Thank you, Mr. Wetzel. 196 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing I do know that some time ago we did have a community meeting. Inglis House was present and the community overwhelmingly approved this proposal, so I thank you.
Council President, I think it is also exciting to see a parcel of land that has been vacant for over 40 years to have a real re-use that will have a real impact and has this level of community support. This is really exciting.
The Chair agrees. It is a wonderful opportunity for everyone. I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill 040500.
An ordinance approving the 15th amendment of the redevelopment proposal for the South Central Urban Renewal Area, being the area beginning at the intersection of the southerly side of Washington Avenue projected and the easterly side of Delaware Avenue, including the 15th amendment to the urban renewal plan and the 12th amendment to the relocation plan, which provides, inter alia, for the additional land acquisition of approximately 15 properties for residential and related uses, the additional land acquisition of one property for 197 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing commercial and related reuses, the additional land acquisition of properties for industrial and 4 related reuses, a change in the land use and related 5 controls of the area bounded by Kimball Street, 6 League Street, 20th Street and 19th Street from 7 residential and related to industrial and related 8 uses. 9
Madam President and Members 11 of the Rules Committee, my name is Herbert Wetzel, 12 executive director of the Redevelopment Authority of 13 the City of Philadelphia. I'm here to speak in 14 support of Bill No. 040500, the 15th amended 15 redevelopment proposal and the 15th amended urban 16 renewal plan for the South Central Redevelopment 17 Area and the South Central Urban Renewal Area. 18 This bill will authorize the Redevelopment Authority to change the land use for the area bounded by Kimball Street on the north, League Street to the south and 20th Street to the west and 19th Street to the east from residential and related to industrial and related. This bill will also allow the Redevelopment Authority to acquire a total of 34 198 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing properties (23 vacant lots and vacant structures) to support new residential and commercial development. Ten properties will be acquired on behalf of Greater St. Matthew Community Development Corporation for a comprehensive neighborhood revitalization effort. M. Night Shyamalan, director of major films such as "The Sixth Sense" and "Signs," established a foundation and has committed up to $1.5 million to Greater St. Matthew CDC to carry out this homeownership project. The initial phase will consist of homes to be rehabilitated and made available for sale at both affordable and market rates. One property, located at 922 South 5th Street in the Queen Village neighborhood, will be acquired on behalf of the Chrimi Corporation to complete site assembly for the development of new townhouses. One property, located at 915 South 19th Street, will be acquired on behalf of Gracie and Bob Lewis for new construction of market rate apartments. Mr. and Mrs. Lewis own 911, 913, 917, 919 and 921 South 9th Street and need 915 South 9th 199 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Street in order to complete the project site. One vacant and one abandoned one-story property at 720 South Broad Street will be acquired on behalf of Brandywine Graphics. This property will be demolished and the land incorporated with existing lots at 722-728 South Broad Street already owned by Brandywine Graphics. The lots will be redeveloped into accessible parking for Brandywine Graphics Cultural Institution located at 732 South Broad Street and for other commercial tenants in the rear of the property at 1401-10 Pemberton Street. properties (13 vacant lots and 5 14 vacant structures) will be acquired on behalf of 15 Cava International Marble and Granite for the 16 expansion of its business. Cava is working in 17 partnership with the Commerce Department and the 18 Council President's office to develop a comprehensive plan for the project area, which is bounded by Washington Avenue, Kimball Street and South 19th and South 20th Streets. Three properties (one vacant structure and two vacant lots) will be acquired on behalf of Fitzwater 2000 Garden Associates. The association has been caring for this award-winning garden since 200 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing 1995. Passage of this bill will support the development of 29 new residential units, the expansion of two businesses and preserve an important community asset. Madam President and Members of the Rules Committee, I respectfully request favorable consideration of Bill No. 040500 and would also ask the suspension of Council rules to allow first reading on June 10, 2004.
Thank you. Mr. Wetzel, for the record, will you commit that you will not file declarations of takings on any of the properties in South Central Urban Renewal Area until you have confirmed them with my office, specifically with Kathleen Murray?
That's on the record. Also, the community has asked for an opportunity to have another meeting with Cava, in particular concerning the landscaping for that facility. In the event that an acceptable plan is 201 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing developed, is it possible for the RDA to place landscaping requirements into the developer's agreement with Cava.
I believe that would be possible. And, as you well know, we will not be able -- this is the first step in it. The second step of the process is disposition, so until your office is satisfied with the plan, there will be no 10 disposition of this real estate.
And I will double-check with you to see if we can put those controls in the --
That is wonderful. And I see that Reverend Avinger has been patiently sitting here very quietly since quite early this morning. Reverend, do you want to make any comments? Thank you for your patience, Reverend. And I'm sure that when you saw I was the chairperson of the committee you thought, oh, good she's going to call me first. We did do it by numerical order of the bills. Welcome and thank you for all of the 202 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing good work that you are doing. I'm sure that you would like to present a few words of testimony?
