Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 000606 be reported out with a favorable recommendation, together with a request for a suspension of rules to permit first reading. (Duly seconded.)
It's been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 000606 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. All those in favor of the bill will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The bill is approved. Bill 000512 has been withdrawn at the request of the sponsor. Bill No. 000508 and 000547 are being held till the call of the Chair. This concludes the public meeting on the Committee of Streets and Services. - - -
We now will go back into the public hearing on Resolution No. 140 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 000041. Is there anyone here who wishes to testify on Resolution 41? Please approach the witness table. Thank you. Sir, you can come up now if you'd like. Are you going to testify? UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: No. 9
Okay, thank you. Thank you for waiting. If Councilman Nutter is listening, the witnesses are about ready to testify on your Resolution 41.
Basically, we want to know why you haven't produced by yesterday a full, worked-out, thorough plan documenting every alley, retaining wall, or driveway that needs to be fixed with a specific program of when you are going to fix it. Councilman Nutter, did I explain your position?
We're really not 141 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 looking for all the finest details, but we would like to feel that there is a specific program that has been worked out and that progress is being made. If there are funding requirements, that proposals be made with respect to the funding requirements. But we think the situation is desperate. In addition to my role as a Councilman-at-large, I'm the Democratic leader of the 17th Ward; that's the ward in Northwest Philadelphia, which encompasses East Germantown and West Oak Lane, and I can tell you that every time we have a political meeting or any kind of community meeting, or if the community development corporations are meeting or the community associations, questions keep coming up about the urgent need before the total value of the property collapses and maybe the retaining wall is collapsing too. When is there going to be some help to the people in the City of Philadelphia? And I think they're justified in asking for that help. And we need your cooperation badly to come forth with a specific program. 142 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 I understand from Councilman Nutter that there have been frequent meetings and discussions, but that thus far, the progress has been what's been lacking.
One minute. We have to read the title of the resolution first.
And then in the record, put my comments after the title of the resolution having been read.
Yes. Resolution No. 12 000041, authorizing the Council's Committee on Streets and Services to hold hearings on the dangers and damage caused by the deterioration of retaining walls, driveways, and alleys, and the complications involved in coordinating necessary repairs by abutting property owners; and to determine the scope of these dangerous conditions throughout the City and the cost to repair them; and further authorizing the committee to formulate a program to correct these hazardous and dangerous conditions in neighborhoods throughout the City. I believe that Councilmember Cohen has already made a statement, which will be a part of the record. 143 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon and good evening. My name is Debra Russo. I'm here on behalf of the Managing Director's Office. We do not have any formal testimony prepared. What I do have is some statements with respect to this particular issue. Alleyways, retaining walls, and common driveways are private property. They are subject to all the rules and regulations of joint ownership. The City of Philadelphia does not own these particular structures. With that being said, at this point in time, there is no viable funding source for a program. It's my understanding that the Streets Department was charged to come up with some type of a plan in which to address these issues, but I think the important fact to keep in mind is that there is not a viable funding source, save grants.
Thank you. Miss Russo, I understand at the beginning of your statement, it's my recollection 144 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 that at the public hearing a few months ago, we asked the Streets Department -- the committee asked the Streets Department and passed a resolution to the effect that we wanted the Department to come up with a plan and a program. I do not believe that we asked for at that time the specifics of funding. I believe that we asked that there be a survey of the areas that are affected, detailed information derived about them, estimates on costs associated with it, and what kind of plan or program could be put into place to try to solve these problems.
Neither the Department or any other particular agency of the government would necessarily be requested or required to determine what the funding source is. That is usually a decision left to the elected officials in both the legislative body and the executive branch. Do you have a dispute about that?
The Streets Department does have that information, and Paul Lonie could speak to those issues. 145 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041
Thank you, Madam Chair. My name is Paul Lonie with the Department of Streets, and the Streets Department would like to answer any questions dealing with their involvement in this program. However, at this time, we are presenting no formal testimony because we feel that perhaps it would be premature to do so. We have developed a lot of systems and a lot of ways of dealing with some of the issues that Councilman Nutter had requested that we deal with. We feel we have certain steps that we can take to remedy this situation. But as of this point, we're -- the key to the situation is the fundability of it and how expansive the program will be, depending on that funding.
