and appurtenant work along Paleski Road. BILL 000605 - Appropriate right-of-way through Hagy's Mill Road. BILL 000606 - Grant right-of-way for water main purposes along Paleski Road. RES. 000041 - Re dangers caused by deteriorating retaining walls. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO, Chairman COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN, Vice Chair COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN ANGEL L. ORTIZ COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 2 10/24/00 STREETS & SERVICES COMMITTEE I N D E X Page 000506 Paul Lonie, Streets Department . . . . . . . . Martin Soffer, Planning Commission . . . . . . 5 Nancy Sen, Streets Department. . . . . . . . . 6 000508 Nancy Sen, Streets Department. . . . . . . . . 7 Martin Soffer, Planning Commission . . . . . . 14 000538 Nancy Sen, Streets Department. . . . . . . . . 15 Darwin Beauvais, Aide to Jannie Blackwell. . . 16 000510 Charles Denny, Streets Department. . . . . . . 17 000542 Charles Denny, Streets Department. . . . . . . 17 000604, 605, 606 Paul McCloskey, Water Department . . . . . . . 20 Martin Soffer, Planning Commission . . . . . . 22 000512 Paul Lonie, Streets Department . . . . . . . . 27 000513 Paul Lonie, Streets Department . . . . . . . . 28 000582 Paul Lonie, Streets Department . . . . . . . . 30 000584 Paul Lonie, Streets Department . . . . . . . . 32 000589 Paul Lonie, Streets Department . . . . . . . . 33 000547 Debra Russo, Managing Director's Office. . . . 35 Robert Wright, Streets Department. . . . . . . 37 Paul Levy, Center City District. . . . . . . . 63 3 10/24/00 STREETS & SERVICES COMMITTEE (Index, cont'd.) 000547, cont'd. Donald Nigro, President. . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Delaware Valley Association of Rail Passengers Sarah Borden, General Manager, Rittenhouse Row 77 Sue McNamara, Delaware Valley Bicycle Coalition 78 Kate Ryan, Thomas Jefferson Hospital . . . . . 92 Dennis Winters, Clean Air Council. . . . . . . 97 Jennifer Escorcia, Bicycle Club of Phila . . . 116 Kevin Smith, Del. Valley Transit Users Group 123 John Jordan, Washington Square West Resident 127 Resolution 000041 Debra Russo, Managing Director's Office. . . . 143 4 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000506 P R O C E E D I N G S
Good afternoon, everyone. The Committee on Streets and Services is now in session. With me are committee members Councilmember Rizzo, Councilman Wilson Goode, Jr., Councilman David Cohen, and Councilman Darrell Clarke. We have a quorum, I believe, right? We do have a quorum. What we will do this afternoon is, we will take the bills out of order from the calendar. In order to move the hearings along much more quickly, we will take those bills with little or no testimony attached to them so we can run those bills first, and then we'll take the bills we expect to have significant testimony on. We do this in this arrangement all the time because it does move much quicker. And as soon as my clerk gets back to me. . .
The clerk will read the title of the first bill. 5 10/24/00 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000506
Bill No. 000506, an ordinance authorizing and directing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No.'s 157, 158, and 226 by relocating the southerly curb line of Erie Avenue between Second Street and Sedgely Avenue, relocating a portion of the southerly curb line of Erie Avenue at the southeast corner of Second Street and Erie Avenue, and relocating a portion of the northerly curb line of Erie Avenue at the northeast corner of Second Street and Erie Avenue.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 000506, I think: This is an administration ordinance 20 requested by the Streets Department. The purpose of this ordinance is to relocate the curb lines and the described portions of Erie Avenue to make the intersection safer for children crossing to their school. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to the 6 10/24/00 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000506 committee for favorable action.
Good afternoon, Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Martin Soffer, from the Planning Commission. The purpose of this bill to revise lines and grades of the subject streets for public safety purposes. The Planning Commission staff supports this bill, and the Commission will recommend approval of Bill 000506 at its next meeting on November 2, 2000. Thank you.
Thank you. Are there any other questions for this witness from the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 000508, an ordinance granting permission to the owners of certain newsstands located within the 1st Councilmatic District to construct, use, and 7 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000508 maintain on a temporary basis newsstands with a greater dimension of advertising than that permitted by general ordinance; in particular, granting such permission with respect to the owners of the newsstands located at the southeast corner of Broad and McKean Streets, the southeast corner of Broad and Tasker Streets, the southwest corner of Tenth and Reed Streets, the southeast corner of 13th and Mifflin Streets, the northeast corner of Juniper and Market Streets, the northwest corner of Tenth and Market Streets, the northeast corner of Ninth and Market Streets, the southeast corner of Eighth and Market Streets, and the northeast corner of 11th and Walnut Streets, all under certain terms and conditions.
