For or against. Please identify yourself for the record.
Thank you, Madam President. My name is Harry Citrino, C-I-T-R-I-N-O. I'm an attorney in Philadelphia. I'm a resident, lifelong resident of Philadelphia. I represent some people especially a farm owner. We do have a working farm in Philadelphia, and unbeknownst to many of the people in the Philadelphia area, the 126 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing bill as written would not allow the farmer at the working farm to keep farm animals. I can understand the homeowners that have testified and they have indicated that they have problems with certain neighbors, but I think the record will show that those laws that are presently on the books, if enforced, for cleanliness, smell, odor, that kind of thing would eliminate those problems. We have some people here that are also residents of Philadelphia that own farm animals as pets, and these folks keep the animals clean, in a nice, safe area, with plenty of land. My farm owner has three-plus acres to keep his goat, sheep, goose, chickens, roosters and ducks, and there hasn't been any problem with that being a clean, safe area. A number of times the Health Department has come out to inspect, and every time he has passed his inspection. And I know that some of the other residents that are here that do have other animals as pets also keep them in a clean and safe manner. I can understand Councilman O'Neill's idea, but it kind of seems to encompass the entire 127 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing universe of Philadelphia instead of selecting those people that do not take care of their animals. (Applause.)
As a child in Philadelphia, I was brought up in the Frankford area, and there were always people that had horses -- and I know this does not apply to horses, but horses were always a common animal that were kept. Chickens were always kept because people used the eggs, ducks, geese the same way, the eggs can be utilized, and the sheep that my farmer has, the wool is taken and donated so people can get blankets and some clothing. Therefore, I would ask Council and the Council members not to pass the legislation as written; however, if you are going to tighten up the bill in order to penalize people that don't take care of their animals, then I see the next extension is we can also start penalizing parents what don't take care of their children.
I don't know where this will stop. So to stop people from having animals, 128 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing especially a farmer who has farm animals on his farm, would be a liability, since that is his sole support and means of making a living.
Thank you, sir. Any questions or comments from members of the committee? The Chair recognizes Councilman O'Neill.
Harry, I would like to work with both you and the Health Department on that farmer. A three-acre property, that is not the intent of this bill.
I understand the intent of the legislation, but I don't want you to penalize other people who take care of their animals.
I don't want to be misunderstood. If there is a way of doing something for the farmer, I'm not sure what the location is or anything -- where is the location?
Bustleton. I will show it to you one of these days. It is in your district.
I probably have seen it, but I'm sure that is not the intent of this bill, something so rural. It is still an old 129 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing throwback to the -- I think we can work with that, but I want to limit my remarks to that issue. Thank you.
Thank you. Any other witnesses to testify on this bill? Please approach the witness table. Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to be here. I have a new respect for someone that has to do public speaking. My name is Jean Smith, and my husband of 33 years and I have three children. I drive a school bus for a living and work at Feeney's Nursery. I also work in area farms in Richboro, Langhorne and Doylestown. I live in the Somerton section on Buxmont Street, and it is called that because the site sits on the corner where Bucks and Montgomery come into Philadelphia. We have lived there since 1979. I do not sculpture or play an instrument, but I know what it takes to care for poultry. We bought our home only after making sure we could raise these animals. We wanted also for our children not to think that five hours in school 130 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing was a day's work. It is hard work, but it is work that I do know and that I can do correctly. I also know that when city people hear the word "chickens," hillbilly music starts playing in their heads and they envision chickens crazily running wildly. First of all, all chickens don't come with hillbilly music and chickens like to be calm and quiet. Secondly, it would take a chicken a month to create the amount of waste a puppy makes in a single day. I have the chickens to do hatchings in schools and for eggs for my family. There is no 14 comparison between store eggs and farm-raised eggs. Like everything in our lives, raising chickens can be done the right way or the wrong way. There are people living in very dirty situations without an animal in site. You can have farm animals and do it correctly. You can be clean. Yes, it was very long ago, but when I was in school we were taught about majority rules but minority rights. Just because the majority of this city is urban and residential, that does not mean there aren't some less densely populated areas where such animals can be effectively supported. 131 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing To pass a bill that considers only the majority of neighborhoods but nonetheless supplies to the whole city would overlook the rights of the minority of our neighborhoods. Just because the minority of our city chooses not to rear farm animals, that does not mean the rest of us have not that right. I would like to give our Councilman two petitions that were circulated and then notarized at our State Representative's office. And I also have some letters to our City Councilman. I present to the children the opportunity to know what farm life is like. They are getting further and further away from it all the time. Two of the teachers at St. Christopher's wrote a letter to you, and I would like to read it. It says, "Over the past few years the students and adults at St. Christopher's School have had the opportunity to engage in the hatching of ducks and chicks through the kindness and involvement of Mrs. Smith. Our children as well as staff have learned patience as we waited for our eggs to hatch. Our patience was often rewarded with the miracle of life as we watched most of our eggs 132 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing hatch into ducklings and chicks. The children learn to accept the differences in our newborns and marvel at their abilities and rapid growth. We have cheered on and cared for the frail as well as the strong. This was a wonderful experience for the entire St. Christopher's community, an experience we look forward to offering to our children each year. " And they go on to say they support me very strongly. " Councilmen and women, please enforce the laws that are already on our books. Pleas know that you can take care of these problem people that are causing problems for their neighbors. That is not what the rest of us want. That is not what has to be. Please enforce the laws that are already on the 133 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing books, but please don't throw out the baby with the bath water. Thank you. )
Thank you. Any questions or comments of this witness? Thank you very much.
Good afternoon. I'm Ed Smith. I'm Jean's husband, Councilmen and Councilwomen. I have one question basically. Why would a law letting farm animals be necessary in the city? Our city has been known for its acceptance of a diverse number of activities as long as it does not have a serious effect on our citizens. We already have laws on the books regulating many of those activities whether it is driving a car, having a pet or maintaining some farm animals. There is no need to create a ban on any such activity if, as long as these laws are enforced, they can all go on safely. What has changed in this city that would make it now necessary to ban farm animals?
