COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON STREETS AND SERVICES - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, January 27, 2009 1:15 a.m. - - - PRESENT: COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO, CHAIR COUNCILMAN BILL GREEN COUNCILMAN WILLIAM GREENLEE COUNCILMAN CURTIS JONES, JR. COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN MARIA QUINONES-SANCHEZ COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER BILLS 080931, 080935, 080945, 080946, 080948 and 080950 - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Good afternoon, everyone. This is the Committee on Streets and Services. We will begin with the public hearing. I will ask Mr. Abernathy to read the title of the first bill. And we do have a quorum. For the record, to my immediate left is Councilwoman Maria Quinones. To my immediate right is Councilman Jones, and to his right is Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller. Thank you.
Bill No. 080935 is being held at the request of the sponsor. Bill No. 080948, an ordinance 17 authorizing and directing the revision of a portion of City Plan No. 231 by changing the grades of Cross Street from Gates Street to Hermitage Street and Gates Street from Silverwood Street to Cross Street in order to conform more closely with existing physical conditions, under certain terms and conditions. 3 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. (Witnesses approached witness table.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Good afternoon, gentlemen. Please identify yourselves for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Frank Morelli, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 080948. This is not an administrative ordinance, but an ordinance requested by Mr. Lairon D. Lawrence, engineering designer, Stantec Consulting Services, 260 South Broad Street, Suite 1210, Philadelphia, PA. The purpose of this ordinance 22 is to change the City Plan grades to match the existing conditions along Cross Street to facilitate the development and construction of 16 single-family 4 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. dwellings. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your Committee for favorable action.
Good afternoon, Chairman DiCicco and members of the Streets and Services Committee. I am William Erickson, a City Planner with the Development Planning Division of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here to testify on Bill No. 080948, which Councilmember Jones introduced on December 11, 2008. This Streets bill will revise the grades of Cross Street from Gates Street to Hermitage Street and Gates Street from Silverwood Street to Cross Street in order to conform more closely to the existing physical conditions. This will allow for the development of 16 new single-family dwellings at this location. The Planning Commission at its 5 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. meeting of January 20, 2009 recommended that Bill No. 080948 be approved. This concludes my testimony. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today and would be pleased to answer any questions you may have. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, gentlemen. Any questions? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Any comments for these witnesses? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Is there anyone else who wishes to testify for or against this bill? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Seeing none, Mr. Abernathy, the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 080950, an ordinance authorizing the paving of Cross Street from Gates Street to Hermitage Street and Gates Street from Silverwood 6 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. Street to Cross Street, under certain terms and conditions.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Frank Morelli, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 080950. This is not an administrative ordinance, but an ordinance requested by Mr. Larion D. Lawrence, engineering designer, Stantec Consulting Services, 260 South Broad Street, Suite 1210, Philadelphia, PA. The purpose of this ordinance 18 is to pave Cross Street and Gates Street to facilitate the development and construction of 16 single-family dwellings. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your Committee for favorable action. 7 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Any questions for this witness from the Committee? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against the bill? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Seeing none, Mr. Abernathy, the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 080931, an ordinance amending Chapter 12-3000 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Use of an Automated Red Light Enforcement System to Prevent Red Light Violations," by authorizing the installation of red light enforcement systems at certain additional locations and conforming the Code to state law standards with respect to the recording of violations, all under certain terms and conditions. (Witnesses approached witness table.) 8 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Good afternoon, Mr. Fenerty.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman -- or good afternoon. I'm sorry. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: That's all right. The snowstorm held you up, I know. Please proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon. My name is Vince Fenerty. I'm the Executive Director of the Philadelphia Parking Authority. First of all, I would like to thank Chairman DiCicco and members of the Committee for allowing me to testify today. I would also like to thank Councilmembers Kenney, Clarke and DiCicco for introducing this legislation. I am testifying in favor of Bill 080931, which would add two more intersections to the red light camera program in the City. These intersections will be on North Broad Street at JFK Boulevard, along with South Broad Street at South Penn Square. 