- - - COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING - COMMITTEE ON RULES - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Monday, October 25, 2004, 10:48 a.m. - - - BILL 040467 - An Ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Rittenhouse Street, Pulaski Avenue, Chelten Avenue and Morris Street. RESOLUTION 040388 - Resolution amending Resolution No. 040001 concerning the Rules for the government of the City Council of Philadelphia by amending Section III, entitled "Standing Committees," by adding a Committee on Waterfront Development. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE, Chair COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS-BROWN COUNCILMAN FRANK DI CICCO COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED-MILLER COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2 Hearing - Bill 040467 - 10/25/04 - - - P R O C E E D I N G S - - -
We now go back into the public hearing on Bill Number 040467. Is there anyone to testify on this bill? Please state your name for the record.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Rules Committee. My name Thomas Chapman. I am the Director of the Development Planning Division for the City Planning Commission. I'm here today to testify on Bill 18 Number 040467. Councilwoman Donna Reed-Miller introduced this bill on May 6, 2004. This Bill would re-zone a parcel of land located within the area bounded by Pulaski Avenue, Chelten Avenue, Morris Street, Rittenhouse Street. The subject property would be 3 Hearing - Bill 040467 - 10/25/04 rezoned from the existing C-2 commercial to area shopping center, commercial. Currently within the parcel to be rezoned are a supermarket with off-street parking and a vacant gas station. This rezoning has been requested in order to permit the expansion of the supermarket. Currently the supermarket is a relatively small store right now. It's about 33,000 square feet. The owners would like to expand the supermarket with approximate 10 to 14,000 square foot addition. It's my understanding that this will allow them to expand the products offered to the community, and also to hire an additional 35 to 50 people. The site in question is approximately 200,000 square feet. The Planning Commission in its meeting of October 20, 2004, reviewed this bill and recommended that it be approved. That concludes my testimony. I'd be 4 Hearing - Bill 040467 - 10/25/04 happy to answer my questions from the Committee.
Thank you. Any questions by members of the Committee of this witness? Thank you. What supermarket is that?
Please state your name for the record. REV. SIMMONS: Reverend Leroy Simmons. I'm Executive Director of the Central Germantown Council.
Please proceed. REV. SIMMONS: And the community is 5 Hearing - Bill 040467 - 10/25/04 in total support of this change. We are in support for several reasons: But one, the employment; two, the tax base. We need to increase the tax base, for we also work with the Germantown Special Services District. And we promised when we were able to attract a Pathmark to support Mr. Lesa as he tried to expand, so that he can best meet the needs of the survey we ran in the community, to get a better supermarket and better product for the populous in the area. That's about the extent of it. We represent the Central Germantown Council which is a coalition of organizations that represent several of the neighborhood organizations and many of the business organizations in the area.
Councilwoman 6 Hearing - Bill 040467 - 10/25/04 Miller.
I want to thank you for coming in to testify in support of this bill. This supermarket actually needs to the expansion. (Interference with microphone system.)
Someone has said Bill Clinton was outside. But anyway, this supermarket really needs this expansion. It's been a market at that location, I would say, for the last 30 years. And now that we have these mega markets... One of the problems with that particular Shop Rite is that it doesn't have enough shelf space? REV. SIMMONS: Right.
And you know, I mean, my husband shops there. I don't. My husband does the grocery shopping in my family. But when you go...
Aren't 7 Hearing - Bill 040467 - 10/25/04 you lucky.
Every Sunday. I love it. But that's all he does, though. (Laughter.)
But when I do go to the market, most of the time is spent, if it's crowded, just trying to get through the aisles because it's just not enough space. So I'm looking forward to the expansion. And I again want to thank you for coming in. Thank you. REV. SIMMONS: Yes. Yes. I agree. The owner said that he needed to -- he needed to expand so that he can keep up with the traffic he has, and to clean the market and make it more appealing.
