Well, I believe, at the zoning hearing, they put some restrictions on that, and I think that was the proper place to do that. But as far as we're concerned, I don't know, again, of any vehicle within the Code that lets us call something that's -- you know what I mean?
No. For the point of the record, I find his answer exactly the anxiety-provoking situation that has caused us to be here in the beginning. We hear over and over that there's 150,000 people leaving Philadelphia and nobody knows why. I am not saying that you are responsible for 150,000 people leaving, but your good faith is very slim. Our trust in you is even slimmer. And when you come up with answers like 166 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990672 this, the anxiety level goes through the ceiling. If we are planning to keep the city alive and well, and if we are trying to do things in a constructive manner to make it a better place to live, you're sure not helping. Thank you.
Thank you. Councilman Nutter, you're in a thought-process mode, I can see.
Well, just, I guess kind of two items. Number one, Mr. Lonie touched on the issue of the zoning restriction, but to go back to some of the earlier questioning, I thought it was somewhat clear that the Streets Department does have the ability to designate on its plans what becomes the official plan for this particular development, the actual width of the street. I don't believe the actual ordinance and past ordinances that I've seen put in streets on a plan. I've done streets ordinances for Spring Lane Meadows, and I don't believe any of them had street widths or lengths on them.
Right. Maybe I can lower 167 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990672 some anxiety levels here. I did not mean to say that we do not have the ability to design streets the way that we feel is necessary to do, and we do have that ability at the final design to change the roadway widths, that's correct. But the ability of calling something "a street," City Council has that authority; we don't have that authority. If they say this Founders Place is a street, as they did in this ordinance, we can't overrule them. That's my only question here.
All right, okay. I mean, I understand what you're saying.
Okay. Does that answer somewhat? I mean, not happily, but somewhat the question?
Ma'am, you're at the table now. Do you have another question or is it in the same line of questioning?
Identify yourself for the record. 168 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990672
Marjorie E. Greenfield for Community Council. It is the consensus of this group that this designated road should be stricken from this ordinance and that an easement should be provided for the access that is needed to protect the residents in emergency situations. And easements can be granted, and there was no reason why it could not be granted. There's nothing unlawful about it, there's nothing improper about it. PHA owns the land, it is concerned about the people who will be living there. And that an easement could be properly drafted, and the easement area could be paved and the bollards could be placed, and then we wouldn't have this problem of what the Streets Department can and can't do, or does or doesn't know how to do. And it would satisfy everybody's needs. And I don't know whether Councilman Nutter necessarily agrees with me, but that's where we think that this ought to go.
Mr. Chairman, Miss Greenfield and I and the group had a little bit of a discussion about the easement issue, which is 169 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990672 certainly an idea that I'm more than willing to pursue and find out about. It already sounds like we need -- I think Mr. Lonie's testimony was that we already needed a right-of-way over there to deal with utility issues anyway. My concern, if not reservation, with regard to striking the street off the plan at this moment is that I don't have an easement in hand. And, as Miss Greenfield said, certainly something like that may possibly be able to be granted. I've never personally worked through that process. I know that there is a process and we could explore that. My concern, though, is that striking from the plan the street with no easement in my other hand leaves me without anything at the moment, and I would rather be in a safer position of having something possibly that I don't need, which I can worry about later, than needing something that I don't have. And that's a little bit of difficulty just for me as a legislator in dealing with this particular issue at this moment.
And I guess my question is, what is the anticipated time if all 170 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990672 these issues were resolved and easement issues, aside from when the construction of these streets was to begin? Do we have a --
Well, the site itself -- I mean, Mr. Soffer and Mr. Lonie may have more up-to-date information, but the site itself is -- the construction of, quote/unquote, Phase I, which is actually, if you look at the plan, the right side of the plan, more the Merrick Road, Heritage Drive side of the plan is -- the construction is slated to start sometime early next year. The still have demolition work to do and the low rises and all of that activity. So, you know --
So there's sufficient time, should the bill pass, to work through some of those other issues and the easement.
I'll put it to you this way: I don't know that anyone's going to be sitting in their living room, you know, watching, you know, next season's TV shows for -- at this particular development.
Okay, thank you. Yes, sir? Identify yourself again, please.
This is Michael Markowitz. I appreciate the dilemma that Councilman Nutter's facing, but for two years, the community has been asked to trust the good faith of the Streets Department, the executive branch of the City of Philadelphia, and for two years, we've trusted it. And we've gotten to a Stage I today where we see on a plan Founders Lane or Place -- I don't know which. It's a street, it's 34 feet wide, it has to be done to code, it's got a 54-foot right-of-way. And now Councilman Nutter would have the community suggest that we should go along again and trust in the good faith of the Streets Department to modify this and to agree to come back to Council and have this street struck. This street isn't necessary for the first phase of the development of the project to begin with, because, 172 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990672 as you just heard, it's off to the other side of the project. Secondly, to a person in the community, there is no opposition to an emergency access easement to be provided. We're talking about a day or two days of drafting a document that would satisfy this need. And it's a question of whether the City wants to push the Streets Department bulls around the neighborhood, or the neighborhood gets something, i.e. nothing at the moment, with the street being struck, and we get the easement in hand at a later date. I strongly support what Mrs. Greenfield said about how we should have an easement and this street should be struck from this ordinance.