9 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. I would like to take this time to commend City Council for its past excellent and most previous times unanimous support for this program. Since the first cameras were activated at Grant and Roosevelt Boulevard on February 3, 2005, the program has been successful in its main goals: Decreasing red light running, accidents, injuries and fatalities. There are now 64 cameras at intersections, the latest being at 13 58th and Walnut Streets, 9th and Roosevelt Boulevard and Broad and Hunting Park Avenue. The addition of these two intersections would bring the citywide total of red light cameras to 15. The intersections at Broad Street which empty into City Hall circle at its north and south points have long been places where pedestrians and motorists alike are held hostage by the dangerous disregard for traffic signals that have become an epidemic at these points. It is not an exaggeration to say 10 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. that sometimes you put your life in your hands navigating in these areas. I believe that the red light cameras will change the behavior of motorists here, as they have in other parts of the City, to make walking and driving to City Hall a much safer experience. The establishment of red light cameras at these intersections will continue to enhance and extend this program to the dangerous intersections in the City. I'm asking the Committee to give Bill 080931 a favorable recommendation and request that the rules be suspended to allow first reading at the next Council session. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify before the Committee this afternoon. I would be happy to answer any questions which you may have. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, Mr. Fenerty. Let the record reflect that 11 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. Councilman Green, who is a member of this committee, is also in attendance. Mr. Fenerty, I believe you did a survey or your department did a survey of the infractions as it relates to people going through red lights. Do you recall what any of those numbers are?
Yes, we do. We did a VIM study, and Mr. Vogler, the Manager of the Red Light Camera Department, can testify on what the findings were. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you.
Good afternoon, Chairman. How are you today? COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is Christopher Vogler, V-O-G-L-E-R, Manager of Red Light Photo Enforcement at the Parking Authority. At intersections that are candidates of red light cameras, it's called -- what is done is called a VIM 12 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. study, which really is videotaping of a set intersection, all the approaches for a time, usually hours or less, to be 5 able to see how many vehicles have gone 6 through red lights, either straight or 7 making a right or left turn, depending on 8 the intersection. 9 Statistics for Broad and JFK 10 show that in a 12-hour period, it was 11 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on a given 12 weekday, which was done approximately, I think, three or four months ago -- I'm sorry. I don't have the exact date for the Committee -- there were 102 violations. That's 102 acts of an automobile going through a red light within a 12-hour period just on South Broad Street going into JFK, when you make the right-hand turn, if you proceed around the Masonic Temple, going into City Hall circle. Going west on JFK Boulevard, either turning right onto North Broad or continuing toward 15th Street, in a 13 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. four-hour period -- so that would be right coming from the Mayor's corner, going away from the Mayor's corner -- there were 56 violations in a four-hour period. It was taken during the morning rush hour. So 158 violations for the span of less than one day at that controlled intersection. On the south side of City Hall at South Penn Square where South Broad empties into or comes from the circle, there were a total of 76 violations in a 12-hour period at that intersection. And that is just on any given day. So, I mean, if you average that out over the span of the rest of the day, which traffic would be less, but average that over a month, I mean, there are thousands of instances at those two intersections where red light running occurs each month. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. I just wanted that for the record. I remember you did have a report. I didn't 14 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. recall the exact numbers, but from personal observation is how pretty much this all came about. The numbers, for even myself, were a lot higher than I anticipated. Councilwoman Quinones.
Thank you. Is there going to be a warning period? How long will that be, and when are we looking to implement this, assuming we get this out in two weeks?
Councilwoman, there would be a warning period after the Mayor would sign the bill, if it's successful. The engineering study would be completed between PennDot and City Streets Department. Once the intersection is constructed, under the current statute it would be a 60-day warning period. Signs would be posted, and the individual who would go through the intersection would receive a warning notice instead of a citation for a period 15 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. of 60 days. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Any other questions from this Committee? (No response.)