Thank you very 134 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing much. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Before our next witness, I would just like to remind everyone that we still have a number of bills to be considered. I think you have all been extremely, extremely patient. I would just ask in fairness to everybody that when you come up to testify that you try to be as concise as possible. Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is Patricia DeCarlo, and I live and work in Norris Square, and I'm going to be very brief because that is not what I was here for, but I would agree with the prior two witnesses. There's enough laws on the books. If you don't maintain your pet, then they enforce it. I happen to live in an urban neighborhood, the heart of North Philadelphia, and people keep chickens. They wake us up in the mornings. It's wonderful. Another one has geese. Somebody else has a peacock and somebody else has a midget African goat, and it is part of living in a city that has all kinds of things. We have to put 135 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing up with the blair of loud music, so I like to put up with the blair of the roosters in the morning or the geese. So we all learn to live with each other and appreciate all of the things and the variety that we bring, right, and you just need to maintain your pet just like you do with dogs. Thank you. (Applause.)
Thank you. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Please approach the witness table.
My name is Sue Strunk, and I live in Northeast Philadelphia. At the present time I don't have the particular animals that this bill is against, but I do own horses. I have lived at my residence for over 30 years. I bag my manure twice a day every day seven days a week. I have been out there in lightning storms, cleaning up and picking up. The bathtubs that I fill for water I clean out to make sure there is no mosquito larvae growing in it. I probably do a lot more on my property to protect my horses against the mosquitos than the normal person will do on their open property, leaving tires, barrels, buckets or whatever that have rainwater that will grow mosquito 136 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing larvae. I have a friend that has a potbelly pig, which I have watched on several occasions at my home when she goes on vacation, and contrary to popular belief the pigs are usually very clean animals. They go in the same spot all the time, not all over the yard like my dogs do. I also had a vacant property next door to me for a while that originally had a barn also with several horses, a peacock, chickens and other animals. A gentleman bought the property. Well, before he bought it, he was out looking at the property. I brought my horses out into the yard for him to see and I went over and I spoke to him and I said, "Well, you know I have horses here?" He said, "Oh, yes, that's fine. I like horses. My father used to have horses." He moved in, started to build his home.
You understand that horses are not covered under this?
Yes. I'm just trying to bring up this point that he moved in and started to build and tearing down the fence on my property, and when I had the police out to stop him, he was saying 137 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing he hated the horses, he didn't want them there. He wants wide open spaces and didn't like my fence. And one of the questions that was asked to him was "Didn't he know that I had horses before he bought the property?" And he said yes, but now he wanted them out. And this is what seems to be happening especially in the Northeast area. People have lived at their homes, had these animals for years. They are developing every vacant lot that is around. The new people move in, and all of a sudden they don't like our animals. Then why did they move there in the first place? They knew we already had them. Why penalize us for people that are now coming in to our area that don't want these animals there? And, again, you have laws. There is the SPCA. There is Licenses & Inspections. Even a Pollution Control was sent out to a friend's house on various occasions, not once, not twice, probably a dozen or more times. They found everything to be in order, the animals well kept, the area cleaned up, no problem around, and they leave. And yet they get another complaint and they are back again at the same people's homes. 138 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing My opinion is they need to first go after the laws that are already on the books, enforce them more, but also these people that constantly complain about the same person and no 6 problem is ever found, they ought to start fining them for filing false complaints. (Applause.)
And I really wish that the Councilman will really take this under consideration and not penalize everybody that loves and keeps animals for the few people out there that do not take care of their animals.
Fine. Thank you very much. We appreciate your testimony. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Seeing none, I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 040616.
Bill No. 040616, an ordinance declaring it is desirable for the health, safety and welfare of the people of the area served by Temple University Hospital, Inc., Temple University Children's Medical Center, Inc., Jeanes Hospital, Temple East, Inc. and Temple Physicians, 139 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Inc. (collectively the Temple facilities) for the Hospitals and Higher Education Facilities Authority of Philadelphia to undertake certain projects for the Temple entities, each of which are nonprofit corporations organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Thank you for your patience. Please proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon, Council President Verna, Councilman Clarke, Committee Members. Thank you so very much for continuing the hearing this morning through lunch in order that we might be heard. My name is Donald Cramp. I serve as the chief executive officer of the Hospitals and Higher Education Facilities Authority of Philadelphia. I wish to make a brief introduction statement in support of the proposed bill before you today for Temple University Health System. Temple University Health System submitted an application to the Hospitals and Higher 140 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Education Facilities Authority of Philadelphia seeking the authority's assistance in this financing. The application was accepted for consideration by the authority. A public tax, equity and fiscal responsibility act, TEFRA, hearing on behalf of Temple University Health System is to be held in the authority board room with the authority and Temple University Health System represented at that forthcoming hearing. Today we have the privilege together of assisting Temple University Health Systems and the many people associated with this remarkable organization. And, to close, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to each member of the committee and the Council on behalf of the board of the authority for the scheduling of this hearing. It is customary, Mr. Chairman, that I let each guest introduce and speak for themself, but today if I may introduce Mr. Robert Lux, vice president and chief financial officer of the health system. Mr. Lux is a highly regarded, respected individual healthcare executive in this region and far behind. Mr. Roberts Lux. 141 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing
My name is Robert Lux, and I'm here this afternoon to offer this testimony in support of Ordinance 040616. As Mr. Cramp has indicated, I'm the chief financial officer for the Temple University Health System. On behalf of the Temple University Health System board of directors and our chairman and chief executive officer, Joseph Marshall, we respectfully request authorization to proceed with the issuance of our proposed series 2004 revenue bonds. The maximum bond authorization of this ordinance is $300 million of consisting of $55 million of new financing for the completion of various capital projects including the Temple University Hospital, a military care center, and the remainder for the refunding of existing debt. However, due to the recent increases in long-term interest rates, we expect to initially issue approximately $110 million of these bonds. The proposed bonds will be fully the sole obligation of the health system. 142 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing With your authorization we intend to price the series 2004 bonds at the end of the month of June and into the early part of July. Therefore, we respectfully request the suspension of the rules in order to have final passage of this ordinance by June 17. This concludes my testimony. I am available to answer any questions you may have regarding this transaction. Thank you.
What's the fiscal health of the health systems? Are we doing well, better?
The Temple University Health System is very fiscally stable, although given the mission that Temple has in the service of the indigent population of the City of Philadelphia, it is not a situation that can't change very quickly, but we are stable. Our credit rating with Mood's and Standard & Poor's is clearly in the investment grade category. 143 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing
What is the status of the ambulatory facility? Is that under construction yet?