Well, I have all the confidence in Councilman Nutter and in this committee that, going forward, I believe we'll get this resolved to everyone's satisfaction, everyone, in particular the community. With the exception of the two gentlemen that are here, we have all had problems with the Streets Department, but we have been able to get through those things through the process, and I'm 173 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990672 confident in Councilman Nutter getting the community through that process. And I understand the frustration of two years, and I'm not going to belabor this record or your time with some of the problems that we've had to live with for two years or four years that I've been Chair. Councilman Nutter?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a couple other items that I think at least need to be placed on the record. Again, with regard to the proposed striking of the street, the other slight complication here is, there are still residents living on this site. And, I mean, it's just the reality of this particular development. It is planned that they will stay there during construction. And for a while, there will not be a Merrick Road that will be drivable. That point over at what is now technically called "Founders Place," will be the off-site access for those residents during the construction of Phase I. When Phase I is completed, those -- some of those 174 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990672 residents, and I cannot tell you who 'cause I don't know who and there's a whole process for that. All of those residents will come out of what is on the left side and called Phase II. Some will relocate to Phase I. I don't know where, I don't know who they will be, and I don't know where they will go. So that is another issue that, again, I'm somewhat confronted with in terms of striking something today for a road that I know that I will need shortly for people to be able to get off-site.
Let me just finish. Secondly, I believe that there are some levels of protection with regard to many of the difficulties that have already been articulated with regard to the Streets Department in that the community did get agreement from the developer to only use that road for that purpose and build that road for the purpose that we've discussed. By way of their conditional support of the zoning 175 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990672 variance -- there was a zoning hearing yesterday, I think that's been testified to -- they also requested, and I'm sure it's a little more complicated than just someone asking and the other person saying yes, but they've also requested a deed restriction from the developer which, again, will probably be somewhat complicated by the fact that PHA actually owns the site, although there is still an unresolved question of who will ultimately own the site because of the nature of the Hope VI application, the fact that people will be buying homes. And I've ask the question on a couple of occasions of, for instance, who are they going to get their deed from? I've not ever gotten a straight answer to that particular question, so. . . And I don't -- I can't tell you here today that PHA will always own this particular property, but those discussions are ongoing as well. And, I mean, I foresee at least a draft of a document for an agreement. I wasn't at the zoning hearing yesterday; I think Meg Greenfield was. And I will assume -- so correct me if I'm wrong -- that there was a signed agreement between 176 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990672 the parties. So, I mean, there's a couple of other little factors there that affect all of us.
I'm Meg Greenfield. May I address that? First of all, I know that you do not need a city-dedicated road in order to service a community. I live on one; we maintain it. There are private roads and for temporary purposes of access in and out of the site.
We live on a private road. It's Apalogen Road, it's a cul-de-sac. We have one way in and out. There are, I don't know, 15, 20 houses on it. We maintain it. You do not need a public road in order 177 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990672 -- a public road in order to connect with a city road to get off that site. If they need an access there during construction, it can be constructed without having it dedicated on the City Map. Secondly, the agreement with the developer, while we wanted the developer to make the commitment that it would use that road soley for access purposes, the developer refused. The developer said they would use their best efforts, but they said, We cannot make that commitment because the City will own the road, and the Streets Department will not allow it. So we have now been pushed from one to the other and back again. And that is the change that was made after the draft that you may have, Councilman. They said they'd do their best, but they would not commit to it because they didn't think they could deliver it -- because of the Streets Department more than anything else, and because they won't own it once dedicate the road. And I could understand that. And so it isn't simply an answer that the developers made an agreement; they made an agreement to try, which will ultimately be 178 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990672 determined by this City Council and the Streets Department.
It appears to me ultimately by City Council, from what Mr. Lonie's testimony was, and I think that there is where your Councilperson, in conjunction with this committee, can do the appropriate things for the community.
Well, that is why we are asking you to take that out of this ordinance. There is no reason why a road can't be cut there for the temporary use of the tenants when they have no other way to get in and out of the site. It does not require an ordinance 16 placing it permanently on the City's map in order to let them get off that site.
Thank you. Councilman Nutter? Any other questions for these witnesses from the members of the committee. (No further questions.)
Anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against this bill? (No response.) 179 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990684
Thank you for your testimony or patience. The clerk will please read the title of the next bill.
Bill No.990684. This is a very quick one, for all these people who have been waiting very patiently. An ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property and the Director of Commerce, on behalf of the City, to grant to the Department of Transportation of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania a perpetual area and structural support easement for the use, operation or occupancy, maintenance, repair, and placement of certain highway improvements, including roads and related improvements over a portion of certain land located at Penn's Landing-Stage I to replace the Market Street and Chestnut Street ramps and elevated viaduct connecting Market and Chestnut Streets, under certain terms and conditions.
Good evening, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Dwayne Bumb. I'm the Deputy Director of Commerce. I'm 180 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990684 here today to give testimony in support of Bill 3 No. 990684. This bill will allow the City to demolish the two existing ramps that connect both Chestnut Street and Market Street to Christopher Columbus Boulevard as well as the connecting viaduct. The developer for the Penn's Landing family entertainment center will construct that large development and reestablish the ramps that conduct Chestnut and Market Street to the development. The bill allows us to give perpetual easement to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation for the permanent maintenance of the new ramps. All the costs associated with this construction will be borne by the developer.
My name is Henry Schwartz. I'm with the City Law Department, just here to --
Just here to keep me straight. 181 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990684
Thank you. Are there any other questions for these witnesses? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against this bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill. Thank you, have a nice day, and I appreciate your patience. No, wait, I guess you might as well stay here, right?. Dwayne, you've got a couple more.
Bill No. 990726, an ordinance amending provisions of the Philadelphia Code relating to sidewalk cafes in Center City; in particular, amending Section 9-208, entitled "Sidewalk Cafes," by permitting sidewalk cafes to be maintained on Broad Street, between Bainbridge Street and the north houseline of Washington Avenue; and amending Section 14-1607, entitled "Special Controls for the Center City Commercial 182 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 Area," by providing that nothing in that section 3 shall prohibit the maintenance of or require a Zoning Board of Adjustment certificate for the maintenance of licensed sidewalk cafes along certain portions of Chestnut Street, Walnut Street, Market Street, and Broad Street, all under certain terms and conditions.