That's it. I thought Carl Primavera was coming, but I guess he changed his mind. Okay. Thank you.
Thank you. Okay. Will the Clerk please read the title of the resolution.
Resolution 040388, resolution amending Resolution Number 040001, concerning the Rules for the government of the City Council of Philadelphia by amending Section III, entitled "Standing Committees," by adding a Committee on Waterfront Development.
Thank you. Anyone to testify on this resolution? Councilman? Councilman DiCicco. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Good morning. Let me at the onset make a comment about this resolution. It was certainly not my intention to circumvent or to create a mechanism to begin to dismantle the current rules as 9 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 they exist for this legislative body. By way of background, this resolution would only create a committee for waterfront development. And I have some notes here I'll read through, to give you a little bit more of the reason why I think this is important. the committee would consist of at least seven members of the legislative body of City Council. All District Council members whose districts represent an area that includes either the Delaware or Schuylkill Rivers would be members of that Committee. And I'll just list the six that I know of that I think are the only six that have any of their District that affronts either the Schuylkill or the Delaware: Would be myself, which has the Delaware River; Council President Verna, whose District touches on both the Schuylkill and Delaware Rivers; Councilwoman Blackwell, the Schuylkill River; Councilwoman Krajewski, who has part of her District 10 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 along the Delaware River; Counsel member Nutter, who has a portion of the Schuylkill River; and you, Mr. Chairman, your District also touches the Schuylkill River. So those six Council members would be standing members of the Committee. The seventh member would be an individual or individuals that would be assigned by the Council President, as determined under the current rules of Council. So, I'm not looking for any changes in the rules that, again, would circumvent or try to dismantle anything that's in place today, but just basically create a new committee. The committee would be chaired by the President. The reason I introduced this resolution is... A little bit of background. When I first came to Council in 1996, shortly thereafter -- I think it was June of '96 -- then Mayor Ed Rendell chose a developer of the Simon Group to develop the Penn's Landing site. 11 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 And for several years, approximately seven of the years afterwards, I personally was involved in most of the negotiations and discussions and deliberations for that seven-year period. From time to time, Council members would ask me, how are things going? What do you think? Is this thing ever going to happen? And so forth. And there were basically informal conversations on a Thursday morning or just in passing. We reached a point where there was a financing deal that was in place for that project. I came to City Council and gave my reasons why I thought the TIF was in order. I appreciate the fact that Council members saw fit to support that TIF. But really what was happening was, most Council people, if not the majority of them, had no real idea of what was going on, other than what they read in the paper or, again, from time to time, those 12 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 informal discussions that we were having, and relied basically on my involvement, expertise in dealing with the project, developer and the communities. And I fully respect, although sometimes I know Councilman Cohen and I and others get into this debate about at-large Council people should have as much say in what goes on in the District. And we can debate that from now till doomsday. And I don't want to do that. But there is some... In cases, in certain instances, I think that there is some legitimacy to having a much greater debate or involvement from the body, especially when we're talking about a project that has such broad implications for the Philadelphia community and all of its citizens, and especially in those instances where there may be some financial contribution from the City to the project that involves all taxpayers in the City of Philadelphia.