Yes, Madam President, and to the other Council Members. My name is Reverend Steven Avinger, Sr., senior pastor at Greater St. Matthew Baptist Church and president of Greater St. Matthew Community Development Corporation. We are excited about the opportunity to participate in revitalization of this community. As was read by Mr. Wetzel, we are in partnership with M. Night Shyamalan, who is a noted film producer and who has an interest in seeing this neighborhood revitalized along with the Eastern Pennsylvania Organizing Project. The list of ten properties --
Reverend, I'm sorry. I think you deserve a little more respect than you are getting. The noise level is much, much too high. Anybody having personal conversations, do so in the corridor, please. Please proceed, Reverend.
Thank you. The list of ten properties is a part of 203 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing properties that we hope to develop, 70 percent affordable and 30 percent market rate housing in the area. As you are well aware, this is a very exciting community. It is moving very rapidly. Housing costs are rising, and we would like to ensure that a certain level of these properties remain affordable for individuals who want to move to this area and who want to stay in this area, and that's what we are attempting to do. Again, we are just excited about it and we are looking forward to continuing to working with Council President and your office and working in this neighborhood.
Thank you, 16 Reverend. 17 Reverend, can you just explain the need 18 to acquire 2427 Grays Ferry Avenue, which was sold 19 in January '04 and has undergone significant 20 renovation? 21
Yes. Several months 25 ago we entered into negotiations with the owner of 204 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing the bar next to that, to that residence. We received several complaints that that was a nuisance bar and so, having spoken to the owners, we decided to purchase the bar from them and began to put plans together for a comprehensive child development center. That center would house 70 children. We looked at both properties before purchasing them on either side of the bar, both of which were vacant, and then, having purchased the bar, we discussed putting those two properties on the possible list that we would include in our development strategy. We lost a property on Christian Street and up until probably just two weeks ago the property that has been on our list that is necessary in order for us to develop that corner for that center for 70 kids, someone purchased that.
We found out a couple weeks ago. Now, we have made contact with that individual. And, in fact, we have a meeting with them tomorrow to discuss seeing whether or not we can reach some negotiation with them.
So you are 205 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing willing to pursue the possibility of purchasing that on the private market?
Reverend, I'm sure that you have some estimation as to how long many of these properties have been vacant and I think that you are doing a great job with this. I really do. Any way we can help, you know that our office is always available, willing and able to help in any way possible.
Thank you. Are there any questions of Reverend Avinger or Mr. Wetzel? Did we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Please approach the witness table. Welcome. I haven't seen you for a while. It's great news. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon. My name is Jeffrey Kruz. I'm a member of the board of directors of Brandywine Workshop. I'm here to 206 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing support the bill to acquire 720 South Broad Street. As you well know, Brandywine Workshop has been in existence for over 30 years, providing art education programs for the South Philadelphia community and built the Firehouse Art Center there with your support in 1993 and have been trying to acquire that property since that time. It has been vacant all of this time. So we very much appreciate your support.
Will any new tenants be relocated to Brandywine as a result of this condemnation?
Yes; we are anticipating a relationship with Solutions for Progress, will be taking the upper two floors of the facility there. And this parking lot will support the tenants there and visitors to the art centers and the galleries.
That has been a long time coming. Congratulations.
Thank you. Any other witnesses? Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your 207 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing testimony.
Good afternoon, Madam President and Members of the Committee. My name is Steven Maciejewski. I'm one of the founding members of the Fitzwater 2000 Community Garden. Before I start, I have a couple of handouts. I have some photographs of our garden and two letters of support from the Philadelphia Planning Commission and from the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society. I would like to tell you a little bit about our garden. We started about ten years ago in '95 and the garden was just a collection of weeds and trash and drug use, so we got involved. We formed a neighborhood organization and from that we were able to deal with other issues like parking on our block, abandoned cars and street cleanup, and from that a landscape architect, Michael LaFerno, designed the garden for us. We have a sitting garden, a butterfly garden, and we have nine 8 x 8 plots. We try to use a lot of native plants. It is a very successful community garden. It has been in the City Garden Contest every year winning first place. We exhibit at the 208 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Philadelphia Harvest Show. We have beaten out every other community garden in the Delaware Valley. We have workshops. The Horticultural Society provides tours through our garden. They use us as kind of an example of how successful community gardens should be run. We have a plant giveaway. We were featured in the art in City Hall a few years ago. So in trying to preserve our garden, we tried to locate the owners and it turned out to be rather complicated. We turned to NGA, Neighborhood Garden Association, and, Madam President, we turned to our office for help, and you have been very helpful. As you know, in our neighborhood in South Philly we do have a lack of greenspace and we have lost the community garden on the 2100 block and the 2200 block, and I would like to remind people that a garden is like a park. It gives back to everyone, to the people, to animals, to plants, and we are not against development, but we'd like to seek a balance. PBS is doing a national program on urban greening called Edens Lost and Edens Found, and they have chosen our garden to be featured, and I was 209 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing hoping that we would be in the column of Edens Found, and I want to thank you again for your help and consideration.