The ambulatory facility is currently in construction. Initial opening date would be in April/May of 2005. Part of what this proposal is is to complete the fitting out of various floors of that building.
So there would be financing and this ties into the ability to complete that facility?
Thank you, Councilman Clarke. The institutions that choose to come to the city authority have other options in this state. We are a multistate issuer unlike many other states, and so the courtesy shown by the Council in general, by you introducing this in a timely manner in order 144 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing that we may proceed through the summer rather than be delayed until the fall is greatly appreciated.
Thank you. Anyone else to testify on this bill? Thank you for your testimony.
My name is Austin McGrath. I'm general Council of the hospital authority. I know Mr. Lux has asked, but I want suspension of the rules. Thank you very much.
So noted. Thank you. Will the clerk please read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 040427, approving the first amendment of the redevelopment proposal for the Tioga urban renewal area, being the area generally bounded by Hunting Park Avenue on the north, Broad Street, Germantown Avenue, Venango Street, 15th Street, Allegheny Avenue and Germantown Avenue on the east, Glenwood Avenue and Lehigh Avenue on the south and 23rd Street, Allegheny Avenue and 22nd Street on the west, including the first amendment to the urban renewal plan and the relocation plan, which provides, inter alia, for the 145 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing additional land acquisition of one property for industrial and related uses.
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee on Rules, I am Herbert Wetzel, executive director of the Redevelopment Authority. I'm here today to speak in support of Bill No. 14 040427, the first amended redevelopment proposal and the first amended urban renewal plan for the Tioga Redevelopment area and the Tioga urban renewal area. This bill would authorize the Redevelopment Authority to acquire one vacant property in support of the NewCourtland Elder Services for the development of the NewCourtland Logistics Center. NewCourtland Elder Services, a subsidiary Presbyterian foundation for Philadelphia, currently operates six nursing homes in the Philadelphia area. The new logistics center 146 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing proposed for this site will consist of a consolidated laundry facility, a medical equipment maintenance and repair center, a centralized medical supply site, and the center will also house a job training program and support staff. Acquisition costs will be paid for with bond proceeds from the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. Passage of this bill would eliminate blight --
Mr. Wetzel, can you hold on? Excuse me. Can I please ask for the side bar discussions to be limited or outside please? It is difficult hearing the testimony. Please proceed.
Passage of this bill would eliminate blight, help create up to 30 new jobs and enhance the quality of services for the infirm elderly provided by the valued community partner. Mr. Chairman and members of the Rules Committee, I respectfully request favorable consideration of Bill No. 040427 and would ask the suspension of Council rules to allow the first reading on June 10, 2004. 147 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing
Thank you. Do we have anyone to testify on this bill?
Good afternoon, Madam President, Councilwoman Miller. My name is Max Kent. I'm the senior project manager for NewCourtland Elder Services and the Presbyterian Foundation for Philadelphia, and I'm here to corroborate Mr. Wetzel's testimony with one small change. As of two weeks ago, we no longer control six nursing homes in the City of Philadelphia; we control seven. And I'm prepared to answer any questions.
I'm sorry. We are having difficulty in hearing you. Can you pull the microphone closer. Let's try it that way. It may be the microphone. Please proceed.
My name is Max Kent. I'm the senior project manager for NewCourtland Elder Services and the Presbyterian Foundation for 148 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Philadelphia, and I'm here to corroborate Mr. Wetzel's testimony and to answer any questions.
Thank you. I don't have any questions. Do you, Councilwoman? We have none. Thank you. Anyone else to testify on this bill? Thank you very much. I would ask Mr. McPherson to please -- do you want to testify on this bill?
Please approach the witness table and identify yourself for the record.
My name is Steven Agresta, and I am part ownership of the property in question.
If I may, the property was deemed imminently dangerous because of certain conditions having to do with the building. A violation was issued by L & I. Our intentions with the property are to put a storage, like a garage, a storage garage, self-storage type of situation. We have two tenants there already. 149 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing
I'm sorry. You have two tenants in an imminently dangerous property?
No, there are several -- there are multiple buildings. One of the buildings -- that didn't sound good, did it? One of the buildings has a couple structural issues, which we have a current permit for to do the repairs. I have my architect with me here today if you have any questions about the structure itself. We also happen to have something that we are trying to work out with someone who was interested in purchasing the property, but in the interim we feel it is beneficial to do the few repairs necessary under this permit. I don't know how it affects this whole scenario, but the redevelopment issue I believe has to do with the future use with another person that is interested.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.
Thank you, Madam President. 150 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing We talked most recently this morning with Mr. Steve Agresta, but this is a part of our -- this site is important to our whole redevelopment scheme in that particular section, that area of our district, that Tioga area, so we are going to be having a meeting with him in probably two weeks, when Bob Sibibley returns, and we want to continue to work together. Our goal and interest is to do development on that site, and so we are not sure just yet exactly what is going to happen, but we are very grateful that NewCourtland Elder Services is interested in locations in our district and I'm glad Steven was here today.
I'm sorry. Who was the interested party? Can you repeat the name of the company's name?
And if things don't work out amicably for both sides with NewCourtland, we would like to proceed with the --
-- repair of the building and turn it into storage garages instead of just a 151 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing vacant lot.
And/or possible demolition; is that not what we talked about this morning?
Well, we talked about the possible demolition actually in preparation of their use as well. It is kind of up in the air, so I don't think a decision would be appropriate at this time.
We will meet in two weeks and figure this out. This building has been an issue in our district for some time now and it is time to bring this to closure and move forward and do some positive things with this site. So I'm really glad that you did come in this morning. We did have a chance to meet and talk, and my staff has met with you, I think, on two previous occasions.
There was one other previous occasion, at which time they were supposed to get back to us with appraisals and stuff, but I think some things fell through the cracks a bit with the appraisals.
So we were kind of at a 152 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing blockade at that moment. So that's what brought us here at this point. I think we have ironed out a lot of those issues this morning, so we will see where we go from there.
We look forward to working with you and having a good, positive relationship, and we like to see people that own these large vacant, blighted buildings in our district come forward and put together a plan to rid the neighborhood of blight. So I do want to thank you for coming this morning.
Any other witnesses on this bill? Seeing none, I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. -- I'm sorry.