So I think all of us, all the 13 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 members of City Council, at times will have to have some answer or response to either their constituency or in the case of the at-large Council members, when you go out to the various neighborhoods throughout the entire City, a question may be asked, what's going on at the Penn's Landing site or what's going on down at the Navy Yard, and what's going to be happening on the Schuylkill River, in terms of a particular project that we may have to deal with in the future, it would be nice, I think, to have some sense of real information. So that's basically what led me to do this. You know, unfortunately, for decades we've never been able to finalize a development at that 13-acre site of Penn's Landing. Because I now tend to think of Penn's Landing in a much broader scope than I did before because Penn's landing runs from approximately Christian Street, I'd say, up through just above Spring Garden. There are many parcels of land that 14 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 Penn's Landing has control of within that area. So I don't just necessarily dwell on the 13-acre site. When somebody says Penn's Landing, I think of the more larger area, as opposed to that 13-acre site. So, with that I just thought that it might not be a bad idea for to us create a committee, and maybe we as Council members, in our role as legislators, would be more fully involved with potential development, whether it's something that the administration, whether it's this administration or the next administration or administrations that come, could be involved in that process. You know, it's kind of strange, I guess, as a District Council person, for me to want to give up, if you will, that autonomy that I have. But again, as I said earlier, I think, in the scheme of things it is a much more wiser thing for us to do collectively, in particular, what the District Council 15 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 folks who have waterfront as part of their respective districts. You know, the Mayor talked about the New River City. And we all welcome that. I don't know what it is yet. And I don't mean that to be sarcastic. He and I have had some conversations. I refer to that portion of the Delaware River that I represent as a neighborhood, creating a neighborhood along the river, which not necessarily would mean the big box development. And that's something that I think the people that I represent along the riverfront are more inclined to support these days, as opposed to the big box that we looked at with the Simon project. We have a multi-million dollar infrastructure proposal that the Mayor's talked about that would deal with both rivers. And again, it's huge. It's multi-million dollar. I think that we as legislators should be involved in that process. I 16 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 don't think it's something that should come to us after the fact. I think that's something that we should be working with, literally from day one, if there's a plan. I don't know if the Planning Commission has anything or not. They say that they do, at least in my area on the Delaware River, but I've never seen any real plan. So, again, it's just a way of involving... I kind of look at this similar to the way I do things in my District. When a developer comes to me with a proposal, the first thing I advise that developer to do is talk to the community group and engage in a process, a process that includes the community, includes myself as the elected official and other elected officials when they represent that community as well, Senators, State Representatives, et cetera. So really for me this is just an exercise in engaging the legislative body 17 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 or those members of this legislative body who represent the areas of waterfront in their respective Councilmanic Districts in a process. And I'm here to answer any other questions.
My thoughts on a committee, a Council committee doing development, I could see you guys up here now. But anyway... COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I don't -- I'll let you finish. I'm sorry.
I would actually think it would be more effective if all of you were on some type of waterfront task force or something like that, rather than a Council committee. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I'm sorry. All 18 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 of...
The District Council members that impact the waterfront. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Would have what?
I would think that you would be able to work in a more positive and effective manner other than a City Council committee, not the committees that I've seen in action. I've not seen that kind of structure here. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Well...
In Philadelphia, not since I've been here. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: My answer to that, meaning no disrespect, is maybe it's about time we changed that a little bit and created a different way of doing it. We haven't been successful. I mean, seven years of work, literally. I put -- I don't know; I can't remember the meetings that I attended. And that's okay because it was my District...
Right. 19 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: ...where the Penn's Landing site is. And again, as I said earlier, I respect the fact that Council members relied on me to give them the appropriate information. But it really was bits and pieces of a whole thing that was going on for seven years. You know, Councilman Clarke and I had some sidebar discussion about does this in a way take away from the responsibility of other committees. I don't see it that way. And that's okay. We may have a difference of opinion, but I don't see it that way. I think this is specifically designed to talk about the broader scope of development of our rivers, not just that one area. At some point, if there is public dollars that are going into it, it is most likely that whatever that committee, the waterfront development committee, comes up with will have to go back to the Committee 20 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 of the Whole anyway. Just like we have Streets and Services Committee. We have committee hearings. People come and testify at those different hearings. It goes back to the Committee of the Whole eventually. So, it's just like any other committee, in the sense of how it will operate. But this is more. This is specifically designed to talk about and engage in this process about how do we get one of our greatest assets developed and help this administration or other administrations through that process. Again, you know, it's unusual that a District Council person, I think, is sitting here saying, I want to give up some of my autonomy on dealing with these issues. But I see it as a City-wide issue for generations to come. And it's not specific to that several miles or two, three, four miles, whatever it is, that I represent. It's much greater than that. 21 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 And it impacts everybody.