Good evening Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Dwayne Bumb, Director of Commerce. And I'm here in support of Bill No. 99726. This bill seeks to alter the review process for restaurants pursuing sidewalk care licenses in the Center City overlay areas, as defined in the Philadelphia Code. Specifically, the areas are: Chestnut Street, between Front and 18th Street; Walnut Street, between Front and 18th Street; South Street, between City Hall and Washington Avenue; and Market, between Front and Fifth. All the areas I've just mentioned are key commercial areas in Center City. During the last decade, this administration and this City Council have invested, and continue to invest, 183 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 heavily in infrastructure and improvements in each of these areas. As Philadelphia Center City continues to grow in popularity, attracting more and more visitors from all over the region, as well as tourists from all over the world, restaurants continue to thrive. In order to position Philadelphia as an international destination, we are capitalizing on the city's strengths as one that is accessible by foot, as well as one that has a reputation for a strong restaurant industry. Sidewalk cafes are a natural extension of the existing successful Center City that will undoubtedly add a great deal of liveliness and vitality to the city streetscape. In concert with the tangible changes that have taken place, this administration and City Council have tried to foster an environment that works not only to retain businesses, but to help them grow in the city. The ordinance for which I m testifying today fortifies this objective. From an administrative standpoint, the effects of the ordinance do not impose any added 184 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 costs to the departments involved with the review process. We believe that a streamlined license review will only stimulate growth of existing restaurants. By allowing restaurants to expand existing operations within a greater sense of ease, it allows these businesses to create jobs as well as increase revenues to the City. This year, the Mayor issued an executive order that allows restaurants located within the areas that we are discussing to receive licenses through a typical review. This order created a trial period for us to determine whether to pursue the legislation that we are discussing today. Business and development organizations with whom we've discussed this order and this legislation were pleased with the City's efforts to streamline the license review process. We believe the efforts of this order were very positive. We are unaware of any negative effects this order had on any of the relevant commercial areas or any costs to the departments involved with the license review. The Commerce Department, in concert with other City agencies, has been trying to 185 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 implement practices that are both business- friendly in an effort not only to retain City businesses, but to help them expand. This ordinance does both of these things. This ordinance signifies that we as a city are encouraging business to grow by making it easier for them to do so in the City. This ordinance 9 will truly add to the City's efforts to create a more attractive business environment and will result in a win/win for everyone. Thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of this bill. I respectfully request this committee give this bill your favorable consideration. And just sort of one sort of unwritten comment that I have. Just to give you an update, City Planning Commission, which I attended immediately before coming to this hearing, did vote to approve this legislation subject to us working with community and business associations that may have some concerns and trying to address those concerns within the context of the legislation.
Thank you. 186 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 Do you happen to know, Dwayne, the number of businesses, restaurant and bar businesses, what have you, that took advantage of the Mayor's executive order? Or would L&I be more in a position to answer that?
To the best of my knowledge, a total of two businesses took advantage of that.
Thank you. Whoever else is testifying next, please state your name for the record.
You need to speak a little bit closer to the microphone.
My name is Tim Lidiak and I'm the Assistant Director of Avenue of the Arts, Inc. My responsibilities there include the physical planning, economic development, and street maintenance of North and South Broad Streets. Two years ago, our board embarked on a strategic planning exercise to map out a long-term vision for the Avenue of the Arts into the 21st century. The first goal that emerged from this 187 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 exercise focussed on getting more people out on the streets of the arts district hours a day, 7 4 days a week. 5 Ordinance 990726, which amends the 6 City's zoning code and permits sidewalk cafes 7 within certain districts of Center City, including 8 South Broad Street, will assist us (Avenue of the 9 Arts, Inc.) greatly in meeting this defined goal. 10 Allowing sidewalk cafes on South Broad Street will 11 be a welcome boost to our efforts to create a 12 lively, distinctive, and secure and safe 13 atmosphere that will attract patrons, visitors, 14 workers, tourists, and residents, and will support 15 our campaign to make the Avenue of the Arts a 16 premiere destination both day and night. 17 The diversity and number of restaurants 18 within the Avenue of the Arts District are an 19 essential element to its economic vitality. 20 Allowing the City's growing list of restaurateurs 21 to place seating outdoors will strengthen their 22 operations and increase their clientele, as well 23 as build much-needed foot traffic on South Broad 24 Street and support the long-term goals of the Avenue of the Arts. 188 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 Thank you for your time and for your support of this ordinance.