You're welcome. And I just want to thank the Neighborhood Garden Association for stepping up to the plate, so to speak, and agreeing to advance a loan to the neighborhood group to help pay for their portion of the acquisition costs. I think that is wonderful. Thank you.
Michael LaFerno. I'm a landscape architect and professional planner, and I'm one of the founders also of the Community Garden Association. We are here to answer any questions that you might have, and we also have a petition of 140 names of people that have signed on to request that this garden be permanently protected.
Thank you. Thank you very much. It is my understanding that we do have some people here from the 2000 Fitzwater Garden. Welcome. Welcome. (Applause.)
Job well done. 210 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Thank you very much. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon, Madam President, Rules Committee. Hi. My name is Lisa Parsley. I'm the president and CEO of my own real estate research business. I operate primarily in the 30th ward. I find the owners that other people have trouble finding and work for builders who renovate distressed property. I also live in the 2300 block of St. Alban's Place, which had had a terrible drug activity problem, which you helped tremendously with and Linda Callans, so thank you again for that.
I had had the opportunity to have had long-standing relationships with people who are on the condemnation lists because I worked with them to try to persuade them to sell for the prices that they want. These properties typically turn out to be abandoned, but rather the owners are 211 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing pretty easy to find. I have a few handouts. While I support the Fitzwater Garden request definitely and the Cava expansion by all means and all of the commercial requests that the RDA is doing, I have to ask that Council recommend caution and go slow and reexamine the Greater St. Matthew Baptist Church proposal. This is because the map -- unfortunately, it's in the back against the wall -- the map is out of date and that map shows the requested properties. For example, I will use my own notes. Let me just say first in the first instance that ever since Greater St. Matthew's has come to the neighborhood, they have done tremendously wonderful things. They are a wonderful congregation. However, Dr. Avinger in several community meetings, or at least certainly the most recent one, has cited the need to create a racial balance, and I am confused by this language because there is a racial balance. The neighborhood is over 70 percent black, 30 percent -- less than 30 percent is Caucasian and the remainder are a variety of minorities, and the other minorities are increasing in number, and we think that is great. That is diversity right there. 212 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing We think our neighborhood represents integration in action. However, if you look at my notes, you will see that of the requested properties pink represents properties that have been sold since 2002. Orange represents properties that have a private lien and blue, properties that are under agreement. So, in other words, properties are requested that are sold or under agreement, and the effect of this on the private development community is like ice. It ices the community. And, Miss Murray, I recently read an article by Ernie Young of the Daily News that showed that real estate values have gone down in 19146, and while Miss Murray did very good research to show that that is probably due to other factors, and I agree, and that values have actually been increasing, I do anecdotally see, but I have to wonder why do we need to have condemnation of property where there is extremely rapid, healthy, private-market turnover where every closing I go to huge water liens are paid off in full; gasoline is paid off in full. These are liens that are 213 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing typically thousands and thousands of dollars. It is not uncommon to see liens over $10,000 be paid in a closing. And this program has the city paying its own acquisition costs. So, in other words, when the City closes on these properties, the City is paying the PGW liens and the water liens, the gas liens, the nuisance liens, and I urge caution using this money in a ward, the 30th ward, where the private market is taking care of so much of this. And you will excuse me while I refer to my handout. I'm sorry. I'm not a good public speaker. The tax base -- the schools in the area are schools that need the middle class, so what you see not so much in the area in my experience professionally -- it is not a gentrification but rather a re-middle classification where you had Center City, South Street, high upper, upper income, and then you had tremendously lower income properties and no middle class. Well, now the middle class is back, and I'm one of them. And a good example of why we can't afford to undercut the tax base is that any NTI 214 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing program, any condemnation program, has to be very careful first to do no harm. If you have a stated purpose of lowering property values in the area, that hurts me personally as a homeowner.