I appreciate your thought and your intentions. I just think the way that these committees work around here -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: And my legislative assistant handed me some notes that I failed to mention earlier. And I'll read it, actually. Development along the water is not simply about construction. It's about community building. And we engage in that, in some form as a body, as a whole, many times about these kinds of developments. And I will say -- probably won't repeat myself any more -- but it's no 19 attempt -- And I don't think anybody thinks that right now. But it's no attempt to minimize any of the involvement of other committees that are already standing. I just see it as an added committee for riverfront development.
Well, I just 22 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 think you could be more effective in some other type of structure. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I'm willing to listen to that as well. I'm not... I'm not going to go out of here today and being upset and kicking and screaming, saying, I couldn't get this committee. For me it was just an opportunity to talk to my colleagues about what I think this body should be more involved with.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just to give you a little bit of my experience, relative to Penn's Landing. I've been on the Penn's Landing Board for probably 19 years, and have seen developments, proposals come and go, and come and go, and come and go again. And nothing, with the exception of some infrastructure work, very positive, 23 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 which is now really beginning to deteriorate has anything really come to fruition. As a matter of fact, I think part of the Councilmanic autonomy in that particular District caused a serious problem with a District Councilman a number of years ago relative to Penn's Landing, you know, on a corruption issue. I think that in many ways District Council prerogative is very, very good, when it comes to issues that are peculiar particular to that District. But when you have issues, such as waterfront development, whether it's Northeast waterfront development, Center City, Schuylkill River, and you see how active now the communities around the Schuylkill River are all the way up and down and how active the activity is at the Naval Shipyard, how it relates also to not only commercial and retail development and residential development, but also the Port of Philadelphia, even though it's a state 24 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 entity now, it still affects our traffic. It affects our commerce. It affects our food distribution center. It's just a wide range of issues. And I think sometimes the more involvement from various members of Council, whether they are District or at-large, brings a different perspective to the issue, as opposed to, well, that's Frank's district, or that's Darrell's district, or that's Michael's district and they'll worry about it. I think sometimes having varying viewpoints and different experiences enhance the ultimate development that will go there. And as we see now, the development at Penn's Landing is again stopped again, and hopefully will resume soon. But I just, you know, wanted to add my comments relative to my experience just with Penn's Landing, that sometimes I think the more ideas and the more interest and the more opinions the better. 25 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 And I think that this particular proposal has the potential to bring that kind of City-wide perspective to individual important pieces of development parcels. So, just my view. Thank you. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: If I can comment on that, in the last go-around, if you will, after the Simon project was shelved, the City put out some RFP's. There was a public process. The Inquirer, and I can't remember who else, sponsored some community outreach throughout the City where the public came to testify and hear what was possibly being proposed, and what they, the public, felt would be a best use at Penn's Landing. And that was a good thing. I think it kind of got narrowed down a little bit, and the public was not -- the public in general was not necessarily... Their issues were not necessarily addressed the way they could have and should have been. I got involved with about a dozen or so of the community groups who are adjacent Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 to the Delaware River and Penn's Landing area, similar to what I did with the Simon project. What I did was, I asked that a representative, one or two representatives, from each of those community groups meet with me to create this riverfront development nonprofit group to deal with those issues that would be coming if this administration chose a developer, after having gone through their process. And with the help of Senator Fumo through a grant, we retained an architectural firm that came up with -- They drew some drawings about some of the infrastructure issues on Delaware Avenue, Columbus Boulevard, not necessarily to talk about the type of development or developers that should be there, but talk about some of the things that might be more attractive and make it more attractive for development to happen or occur down there.