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon, Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Nancy Sen. I'm an engineering supervisor with the Streets Department, and I'm here to testify on Bill No. 23 000508 on behalf of the Streets Department. This bill authorizes newsstand owners at nine particular locations within the City to 8 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000508 install new newsstand structures. The Streets Department will need to review the final plans for the structure to be installed at these locations as part of the newsstand licensing process. We would like to point out that at one location, the northeast corner of 11th and Walnut Streets, we expect that there will not be sufficient room to accommodate the footprint size required by previous ordinance. And, therefore, the Streets Department objects to the passage of this bill in its present form. The Streets Department would have no 14 objection to the legislation if the 11th Walnut and Street location were not included, which is -- that's the last location of the nine.
Is there anyone here from the Newsstand Association? (No response.)
I happened to notice on the southeast corner of Broad and McKean last evening a new newsstand that has kind of like been temporarily dropped on the sidewalk. It is not like the newsstands that we had been talking about that -- similar to the one at 12th and 9 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000508 Market.
I haven't a clue to these things -- are these the self-contained units that we worked on or not? Do you happen to know?
I'm not aware of that, but I can send our inspectors out and get back to you. Did you notice if it was a wooden stand?
No, it's metal, they're metal. So at least they're conforming to the material.
But it is a larger version of the square newsstand on the east side of East Penn Square.
I don't see any real significant difference other than a larger newsstand. And if it's not going to accommodate the amenities that we were hoping to have in the newsstand, then I, as the sponsor of that, would not agree to that. So I'm going to hold this bill -- 10 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000508
-- until someone from the Newsstand Association and the advertising company, if they're still a partner in this, gets back to me to let me know what they're doing.
There was a motive to my madness. Although some people disagreed with it, it wasn't just to put larger newsstands there; we wanted something that was going to be much more attractive and also accommodate the needs of the operator while we address the issue of what needs to be -- what they're obligated to do by the code.
Exactly. And a lot of work with all of the departments, you know, under your guidance --
Listen, I'm not going to throw all that work aside. Either they do what we asked them to do or they'll have to figure out a better way of getting a newsstand that conforms to the materials in the code, and not come up with an over-sized newsstand and think 11 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000508 that that's what's going to get them past me; that's not going to work. So I'm going to hold this. And I just wanted you to go on record as to what you knew today, and I'll bring this back up at a later date.
Okay. And we'll send somebody out to look at it. And I guess we'll have a meeting of the parties and we'll, you know, let you know.
And I noticed at that same location at the southeast corner of Broad and McKean, after about a year, we finally got them to relocate the newsstand a little further south on Broad Street because it was literally blocking entrance to the bank building at Broad and McKean. So the stand that I observed last night is back where the old stand was. Now, that may just be temporary because there's electrical hookups, but I don't know that to be a fact.
So, again, I thought somebody would be here today to testify. 12 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000508 Apparently not, 'cause no one has contacted my office.
They're busy making their business, so -- but we'll get in touch with them.
And while you're here, I've had discussions with L&I, and I believe I may have spoken to the Managing Director about it. There are a couple of locations where there have been abandoned newsstands in Center City, one being across the street in front of the Wanamaker building, and another one at Seventh and Walnut, which probably allows for maybe two foot of sidewalk from the curb in, and it's sitting there abandoned. And there's another one at the southeast corner of Fourth and Market. I'm really just trying to get rid of those things completely.
I mean, I know they've been abandoned for four years or more.
I do know that the Streets 13 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000508 Department was asked to help L&I remove them because we have a little bit better equipment than they do. And, actually, we're in the process of getting some procedure together that they could officially notify us, after due process has been made to the owners and -- because Streets would be happy to help, but we want to make sure that legally we're allowed to pick it up and remove it.
I mean, the one at Seventh and Walnut is probably the most offensive, and the most dangerous one.
There is virtually probably two foot or less of public walk space.
You have to step into the street to get around there.
Thank you. Are there any other questions for these witnesses? (No questions.)
We just concur with what Nancy had said, and now that the bill's being withheld, we would like to partake in that review since we have not seen any of those things.
These are new microphones. What you need to do with these is, you have to pull them as close to you as possible and speak directly into them.