Good evening. I'm Michelle Shannon, Director of Marketing, for the Center City District, and I want to thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of Ordinance 10 No. 990726, sponsored by Councilman DiCicco. On behalf of the Center City District, I'm extremely pleased to support this ordinance 13 which will enable outdoor, unenclosed sidewalk cafes on Chestnut and Walnut Street- from Front to Eighth Street, Market Street - from Front to Fifth Street, and Broad Street - from City Hall to Washington Avenue. The Rendell Administration, City Council, and countless other organizations have worked incredibly hard to make Center City an attractive destination for residents, workers, and visitors to enjoy dining, culture, and the arts. Creating a lively street front atmosphere is an integral part of continuing to build that vitality and the success of Center City. Sidewalk cafes 189 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 are an important effective tool in animating our street front and adding to the sense of safety and festivity. Restaurants and cafes are often pioneers in the revitalization of a neighborhood, enticing other businesses to reap the benefits of the newly enlivened area. Yet only to stroll the sidewalks along lower East Market Street or Rittenhouse Square during a fall or a summer evening, to see the diners enjoying a meal or a cocktail at a sidewalk cafe, there are crowds of people in the evening animating the sidewalks of Old City and Center City, where there was once little or no activity. Sidewalk cafes are a symbol of a city that is civil and welcoming. By expanding seating areas and facilitating impulse decisions to enjoy a meal or refreshments, cafes can also expand a volume of business, creating new jobs and tax revenues for Philadelphia. And on a side note, if a few extra paper napkins blow onto the sidewalk, the Center City District will be pleased to sweep them up. Thank you very much. 190 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726
I'm Kristen Young, Program Director for Rittenhouse Row. I'm here on behalf of Neil Stein, Chairperson of Rittenhouse Row Restaurant Committee and also a member of the board. I'm here today representing Rittenhouse Row, which is a destination marketing organization composed of over 200 businesses, from Avenue of the Arts South Broad Street to 21st between Spruce and Market, which is committed to promoting our area as Philadelphia's premiere location for working, living, and visiting. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify today in favor of Ordinance 990726, which will extend on a permanent basis Mayor Rendell's executive order of May 26, 1999, which allows outdoor unenclosed sidewalk cafes in Center City. The bill addresses all concerns of congestion, number of tables, and cleanliness to our satisfaction. Rittenhouse Row feels that the sidewalk cafes bring a terrific ambiance to our destination, adding to our reputation as an 191 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 exciting area for diners. Neil's restaurant, Rouge 99, and many of the neighboring restaurants have enjoyed much success as a result of the addition of sidewalk cafes. It has also done a great deal to improve the neighborhood in terms of safety, creating an exciting environment in which many people are out on the streets after business hours. The increased number of people spending time in our neighborhood because of the cafes also stimulates business in our area's boutiques and greatly contributes to ensuring that Rittenhouse Row continues to be known as an exciting destination. On behalf of all the members of the Rittenhouse Row, we applaud Mayor Rendell and Councilman DiCicco for taking the next step in making Philadelphia a great place for restaurants to thrive. Thank you.
I'm Ashley Andrus, Director of Public Policy for the Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce. 192 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 And I submitted my full text of my remarks to the committee. In the interest of time, I will just provide some summarizing remarks, because every point made by previous witnesses was made in my written testimony, but I have two side notes. We worked with the Mayor's Office this summer on creating the executive order, and when we notified our members of the executive order, they were all very pleased with it and urged us to support any action making the executive order permanent. We did so in a letter urging Mayor Rendell just last month, and are here today to urge City Council, through approval of this bill, to make the action permanent. And on a personal note, I am a resident of Center City, as are many of my friends. And even with all the development and progress in Center City, probably the thing that we're most excited about is the growth in sidewalk cafes. And with that, we would urge support and approval of this bill. Thanks.
Thank you. 193 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 Ruth?
Chairman DiCicco and members of the committee, my name is Ruth Ann Madway, and I'm the Executive Director of East of Broad Improvement Association. However, I'm here today as a private citizen, a long time resident of Center City, and someone who has long been active in civic improvement efforts in Center City. My academic background and training are in the field of architectural history and American city planning, and so I come to the issue before City Council both with an avid interest as a citizen concerned about her community, as well as someone who has studied and focused on these sorts of issues in a professional context. I am testifying here today in support of Bill No. 990726, which will amend relevant sections of the Philadelphia Code to permit sidewalk cafes in Center City and to make the licensing of sidewalk cafes in Center City a standard part of the business environment in the downtown. This legislation would streamline the 194 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 zoning and licensing process and remove the current ban on sidewalk cafes. The legislation would eliminate unnecessary costs and uncertainty for restaurateurs in Center City who are willing and eager to enhance the Center City business environment by adding outdoor cafes. Bill 990726 would go a long way towards making City government a full partner in Center City's economic renaissance. Outdoor cafes have a strong, positive, and highly visible effect on the business and cultural life of the city. They create a sense of place and add real excitement and visual appeal to the streetscape in Center City. This proposed legislation would have the effect of encouraging and enhancing the viability of the restaurant industry, which is critical to Center City's economic health and well-being. On the blocks west of Broad Street and around Rittenhouse Square, the temporary lifting of the ban on sidewalk cafes has proven to be successful. The outdoor cafes in this area convey a sense of street life and urban vibrancy and a climate where outdoor dining can thrive for six to 195 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 eight months of the year. It is critical to the continued revival along the Avenue of the Arts, as well as east of Broad, that City government encourage a similar vibrancy in these areas. The addition of sidewalk cafes to Center City will have an additional beneficial effect on the safety, security and appearance of the downtown. With more people on the streets enjoying Center City's varied dining experience, it is far less likely that opportunistic crimes, such as purse-snatching, car break-ins, and similar kinds of quality-of-life offenses will occur. Moreover, with the addition of sidewalk cafes, restaurant owners themselves will become more concerned and vigilant about the appearance, safety, and lighting of their own blocks. This proposed ordinance will have the practical effect of invoking one of the most efficient and cost-effective economic development tools, namely enlightened self-interest. In conclusion, these proposed legislative changes regarding sidewalk cafes will be a positive thing for the economic and cultural life of Center City. With a reasonable degree of 196 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 diligence and a provision for incorporating community input and comment in the process, the legislation Council is considering today will have a beneficial impact on the continued renaissance and viability of Philadelphia's downtown, making it an even greater attraction for residents, business people, and visitors alike. Thank you.
Thank you, thank you for your testimony. And of all the things you said, I certainly agree with everything, but I think the one most important thing that some people miss out is, no one would want to have customers on the sidewalk if the sidewalk wasn't being maintained, so it does basically provide the City with a service that we'd otherwise be paying for, or through the Special Services District. So I certainly agree with you there. And my experience in Chicago in the early '90s, my son was out in school in Chicago. One of the nicest things I found out about Chicago is that they have all these outdoor cafes, and I said, Why don't they do more of those in 197 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 Philadelphia? And then more recently, my trip to Europe, it's a phenomenal thing. But thank you again for your testimony. Councilman Rizzo?