Yes. Good afternoon. My name is Dave Yerke, and I work for Councilwoman Donna Miller. I had a document to submit for the record on this case. I would ask that it be entered 153 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing into the record. It is basically pictures of the building, so that Council can be guided and have an understanding of the deteriorated condition. The page following that is Municipal Court information concerning code enforcement violations. There are four failures to appear and fines imposed by the Municipal Court and also the other pages are from central clerical at L & I. It is about seven or eight pages of open violations that exist as of Monday on this property. I would ask that those be entered into the record.
I would like to testify further in light of that. I would like to respond to his testimony if it is possible. I have something else to add.
I would like to add a couple of points of interest and also have these part of the record because the pictures you have been given are not current at all because prior to the last violation, which was satisfied according to Licenses & Inspection, the building is about another 15 or 20 feet lower now because I took the entire 154 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing second floor off. That is not accurate. So I would like to let the Councilpeople know that, as well as when I went and got a permit as of -- this most recent permit was yesterday -- the only violation that was existing on the entire property was addressed in this permit and approved by Bob Sibibley's office as well. So you have old news there is what you have.
As Councilwoman Miller indicated, within two weeks you will be getting together and hopefully you can resolve this.
Again I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill 20 No. 040429.
An ordinance approving the redevelopment proposal of the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia for the redevelopment of the 54th and Columbia urban renewal area, being the area generally bounded by North 54th 155 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Street, Columbia Avenue, Ruby Street and Hazelhurst Street, approving the urban renewal plan and determining that such plan and redevelopment proposal conform to the general locality plan and make adequate provisions for individuals, business concerns and families who are displaced.
Madam President and Members of the Rules Committee, I'm here to speak in support of Bill No. 040429, which is the establishment of the redevelopment proposal and the creation of the 54th and Columbia redevelopment area and the 54th and Columbia urban renewal area. This bill would authorize the Redevelopment Authority to acquire one vacant commercial property. The property, formerly the site of Kirschner Oil Company, is located at 1717-25 North 54th Street in the Wynnefield section of Philadelphia. The property will be demolished and redeveloped for residential use. The Fourth Councilmatic District office has indicated private developers have expressed interest in this site. Passage of this bill will lead to the elimination of a vacant, blighted structure and the creation of 156 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing additional residential options in the Wynnefield neighborhood. Madam President and Members of the Rules Committee, I respectfully request favorable consideration of Bill No. 040429 and would ask for the suspension of Council rules to allow a first reading on June 10, 2004.
Thank you. Are there any questions from members of the committee? Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Please approach the witness table, sir. Kindly identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon. My name is Yusef Syiam, S-Y-I-A-M. I'm the owner of the property 1717 North 54th Street in the Wynnefield area. The first that I know about this ordinance is a letter signed by Mr. Wetzel that I received on Friday. I spoke to Mr. Wetzel a couple of times. I oppose that ordinance. I had purchased that property a few years ago from a street association in Wynnefield. The building was a shell. It had a lot of back taxes, water bills. It was in a 157 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing terrible condition. I invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in that building with the intention of having a minimall, a few supermarkets, a restaurant, a few stores, a recreation area, but I had met some opposition from the neighbor. Unless I get absolutely I cannot evolve that property and unless I get a fair compensation for what I have invested, I oppose that. And I would like to mention that the City has approached me a couple of times to purchase that property. A private developer approached me, but because of some resistance from the neighbor, I could not do that. So for the record I oppose the request of the Redevelopment Authority.
Thank you, sir. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Seeing none, I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 040430.
An ordinance approving the fourth amendment of the redevelopment proposal for the Independence Mall urban renewal area, Unit No. 4, being the area beginning at the intersection 158 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing of the southerly side of Arch Street and the westerly side of 9th Street including the fourth amendment to the urban renewal plan and the relocation plan, which provides, inter alia, for the additional land acquisition of certain parcels located within the bed of ground formerly known as Ridge Avenue and generally situated between the northwest intersection of North 8th Street, Race Street and the southeast intersection of North 9th Street and Vine Street for commercial and related uses.
Madam President and Members of the Rules Committee, my name is Herbert Wetzel, executive director of the Redevelopment Authority, and I'm here to speak in support of Bill No. 040430, the fourth amended redevelopment proposal and the fourth amended urban renewal plan for the Center City redevelopment area and the Independence Mall urban renewal area, Unit No. 4. This bill would authorize the Redevelopment Authority to acquire properties located within a bed of a portion of ground formerly known as Ridge Avenue. The acquisition of these 159 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing properties would enable the Redevelopment Authority to consolidate parcels bounded by 8th, 9th, Race and Vine Streets into one parcel for eventual disposition. Passage of this bill would promote future development of the site and enhancement of the City's tax base. The proposed development site is across the street from the former Metropolitan Hospital which is currently being renovated for residential use. Madam President and Members of the Rules Committee, I respectfully request favorable consideration of Bill No. 040430 and would also ask for the suspension of Council rules to allow first reading on June 10, 2004.
Thank you. Are there any questions? Do we have anyone to testify on this bill? Please approach the witness table, sir.