Okay, excuse me. You've answered the question that we're going to withhold the bill, 'cause our review -- we'd like to review these sites, and we had some concerns with them as well.
Hearing none, the clerk 15 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000538 will read the title of the next bill. And let the record reflect that Councilman Ortiz is now present and Councilman Mariano.
Bill No. 000538, which is on the second page, is an ordinance authorizing Kate Osuala, the owner of the property located at 1301 South 57th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19143, to construct, use, and maintain a one-story garage addition on and over the south footway of Thomas Street, adjacent to the property 1301 South 57th Street, all under certain terms and conditions.
Good afternoon, members. Again my name is Nancy Sen. I'm here from the Streets Department to testify on Bill No. 000538. This bill authorizes Kate Osuala to construct, use, and maintain a one-story garage addition, projecting a maximum of three feet into the south footway of Thomas Street, adjacent to her property at 1301 South 57th Street. The garage addition leaves adequate width and clearance of unobstructed footway on Thomas Street. Therefore, the Streets Department has no 16 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000538 objections to the passage of this bill.
Also for the record, my name is Darwin Beauvais. I'm from Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell's office. She introduced the bill and she does support the decision.
Thank you. Are there any other questions for this witness from the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Is Charles Denny here from the Streets Department? Do you have two bills? (Witness comes forward.)
Bill 000510, an ordinance 24 amending Section 12-2409 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Towing Zone Locations and Hours," by 17 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000510 adding as a towing zone location the north and south sides of Green Street between Tenth Street and Eleventh Street graffiti, under certain terms and conditions.
Good afternoon. My name is Charles Denny. I'm the Assistant Chief Traffic Engineer, and I'm here to testify on Bill 510. The Streets Department posted this regulation on June 17th of this year, and we have no objections to this posting.
Thank you. Are there any other questions for this witness from the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
On of the list is Bill No. 000542, an ordinance establishing a no 23 motor home parking regulation on Bennington Street, Pike Street to Luzerne Street, both sides.
The Streets Department 18 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000542 posted this regulation on August 11, 2000. And the Streets Department has no objections to this bill.
Thank you. Are there any other questions for this witness from the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 000605, which is on of the announcement, is an ordinance 22 authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property to select and appropriate a certain right-of-way through 8480 Hagy's Mill Road for construction, reconstruction, alteration, connection, operation, 19 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000604, 5, 6 maintenance, and inspection of water facilities, partly along and within the bed of Paleski Road, a private street, from Hagy's Mill Road to approximately 489 feet southwesterly of Hagy's Mill Road. I believe that is also a companion Bill 8 No. 000604. Paul? Which is an ordinance 9 authorizing the construction of water mains and appurtenant work and a right-of-way partially in and along portions of a private street known as Paleski Road and along the southwesterly boundary of Manatawna Farms in the Roxborough area of the City. And Bill No. 000606, an ordinance to authorize the Water Commissioner, on behalf of the City, to enter into agreements owners of the properties and their successors of an L-shaped private street known as Paleski Road that begins southeasterly of Schuylkill Nature Center's property, approximately 489 southeasterly of Hagy's Mill Road, thence in a southeasterly direction for approximately 137 feet, and continuing in a southwesterly direction for approximately 635 feet for the grant of a 20 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000604, 5, 6 right-of-way to the City for water main purposes. These three bills will be heard at the same time.