Well, Mr. Lonie, I appreciate that. I do not wish to be in a chicken-and-egg situation where either the Department or even the Managing Director's Office makes a the determination that while we might be 146 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 able to come up with a program, if we cannot identify a funding source or sources, we therefore then cannot have a program, when none of the details of even a proposed or hypothetical program have been shared with the body who asked for the information. So my problem here is, it's laid out to us that since there's no funding source, we don't think we have a program.
Well, no, sir. We have a system in place that if we did identify a funding source, it would go into effect immediately.
The system would involve a revolving fund type of operation. The problem with the retaining walls that have always stopped are not retaining walls in specific but with driveways and alleys and retaining walls is that contractors have been reluctant to bid on these projects because there was no funding up front for 147 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 them. The City could not promise any cash for the work that they had done. The only thing we could promise under the current laws were assessment bills against the abutting property owners.
This would put the contractors in the business of trying to collect these bills. One of the ways that we could do something like this is, if we could identify the funding source, then what we would have the ability to do is allow the contractors to get in there and do their work, repair the situation, move on. And then we, as a City agency, would send the bills directly to the property owners, collect that money back and replenish the fund. I have spoken with the Revenue Department, and they're in agreement with this plan. I have spoken with many other agencies, including the Law Department, and they're in agreement with some parts of this plan, or with all of the plan. I have spoken with the Managing Director's Office and, again, they see no problem with that plan, if the funding can be actually 148 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 found. I have, as part of my charge, looked into some of these funding sources and have had a difficult time coming up with anything viable. Part of the program would involve community development, working with the community, educating the community on their respective rights and responsibilities as far as these things go. We're trying our best to work within a system that's difficult, but we feel that we do have some preliminary programs that are ready to go if a funding source can be found. Councilman Cohen was looking before for the scope of the program. One of the beauties of the preliminary program would be that it doesn't need to be done all at once. We can do this for whatever funding we have. We have a program, we feel, could be in place to utilize that money as far as it would take us.
Well, let me ask this question. Miss Russo, you said that particular areas that we're talking about are private property?
And, that was Miss 149 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 Russo. Can we have a microphone please? Why don't we just leave them on.
Yeah, yeah. One of the -- I think that one -- as I said, the Streets Department does have what they think could be a plan that would work. It would be like a resolving plan.
I asked you a question. I asked you, did you say earlier that the areas that we're talking about are private property.
And, therefore, there's nothing we can do about it. Is that what you said?
I said that the areas that 150 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 we're talking about were private property, and that that was an impediment to many of the funding sources.
Fine. Are you aware recently that a number of buildings throughout the City had fallen down?
I'm not really sure of the number. I know that the City's right now involved in looking at demolishing those properties.
I'm not -- it's a combination of the various factors probably of HUD, private property owners, et cetera.
Some of them were, but I'm not sure as to what we're doing with the actual -- 151 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 like, I'm not sure if we're liening the properties, I'm not sure of those aspects of the program.
I know that the City's tearing down the properties. What I'm not --
Because it's -- from what I'm -- my understanding is it's because they're imminently dangerous.
They present a danger to the health, safety, and welfare out in 152 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 the community.
From my understanding, from talking to the Streets Department on this issue, there are some retaining walls that are in a state of disrepair; I think we're looking at 90 of them, okay. The cost for repairing them, I think, will be approximately $9 million, okay. Alleys and driveways, from what I understand, are looked at separately because the costs are so much different.
I didn't ask you about the cost; I asked about ownership.
You said that we tear down privately owned buildings that are dangerous. 153 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041
But we can't do anything about dangerous condemned retaining walls, alleys, and driveways. Is that your testimony?
No. I know what they are from pictures that have been presented to me by the Streets Department, but I've never actually seen one.
You've never 154 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 personally seen a damaged or a condemned retaining wall.
But your testimony is that the vacant building that's falling down, we can do something about that, but the driveway in the back or retaining wall that's falling down, it's also private property, it represents a danger to City workers, private citizens, an individuals and children, we can't do anything about that. That's your testimony today?
Yes, that's my testimony because it's my understanding that --
Well, it's my understanding that the Department of L&I is in charges of demolitions in the City and that when a property is demolished, the costs are then assessed against the property owner.
From what my understanding is -- 155 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041
Do you think it's less dangerous in the back than it is out in the front?
I think that L&I has a funding line for demolitions and I don't know of any funding line for retaining walls. And that could be --
Because it was my understanding, from talking to our budget office, that dollars could not be allocated because this was private property.