I've got a question. In the winter, nice days, is there a restriction on the time, like June, July or if they choose to --
No, no. If you go to Rittenhouse Square outside of Rouge and Devon's, they have these kerosene heaters. I've been out there two weeks ago, and it was 50-something degrees.
I guess where I'm heading is that, when the weather becomes cold, are we going to permit canopies or awnings and things like that to be erected?
That's going to be up, I think, to the individual owner of the establishment if they want to provide those 198 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 heaters and whoever's willing to sit outside. Again, I've seen it when the weather was in the middle 50s a couple of weeks ago on a Saturday night. And for one who doesn't like the cold, it was very warm under there with those heaters. So I think that's just going to be a judgment call by each individual establishment, whether they want to provide those heaters or not.
I think that's a good question for L&I as far as the safety issue concerns.
Well, I would assume that if there's canopies, there would have to be some coordination of noncombustible materials with kerosene heaters.
Well, L&I is here, and I think they can answer that. Thank you. Thank you, Ruth Ann. (Otis Haigler comes forward.)
My name is Otis Haigler, 199 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 Legislative Regulatory Affairs Manager for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. To answer Councilman Rizzo's question, if someone wanted to erect a canopy or a tent to cover the sidewalk cafe tables and chairs, they would need a permit for that. They would have to come into our department and secure a permit for the erection of a tent to cover tables and chairs. We would then review their permit application to determine whether or not they're in compliance with the Fire Prevention Code, including whether or not the heating that they're going to provide for the tent is sufficient or is covered under the requirements of Code. That was my previous job so I know that part.
That's great. So what you're basically saying is that it won't be just an automatic; you come in for a permit and you get it without any oversight.
No, sir. No, sir. They would also work in concert with the Fire Department, the application would be submitted to them as well so that they could review the heating 200 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 for the tent.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good evening. My name is John Cunningham, and I'm the Right-of-Way Manager for the Department of Streets. Regarding Bill No. 990726, an ordinance 12 amending provisions of the Philadelphia Code relating to sidewalk sales in Center City, and in particular, certain streets such as Broad Street, Chestnut Street, Walnut Street, the Department of Streets offers no objection to the passage of this ordinance.
Since we're talking about right-of-way, we have utility, we have electric, bell, we have cable, we have all types of facilities in the sidewalk. Would the operator of a cafe, a outdoor cafe, have to immediately give right-of-way to a utility company that might have facilities in the area that they're utilizing? 201 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726
Right. That would be part of the review process. When they submit a drawing to us, we compare that drawing to existing structures underground. If, in fact, there is a conduit beneath the proposed cafe, we would request that the licensee get a waiver from that utility to erect the structure.
Thank you. I'm Judith Eden, Vice President of the Center City Residents Association. And I would like to point out that within the CCRA membership area is the very first licensed unenclosed sidewalk cafe, Elephant and Castle, at 18th and Market, which we were extremely supportive and instrumental in having happen. However, we have great reservations about this bill at this time. We had expected 202 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 that after the trial period implemented by the Mayor's executive order, that there would, in fact, be an opportunity to appraise the results of what, I guess, we could call an experiment. And I find the most interesting testimony that I heard here today the fact that exactly two licenses were issued under it, which would tend to track my observation that most of the sidewalk cafes that we're seeing out there are, in fact, completely unlicensed at all. But we've certainly had enough experience now, legal or illegal though the cafes may be one, to see that one size does not fit all. And the kind of law and regulatory scheme that would be appropriate for a restaurant that has tables with waitresses and waiters and non-disposables is one thing; the kind of sidewalk cafe that is operated by an all takeout restaurant with nothing but disposables is another. We see a need for provisions for umbrellas and railings and heaters and the paraphernalia that comes on with it. We see a need that the law be made very clear that you, in fact, have been to be a restaurant. We know of a Wawa that has a sidewalk cafe 203 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 license, we know of a number of retail bakeries. We've had inquiries at CCRA to have sidewalk cafes from stores that are just selling housewares and ladies' accessories. And we don't find this law to be a complete and comprehensive scheme. And it's not the product of the conversation that included, I think, many people that could have contributed to it from actual experience.
Thank you. I asked the question as to the number of establishments that took advantage of the Mayor's executive order only to see if there was a rush to do this. And if I recall correctly, my conversations with the administration, was that at least as it pertained to the 1st Councilmatic District and a number of establishments who had contacted my office seeking to get a sidewalk cafe license, the process would have taken them probably the better part of the warm weather months to get the license which, in fact, they would have been granted anyway, or at least my office was prepared to support. So it was an effort basically to get these cafes established in 204 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 anticipation of approval of the ordinance. So I'm not certain that all of the other licenses or sidewalk cafes that are out there today, with the exception of those two, are illegal. And I think L&I can probably answer that better. My guess is, from the experience that I've had here for four years, a number of establishments are legal because they went through that process. And it's okay if you begin the process in January, which may take you sometime -- and L&I can correct me if I'm wrong -- probably through the better part of April or May to get the license. So all we were trying to do is saying if "Establishment X" is going to apply for the license and in fact we're going to approve it, why not give them the right in anticipation of the act being passed so that at least they can conduct business over the warm weather months in anticipation of Council approval.
Well, be that as it may, I do think that the ordinance is very inadequate. And if I could just close, I mean, with one particular. There's actually no connection 205 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 between the size of the sidewalk seating available and the amount of seating, for example, that a restaurant would otherwise have. And, therefore, an all takeout restaurant could apply and receive a license, put the tables and chairs out there, even though it will all be disposables. They will have no people to clean, etc. And, in fact, we do know of two instances on Chestnut Street where people have taken minute spaces for rent. I'm talking 350 square feet, and it is fully their intention of using that as like a base, and all of their seating will be outside and none would be inside. And I would suggest to you that Chestnut Street, at least west of Broad, does not need to turn into one huge outdoor food court with no one to clean up after anyone.