In the interest of time, that's how I planned it. My name is Paul McCloskey, and I'm with the Philadelphia Water Department testifying on these three bills introduction. To give you an introduction, Manatawna Farms and the Schuylkill Nature Center area of the City encompasses the upper portion of the northwestern upper Roxborough. The nature center is devoted to preserving the nature, undeveloped area for environmental education. The Manatawna Farms, which is adjacent, is a working farm, owned and operated by the City through the Fairmount Park Commission. Within the nature center adjacent to the farm is a residential community. The property are served by onsite sewerage treatment facilities and wells. Over the last few years, there's been genuine concern over the quality and quantity of water produced by the individual wells. The current construction of the housing development 21 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000604, 5, 6 over a landfill in nearby Montgomery County has sharpened the concern over the possible contamination of the water table and water quality. The severe drought of 1999 has severely hampered all the wells' ability to provide adequate water to the households. A public water main has recently been extended to Spring Lane to the Montgomery County line. This makes public water relatively available to the community. Bill No. 604 authorizes the Water Department to construct water mains in along a private street known as Paleski Road from Hagy's Mill/Spring Lane southward through the Schuylkill Nature Center property for approximately 489 feet. Thence in the same road southward, approximately 137 feet more and then westward in an L-shaped direction approximately 635 feet till it comes to an end. This main would service half the properties. A second water main will be laid along and within the southern property line of Manatawna Farms. This main will service the remaining properties and the City's farm itself. In order to provide access for one of the water mains, Bill No. 605 authorizes the 22 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000604, 5, 6 Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City, to purchase a right-of-way for water purposes through the Schuylkill Nature Center in and along the private road of Paleski Street. Bill No. 606 provides for the continuation of the access in the private road by authorizing the Water Commissioner, on behalf of the City, to enter into agreements with the owners of the properties and their successors of the private road for the granting of a right-of-way to the City for water main purposes. The agreements will also revise the language that the City may place the right-of-way on the City Plan at a future date. We recommend that the bills be voted favorably out of committee. Due to the urgency of this situation, we request the rules of City Council are suspended and that the three bills have their reading at the next Council hearing.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, the purpose of this bill is to provide the residents of this area with water service. The proposed right-of-way will be 23 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000604, 5, 6 purchased from the Schuylkill Nature Center for a price of $ 2000. The money will come from the capital budget of the Water Department. Additionally, in the near future, the Streets bills will be introduced into City Council, which will strike paper streets from 8 the City Plan to consolidate the 500-acre 9 landscape for the Schuylkill Valley Nature 10 Center. 11 Therefore, by action at its meeting on 12 October 19, 2000, the Planning Commission 13 recommends that Bill No. 000605 be approved. 14 Thank you. 15
Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions for this witness from the committee? (No questions.) 24 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000511
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill. Thank you.
Bill No. 000511, an ordinance amending Section 2 of an ordinance (Bill 12 No. 980443) approved June 25, 1998, entitled "An ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 120 of the area bounded by 18th Street, 19th Street, Master Street, and Jefferson Street," by striking from the City Plan and vacating Sharswood Street from 18th Street to 19th Street, widening Harlan Street on the northerly side, relocating the southerly curb line of Harlan Street, and placing on the City Plan Gratz Street from Jefferson Street to Harlan Street, under certain terms and conditions, including the dedication to the City free and clear of all encumbrances of the bed of Gratz Street and the northerly 15-foot widened portion 25 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000511 of Harlan Street, by extending the time for compliance with the conditions stated therein.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets. And the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 000511: This is not an administration ordinance 11 but an ordinance requested by Mr. Michael Koontz, Project Manager of the Redevelopment Authority, dealing with the Cecil B. Moore residential development area. The purpose of this ordinance 15 is to extend the time period to strike Sharswood Street from the City Plan and place Gratz Street and widen Harlan Street on the City Plan to facilitate new home construction. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Thank you. Are there any other questions for this witness from the committee? (No questions.) 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000512
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 000512, an ordinance amending Section 2 of an ordinance (Bill 9 No. 980444) approved June 15, 1998, entitled "An ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 58," by striking from the City Plan and vacating Reno Street from Broad Street to 13th Street, Camac Street from Brown Street to Parrish Street, and a portion of Ogden Street from Watts Street to a point approximately 85 feet east of Watts Street; and by placing on the City Plan Park Avenue from Brown Street to Parrish Street, by relocating Camac Street from Brown Street to Parrish Street, and by reserving and placing on the City Plan a right-of-way for drainage purposes and water main purposes within the portion of Ogden Street being stricken from the City Plan and vacated by this ordinance, and the dedication to the City of unopened portions of Park Avenue and Camac Street, 27 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000512 all under certain terms and conditions, by extending time for compliance with the conditions stated therein.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 000512: The Survey Bureau requests that this bill be pulled at the request of Councilman Clarke because the conditions have already been met, and this has been confirmed by the Board of Surveyors, and it would be redundant legislation.
Are there any questions from the committee? (No questions.)