Chairman DiCicco, your office had asked if we provide current data for the intersections, which we currently have. I have that with me for review by the Committee. It would be for ten intersections. The three that just went live on January 6th, there's no 14 data on them yet. And this information is complete through the end of September. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Councilman Kenney would like to ask a question.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, I would like to thank the Chairman for allowing me to co-sponsor the bill with him, and thank the Parking Authority for the cooperation and doing the investigation, the due diligence, necessary to get this 16 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. hopefully accomplished. Mr. Chairman, as you know, those four intersections around City Hall are perhaps maybe not as dangerous vehicularly as some of the ones up in Northeast off of like Red Lion Road and some of the other places up there that you initiated the cameras, but I think that the four intersections around City Hall are an absolute disaster as far as pedestrian traffic is concerned. People have absolutely no regard for a red light whatsoever. It's not even only a suggestion, it's almost as if it's a red flag to go through it. I think that vehicular traffic, SEPTA buses, people think that once they get into that crosswalk and the light turns red, that they have somehow a right to continue on through. I watch people, older people, all kinds of people, dodging traffic. I watch people step off the curb at City Hall and have a car blow by them at a high rate of speed through a 17 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. red light. And you yell at them, you try to get them to pay attention, you try to get a police officer to chase them, but this at least will bring some sense that they're being punished for the reckless way in which they go through these intersections. I know I got myself a $100 fine at Broad and Oregon and learned my lesson. When I see the counter going down four, three, two, I put my foot on the brake and not on the accelerator. I paid my fine and learned my lesson, but I do think that around City Hall, especially in some of the blind spots on the northwest corner where you can't -- where either there's the parking in the running lane sometimes around City Hall, where there's truck parking or double parking, there's a total blind spot. People walk out thinking it's a green light and that they're safe, and cars go whizzing by them. So as soon as you can possibly get them in, the better. I think that 18 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. it's a miracle now that we haven't had anyone killed, but you're taking your life in your hands when you step off the curb with a green light sometimes around City Hall. So I want to thank the Chairman and thank the Parking Authority for your continued cooperation in many areas, not only in the red light camera stuff, but on all the issues that we bring before you relative to service of the Parking Authority. I am very happy with the way in which the Parking Authority conducts themselves and the way in which they respond to complaints about taxi cabs, about sometimes employees that don't interact correctly with citizens. You're right on top of it and very responsive. So I wanted to thank you for all your work.
Thank you. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, 19 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. Councilman. Councilman Jones.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon. Right now somewhere in the City of Philadelphia watching Channel 64 or 52 there's somebody writing down a note to write to one of the Councilpeople on how to get their own block qualified for a red light camera. Can you describe that process for the record, please?
The process would have to be a request to the Parking Authority from a member of the public to study it, or primarily it should go through the District Councilperson. By the statute, any intersections which the Parking Authority would feel qualified, we have to come to the District Councilperson to have an ordinance 23 written and brought before this Committee and then passed by City Council and approved by the Mayor. 20 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. We have generally done most of the studies through citizen complaints, through Councilmember complaints. There are some intersections which we've studied that there were not that many red light runnings. There are some intersections that are almost impossible to control with a red light camera, because you need overhead signals. You can't have tree blockage or shrubbery blocking the cameras. But we've been very successful working with the Councilmembers' staffs, and we will -- I anticipate we would be able to work with any members of the public that would want a study.
I just wanted you to say that, because when I go back to my district and there's a committee up in East Falls and Manayunk dealing with Ridge Avenue and Henry Avenue, for them to understand the process of how this is done. So thank you. 21 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc.
I do believe, Councilman, both from citizen complaints and from your office, we're in the process of doing some VIM studies up on Ridge Avenue and Henry Avenue right now.
We appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Any other questions from the Committee? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against this bill? Yes, ma'am. (Witness approached witness table.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Vince, just sit over there. You have two more bills, don't you?