I need the equity in my 120-year-old row house to go to the bank to borrow money to perform renovations, and these are not high-end renovations. This is structural, joists, roof, basement. All of the stuff is absolutely essential for it to be sold, to actually remain standing. If the equity in the neighborhood goes down because a condemnation program floods comp values that are lower but brings average prices down, that's a hardship for someone who has to deal with vacant housing on my block. You know, when you try to get a mortgage from somebody who does not do business in the city, you have to explain to them, well, gee, you have a vacant property and you have probably other problems in the neighborhood that make us not want to write a mortgage for you, and that is very difficult. Whereas, in our neighborhood we are just getting the middle class back. Southwest Center City has home averages 215 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing of 131,000 on average for the 19146 zip code, and my question to you is why do we need to have so much market rate housing being built by the government? It puts me professionally at a competitive disadvantage. If the government gives you an apple for free and I have to buy apples to sell them, who is at the competitive disadvantage? I am and my clients. If my clients go away -- and they can, like that (snaps fingers) -- if they go to Spring Garden, Northern Liberties, Bella Vista, then I will not be working in the 30th ward anymore, and it will be all NTI doing the cleanup. The tax base, again, I just have to say that Greater St. Matthew Baptist is a newcomer. I have been in the neighborhood longer than they have by a slight amount and I am shocked that they would try to impose any concepts of some kind of idea of what race people should be in the neighborhood. It is constantly changing, and that is healthy. That's good. There are people who are old-timers that have been there a long time, do well. They tend to move out. That has always been the way it was whether it was Irish Catholics or Jews or whoever it 216 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing may have been. That is a sign of health and change. To try to keep the neighborhood all one exact proportion with a quota is madness. It won't work. It will cause disruption and difficulty in the neighborhood. There is no reason to even go there. There is such a thing as gentrification, but that does not seem to be the case here as much because, like I say, it is a re-middle classification. If you have nine governmental organizations also that cannot structure condemnations -- I'm sorry. Let's put it this way: We have so many. We have Section 8. We have PHA properties and PHDC properties that are untouched. I have a photograph of a property in my cell phone right now that has been vacant and blighted for over a decade. It's an eyesore. The junkies go in there. The alcoholics go in there. It is the 2200 block of Fitzwater, and this property is not being renovated. These PHDC properties and City-owned properties are not on the NTI list; whereas, let's look at the list for today, 2327 Grays Ferry is on the list. That is owned by a private person, just as you pointed out, since January. Permits were posted. Demolition is obvious. 217 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing And that is not the only one. 2404 Catherine Street is under agreement, about to close. That property is owned by the accountant of the church. It seems like the church has not done what I do every day, and that is why I urge caution. When you are recruiting a CDC with no experience to take on a huge tract of property, then that courts disaster because, just as you so wisely pointed out when the legislation was being considered, it's vague. You urged demerit or revisit and to fill out the procedural -- the rules of law and the procedural safeguards here, and this is where I think we are running into so much controversy.
And I would just urge caution to City Council because there was even an eminent domain case in Conshohocken that said nongovernmental entities cannot structure condemnation to benefit themselves. So, in other words, if you build market rate housing and you are making a profit from that and you are a nonprofit nonetheless and you have made a list and you have presented it to the councilperson and it has been -- it has gone through the approval process and it has even the appearance 218 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing of having been structured to benefit themselves, that was found by the courts to reduce sovereignty of the governmental condemnation process. And this was told to me by a few attorneys that said, yeah, the City is really skating on thin ice here in areas where condemnation is no longer -- where these plans -- where condemnation is no longer necessary because the private markets are really addressing these things. So, yes, these things have been vacant for a long time, some of them.
Very delinquent, yes. I can't agree with you more on that. There is a solution to that, and that is just to collect the property tax. Don't make is so hard. Don't make it so someone has to put down an $800 deposit to certify someone with City-held liens. That is what you have to do. In order to ensure that something comes up for sheriff sale, you have to put done an $800 deposit. It is not optional; otherwise, paying property tax in the City of Philadelphia, it is a little-known kind of dirty secret, is effectively 219 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing optional. If you do not have a privately-held lien by Lineberger that was produced under the Rendell administration, you do not have to pay your taxes because you can pretty count on the City not coming after you. I have personally seen property tax bills all the time, 10,000, 15,000, 30,000. Universal Companies owes 61,000 on Universal Court Associates. I have the document right here. And, yes, that is not a title search. I see Miss Murray shaking her head. That is not a title search and, certainly, you would need to confirm that; however, that number comes directly from the BRT, via the BRT's own Web site. It is the best publicly available information you can get. And even the church itself has property tax issues. The church itself, its own rectory, owes $14,800. This is not a title search. Again, you would have to call the BRT to verify this, but when I did this search on the BRT Web site on June 2, that was the number I came up with. And here is the printout. I will gladly hand it to you.
We will take that, but I think that is probably very inaccurate 220 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing because I don't think the Reverend has owned the property all that long to be able to accumulate that.
I think your testimony is very enlightening. I think you have given us very good advice.
There are taxes that are owed on that property. I do this for a living. It is my business to know. I do confirm this information with the title company.