I asked that the bill be withdrawn because the conditions in the ordinance 23 have already been met and it's been confirmed by the Board of Surveyors. Councilman Clarke's aware of it. 28 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000513
He's aware of that? Okay, thank you. The clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 000513, an ordinance amending Section 2 of an ordinance (Bill 8 No. 970818) approved April 13, 1998, entitled "An ordinance authorizing and directing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 11 58," by placing on the City Plan Parrish Street from Ninth Street to 12th Street, Brown Street from Tenth Street to 12th Street, Marvine Street from Fairmount Avenue to Brown Street, Warnock Street from Fairmount Avenue to a dead-end turnaround north of Brown Street and Reno Place from Percy Street westwardly to a dead-end turnaround, all under certain terms and conditions, including the including dedication to the City free and clear of all encumbrances of the beds of the streets being placed on the City Plan by this ordinance, by extending the time for compliance with the conditions stated therein.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My 29 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000513 name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 000513: This is not an administrative ordinance 7 but an ordinance requested by Mr. Cardel Blue of the Philadelphia Housing Authority. The purpose of this ordinance is to extend the expiration date of an ordinance approved July 1, 1997. The purpose of that ordinance was to grant the authority to place five streets on the City Plan to facilitate residential development. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to committee for favorable action.
Thank you. Are there any other questions for this witness from the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill. 30 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000582
Bill No. 000582, an ordinance amending Section 2 of an ordinance (Bill 4 No. 990366) approved July 1, 1999, entitled "An ordinance authorizing the striking from City Plan No. 17-S and abandoning of a certain right-of-way for gas main purposes and public utility purposes within the lines of former Annin Street, extending from the 50-feet wide right-of-way, formerly 28th Street, to 29th Street, under certain terms and conditions," by extending the period for compliance with the authorization and conditions therein.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 000582: This is not an administration ordinance 21 but an ordinance requested by Mr. Robert Boothroyd of Philadelphia. The purpose of this ordinance is to extend the time period to legally abandon a right-of-way in former Annin Street between 29th and former 28th Street and to erect a new facility 31 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000582 for Rosa Foods, Incorporated. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Thank you. Are there any other questions for this witness from the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 000584, an ordinance amending Section 2 of an ordinance (Bill 17 No. 990368) approved July 1, 1999, entitled "An ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 266," by striking from the City Plan and vacating Jefferson Street from 50th Street to a dead-end turnaround northwestwardly therefrom and striking from the City Plan and abandoning a certain right-of-way for drainage purposes, under certain terms and conditions, by extending the period for compliance 32 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000582 with the Authorization conditions therein.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 000584: This is not an administration ordinance 10 but an ordinance requested by Mr. Evan Sparks, of PIDC, 2600 Centre Square West, Philadelphia. The purpose of this ordinance is to extend the time period and allow for the development of a retail shopping center along 52nd Street. This ordinance 15 is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Thank you. Are there any other questions for this witness from the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the 33 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000589 clerk will read the Title of the next bill.
Bill No. 000589, an ordinance amending Section 1 (b) of an ordinance 5 (Bill No. 000374), approved August 11, 2000, entitled "An ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 121 by striking from the City Plan and vacating a portion of Chang Street and by placing a dead-end turnaround at the terminus of Chang Street, all under certain terms and conditions."
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 000589: This is not an administration ordinance 19 but an ordinance requested by Mr. Philip Licht, of Jenkintown, Pennsylvania, who represents the 27th and Girard Trust. The purpose of this ordinance 22 is to provide three parcels and eliminate a portion of Chang Street which borders and separates these parcels to facilitate commercial development. There was an error in the original 34 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000589 development of this ordinance, and this corrects that error, allowing the legislation to go through perfectly. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Thank you. Are there any other questions for this witness from the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill. Before you do that, could I get a show of hands of all those who are here to testify on Bill No. -- On the bill concerning the Chestnut Street Transitway, would you just raise your hand? And who is here to testify on the bill 22 concerning the -- the resolution concerning retaining walls? Could you show your hand again? Okay, thank you. I just wanted to get a sense of how 35 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 many people are here for what bill. Thank you.
Bill No. 000547, an ordinance regulating the movement of traffic on Chestnut Street, in particular authorizing right turns to be made from Chestnut Street at certain intersections in Center City, Philadelphia.
For some reason, we weren't supplied with a witness list so just about everyone in the audience is here to testify, so I will leave it up to you to be as civil as you can and come forward and speak. Miss Russo, are you the only one testifying on behalf of the City? Okay, whoever's from the City, come up first -- you could stay there, sir. And we'll get the City testimony first, and then Paul, everybody else -- you could stay there, sir. (Witness comes forward.)