Good afternoon, Members. My name is Dion Rassias. I'm an attorney here in town, and I have the privilege of representing Easy Parks, Inc. and its principals, Harvey and Robert Spear and their mother, Jeannette Spear, with regard 160 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing to the situation that is presently pending before you. As you members may know, I have hand-delivered to the office of the clerk my remarks today, which constituted about pages, but in 7 light of today's proceedings and in light of the 8 patience which you have all exhibited, I hope that 9 during another moment of convenience you will take 10 the time to read it and simply allow me to summarize 11 my points at this time. 12
No, but I'm glad that he 17 is paying me by the minute in light of today's proceedings today, sir, and I thank you. There are three components to the position we would like you all to consider as you assess the pros and cons of this particular development. They are not ranked in any particular importance for our discussion now, but, number one, I would ask you to please focus on the residents of the Chinatown community and what is going to happen 161 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing to them when this particular parcel is taken. Parking through the city is a premium. We all know that. However, in Chinatown it is a little more acute. In Chinatown you have a situation involving very small businesses who rely on this particular lot. This lot where it's located actually forms the spiritual center of the Chinatown area. Taking this lot will virtually cripple every single small business located in that area. There are no parking alternatives to this particular lot and it is utilized very frequently by the Chinatown community. In addition, if you saw this morning, there were probably 30 to 35 people from the Chinatown small business community who came in and who would like to be heard. Unfortunately, in light of their businesses, they had to leave around 11:30, but I will be submitting to your offices copies of petitions which have been signed by the members of this community respectfully requesting that this proposed development be rejected. There are two other items that I would like to bring to your attention at this time. The second one is my clients operate this parking lot pursuant to a lease. In this lease agreement my 162 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing clients have the right of first refusal to develop this property. For reasons which are completely presently unexplained the Redevelopment Authority has never, ever honored the written right of first refusal which my clients own. It is not subject to dispute. It's very clear. For whatever reason it is simply being ignored. We find this situation to be intolerable. We respectfully request that you consider the rights that our clients have contractually and ultimately, if we are compelled to do so, we will seek redress in both the state and federal courts at the appropriate time. Finally, my clients have committed a lot of time and effort to the development of this property. As a result, to not be involved in a bid process is completely unfair and violates the law. When this property was first considered for condemnation in 1991, at that time bids were requested. Unfortunately now everything is being done behind closed doors. Everything has been done secretly and everything has been done quietly, and ultimately when these types of things occur, the community's suspicions about what is going on at high levels in Philadelphia government have a 163 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing tendency to run wild, and in this instance they appear to be true. We very much look forward to the opportunity to prove these positions to you if we have the appropriate time to do so or to prove them in court at the appropriate time. I would be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco.
I apologize. I was having a conversation off to the side. I didn't realize you guys were talking. Mr. Wetzel, could you explain the process here as to what will have to occur before this proposed development, should it be approved, would be able to take place for the record?
Yes, and I would also like to have the opportunity to state clearly what we are doing here. This is not about -- the action before you is not about any particular development. The 164 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing action before you is to clean up the site. When what was formerly Ridge Avenue was stricken, title to little pie-shaped parcels reverted to the original owners whose deeds date back to the 1920's. So the entire parcel was not assembled at one time. And so now you have a strip of land as you can see by the orange in there that was stricken from the public record, and those little parcels of land that exist inside there need to be acquired. They are not in public ownership; they are in private ownership. In fact, the leases that we have for the parking area do not include those parcels of land. So the bill before you is to essentially clean that up and create an entire development parcel. On the disposition side of this, Councilman, I think you are asking me the question, is that before the Redevelopment Authority can dispose of this proposal -- excuse me -- dispose of this property, we are going to require, and it is statutory, a resolution of Council. And so that any development that takes place on that site will only take place, as you know, with the support of the District Councilperson, who would then introduce 165 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing that resolution.
So without introduction by the District Councilperson, who in this case happens to be me, that would not move forward.
So for the record, although I have not seen the petitions -- the gentleman to the left, I'm sorry, I did not get your name, sir.
I did not see a copy of the petition and I have not yet had any conversation with the Chinatown Development Corporation as well. I can remember that one of the individuals who was interested in developing this site approached me several months ago about the possibility of doing it, developing it, and I insisted at that time, as I would always do no 23 matter, in any type of development, that the community association, neighborhood group, be contacted, and I can assure you that there will be 166 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing no introduction of a resolution on my part until such time that the parties involved, especially the community, have been made aware of this and are fully engaged in a conversation as to whether or not they would support or reject the proposal that would come before me probably -- Mr. Wetzel, what is it? Is it 180 days?
September. So I can assure you of that for the record, that that will not take place. As to your other issues on first right of refusal, I'm somewhat familiar with that claim because several years ago Mr. Ken Baylen, who was developing the Metropolitan Hospital, had sought to develop this site as well at that time. I'm surprised to hear that still has not yet been resolved, but that is a matter for the courts and you as an attorney. I'm not sure who owns what. I'm not about to try it figure that out, but as far as the development, there will be no permanent action taken by me until such time that all parties have been involved in the process.
Thank you for your 167 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing consideration.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Do we have any other witnesses on this bill?
Please identify yourself for the record. Pull the microphone closer. We are having difficulty here.
I'm Harvey Spear. I just wanted to let it be known that my parents were the former owners of properties along this parcel that they are saying they want to condemn on Ridge Avenue, and my mother is happy to be here.
I see that your mother is here, and I was commenting that we haven't seen her for quite a while.
But I also wanted to -- it was my understanding that the Redevelopment Authority has selected a developer for this site and the Chinese community at this point is not happy 168 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing about what happened without any bids taking place. Can I ask Mr. Wetzel if that is true that there was a developer selected?
Certainly. There were two proposals that were presented to the Redevelopment Authority, one by Mr. Spear's company to retain that as a parking lot and another proposal from a developer who would develop about 200 units of housing on that particular site. After a lot of discussion, the Redevelopment Authority board made a preliminary selection, which means it just gives this particular organization that wants to build 200 units on the site 180 days to come back with a plan. It was made very clear to them that they would have to come back with a plan that was supported by both the community and the District Councilperson. We have no obligation beyond that time frame other than to give them an opportunity to come back with a plan.
I also wanted to let the Council know that the site at 9th and Arch also to my understanding has been given to somebody else, so if the Redevelopment Authority does give out both 169 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing contracts, they will lose about a thousand parking spots along 9th Street at the same time. I wanted to let Mr. Wetzel to verify that that was given out also.
Mr. Spear, are you speaking to the property that Mr. Zuretsky expressed an interest in developing?
I don't know the status of that, but it was my understanding that --
There has been an expression of interest there. Mr. Zuretsky has visited me with the concept of a plan. I think, if I'm not mistaken, that parcel was a combination of residential and retail, if I'm not mistaken, but to date, again, as I instructed Mr. Zuretsky to meet with the Chinatown Development Corporation to talk to them about his plan and to see if it was acceptable. To date I have not heard anything pro or con from either of those parties, but he did express an interest. And I would like to see the site developed. There is no question about that.
I think if the site is 170 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing developed, understand there has to be parking also in addition to housing on both sides because Chinatown will lose a number of parking spaces.
We understand that as well, and that is what we need to continue to try to work on to see if we accommodate both issues, both the needs of the community in terms of residential development because Chinatown is one of the few residential communities in the city that is still developing and that people are moving into, and also understand the need for additional parking because of that growth.
Anyone else to testify on this bill? Please approach the witness table.