Well, why couldn't it be allocated for the demolitions?
I don't know that answer. I don't know why L&I has a line item for demolitions.
I'm not talking 156 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 about L&I. You're apparently making a legal judgment and a distinction between private property in the back and private property that's a building that's falling down. I want you to explain into this record what the difference is and what the distinctions are.
Isn't that what you're here for? You're here to give us information, right?
Okay, my information with respect to imminently dangerous buildings is that those buildings are I.D.'d as imminently dangerous and on the verge of collapse.
Well, I know of retaining walls that have been condemned by the Board of Health. Is that less dangerous than what L&I does?
I don't know. (To Mr. Lonie) Is that -- what do you 157 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 do -- what does the Streets Department do when something's falling down?
The Streets Department, when a retaining wall has been condemned by the Board of Health, who has the power to do that, the Streets Department does not. In the past, we would go out and hire a contractor to come in and fix it and assess the abutting property owners. However, it was considered proper back in the 1980s to change that so that a lot of -- you needed 51 percent of the people on the block who were affected to agree to do that. That was a lot of times --
Do we ask for 51 percent of the neighbors on the block to decide whether we're going to tear a building down?
Miss Russo? 158 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041
There is notice given to the property owner and then so much time passes.
And then L&I could then -- or they contract to demolish the building.
So tell me what the program is going to be to deal with the number of damaged, deteriorated, and condemned retaining walls and driveways and alleys in the City of Philadelphia that represent a serious threat to the health, safety, and welfare of people, similar to what we're doing to make sure that buildings don't fall on people. Tell me what you're going to do the day that a City trash vehicle goes crashing over a wall or a wall fails and you got a 9,000-pound 159 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 truck running over it and someone is injured or killed, tell me what you're going to do that day. When that wall is on a list of hundreds that are being condemned or observed to be in deteriorated decision condition, you tell me what the game plan is at that point.
The Streets Department -- and Paul Lonie could speak better to this -- is exploring some legislative changes whereby we might, might -- and I'm not sure if we're going to do this or not, but might be able to cap the assessment for the contractor for a retaining wall for some number. One of the concerns is -- the difference is --
Oh, so now we're talking about some of the elements of a program. Is that what you're putting on the record now?
The Streets Department has looked -- and Paul Lonie could speak to this, they looked at various possibilities of things to do.
One of the impediments with respect to contractors doing the work was that in 160 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 the past, the only way they could be paid is through assessment billings.
And one of the programs that might be possibly looked into by the Streets Department was if there was a way to get some initial funding, this is just exploring possibilities.
Whereby if you could get some initial funding and thereby -- and more or less like they prime the pump, have like a revolving loan.
That was one of the things that we looked at, just to look at it to see if it was possible to do that.
Right. Well, Miss Russo, that's a lot better idea than your first idea, which was, they're private property and there's nothing we can do about it. I like the second idea much better than the first one. What I would like you to do, since you've not had the experience, is to go out to the 161 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 5200 blocks of Berks and Euclid, out in the Wynnefield section, and what I'd like you to do is to then come back to me and tell me what you think we should do about that wall and what I should tell my constituents out there who cannot use their driveway, who cannot walk without fear of danger that the retaining wall is going to fall down on them, and then you tell me whether you think it's dangerous enough or not for us to do something about it.
Now, this is what you're going to find. 5200 to 5254 Berks and 5203 to 5243 Euclid, this is a 450-foot plus or minus wall long, 0 to 12 inches high, 12 feet high, stone retaining wall, it has a 15-foot wide driveway above to the north behind Berks property and a 12-foot wide driveway below to the south behind the Euclid properties. At about the center of the wall is a major collapse. The entire wall, from top to bottom, for a length of about 20 feet, is collapsed into the driveway below. Stone and 162 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 concrete building materials are lying in the driveway, as much of the underlying dirt that supports the upper driveway. The upper driveway has about a 20-foot by 10-foot hole, with much of the remaining concrete surface in the vicinity of the collapse being unsupported. This thing is dangerous. Now, I'd like you to go out and take a look at it as your first of potentially many retaining wall experience, and I'd like you to tell me what we're going to do about it, 'cause I'd like an answer. Oh, by the way, this retaining wall, it was condemned by the Board of Health in 1975. So while we've been sitting around, not doing anything about it, it's been deteriorating, costs have been growing, and it's been a danger to that community for a quarter of a century. It's unacceptable. And if you have any others that you'd like to go to, I've got a list of a couple hundred of them. So that's why I'd like to hear about more what we can do, what we're thinking about doing, what we might possibly do over the next 163 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 couple years as opposed to what we can't do. I'm much more interested in the first than I am in the second. Do you have some other elements that you might want to share with us?