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon. My name is Debra Russo. I'm here on behalf of the Managing Director's Office for the City of Philadelphia. The testimony I'd like to offer today concerns the 36 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 possible withdrawal of federal funding with respect to right-hand turns on Chestnut Street. It's the Managing Director's understanding at this point in time that there are many issues involving the federal grant whereby the bus lane was created on Chestnut Street. There has been some documentation, although not clear, that that federal funding could be in jeopardy if the City of Philadelphia were to allow right-hand turns on Chestnut Street. What I'd like to offer to the committee is if they would be willing to work with our office and the Streets Department in exploring these issues as to whether or not these allegations are true as to whether or not there is any federal funding in jeopardy. Also, we need to -- if the funding in jeopardy, we need to know the amount, and right now, all those issues are not clear. So what I would offer to this particular committee is the assistance of my office and the Streets Department and the Law Department in exploring particular issues further. Thank you. 37 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547
Thank you, Miss Russo. And as you recall, just this week, we had a meeting in my office -- myself, you, and the Managing Director. And as I indicated, I think it was, on Monday -- I lose track of the days, but I think it was Monday -- I will hold the bill since I was the chief sponsor of this. But I wanted to get all of the testimony on the record today so that when we find out whether there is some -- we are jeopardizing any federal or State funding that went into this project, we'll be able to make a decision more accurately at that time. But I do want -- I wanted to get all of the testimony on the record today. Thank you.
And that's the understanding of the Managing Director's Office. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (Witness comes forward.)
My name is Robert Wright, and I'm the Transportation Engineering Manager of the Department of Streets. 38 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547
Okay, my name is Robert Wright, and I'm the Manager of the Transportation Engineering section of the Department of Streets. In 1995, the Department of Streets was requested to undertake a comprehensive study of the Chestnut Street Transitway to solve two major problems on this facility. The first was the condition of sidewalks, which had greatly deteriorated due to inappropriate materials used when the Transitway was constructed in 1975. The second was the proliferation of delivery vehicles which had occurred on the once transit-only corridor. The nature of the street as one which was open to traffic at some hours and not during others and the often confusing signing for this was seen as an additional difficulty. The creation of the Transitway in 1975 was viewed by many as a plus for this city and was consistent with efforts underway in other major 39 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 cities at that time. Since then, some of these cities have completely removed their transit streets for various reasons. While transit operations were revised several times during the life of the transitway, it remained a transit facility for its years of existence. A major 8 factor which influences this is the high 9 percentage of people entering Center City on 10 transit, estimated to be over 60 percent of all 11 Center City-bound trips. 12 The Department's intent and the 13 redesign of Chestnut Street was to preserve a 14 semblance of the transit exclusivity, which has 15 been in place since 1975. Four SEPTA bus routes 16 enter Center City via Chestnut Street, carrying 17 over 50,000 riders per day. As espoused by the 18 City's Transit First policy, the desire to 19 maintain an operational advantage for these buses 20 through the use of an exclusive transit lane was 21 very strong. There were also requests from 22 businesses along Chestnut Street to bring back 23 motor vehicle traffic and parking. The creation 24 of the Transitway and its removal of traffic were 25 believed by the businesses to be detriments to the 40 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 success of the many shops on Chestnut. Accordingly, the proposed redesigned Chestnut Street was a compromise of sorts. Through a widening of the cartway, we were able to once again accommodate vehicular traffic in a single moving lane. On-street parking was reinstituted on the north side of the street, with a loading zone in each block for delivery vehicles. The right-side curb lane was established as a transit lane, to be used only by buses and bicycles. To reinforce the right lane as a transit-only lane, it was decided to not allow right-hand turns from Chestnut Street onto southbound intersecting streets. This would ensure that private vehicles would not need to use the right lane. This approach was viewed as consistent with the City's transit preference policy, and it preserved the transit exclusivity introduced with the opening of the Transitway. This concept was presented to the Chestnut Street Business Association and the various individual property owners, institutions, and stakeholders during the project design phase. 41 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 While initial concerns were expressed about the proposed operation, ultimately, the affected parties determined that the project would improve the situation and agreed that it should move forward. This was also the sense of a public hearing conducted by City Council in June of 1999 on this project and the proposed operational change in Chestnut Street. Additionally, the creation of the Transitway resulted in some of the wider sidewalks in Center City along Chestnut Street. With these wide footways and the reduced amount of traffic, the Transitway became very popular as a pedestrian-friendly route. It still has the highest pedestrian volumes of any street in Center City.