Do you know when St. Matthews purchased the property?
I don't know. 2001. I just can't believe that in 2002 for the rectory only the taxes would have been $11,000, almost $12,000?
You have it in front of you. And the church, while it is a tax-exempt --
The Chair recognizes Council Cohen. 221 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing
Could you explain in ordinary English without so much attention to the specifics what the point is to this?
The point is that a CDC that owes property tax is not allowed to get property from the RDA, and that includes Universal, which owes property tax on numerous of its properties and that includes, unfortunately, Greater St. Matthew at this time. And I just encourage City Council not to criticize Great St. Matthew Baptist Church, not to criticize people who are doing good stuff in the neighborhood; however, one simple rule of the condemnation eminent domain procedure is before you get the whole community riled up for nothing, let's make sure these CDC's books are in order, and these whole groups, that they are doing what they need to do. We shouldn't have to write a code of ethics for them to follow. They should be up to date on their property tax, period, and there shouldn't be any hidden surprises down the road. I don't want you to encounter something in the news because a group is not telling you everything about their own books. Churches 222 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing typically are not subject to the kind of auditing and --
I don't know what the story is, but I would think that in all likelihood when the building was purchased they did not clear -- Reverend, you are right there. Why don't you come up and explain? I'm sure this was not cleared at the time of settlement. Is that what happened?
Yes. Actually, I was going to sit and just listen, but it sounds like it is getting a little personal, so I thought I better come back here. During the time of settlement the rectory, which is now a part of the church, was a residence of the Catholic church. After settlement the City did not include the rectory as part of the church. They looked at it as a private -- as a residence that was not a part of the church.
The rectories in the Catholic churches are always taxed separately.
Right. We believed that was resolved, and so 223 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing this is new information to us because we filed the proper documentation with the City's Revenue Department. We have had meetings with them, and, as far as we were concerned and knew, that issue was resolved. The rectory is a tax-exempt building. It is part of the church. In fact, it is the educational building of the church.
Well, this is a good example of how things -- the numbers are just not matching up. This is a good example of how a group that wants to do good things and has good intentions has not yet had the opportunity to resolve the legal and financial problems, and maybe they are not ready for the kind of public annual statement which I feel is really necessary with the CDC, whether you are having Sister Mary with Project Home. They have an annual report. Churches don't have annual reports. That is the problem with faith-based initiatives. They don't have an annual report that we have access to, and I have a problem with that as a homeowner 224 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing and as someone doing business in the area. I have no way of seeing to it that any checks and balances are being adhered to or that their procedure is good or that they are taking care of their problems with their organization. I want to solve a problem before it happens rather than wait until down the road. This has become a huge issue.
I'm sorry, Miss Parsley, I would really love for you to be up here and testify for as long as you want. However --
-- we must conclude this list because at o'clock we were supposed to have another public hearing and at o'clock there is another hearing scheduled and o'clock there is another hearing scheduled. But I certainly appreciate your coming in and sharing your views with us. Thank you very much.
I just ask that before condemnations, eminent domain, seizures are enacted in the neighborhood and given to a CDC with no 25 experience whatsoever that every other avenue is 225 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing exhausted first, that neighbors are notified. There is a gentleman here, John McHugh, who received no 4 notification that his property was on the condemnation list.
Well, Mr. McHugh said he has had it and he is ready to leave working in your district.
He is ready to stop building in your district. I'm sorry. He's had it.
It was taken off the list, and I believe he knows it.
This is a problem. I'm losing clients because of an egregious and overaggressive condemnation proceeding. It's a problem for me, so forgive me for being like this.
I understand and I thank you for coming and testifying.
Thank you. Thank you. (Applause.) 226 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing
Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Please come forward. I didn't see you sitting back there. Good afternoon and welcome.
Thank you. Good afternoon, Council President and Council Members. My name is Hank Mazola. I'm president of Cava International Marble and Granite. I think you may know that the company between Cava International Marble and Cava Building Supplies, we have been supplying the Philadelphia, the Center City and South Philadelphia areas and North Philadelphia for the last 35 years with building supplies and marble and granite needs. In the past it has not been very difficult to expand value. Properties were available on the avenue and we were able to move forward. I think you know with the parking problem that you helped to resolve -- thank you -- that the other problem is expansion of a company. The second generation has come in. Hopefully my kids are here and I can retire, but in the meantime we are looking to expand the company, but with the growth of the city it just isn't that easy to find locations. On 227 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Washington Avenue there is nothing available and the only place we have to go is in the back streets. We have done a great job in cleaning up the area. We have supplied work for the area. We have almost 50 employees and we have just invested a million dollars on 20th and Washington Avenue with a new facade, with a new 8000-foot showroom, and we have always been a leader in helping our neighborhood and cleaning the blighted areas, and we ask your support in our future expansion in the redevelopment.