Well, I can appreciate your concern for cleaning, as one who walks down the street and picks up paper constantly. As you know, my mother made me that way. But besides that, I personally --
Well, we're looking to west of Broad. 206 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726
On a personal note, I would welcome every food establishment to put some people back out on the street because I think it was very eloquently described in Ruth Ann Medway's testimony about bringing people out on the sidewalk, which I think makes better, safer environment and puts people out there. And --
And if someone wants to -- (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)
But this does not provide for a distinction between lunch, dinner, how late you --
I don't know if we need the distinction. I mean, in Europe, people are outside, morning, noon, and night, and I think that really is a wonderful experience. I think it makes for a much safer, more vibrant environment, for which people will want to come and visit. And whether it's a 350-square-foot minute, little building and may take advantage of putting tables 207 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 outside, so what? I mean, that's the intent, to put activity back out onto the sidewalk to bring people out, as opposed to keeping them in.
Well, believe it or not, people trip over the tables on 18th Street at lunchtime.
Please. And I think there's some provisions, if I'm not mistaken, where we can talk about what the allowable space of the sidewalk for pedestrian travel may be. I mean, you can only bring the tables out so far, if I'm not mistaken. Correct me if I'm wrong. Streets Department.
Yes, you're correct, Councilman. We have to control the available width for pedestrian travel. So certainly, a 20-feet and a 12-foot wide sidewalk would have to be treated accordingly.
And I would just like to add for the record that our policy at L&I is not 208 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 to issue any licenses to takeout restaurants. You would have to be a full-fledged restaurant with 75 percent seating in order to get the sidewalk cafe license. So if you know of locations where you know of a takeout restaurant, let us know, and we will send out an inspector to write violations against those persons. We would have to check into that.
Miss Eden, if you have a question, you can address it to me, and if you do have a location, as you just stated, please let us know or let your Councilman know.
There's one location. As I said, it's a Wawa, so it's not a restaurant tall.
Okay. So I suggest you bring it to Councilman Clarke's attention or to L&I, and we'll address that. Councilmember Rizzo?
Could I just make a quick observation? Rather than we depend on the community to report these, could we ask L&I to do a survey of the outdoor facilities and you identify whether they're legal or not. If you 209 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 send an inspector out and you see a outdoor, then check to make sure that they're appropriately licensed, and you take the action.
I think I understand what you're saying, but today they can inspect it and then tomorrow, something's there. So I think the community, which is Center City residents, also are a very active and vigilant community group, as was just pointed out. Miss Eden said there's a couple places that -- one is a Wawa, which is not a restaurant, and I would agree on that one. But with the combination of the two, we'll be able to police it.
Sure. You said the magic word. As long as there is some proactive enforcement from L&I, along with the community's assistance, but I think primarily L&I should be -- now that you're aware that this condition may exist, that you're out there looking for these unlicensed outdoor facilities.
Our department periodically conducts program inspections for various activities. Specifically on an issue such as this, I would have to take this back to the 210 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 manager of the unit that handles this, because he would have to allocate his resources in order to do this, and that would be our Business Compliance Unit, and they only have twenty inspectors, and they do various inspections for various things out there.
You know, I also think what may give the community some leverage is, aside from the already-existing establishments, any future restaurant -- most restaurants will apply for a liquor license, and I think that's where the community could get involved in the process, on the transfer of the license and make some provisions as to whether or not you do want another outdoor cafe as a proviso for support for the transfer or limit the number of tables. So I think the community can still be a part of that process for any future restaurants, at least when it comes to restaurants that have to apply for a liquor license or a use permit. So I don't think the community is going to be excluded 211 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 from the process for any future.
Mr. Chairman, does a bring-your-own-bottle require a use permit?
Well, if the establishment doesn't have the liquor license, no. 7 If the establishment has to go for a use permit to provide for the business of a restaurant, if they're changing the use, then they would have to go in front of the Zoning Board for a use permit. Am I correct? In most cases?
My questions is, can you bring -- can an outdoor cafe that doesn't have a liquor license, can a person bring a bottle of wine or a bottle of scotch?
Can you bring alcoholic beverages to a BYO restaurant facility and put that bottle on the table outside? I would think so. It's part of -- it's an extension of the property.
But I thought that it was a violation of the Liquor Code if you were in a bar and brought a bottle of beer outside.
Yeah, but the outdoor cafe becomes an extension of the 212 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 facility. Am I correct?
Yes, it does. And if the facility has a liquor license, then it would extend to outdoor cafe.
So whether you have a license or not, a liquor license or not, the sidewalk cafe is an extension of your existing property, and that would not violate the container-drinking, or whatever the term is I'm looking for -- it's getting late. You know, for bringing drinks outside the establishment, because you are, in fact, a part of that establishment; you're not walking down the street with it. Does that make sense the way I'm --
You need to speak directly into the microphone and identify yourself for the record. Thank you.
I'll try. My voice isn't much better than when you were on the panel at my 213 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 forum last month. I'm Nancy Lavin.
I'm the Chair of Philly Walks Organization. And for those who may not have heard of us, we are the only organization in Philadelphia that's solely dedicated to a word that I haven't heard from any of the professionals here, and that is "pedestrian." You've talked about people, you've talked about diners, etc. But I'm here to talk about the pedestrian. And as you have been talking about the cafes along 18th Street in particular, I am quite sure -- I haven't gone out there with my ruler, but I'm positive that the required six feet doesn't exist in front of some of the places. And we'd appreciate it if you could verify that for us and see what can be done.