I don't think anybody up here, maybe with the exception of Jimmy -- I don't even 27 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 know if Councilman Kenney knew about this -- knew anything about that because it was basically my thing. It's my District, people I represent, and that's okay. I was able to get a meeting with the Mayor. Planning Commission, I believe, was there, the Commerce Director and a few other folks from the administration, and about or so of those individuals who 11 represent the neighbors that I talked about 12 earlier. And the architect came in with 13 their rendition. 14 I have not been able to get a 15 follow-up meeting. And these are people, by the way, in the community who are not suggesting that they were going to decide everything that happens down there. I mean, I let people know up front nobody gets a hundred percent, you know, there's going to be give and take on both sides. But these are people who wanted to be engaged in a process about the impact to their community, and maybe put something on 28 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 the table so that future developers would look at and figure out what fits into what the community would accept, as opposed to what we've normally been doing for the last 30 years -- and I don't mean that to be critical, but that's the way it has been done -- is the projects that were proposed at Delaware Avenue -- at Penn's Landing, were development driven. So, then we, the community and legislators, as Council people, have to engage in the process almost after the fact, and then try to back out of that project the things that may be found intrusive to the community. So, if we can put out a plan -- and that's what I envision part of the role of this waterfront development committee, is to kind of go out in our communities, talk to people and engage in a process, and maybe help the administration. And again, it's not just for this administration because whatever happens down there -- and we hope it happens -- 29 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 could be for decades to come, long before some of us -- after some of us will have left here. But to lay out a plan -- and I'm sure if the Planning Commission -- Well, they are here today. I don't know if they're testifying. No -- were testifying, they would probably say they have a plan. But I don't know what that plan is. And no disrespect to Mr. Chapman. I don't know what that plan is. And I talked about this in 2000. We should have a master plan. If they have a master plan, I don't know -- again, I don't know what it looks like. I don't think anybody else up here knows what it looks like. We should be engaged in that, but not after the decision has been made. And then we've got to try to figure out how to sell it to people who may not be comfortable with it, either because they don't know what it's about or because they haven't been engaged in that process. 30 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 But for the time we say, here, here's the plan. This is what we're going to do. And that's really what happened to me and all of us, but me in particular, with the Simon project. Mayor Rendell at the time picked the developer. I met with the guy the night before they mailed out the press announcement. He's going to build 600,000 square foot retail. And I said, well, I represent a lot of neighborhoods down there. They're going to want to know what it's about, obviously, other than 600,000 square feet of retail. What about traffic? What about parking? And I said, I'll be involved. I'll engage in this in a supporting role, but the community that I represent is going to be engaged in it as well. And that's when I created the task force that literally met for seven years. Once a month, probably nine months a year for seven years. And that was a lot of 31 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 meetings. But you all, this legislative body, had really no understanding of what we were talking about at those meetings, until I came in and said, would you support a $62 million TIF?
And that's really... You relied again on me and my information. And certainly I gave you all the correct information, but it was very limited. So this opens to me, broadens the scope of the process, and the involvement, and your knowledge, going forward.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Councilman DiCicco, your explanation regarding the task force more than adequately addresses the question I had which was, why not a task force. The reverse of the question, in an attempt not to diminish the work of 32 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 existing committees, but maybe consideration to broaden the role of existing committees, namely, Finance or Appropriations or maybe even Committee of the whole. I would offer that up for consideration. And I have to say I can't take credit for that idea. I'm actually sharing with you a comment shared by Councilman Kelly. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Well, it's a good point. But when you deal with waterfront development as I understand it, having been dealing with it for about nine years, it's a unique animal, if you will. There's a whole host of things that you don't normally have to be concerned with that you would if you did something in the heart of Center City because you have water. You have riparian issues. You have infrastructure issues that are unique to developing on the river. 