One of the factors in this popularity was the lack of turning traffic, since there was no 19 traffic on Chestnut Street; thus, pedestrians could cross numbered streets without any conflict from traffic either turning onto Chestnut Street or turning from Chestnut Street. With the proposed dedicated bus lane, this conflict-free pedestrian path would be retained at least on one sidewalk along the corridor. 42 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 The overall cost of the improvements on Chestnut Street is approximately $13 million. 7 milling coming as transit assistance from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. Each of these agencies stipulated that there must be a dedicated transit lane and made this a condition of the funding. 5 million, has also warned the City that any change in the operation of the exclusive transit lane will cause it to reconsider its participation. Thus, the City stands to forfeit a total of over $10 million in outside funding if any change is made in the operation of the transit lane. Additionally, subsequent funding application of this nature may be at risk. We realize that the change in operation on Chestnut Street is significant one. However, given the public outreach efforts undertaken during the project's development and the relatively short amount of time the new operation has been fully in effect -- the street was 43 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 reopened to traffic only in mid-July -- we would recommend that this operation be permitted to remain for some longer period of time to allow us to fully and fairly judge its effectiveness. This will permit stakeholders and users to become more accustomed to the benefits of the reintroduction of general traffic to Chestnut Street, something that has been desired by many for quite some time.
How much more time do you think you would need to determine whether we should do the -- lift the prohibition on turns or not?
We would normally look for at least a year of full operation.
An additional year? For how long has it been open now to traffic?
It's been fully open since the middle of July, so we would look for a full year. So if we could get --
From this date, another year? For a full year, including -- to this July you're saying?
Till mid-July of 2001. 44 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547
And I think I heard -- I'm not sure if I heard you right because we don't hear things up here. It kind of bounces around with this new system. You made mention of the fact that Chestnut Street has always been a very high-volume pedestrian way?
And that it appears that people use Chestnut Street because of the pedestrian-friendly environment because there were not cars -- the cars were not allowed there at a particular time?
How did you get to that? Is that a scientific survey or is there -- I mean, did you poll people?
We polled people and we also did some pedestrian counts over the last few years, went out and actually tried to count people on different blocks. And some of the information we obtained just from those rather non-scientific counts showed that there were more people on Chestnut Street than on Market Street and other streets. 45 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547
Have there been any surveys since you've reopened it to traffic?
There have been no 5 specific surveys. We've heard comments from some of the businesses, both pro and con, but we haven't really conducted a survey.
I guess I find -- I must be one of the people who would have found Chestnut Street, prior to reopening it up to traffic, to be more intimidating 'cause I had this sense, when I was on the pedestrian way, I never expected to have vehicles, but yet there were the double-car buses and other kinds of vehicles that would use it daily. I never really felt as though, in my opinion, it was pedestrian-friendly. In fact, I believe there were crosswalks in the middle of intersections at one time?
And they were eliminated because they were creating a very pedestrian-unfriendly environment?
All right, just curious. 46 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547
I'm not through yet. I think you heard my statement that I would hold this bill. I'm not certain if I would recommend that we hold it for a year. Naturally, I'm only one voting member here, but my biggest concerns are for what the financial implications may or may not be. Was there any consideration -- or do you have any statistics? Or when you were looking to design the reopening the Chestnut Street, did anyone ever take into consideration what the impact on the businesses would be?
Councilman, if I may? Like, you said, the sound here is -- did you say that things were eliminated like crosswalks and -- because they were creating a pedestrian- friendly environment?
Dangerous. They were dangerous. There were crosswalks in between 47 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 the numbered streets, between 15th and 16th, between 16th and 17th. In the center, there were these pedestrian walkways so that people could transit from one side of the street to another. Now, in a mall environment -- in Disney World, that works, but it didn't work on Chestnut Street, because you still had public transportation vehicles and -- correct me if I'm wrong -- in addition to delivery trucks. So it wasn't as though we eliminated vehicles entirely from the Chestnut Street mall. You always had both things happening at the same time. And for me, and I may be in the minority here, and I'll get to you, Councilman Rizzo. For me maybe, and I may be in the minority, I always felt very intimidated because I had this sense of kind being like, I guess, oversafe about the fact that I was walking down the sidewalk but yet, there was still cars, and I just couldn't figure out how we can call it a pedestrian walkway or mall when you had vehicles running down there constantly. So -- and I believe those center intersection walkways, or whatever the technical 48 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 name for it is, were eliminated because they posed a big hazard to pedestrians. I mean, people would walk out into the middle of the street and -- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: They've been eliminated.