This is John Cunningham, with the Streets Department. I'll glad to look into that matter for you. Could you give me the exact locations on that?
Yes. That would be the Rouge restaurant, I believe, and maybe even the one next to it, where especially they have -- 214 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726
Let me ask you a question, and I don't want to get into a debate or an argument. Are you suggesting, in the case of Rouge or Devon's, if the sidewalk is less than six foot for pedestrians, that we should eliminate those outdoor cafes?
Well, you're asking him to go out and measure the sidewalk, and I have a feeling that at least when it comes to Rouge, it's going to be under six foot. I could be wrong, but that may be under six foot.
For this very reason, I think that it warrants continuing this until next year so that we can further discuss it and find out what's realistic and what isn't. To me, the idea of sidewalk cafes is akin to motherhood and apple pie. What's to say evil about them, really? My family's from Paris. Need I say more? I couldn't love them more. But, of course, Paris boulevards are a little different from our narrow sidewalks and 215 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990726 streets. So I'm not going to go through a whole text of what I was going to say because Judith Eden really said most of it for me. So I do reiterate what she has to say, and those are my feelings.
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify? (No response.)
Could we take a two-minute break? I think Councilman Clarke wanted to offer an amendment to this bill, if I'm not mistaken. (Short break taken.) (Proceedings resume.)
We're going to continue with the hearing. The clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 990148, an ordinance authorizing Michael Del Quadro, the owner of the property of 1100 Mercy Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19146, to construct 216 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990148 and maintain various encroachments onto and over the west footway of 11th Street and the south footway of Mercy Street adjacent to the property 1100 Mercy Street, all under certain terms and conditions.
Good evening, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is John Cunningham, Right-of-Way Manager, Department of Streets. Returned herewith is Bill No. 990148, an ordinance authorizing Michael Del Quadro owner of the property at 1100 Mercy Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19146, to construct and maintain various encroachments onto and over the west footway of 11th Street and the south footway of Mercy Street, adjacent to the property at 1100 Mercy Street, all under certain terms and conditions. Due to the numerous encroachments contained in this ordinance that in particular reduce the legal (unintelligible) width of 11th Street to less than 50 percent of its designed width, the Department of Streets objects to the passage of ordinance. 217 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990148
Thank you. I'd just like to read into the record -- a declaration from Debra M. Russo, R-U-S-S-O, Title 2 Coordinator for the Americans Disabilities Act for the City of Philadelphia. She's in support of Bill No. 990148 and her declaration goes as follows: I Debra M. Russo, Title 2 Coordinator for the American with Disabilities Act, conducted a site investigation on the subject property. The area between the planter and the curbside does not violate any promulgated rules by the United States Department of Justice dealing with pedestrian sidewalk guidelines and the ADA. Anyone here have any questions this bill? (No questions.)
Anyone here who wishes to testify for or against the bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 990556 will be continued to a December 9th hearing. 218 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990556 Bill No. 990727, an ordinance 3 authorizing LaLiberte L.P., 245 Park Avenue, New York, New York, 10167, owner of the properties 116-122 South 17th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19103, and 1729-1735 Sansom Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19103, to construct and maintain two electrified marquees and six rigid awnings attached to the property and projecting over the public footways of 17th Street and on Sansom Street, under certain terms and conditions.
Mr. Chairman, my name is John Cunningham, Right-of-Way Manager for the Department of Streets. Regarding Bill No. 990727, an ordinance 17 authorizing LaLiberte, L.P., 245 Park Avenue, 26th Floor, New York, New York, 10167, owner of the properties 116-122 South 17th Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19103, and 1729-1735 Sansom Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19103, to construct and maintain two electrified marquees and six rigid awnings attached to the property and projecting over the public footways of 17th Street and Sansom Street, under certain terms and conditions. 219 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990766 Since these encroachments do not impair pedestrian travel, the Department of Streets has no objection to the passage of this ordinance.
Any other questions for this witness from the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 990766, an ordinance authorizing Filbert Street Associates, L.P., 150 North Broad Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 191023-1424, owner of the property bounded by 12th Street, 13th Street, Filbert Street, and Cuthbert Street to construct, own, and maintain a bridge over Cuthbert Street, between 12th Street and 13th Street, under certain terms and conditions.
Mr. Chairman, my name is John Cunningham, Right-of-Way Manager for the Department of Streets. 220 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990766 Regarding Bill No. 990766, an ordinance 3 authorizing Filbert Streets Associates L.P., 150 North Broad Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19102-1424, owner of the property bounded by 12th Street, 13th Street, Filbert Street, and Cuthbert Street, to construct, own, and maintain a bridge over Cuthbert Street between 12th Street and 13th Street, under certain terms and conditions, the plans for this structure were approved by Jack Lutz, Chief Bridge Engineer for the Streets Department, on October 19, 1999. Therefore, the Department of Streets has no objection to the passage of this ordinance.
Thank you. Are there any questions for this witness from the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 990814, an 221 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990814 ordinance Frank Milorey, owner of the newsstand located on the northwest corner of 12th and Market Streets, to construct, use and maintain an oversized prototype newsstand on a temporary basis, under certain terms and conditions.
Good evening, Mr. Chairman. My name is John Cunningham, Right-of-Way Manager for the Department of Streets. Regarding Bill No. 990814, an ordinance 13 granting permission to Frank Milorey, owner of the newsstands located on the northwest corner of 12th and Market Streets, to construct, maintain, and use an oversized prototype newsstand on a temporary basis, under certain terms and conditions, for the past several months, the Streets Department has been working with City Council, the Newsstand Association, and the Department of Licenses and Inspections to develop legislation to permit the placement of this prototype newsstand located only at Market Street for the purpose of determining standards upon which future newsstands of this type will conform. 222 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990814 Since this ordinance allows a one-year evaluation period, the Department of Streets has no objection to the passage of this ordinance.