Thank you. And it is my understanding that there will be another community meeting in, I guess, the near future to talk about it? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Whenever they set it up. I have already been in contact with SASA and I guess whenever Kathy can set it up. I would like to say one more thing. The greenspace that was an issue is not an issue. We have already spoken with SASA and we are open to any suggestions and we are more than willing --
I hope you can work it out. It is a very simple issue. Thank you. 228 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Seeing none, I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the final bill, 040520.
An ordinance approving the second amendment of the redevelopment proposal for the Brewerytown Urban Renewal Area, being the area generally bounded by Oxford Avenue on the north, 30th Street on the East, Girard Avenue on the south, 33rd Street on the west and the Amtrak Railroad right-of-way on the northwest, including the second amendment to the urban renewal plan and the second amendment to the relocation plan, which provides, inter alia, for the additional land acquisition of approximately 2 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 of the City of Philadelphia. I'm here to speak in support of Bill No. 24 040520, the second amended redevelopment proposal and the second amended Urban Renewal plan for the 229 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing North Philadelphia Redevelopment Area and the Brewerytown Urban Renewal Area. This bill would authorize the Redevelopment Authority to acquire two occupied commercial structures to support residential development being undertaken by Westrum Development Company. Westrum is a Fort Washington-based developer of market-rate housing that proposes to create homeownership units in the Brewerytown section of Philadelphia. The boundary area for the multiphased project is from Poplar Street to West Oxford Street and North 30th Street to North 33rd Street. All direct and indirect costs incurred by the Authority through this project will be paid for by Westrum Development. Passage of this bill would lead to the creation of new market-rate homes and contribute to the revitalization of the Brewerytown neighborhood. Madam President and Members of the Rules Committee, I respectfully request favorable consideration of Bill No. 040520 and would ask for the suspension of Council rules to allow first reading on June 10, 2004. Thank you.
Thank you. 230 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Are there any questions from members of the committee? The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, Mr. Wetzel. Mr. Wetzel, this particular action acquires two properties?
What is currently taking place on those properties now?
My name is Catherine Calafano, deputy secretary of the Office of Housing. The two parcels we are seeking authority to condemn, one is currently occupied by stables and one is an automotive garage that is operational at times.
Is that on the corner of Oxford Street? 231 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing
Has that operator been offered relocation opportunities?
At this point we have not engaged with the various operators.
But that would be part of the relocation process. They are on Master Street, not Oxford.
So this is not the one on the corner of Oxford Street?
Right; in the middle of the block. 232 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing
You will be doing that upon what, passage of the bill?
We have had several conversations with the stable operator.
Upon passage of the bill, this particular bill simply takes the properties into the inventory of the Redevelopment Authority?
No; this bill authorizes the redevelopment proposal that was adopted by the board. There is a series of steps that would follow this ultimately leading to the board voting for a declaration of taking and that declaration of taking being filed. So the ordinance is not a condemnation ordinance itself. It does not condemn properties. It only authorizes the Redevelopment Authority to 233 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing proceed and, as you heard Council president asked earlier, would we only proceed if her office told us to proceed on certain properties. So it is not -- this in and of itself is not a condemnation ordinance. It does not condemn the real estate. It only authorizes the condemnation.
So in order to finalize this action, you were required to come back to Council?
No; that would be for disposition. The next step after this is the Redevelopment Authority would send out letters of intent or letters of interest to the owners of the property letting them -- informing them that we are interested in acquiring the property, that we are engaging an appraiser, that they have a right to be there with the appraiser, that the appraiser would contact them.
Then you have to -- once you have reached an agreement -
Then what would follow is we would get the appraisal and issue what is called an offer letter. At that point we are proceeding with offering to purchase the property, and then 234 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing after a period of time, if there is no successful negotiations, we can proceed with condemnation.
Once that is done, you then have to come back to Council for disposition?
Disposition of properties owned by the Redevelopment Authority in urban renewal areas requires a resolution of City Council.
And that will not be able to be done until when, fall?
Are there any other questions from members of the committee?
Are you authorized to proceed with what you are intending to do without this action by Council?
I'm asking whether 235 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing you need this action in order to move ahead. It seems to me like a real waste of time to have two different actions come before Council and it also seems to me as if what is happening is that you want to get a green light and then Redevelopment Authority is free to do whatever it wants to do and then you come back to us later and the District Council introduces a simple resolution and nobody at that time knows what it is and it may be okay, but it is not subject to the same kind of questioning as this hearing provides.
Do you believe that it ought to happen at one time so that we can get a picture to note what happens afterwards as well as what is ongoing now?