33 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 You just don't put a box on one of those piers. There are so many other things that need to be taken into consideration. The Army Corps of Engineers gets involved. The E.P.A. gets involved. The size of the building. The shadows on the river. Will it interfere with the sturgeon and their spawning? I mean, it goes on and on. One of the reasons Ikea moved off of the former incinerator site is because of what I told them when they looked at it, that they were going to have a difficult time getting E.P.A. approvals when they wanted to build a bridge that would take the cars from the incinerator site to the former impoundment lot site for additional parking because of the shadows on the water. They looked at me like I had three heads. Three months, four months later they came back and said, you're absolutely right. It will be three years before we 34 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 even get approvals, if we get them. And it had to do with the shadows and the sturgeon spawning. So it's unique in its character. It's not like building a high rise in Center City, where, as long as we make sure we have appropriate parking and that the signage on the streets can accommodate the project. It is a totally, totally different and unique and difficult -- and as Jim -- as Councilman Kenney said that, you know, you do infrastructure work today but tomorrow it may not be appropriate for a different type of development. And a lot of the piers and the bulkheads are deteriorating as we speak. And I think that's what the Mayor was speaking to when he wanted to talk about multi-million dollar infrastructure. And I appreciate that. But I disagree somewhat with why would we do infrastructure improvements that may not be appropriate for the development, if we 35 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 don't know what the development is going to be? You put pilings in in a certain area, but they may not be the proper pilings for the development that comes later down the pike. Drainage systems, and all those things that go in and around that riverfront corridor, do you do that before you do the development? My sense is, from my experience, that, no, you don't do that. I'll give you another one. You know I've just been recently appointed to the Delaware River Port Authority.
Congratulations. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Another non-paying committee. But that being said, when the Simon project was still under consideration, the DRPA put a lot of money aside and into developing a tram, that gondola kind of thing that would take you across the river. And if you notice down at that 36 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 13-acre site in Penn's Landing the piers are up. Whether we think the tram is a good idea or not, the fact is that they've put about $15 million or $30 million into that project. I think we need to finish it, because it's not just to leave it there. And maybe that will encourage some other type of development, because there's a million people a year who now visit Penn's Landing and with very limited -- and I don't mean this to be disrespectful to Penn's Landing Corporation. They do a great job. But when you think about it, other than the fares and the cultural events, which are important, there's nearly no big stuff going on but once or twice a year, and you get a million people. So maybe the tram would be helpful to incentivizing a developer. And that's where I think a waterfront development committee could be very helpful. 37 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 You know, it's DRPA's money. Penn's Landing Corporation owns the land. But we as a City because -- they're a quasi government agency -- have input. I'm on Penn's Landing Board. Councilman Kenney's on it. There are a whole host of other people represent the City, and union people are on there. Collectively, you know, we as a waterfront development committee, can come up with some suggestions, recommendations, and have that involvement in that process. And the word I use quite often is part of a process.
Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. The sponsor of the resolution has agreed to hold that for now. And we will have some further, more detailed discussion 38 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 about formulating some sort of a process that will get members more involved in this. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Mr. Chairman, if I can, we can do it in a out of committee hearing setting. We could just talk about it in a small group. And I welcome your input. And if there's a way in which we can put something into what I've already said or make people more comfortable that this is not an intrusion on the other committees and their role in this body, I'm certainly more than willing to spend the time, and let's talk about it.
Thank you, Councilman, I would like to participate in that debate. I actually, for a short period of time, actually served on the Penn's Landing Committee, as you recall numerous trips -- 39 Resolution 040388 - 10/25/04 well, couple of trips ought to Vegas to visit Mr. Simon. And that didn't prove to be a successful deal. But it was a great trip, I got to say. So I'll be willing to look forward to that. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: If you're suggesting that the Rules Committee take a trip to Vegas to talk about this, although I'm not on the committee, I certainly would support it, if the vote came up at the Committee of the Whole.
There you go. Thank you. All right. We'll be holding the resolution until further discussion. (Public hearing concluded at 11:20 a.m.) 40 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings and evidence are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the public hearing of The Philadelphia City Council, taken on October 25, 2004, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. _____________________________ DAVID A. DEIK, RPR and Commissioner of Deeds (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)