Good afternoon. My name is Carol Stever. I'm an attorney and I have an office at 143 North 9th Street, which is right in Chinatown. I'm here on behalf of primarily the names that were on the petition that has been submitted, and I want to express the concerns of the businesses in that area that for parking. That lot at 9th and Race is used by the patrons of those businesses, and I can say that 90 171 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing percent of the business that comes into that town is from out of Chinatown. Parking is at a premium. So I would say that any development that takes place in that area would really take into consideration the parking issue. That is key.
I just need to know about this petition. Whom was it circulated by? Was it by CCDC, Chinatown Community Development Corporation or individuals.
Individuals, businesses that were -- individuals that are owners and workers of the businesses in Chinatown.
I would appreciate a copy being submitted to the Chair so I can get a copy of it myself. Thank you.
Councilman, with all of the paperwork that we are being deluged with, I would suggest that petition be submitted to Councilman DiCicco directly.
Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Please 172 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing approach the witness table, sir. Do we have anyone else on this bill 4 after this gentleman to testify? Okay. Please come forward so we can save some time. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is Lee. I'm the owner Ocean City Restaurant located at 234 North 9th Street, just across the street from the parking lot, the Easy parking lot. And Chinatown is only two blocks, but we have about a hundred retail stores. We really need that parking space for the local business. And, actually, my company, we represent different association. We talk about it. We really need it. Actually, all of the business, local business people, depends not from the local, not from Chinatown, but from outside, from New Jersey, from Delaware. We very need parking space for these people to come in Chinatown to bring more business in the city, and I very opposed to it and against that. Thank you.
My name is Michael Chow, and I'm restaurant owner at 238 North 9th Street, which 173 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing is across street of the Easy Park. I have a business in that location for years. I would say 4 most of my customers is from all over around great 5 Delaware area, from New Jersey, from Delaware, from 6 Northeast, from Bucks County, Montgomery County. 7 And those people, they come to Chinatown 8 to shop, to eat, to do business. Most of them they 9 are driving cars. When they are driving cars, they 10 need a parking space, and right now the parking lot, 11 the Easy Park, is one of the biggest parking lots in 12 Chinatown. They can park 400 cars and plus. So any 13 plan to develop the site parking is my real concern. 14 If any plan without the parking, they will hurt the 15 business of Chinatown and they will hurt the 16 community. So whoever the person deciding on the 17 lot, I am asking they remember the parking for the 18 public. 19
Thank you very 20 much, sir. 21 Good afternoon. Please identify 22 yourself for the record. 23
My name is John Ciccone. 24 I'm an architect in the City of Philadelphia. I have been here for approximately 30 years. I have a 174 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing distribution for you if you could take it.
Yes, it is basically my testimony. It is only one page long.
We will give that to the stenographer. It will be transcribed in full. If you can simply abbreviate it, we would appreciate that.
Having entered that, I would like to simplify and to state my position. In 1990 actually a group called the Ciccone Group was named the redeveloper for that parcel. At that time we worked intensely and intimately with the Chinese community to develop the plan. I understand that a preliminary selection of a developer has been made, and I have been approached by members in the community in order to request that that plan actually -- that the selection of the developer actually be retracted and to somehow present an alternate plan that more meets their needs. That need was very much incorporated into a project that is attached to my statement, a 175 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing project that we planned in 1990. That included a 550-car parking garage. It included businesses that were an extension of the Chinese community involved in investment by the Chinese community. In order to take a project of this size to fruition, you obviously need a team with the financial capability and experience to do it. This is a very important site for the City of Philadelphia. It is right at the entrance to the city, gateway at the bottom of the Ben Franklin prim. Also, with the Global appreciation we have today of China both economically and culturally, I think this is an opportunity for us to allow the expansion of Chinatown and present the larger cultural aspects of the Asian community. This is the last block south of Vine Street for Chinatown to expand. There is no other block. They have been very successful in going north of Vine Street for housing. They also have some success in developing some wholesale operations north of Vine Street, but it is the retail center of Chinatown that is its heart and soul, and this is the only block left for the expansion of that retail function. So it is not only the parking; it is also 176 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing the expansion of the retail in a way that doesn't make the existing obsolete and allows for the investment by the Chinese community. Third, it is an opportunity again to develop the uniqueness that is Chinatown with the new awareness of the Chinese economy and cultural importance in the world at large. The team that I put together is very capable of doing this project. A number of them were here today, but of course pressing on through the day they had to leave, but they include names that most of you would know: John Rosenthal of Penrose Company, David Grasso of Metro Development Company, Slavko Brkich, who is here today, of Mellon Green Realty, people in the community, some of whom you have just heard, restaurants, and we have met with association leaders there. So we are fully equipped. We have the financial capability and experience to do this project. I have looked at the plan that is currently proposed by the preliminary selection of the developer. It is a grossly willful underestimate of what should be done at that site. It involves 200 apartments and only 135 parking 177 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing spaces. This site deserves much more than that. We are capable of doing it. We think the preliminary section of that developer should be retracted. I think that the Redevelopment Authority should consider closely the Chinese community that has asked us to assist them and the team we put together and the plan we put together. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Seeing none, I would ask Mr. -- I beg your pardon.
Good afternoon. My name is David Yu. I am the secretary of the Merchant Association in Chinatown opposing. A lot of people wanted to come, but too bad they had to work, and a lot of those don't understand English that good, so I'm translating for them and express their feeling that whoever develop in Chinatown we welcome, but we concerning about we already have box in Chinatown already on Market Street side, on Convention Center side. We already boxed in. We have nowhere to go and nowhere to park for the customers who come in 178 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Chinatown. So what I'm concerned is, expressed for the people is, we want more parking space and we consider who propose and let us know about what is going to be built and what the plans will be like. It is benefit for Chinatown.
Thank you very much. We appreciate your attendance. The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco.
Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, sir. I would suggest that you, as the business association, meet with John Chin and Cecilia Yep over at the Community Development Corporation. Are you familiar with John Chin.
Whatever happens 20 there needs to be dealt with by both the business and residential community. I don't know what the end result will be, but you all need to be engaged in this process as it moves forward, so I would suggest that you meet with Mr. Chin to discuss your concerns so that we are all speaking from one 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing at some point in time. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Anyone else to testify on this bill? Seeing none, again I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 040433.