Councilman, the state statutes that we operate under on the acquisition side, the eminent domain side of this activity, requires that an ordinance be adopted by the local legislative body. On the disposition side; in other words, on the sale of properties once acquired, it requires -- 236 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing
You know, Mr. Wetzel, it is getting very tiring to hear City officials come in and, when questioned, say we are doing this under state law. We don't know whether you are doing it under state law or not. Why don't we get City law that can provide for the right protection and most of us won't be so concerned. When you say that you do what the state law tells you to do, you are saying we have no role to play in it and most of us can't accept that. (Applause.)
Why don't you put up a law for us to consider that gives the City Council authority to know what happens in these folli because in the final step we honor the feelings of District Council Members generally unless they tell us there is a problem, and so what happens is this is the only hearing we are going to have on this matter unless the District Council Member finds something wrong, and I don't think that the District 237 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing Council Member and the RDA alone ought to be in charge of the whole process from this point on. (Applause.)
I think people are entitled to have City government get involved, and, therefore it seems to me this hearing ought not to take place until you are ready to present to us the final results so that people involved can report to Council in time for us to know ultimately did they get adversely affected. You send out letters and you are going to frighten a lot of people when they suddenly get letters from you telling them that their house may be taken by you. What has happened to the right of people with respect to their own property? (Applause.)
People buy property to stay there. That is the concern I have and I think it is a concern that many Council Members share.
The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke for a point of 238 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing information.
Just for the record, this particular bill is not asking for authorization to acquire any residential properties. There are two commercial properties that we are speaking about today. So it's not any acquisition or relocation of any residential properties.
Is this procedure different if it was a residential property?
So we are talking about the same thing, taking property away from people who may have worked very hard, and we have to assume they work very hard to own property in Philadelphia. Property is costly. They have earned it whether it is a business or residential. There ought to be greater rights than people have than what appear to have under state law, and that's the concern I'm raising. Why can't we get a City law that protects the rights of citizens of Philadelphia, and 239 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing when they own property, they are going to be fully informed every step of the way and nothing can be done against their interests without their approval? (Applause.)
I think you personally would agree with that, Mr. Wetzel. All right. I think Council has a lot of work to do. This is probably not the time to do it, Councilman Clarke, this close to the finale of Council, if we ever get the budget settled.
Yes; my hearing was sent for 2 o'clock. But I would like to suggest to you, sir, that your department come up with a proposal that lets Philadelphia make its own laws to protect the rights of people.
Thank you. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill. Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record and try to be as concise as possible. We are really running behind schedule.
Yes, Madam President. My name is Robert Rosenthal. I'm vice president of Westrum Development. Along with me is Seth Shapiro, vice president of operations from Westrum Development. We are here today to ask for a favorable response to Bill No. 040520. Westrum Development Company is a 17-year old residential development group that started in the suburbs and four years ago maybe a decision to come into the City of Philadelphia and build residential homes for a market-rate basis. We were successful in Councilman Nutter's district in Roxborough, in Councilman O'Neill's, and right now we are building 230 town homes in the former Capehart housing development in your Council district.
When are 241 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing you -- I know I want everybody to be brief and I'm asking questions. When are you going to start on the construction of the condominiums?
The construction of the condominiums will hopefully start this fall.
Today we are asking for your favorable review on two properties to be condemned, which are part of an entire development area known as Brewerytown in which we have acquired over the last three years various properties in which we intend to commence with the construction of 144 townhouses shortly. This development and these two properties, which are both commercial, are part of an overall plan to build 400 to 700 homes in the area including market-rate homes as well as affordable homes. We believe that these two properties are integral in developing this property. And of the two properties one of the owners is not opposed to the condemnation and we again ask for a favorable response.
Are there any 242 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing questions from members of the committee? Any comments? The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, gentlemen. In this particular community -- and I know this is not necessarily speaking solely on these specific properties that were being acquired today, but there was a meeting earlier last year, a community meeting that was pretty well attended, and there were several questions raised both of the developers, the City, myself, and there were a number of things in particular that were asked that related to the activities associated with your development. One that comes to mind was the issue about participation. As you know, there has been a real concern about participation on construction and development issues throughout the city, and it was quite clear that people in that particular meeting had some interest in having a substantial level of participation by minorities and females. Have you worked on a strategy to give us some reasonable participation goals? 243 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing
Yes, we have, and Seth Shapiro can answer that better than I can.
Sure. In all of our projects now, both the one at 20th and Pattison and in Brewerytown, we do our construction through a general contractor. The general contractor for both of those jobs is a joint venture between Dale Corporation and Neismith & Company. Neismith & Company is a minority firm and Rex Parker, who is the vice president of development for Neismith, is here with us to help answer questions. They actually manage the bid process, the contracting process and the construction process for our jobs at the moment. For the job at 20th and Pattison we had a 51 percent minority participation rate for our contractors. We will exceed that at Brewerytown, and I will actually let Mr. Parker talk about our efforts for a minority work force.