Joseph Beller, attorney on behalf of the Newsstand Operators Association. We're delighted with this bill, and we thank the Streets Department, L&I, Councilman DiCicco, and all of those who worked so very hard to bring this to fruition. We think that once it's up and it's in place, it will be the prime example of how the City and individuals can work together to improve cityscape and to improve their lives as individual operators of the stand, and to make the city more beautiful. And there are provisions in the Newsstand Operators Association to make sure that these places are maintained properly, no graffiti and so forth during this trial period and forever thereafter, assuming they are approved as the prototype as the regular thereafter.
Otis Haigler, Department 223 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990814 of Licenses and Inspections, Legislative Regulatory Affairs Manager. Regarding granting Frank Milorey, owner of the newsstand located at the northwest corner of 12th and Market Streets, permission to construct, use and maintain an oversized prototype newsstand on a temporary basis, under certain terms and conditions, we have no objections to the passage of this ordinance.
Just a comment, Mr. Beller about the newsstands in general. I got a call from one of the owners indicating that they were being burglarized regularly, and I have had a letter from an alarm provider that would like to work with your organization to alarm all of the newsstands so if they are burglarized, that they could get a response, just like any other property within the city.
I would be delighted to have the architect who designed them to look at that. And in addition, I would just like to 224 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990814 tell you, Mr. Councilman, that the new construction will make them a lot tougher to burglarize, and the gates will be inside, and that will be, of course, more sightly but more protective so. . .
If you would like, I will share with you the design of the prototype, and you'll see the security systems that Joe's speaking to in there.
Thank you. Are there any other questions for these witnesses from the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 990815, an ordinance granting permission to Sing Tak Wong, owner of the newsstand located on the northeast corner of Fourth and Chestnut Streets, to construct, use, and maintain an oversized 225 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990815 prototype newsstand on a temporary basis, under certain terms and conditions.
Mr. Chairman. My name is John Cunningham, Right-of-Way Manager, Department of Streets. Regarding Bill No. 990815, an ordinance 8 granting permission to Sing Tak Wong, owner of the newsstand located on the northeast corner of Fourth and Chestnut Streets, to construct, use, and maintain an oversized prototype newsstand on a temporary basis, under certain terms and conditions, for the past several months, the Streets Department has been working with City Council, the Newsstand Association, and the Department of Licenses and Inspections to develop legislation to permit the placement of this prototype newsstand located at Fourth and Chestnut for the purpose of determining standards upon which future newsstands of this type will conform. Since this ordinance allows a one-year evaluation period, the Department of Streets has no objection to the passage of this ordinance.
Joseph Beller. I'll just incorporate my previous remarks into this as well. 226 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990815
Thank you. Any questions for this witness from the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Okay, this concludes the public hearing of the Committee on Streets and Services. Thank you. - - -
We will now go into the public meeting. We have a proposed amendment to 990816 that was read into the record at the public hearing. Do I hear a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 998016?
So moved. (Duly seconded.) 227 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990815
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 990816 be amended to delete Section 2, Subsection e., as in Edward. All those in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The amendment is approved. I make a motion on Bill No. 990816, as amended, be approved by this committee, with a suspension of the rules request. (Duly seconded.)
It's been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 990816, as amended, be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The bill is approved as amended. For Bill No. 990529, the hearing will be continued until Thursday, December 9th, at 9 o'clock a.m. 228 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990815
Mr. Chairman, I make a motion for an amendment to Bill No. 4 990726. I would like to amend Section 5 14-1607-19a. and b. as follows: a. Chestnut Street, from Front Street to Broad, delete 18th Street. b. Walnut Street, from Front Street to Broad, delete 18th Street. That's it. (Duly seconded.)
It's been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 990726 be amended. All those in favor of the amendment, signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The bill is amended.
I make a motion that Bill 990726, as amended, be reported out, with a suspension of the rules. (Duly seconded.)
It's been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 990726, as amended, be reported out of this committee with a 229 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990815 favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The bill is approved as amended.
Bill No.'s 990144, 990148, 990456, 990457, 990458, 990459, 990460, 990461, 990462, 990530, 990531, 990646, 990647, 990648, 990672, 990674, 990676, 990677, 990684, 990713, 990720, 990721, 990725, 990727, 990754, 990756, 990763, 990765, 990766, 990811, 990814, 990815, 990834, 990835, 990837, 990839, 990840, and 990845 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and a suspension of the rules so they may be read at the next counseling meeting. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that the bills that have just been read into the record by the clerk be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor will signify by 230 12/2/99 STREETS & SVCS. - BILL 990815 saying aye. Those opposed? All those bills that have been read into the record have been approved:
Bills No. 990557, 990558, 990559, 990603, 990649, 990714, 990813, 990832, 990833, and 990841 have been withdrawn at the request of the sponsors. Bill No. 990529 and 990556 have been continued to December 9, 1999, 9 o'clock a.m., at the Streets and Service Committee meeting. That's it.
This concludes the public meeting. I want to thank all of my colleagues for hanging in here today. Thank you and have a good evening. (Adjourned at 6:35 p.m.) - - - 231 C E R T I F I C A T E I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Thursday, December 2 1999, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of same. RE: COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON STREETS AND SERVICES BILL NO.'S 990144, 990148, 990456, 990457, 990458, 990459, 990460, 990461, 990462, 990530, 990531, 990646, 990647, 990648, 990672, 990674, 990676, 990677, 990684, 990713, 990720, 990721, 990725, 990726 990727, 990754, 990756, 990763, 990765, 990766, 990811, 990814, 990815, 990816, 990834, 990835, 990837, 990839, 990840, and 990845 __________________________________, JOSEPHINE CARDILLO, Registered Professional Reporter