An ordinance approving the 32nd amendment of the redevelopment proposal for the Model Cities Urban Renewal Area, being the area beginning at the northwest corner of Front Street and Spring Garden Street including the 24th amendment to the urban renewal plan and the 23rd amendment to the relocation plan, which provides, inter alia, for the additional land acquisition of approximately 95 properties for residential and related uses.
Madam President and Members of the Rules Committee. My name is Herbert Wetzel, executive director of the Redevelopment Authority, and I am here to speak in support of Bill 23 No. 040433, the 32nd amended redevelopment proposal and the 24th amended urban renewal plan for the North Philadelphia Redevelopment area and the Model 180 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Cities Urban Renewal Area. This bill would authorize the Redevelopment Authority to acquire 94 properties (81 vacant lots, six vacant structures and seven occupied structures) which will be used for land banking, open space, residential development and commercial and institutional development. All properties will be acquired utilizing bond proceeds from the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative unless otherwise specified. Land banking and open space: 29 vacant lots will be acquired for use as open space. Norris Square Neighborhood Project, in partnership with community gardeners and homeowners, is requesting assistance in acquiring several lots for use as off-street parking, side yards and community gardens. The lots have been abandoned by the prior owners and left in a state of blight. The acquisition of these lots will allow the authority to transfer them to individuals and organizations that will make a commitment to maintain them on a long-term basis. 28 vacant lots in the Strawberry Mansion neighborhood will be acquired on behalf of NTI for 181 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing future residential development. The lots are the result of the NTI-sponsored demolition of imminently dangerous properties in that area. Homeownership: 29 properties will be acquired for homeownership projects. vacant lots 7 and four vacant structures will be acquired as part 8 of a comprehensive market rate development project 9 located in the area just north of 10th and Spring 10 Garden Street. 11 One vacant lot will be acquired to 12 provide for the expansion of the Francisville Design Competition site. This parcel will be combined with others already in public ownership, and, in the process of acquisition, for the development of a tax credit rental project by Community Ventures. Eleven properties (seven occupied structures, one vacant structure and three vacant lots) will be acquired on behalf of the Norris Square Civic Association to complete site acquisition for the Hunter School homeownership project. Norris Square Civic Association proposes to build 50 new homes, affordable to low and moderate-income, first-time homebuyers. Development financing will be provided by a combination of CDBG 182 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing and HOME funding from the City's Office of Housing and Community Development, a grant from the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency's Homeownership Choice Program and from sales proceed. One vacant lot will be acquired for the development of market rate residential units known as capital flats. The lot is currently blighted and used for short dumping. Commercial and institutional: Seven properties will be acquired for commercial and institutional projects. Four vacant lots and -- Council President, I was want to amend my testimony here. About a half hour ago Project Home informed us that what is listed as a vacant structure may not necessarily be vacant, and we will have to talk to the Councilman about that.
Is there a reason why that is an unknown? That's kind of like important.
I think it is very important. I think it was originally listed as 183 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing vacant and sometimes somebody can reoccupy the property. I don't know. I'm just telling you that Project Home informed us that they think it may be occupied.
Well, I'm assuming that the research shows who the owner is, and subsequently I'm assuming that people in the neighborhood might have a sense of who is in the house. Can you file your reply for us before we proceed with this and get some clarity on that, please. Thank you, Madam President.
Having been informed, I wanted to bring that before Council so that we can deal with the issue. The acquisition would be to acquire and complete the site assembly on the 2300 block of West Berks Street on behalf of Project Home CDC. The site will be used for parking in conjunction with the Honickman Learning Center and Comcast Technology Labs located on the 1900 block of North Judson Street. The newly constructed Technology Center contains classroom space, an all-purpose room, 184 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing office space for Project Home and houses after-school and adult education programs. Two vacant lots will be acquired and assembled at the intersection of North 2nd and Oxford Streets for a mixed-use development. The development proposal calls for new construction of townhouses with off-street parking and a 9 four-story commercial building with apartments on 10 the upper floors. 11 One nonassisted acquisition. One vacant lot will be acquired on behalf of Temple University to support a new student housing development which is under construction on land adjacent to the site. Temple has executed a non-assistance agreement that requires Temple to pay for all the direct and indirect costs associated with this acquisition. Passage of this bill would lead to the creation of 65 new homeownership units, 117 new affordable rental housing rental units and the expansion of two businesses. Madam President and Members of the Rules Committee, I respectfully request favorable consideration of Bill No. 040433 and would ask for the suspension of Council rules to allow first 185 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing reading on June 10, 2004.
Thank you. Are there any questions from members of the committee? Do we have anyone else to testify on the bill? Please approach the witness table, sir. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon. My name is Jim Shields from Norris Square Neighborhood Project, and we are here to thank you for consideration of this bill with the gardens. Norris Square Neighborhood Project is an after-school program with an adult women's program and the women's end of it is primarily in the gardens. And this program here now is giving us the opportunity to take the land that we have been using as gardens which are, by the way, award-winning gardens, and Thomasina and a few of the other ladies that wanted to come down today are not able to make it because they have kids working in the gardens, and that's a good thing, them working in the gardens. So with that I would like to give you to Thomasina.
Good afternoon. Thank you for the time you have given us. My name is 186 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Thomasina Ramiro, a member of Norris Square Neighborhood Project for about years and a 4 volunteer also. We have been using these lands as 5 gardens for over 20 years, and as Mr. Jim says, the 6 gardens have been used as educational tools for 7 school children, and we will continue the job as we 8 get more of these lots developed as gardens. 9 They are award-winning every year with 10 the Horticultural Society at garden contests, and we 11 have tours that come to see these gardens during the 12 week and on weekends. It's a pleasure to come 13 around in the community now to see all of these 14 gardens blooming and all of the lots that were 15 trashed being developed as beautiful place to come. 16 So we thank you for your support. 17
Thank you. I 18 think we have to thank Councilman Clarke for his 19 support. 20
I'm not sure if I 21 did anything, but I'll take it. 22
And I don't see Councilman 23 Mariano, but he has been a strong supporter of ours 24 in this effort, and we give it to you, Councilman 25 Clarke. 187 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing
Thank you for your patience. We appreciate you coming in. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Please approach the witness table. Plies identify yourself.