What is the breakdown on the contract of the joint venture in terms of percentages Neismith versus Dale.
My name is Rex Parker. I'm 244 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing the vice president of development for the Neismith Company. In answering your question, it is very straightforward. We are the general contractor, the lead general contractor, which would give us a larger percentage. What that percentage is we will not know until we have given out the contract to the subcontractors. At that time we will know definitely what is what. Oh, your direct question --
I was asking first about the joint venture and then we will get into the specifics.
With respect to subcontractors, you have not let out any of those contracts yet.
We have released the bids but not awarded any contracts, so through the bidding process, first we advertise the bids in local papers. We advertise in the Girard Home News, 245 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing both looking for contractors and for information for people who wanted to be employees of those contractors. Additionally, we sent notices to MBEC and to the African-American Chamber of Commerce and the NAACP. We received back somewhere between a hundred and 200 bids. I don't know the detail of who responded. We are sifting through those now and working with the contractors to decide who we are ultimately going to award to.
And it's the responsibility of the lead contractor, joint venture contractor, Neismith, on the solicitation process?
Yes; the Neismith/Dale joint venture manages that process. We, as the developer, are involved.
Neismith will also, barring some change, do the carpentry. They will end up doing the carpentry.
Generally what is the percentage of the job that will entail carpentry. 246 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing
So 40 percent of the job, just by virtue of Neismith being involved, will be minority contracts.
There were some issues about neighborhood participation on employment opportunities. How are we going to address that, or how are you going to address that I should say?
In addition to the advertisement that went into the Girard News, we also met with many area organizations. We met with the Brewerytown Civic Association, the Girard Coalition, the Girard Avenue Business Association. We have also reached out to other groups like the African-American Business Association, the Brewerytown CDC. Those two groups refused to meet with us, but in those meetings we asked people if they are interested, and, if they are interested, directed them to call Neismith & Company.
So in subsequent discussions, because this bill will not be disposed of until the fall because there is still a 247 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing disposition process and subsequent discussions or opportunities, you are still willing to entertain any organization in that community that wants to have a reasonable discussion about participation?
I just want to get these questions while I can. Thank you. So there will be an opportunity to have participation from neighborhood residents?
This is a strong union town, all right. And in the past we have had issues with respect to participation on union trade jobs. Have you devised or are you working on a strategy because I'm assuming a substantial amount of this work may be dealt with with union work force?
Absolutely. Westrum has had a commitment to the building trades in the city and has worked with them on our jobs, working with 248 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing them at 20th and Pattison, worked with them in Brewerytown. We're meeting with them actively. The problem you identify is not unique to Brewerytown. It is a problem citywide. We know that, and we are working with them very hard to address that issue and to increase the minority participation on this job with unions.
So we can expect in the subsequent discussions a clearly laid out strategy that will overcome some of the hurdles that have been put forth to some of the minority participation on some of these jobs that had union contractors?
With respect to -- and, Miss Calafano, I may need you on this. With respect to some of the issues that were raised in the existing neighborhood, there were some concerns about affordability of certain housing and particularly some of the units that you were looking to build. There were some concerns raised that people that live in that particular community or in North Philadelphia may not be a position to afford those properties, and I'm not sure what the 249 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing number is now. I know it started at one rate and it has been rising relatively quickly. And we talked about being able to have an opportunity in the Brewerytown neighborhood for housing that would be affordable to the existing residents or any other residents who qualified for affordable housing. Do you have some strategy or thought? And I will rely need Miss Calafano to respond to some of these.
We actually had a twofold response. One was in the initial development and in plans for building in Brewerytown we reached out to Penrose Properties, who has agreed to develop 68 affordable units in the former Acme building, which has been vacant since Acme left the warehouse 12 years ago. Presently there's also plans to build additional houses.
Within the Acme warehouse, those will be permanent -- those will be tax credit affordable deals, so there will be for the next 15 years affordable rental units in the neighborhood. In addition, we have been acquiring vacant structures and vacant land on adjacent 250 6/9/05 - Committee on Rules Public Hearing residential blocks to the former industrial properties, and on those blocks the city is committed to ensuring that those are sold affordable to the community.
So have we acquired properties already to start that process?
We have started the acquisition process. We have not disposed of those properties as of yet. When we dispose of them to Westrum Development and their development team, they will be restricted for affordable units.
And that is based on the existing criteria as set forth by HUD/Redevelopment Authority/OACD in terms of affordability.
That's right. That was the target to target these for, homeowners who are 80 percent -- meeting the federal property level, 80 percent above the -- 80 percent below the -- above the federal property level. I apologize.