Yes. We understand a lot of the concerns. The Streets Department fields them. Again, we get the calls just as often as you do. Where we've been frustrated with the individuals -- and, again, it's not necessarily the responsibility of the Streets Department, but the Streets Department would do anything that we could to help to locate whatever funding source the elected officials of the City of Philadelphia say should be used for this project. We think, with a few adjustments, that we have a system that we're ready to put into place, that could remedy a lot of the situations. The only thing that's lacking is the money to do it. We do not have that ability. Under our charter, we cannot use Streets Department money -- and, again, this is in private property, so other 164 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 funding sources must be looked at. It's difficult, it's been looked at for 30 years to do something like that, no one's been successful, and no one would be happier than I if someone would be successful and find that.
Mr. Lonie, all I'm saying to you is -- and this is what the request was of the committee a few months ago -- give us some concrete ideas, whether they fit together like a glove or not at the moment you give them to us is secondary to the fact that there is a plan and a proposal and a few ideas that, as I said earlier, then City Council would have some opportunity to try to figure out the intricacies and the details along with the Administration and the Law Department, Controller's Office, and anyone else who cares about this. But until we have a document, until someone can see a flow chart, until you have the ability to say to people, This is what we're thinking about, and put those ideas down in a concrete fashion, we will never have anything. And that's all we asked for. We said look at the financing, come up with a program, and give us a 165 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 plan. I'm not saying that that's the plan that's going to be implemented and I'm not saying that it's written in stone or anything else. But something every day beats nothing. Today we have nothing, and all we're asking for is something. Now, Miss Russo?
It's my recollection that you're an attorney; is that correct.
Okay. You're with the Managing Director's office, right?
The information that I read to you about the Berks Euclid retaining wall, that's from a public document produced internally by the government, that I am sure that if something happens out there, as an attorney, you would not like to have that particular document in discovery, right?
It's a known 166 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 danger.
And we've know about it for a long time. We've done nothing.
But legally, under the political subdivision tort claims, the City's not responsible for that. I hear what you're saying --
Just, you know, you'll lay back on that and you'll spend a whole lot of time in court in argument about it. All I'm saying is, we know about these things. We have some obligation to do something. And if you want to rest on, Well, the law says X, that's great. I don't have that luxury. I've got 40 to 50 households on a block. I cannot sit around and have nothing happen while people are out there in danger. That's my problem, I don't want it to be the rest of the City's problem. 167 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 And it's not just myself. We've got maps and charts and all kinds of stuff, these situations exist all over the City. I'm not saying they're going to be resolved overnight, it's too expensive, we know that. We're not irresponsible. But you have to start somewhere. When do you think you'll have a program put together without all of the i's dotted and the t's crossed but something that we as a legislative body and as elected officials would have an opportunity to sit down, look at, go over the details, debate it back and forth, and try to and come up with a game plan that makes some sense for the citizens of this city, when?
Is that definitively a month, is it probably a month, is it maybe a month? Give me a date by which you believe that you would have a document that we could sit around and have a discussion about.
A month. I mean, we could explore various -- if you're looking for a paper trail of possibilities, I would say a month.
So you think in a 168 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 month, we'll have a document?
No, I think in a month. One of the issues I think that we really wanted to explore was, we wanted to make sure that if we were coming up with a plan, that it was legal, and that's one of the things that we had, you know, some legal framework to stand on. And I think that in a month, we'll be able to look at a couple of the options and present them, to see if they're viable.
Mr. Lonie, earlier I heard you said you had a plan all ready to go. What is that plan?
The Streets Department has 169 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 a tentative plan that I believe the Streets Department, as a political entity of the Administration, needs a little more administrative tweaking before we're ready to release it. And I think the Administration would like to look at that plan a little further.
Well, Miss Russo, from the Managing Director's Office, had said that that would be ready within a month.
So it's not the Streets Department, you mean, it's outside the Streets Department that the plan --
The Streets Department feels that it's prepared to answer the questions as in the time frame indicated, but we realize that we are an administrative division of -- or an operating division of the Administration and we feel that all of the administrative possibilities need to be looked at.