They've been eliminated. So it wasn't working, it didn't work. And I guess there are other issues as to what the implications to the business community was. I mean, there are lots of different opinions out there. Was it the fact that we did take vehicles off that caused the business community to suffer? Or was it the fact that people's shopping habits had changed and they went to malls anyway? I don't know if we can put our finger on the exact reason for that but I think, in opinion again, that's obviously what led me to do this bill, is that the fact when you took vehicles off that street, it caused businesses to suffer. And I know in the evening -- because most of my free time, if it's not down in my neighborhood going to restaurants, it's in Center City -- Chestnut Street is much more vibrant today, there 49 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 are many more people walking the street at night. You may have had high pedestrian traffic during the day, but I know in the evening, before cars were allowed back on, very few people walked Chestnut Street. Councilman Clarke and then Councilmember Rizzo.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chair, first I would like to thank you for agreeing to hold the bill. As the cosponsor of the bill, I agree that I think we need some more discussion, particularly centering around the public funding nature of this bill. But I had a question with respects to the design of the project and also the existing enforcement. As you recall, prior to bringing back vehicle traffic to Chestnut Street, it was essentially used both, as the Chairman stated, as a mass transit route and additionally, a delivery route. One of the problems that I have, and this kind of centers around the enforcement arm, is in evaluating whether or not we should continue to proceed with the current no-right-hand-turns or ask for those no-right-hand-turns to be taken off 50 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 of -- you can't get a clear sense of what we should do because you currently have loading vehicles in the transit lanes, in the passenger lane. I have no idea what to do because I can't get a sense of what's going on around there. And my question is, first of all, did you take into account that you were essentially eliminating a substantial portion of the loading zones? In addition to which, is there any idea of when we might get some enforcement on Chestnut Street, given the existing conditions?
I can answer he loading zone issue. We did talk to the business people on the street and also worked with the Parking Authority, and each block has a loading zone of varying length, usually at least three delivery trucks long, and in some cases, four. The problem that we have been experiencing now is that there is illegal parking in the loading zones. So there is an enforcement issue. Again, the right turn is an enforcement issue. The Department of Streets isn't an enforcement agency. We've talked to the Parking Authority and police about heightened levels of enforcement. 51 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 The Parking Authority has responded, the police have said they would respond. We're still waiting to see.
You're saying that there is currently loading zones on each block?
They're at least three panel truck's lengths long; in some cases, they're four trucks long. And they vary as to the location on the block. We tried to tailor it, each block so they would be closer to the businesses that needed the deliveries more than others. Some of the businesses have rear access, where they can get delivers deliveries from Sansom Street or the street on the north side, which I believe is Ranstead or Ludlow, depending on the block. So businesses do not --
What was the length prior to the reconstruction of Chestnut Street?
The length of the loading zone? 52 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547
So by the elimination of half of them and by the lack of enforcement, we pretty much have a zoo around there, right?
All right. Even if we get adequate enforcement, we'll still have a problem because we've eliminated half the loading zone.
Some of the loading habits that developed when the Transitway was in effect was that some of the numbered street's businesses would have their loading vehicles park on Chestnut Street. So you have some vehicles that are actually making deliveries or picking up on some of the side streets that at one time used Chestnut Street, and now they may have a problem because 53 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 the loading zones are tailored for the businesses on Chestnut Street. So we recognize in trying to get as much metered parking for patrons or businesses or whatever to park in that we had to compromise and provide a loading zone that was sufficiently enough for most occurrences.
For the record, I'd like to make a note that, you know, I would like to have some discussion about the western side of Chestnut, and I'm assuming that we're having a similar problem on the eastern side where the Chairman's district lies about that loading zone, because it is really getting out of hand. And I understand the need to have commerce but, you know, we have to come to some happy medium 'cause that's -- it's just not acceptable. With respects to the request for enforcement, how is that done; with a phone call, with a letter? 'Cause normally the Parking Authority doesn't hesitate to give people a ticket, and I'm wondering why they're not doing that.
We have actually met with 54 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 both police and the Parking Authority many times during the project design, and we've also sent letters after the project completion to continually ask them to give us higher levels of enforcement. As I noted, the Parking Authority has been there and we have noticed a good response. The police have needed a little more pushing, what they said they would enforce it.
So the Parking Authority is responding, the police are not, essentially, really responding as you would like.
Who has the primary responsibility of writing tickets on Chestnut Street; is it the Parking Authority or the police?
The Parking Authority addresses the parked vehicle and the police are addressing the moving violations like the right turns.
All right. So my 55 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - BILL 000547 issue with respects to delivery vehicles are really the Parking Authority's responsibility.
Okay. I'd like to really talk to you about that 'cause I'd like to come up with some sort of solution; in other words, in the best case, a compromise that we can accommodate everybody's needs, okay?