Good afternoon, Madam President and Members of the Committee. My name is Carolyn Plack. I'm director of housing and community development with Project Home, and also with me is Helen Brown, community resident and community organizer for Project Home. We are here today in support of Bill No. 18 040433 and am here to answer any questions concerning the project on the 2300 block of West Berks Street.
I personally don't have any questions. Councilman Clarke, do you have any questions or comments?
No, I don't have any 188 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing questions, but I would like to commend you on the wonderful work that you have done in the community, not just with respect to housing but with the children and in particular Miss Brown, who is the director extraordinaire of the Philadelphia Foot Stompers, arguably the best drill team in the City of Philadelphia, and I say that in this hearing because I don't see anyone representing another drill team, but I want to commend you for the wonderful work. And the technology center is a wonderful facility, and I want to thank you guys and Comcast for pulling that together.
Project Home thanks you, Councilman Clarke, for all of your support in our projects.
Thank you. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill?
My name is Patricia DeCarlo, Norris Square Civic Association, and in the interest of time, I will just hand you the description of the project.
That will be 189 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing put in the record in full. Are there any other witnesses on this bill? Seeing none, I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 040434.
An ordinance approving the 12th amendment of the redevelopment proposal for the Cecil B. Moore Avenue Urban Renewal Area, being the area generally bounded by 15th Street on the east, Jefferson Street on the south, 19th Street on the west and Montgomery Avenue on the north including the 12th amendment to the urban renewal plan and the eighth amendment to the relocation plan, which provides, inter alia, for the additional land acquisition of approximately two properties for commercial and related uses.
Madam President and Members of the Rules Committee, my name is Herbert Wetzel, executive director of the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia. I am here to speak in support of Bill No. 040434, the 12th amended redevelopment proposal and the 12th amended urban renewal plan for the North Philadelphia 190 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Redevelopment Area and the Cecil B. Moore Avenue urban renewal area. This bill would authorize the Redevelopment Authority to acquire two properties (one vacant lot and one occupied commercial structure) which we will use for commercial development. These properties will be acquired utilizing bond proceeds from the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. The occupied commercial structure will be acquired and combined with seven others already in the process of being acquired and two others already in public ownership to complete site assembly for the north side of the 1500 block of Cecil B. Moore Avenue for future commercial development. The vacant lot will be acquired on behalf of Beech Interplex to complete site assembly to expand parking for their new Social Security Administration office located on the 1500 block of Cecil B. Moore Avenue. Passage of this bill would lead to the expansion of an existing business and the creation of new business opportunities. 191 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Madam President and Members of the Rules Committee, I respectfully request favorable consideration of Bill No. 040434 and would ask for the suspension of Council rules to allow first reading on June 10, 2004.
Are there questions from members of the committee? Do we have anyone to testify on this bill? Seeing none, I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 040462.
An ordinance approving the fifth amendment of the redevelopment proposal for the Point Breeze East Urban Renewal Area, being the area generally bounded by the southerly side of Washington Avenue on the north, the westerly side of Broad Street on the east, the northerly side of Moore Street on the south and the easterly side of 25th Street on the west, including the fifth amendment to the urban renewal plan and the second amendment to the relocation plan, which provides, inter alia, for the expansion of the southern boundary to include the area between 16th Street, Bancroft Street and the northerly side lot lines of 192 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing 1818 South 16th Street and 1823 South Bancroft Street, the additional land acquisition of one property for residential and related uses.
Madam President and Members of the Rules Committee, my name is Herbert Wetzel, executive director of the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia. I'm here to speak in support of Bill No. 040462, the fifth amended redevelopment proposal and the fifth amended urban renewal plan for the Point Breeze Redevelopment Area and the Point Breeze Urban Renewal Area. This bill would authorize the Redevelopment Authority to expand the Point Breeze Redevelopment Area Boundary to Moore Street on the north, South 16th Street on the east, South Bancroft Street on the west and the northerly side lot lines of 1818 South 16th Street and 1823 South Bancroft Street. This bill would also authorize the Redevelopment Authority to acquire one vacant structure, the former site of the Drexel School, located at 1800 South 16th Street. The Altman Group, a private residential developer, proposes to 193 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing rehabilitate the site to create between and 30 units of affordable rental housing for low-income senior citizens. Financing for this project is expected to come from the sale of low-income housing tax credits issued by the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency. Passage of this bill would lead to the creation of up to 30 affordable rental housing units for seniors and leverage private resources through the sale of low-income housing tax credits. Madam Chairperson and Members of the Rules Committee, I respectfully request favorable consideration of Bill No. 040462 and would ask for the suspension of Council rules to allow first reading on June 10, 2004.
Mr. Wetzel, I 18 believe that Miss Murray has contacted your office 19 indicating that we will move forward with the 20 authorization, but we will withhold further action 21 on the declaration of taking at this time due to a 22 new partnership controlling the property. Are you 23 aware of that? 24
I just wanted 194 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing to make sure it was part of the record. Thank you. Are there any questions? Do we have anyone else to testify? Thank you. I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 040498.
An ordinance approving the tenth amendment of the redevelopment proposal for the Eastwick Urban Renewal Area, being the area beginning at the point of intersection of the west side of Lindbergh Boulevard with the north side of 58th Street including the 10th amendment to the urban renewal plan and the first amendment to the relocation plan, which provides for a change of the land use and related controls of 6100 to 6240 Eastwick Avenue from limited industrial to residential and related uses.
Madam Chairperson and Members of the Rules Committee, my name is Herbert Wetzel, executive director of the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia. I'm here to speak in support of Bill No. 040498, the tenth amended redevelopment proposal and tenth amended 195 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing urban renewal plan for the Eastwick Redevelopment Area and the Eastwick Urban Renewal Area. The plan amendment includes a land use change for parcel F (also known as 6100 to 6240 Eastwick Avenue) from limited industrial to residential and related. This change is necessary to accommodate the development of a new 54-unit, special-needs rental housing development sponsored by Inglis House Corporation. The project is expected to cost $10 million and will be financed with a combination of funding under HUD Section 811 program and low-income housing tax credits issued by the Pennsylvania Housing Financing Agency. Passage of this bill will enable Inglis House to carry out its development plan for 54 special needs housing units and remain in compliance with the urban renewal plan for the Eastwick area. Madam President and Members of the Rules Committee, I respectfully request favorable consideration of Bill 040498 and would ask for the suspension of Council rules to allow first reading on June 10, 2004.