Do you have any clue as to the kind of problems that there are?
No. I think you'd have to 170 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 talk to the Administration about that.
Because, you know, this problem has existed for years, and I don't want to be rude, but I don't really think it's the business of the Streets Department to start a presentation by saying, "This is private property and, therefore, we don't have any responsibility."
I don't know whether it was you, Mr. Lonie, or another witness who basically said that, 'cause this is a problem of Philadelphians.
I understand, Councilman. That was not a statement of the Streets Department.
And the City has the responsibility, like Councilman Nutter before talked about legal responsibility. Any -- if anybody falls or trips in any manner or in any of these driveways, particularly where the City in the past has issued a notice, and the City has in many of these cases issued notices as to the dangerous conditions that exist, any lawyer worth 171 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 his salt would immediately include the City of Philadelphia as the defendant in the case. And the charge of negligence against the City would be very simple to prove, that knowing the condition existed that was dangerous and the City couldn't deny it because it had sent a notice out, the City did nothing to require a correction to be made. Now, that's from a legal end. We don't want to get into that, we want to avoid those cases, and what we want to do is to keep people from leaving the City for fear that their property values are going downhill, we want to have mothers at peace that their kids playing in the driveway in the back are not going to be hurt by a falling retaining wall. It seems to me that saving properties that are not yet in the blighted condition or totally should be a priority ahead of taking care of blighted neighborhoods, because if you don't take care of them, of those that are still stable, they're going to, you know, add to the supply of blighted neighborhoods and be far more expensive to take care of at a later time. So number one is saving neighborhoods that are worth saving and maintaining and 172 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 continuing to stabilize. And I think there's got to be a real sense of urgency on that score in the Streets Department.
Well, I agree, Councilman. In the Streets Department, that sense of urgency is there. And -- but how money is allocated and spent, that's not something the Streets Department would get involved in.
I agree with you on that; I don't think it is a Streets Department, except that I think that it's appropriate that you look to see if you already have money appropriated that could be used for this purpose, and then we could discuss priorities within the Streets Department as to how you spend your appropriations. But outside of money already in your budget, that's a matter of the total Administration, the Mayor's Office, and the City Council.
The Mayor has one and the Council has seventeen, but his one may or may not be greater than our seventeen, depending on our ability to override.
That's true, Councilman. We have looked extensively within our own budget and we have found, checking --
And we appreciate your saying, Mr. Lonie, that you do understand it's a very serious problem and that you are anxious to be able to move forward with that.
Yes, we are. And we've worked very hard over the past few months, since April, when we were charged with this, to develop tentative plans how to deal with this. And, again, I think it's incumbent on this body to look to the Law Department and say what funds are available and what are not.
Well, we would like to know, for example, when we deal with funds, what are we talking about, what is the estimate as to the need, how much money is needed for how many things so that we could pick the hundred worse case, you know, situations and deal with them, 174 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 say.
Right. In the tentative plan, one of the things that we wanted to look at what was, we wanted to make it flexible enough because we knew that we can't take care of this problem all at once, no matter what we did, it's just too big. So we wanted to make it flexible enough so that if we had a limited amount of money, we could do a limited amount of driveways or alleys or walls or whatever. And the tentative program is flexible enough that whatever money we have, we can spend it in the most appropriate manner. If Council, whatever, somehow magically comes up with $9 million for retaining walls, we'll fix them all. If Council doesn't, then we'll fix one this year, one next year, or one whenever we can. We believe we have a program, as was charged, to take care of that type of situation if the funding was found. We could be ready whenever this program could be put into place.
Well, are you able to tell us now or within a short time what money 175 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041 exists in the Streets Department budget, which you could use for this purpose?
-- in the opinion of the Law Department, no money in the Streets Department can be used for anything outside its designated rights-of-way. These alleys, driveways, and retaining walls, none of them, fall within the inventory of the Streets Department; so, therefore, our operational funds are not available for this project. And, again, as an attorney, I am going by what the Law Department tells me and I have no reason to doubt that. So I think we -- that's one of the real stumbling blocks of this is to identify. I've identified in this tentative program some funding sources, but it's been very frustrating because it's difficult.
Well, what if there were, say, a fund of $100,000, or let's say of $1 million, would you be in a position to make a specific proposal as to how it would be spent? 176 10/24/00 STREETS/SERVICES - RES. 000041