Two more bills, yeah. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Just stay 22 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. there. Stay at the table. Save yourself some walking time. Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, Councilman DiCicco and Councilmembers. I'm Cathy Rossi, Manager of Public and Government Affairs for AAA Mid-Atlantic. AAA was founded more than 100 years ago on the principles of motorist safety and pedestrian safety, and we are a motorist advocate, and so, therefore, I'm representing the viewpoints of motorists. I testified before City Council on this issue in September of 2007 prior to the State Legislature's extension of the red light camera program. And AAA has been an advocate of the red light camera program in Philadelphia and in the State, with the caveat that it operate with certain protections for motorists, many of which were incorporated into the enabling legislation, such as the posting of the warning signs, telling motorists the red 23 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. light cameras are in effect, reasonable and appropriate penalties, mandate that camera vendors be paid flat fees that in no way correlate to the number of citations issued, that monies from red light citations support transportation projects and not be diverted to other needs. The purpose of the red light cameras is to catch people -- is not to catch people in the act of running the red light and certainly not to enhance revenue merely, but to slow motorists down and stop them from running the red lights in the first place in order to prevent crashes from occurring and pedestrians from being hit. Each year about 5,000 pedestrians die after being struck by automobiles. I don't have Philadelphia's specific numbers, but in Pennsylvania in one year, 5,000 crashes involved pedestrians. We know that cameras are meant to serve as a deterrent to take the place 24 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. of police officers who can't be at every intersection. AAA, however, will not blindly accept the success of the program. We have, from the beginning on behalf of motorists, demanded accountability, and we just raise some yellow caution flags, and that's why I'm here today, to raise a couple yellow caution flags. We have two main concerns about the proposed new cameras. One is traffic management, including the timing and sequencing of lights, and the second is statistical accountability and justification. We believe the City needs to address a traffic management and light timing issue in Center City, especially in the vicinity of City Hall, before installing red light cameras. Poor timing of lights and sequencing and congestion produce pure gridlock at certain times, and AAA believes that the City can reassess and perhaps reset some of the traffic signals before installing 25 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. the red light cameras. Secondly, the Parking Authority as the administrator of the program should, we believe, publicly disclose more information and analysis about the red light violators and intersection crashes, including comparative data that justifies the new cameras. We assume that you as lawmakers would like to know have the red light running violations dropped at the intersections where the cameras are present and have the number of crashes declined as well. We see some raw data, but we don't always see the comparative data and analysis that we believe is needed, especially as we look at putting more cameras in place. We don't have all the up-to-date answers to the questions at least that AAA is aware of. The last report from the Parking Authority that was published on the website in September falls a little bit short of what we need to make intelligent decisions about 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. additional cameras. It provides the intersection data in raw numbers, but doesn't really tell us whether the numbers are up, down, sideways, and doesn't provide the relevant crash data about the intersections. We know the crash information has to come from the police. We believe it should be included in the annual red light camera report and in ongoing reports as you consider whether or not to install more cameras.
We're concerned about the lack of the relevant statistical disclosure. Are the cameras making things safer? How many cameras are too many cameras? Fair questions, given the pretty rapid expansion of the red light camera program. Even with vendor payments limited to flat monthly fees, the revenue grows, their revenue grows, and government revenue grows every time a new camera is installed. This is not supposed to be about making money. It's 27 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. supposed to be about safety and stopping people from running red lights. AAA's interest in this is in keeping the program credible. We have seen the program lose credibility in many other large cities, and we don't want to see that happen here. That's why we say performance has to be measured and publicly stated. Otherwise, it's going to lose face among motorists. To the Parking Authority's credit, it has done the right thing when it issued refunds to some violators who were unfairly ticketed last year, but it did take the case of one motorist to bring that to light. So speaking on behalf of the hundreds of motorists who are members of AAA and pedestrians as well -- and I'll say that I saw someone blow a red light as I walked here across the street today, came right through it. AAA believes the Parking Authority website should list all of Philadelphia's red light camera 28 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. intersections. It currently does not. Pretty simple, but an important reference. We need to see information about the justification for these particular red light camera placements. Are these intersections more dangerous than other intersections? How do they compare? The comparative analysis. Anecdotally, you're right, we know that drivers have countless near misses with pedestrians in this area and perhaps the cameras are needed for safety's sake. We agree that they probably are, but we ask that the Parking Authority or City Council provide the statistics, the justification that validates the rationale for approval. We ask that City Council, before approving any additional cameras, including those on Broad Street near City Hall, help the City to address the traffic management issues and require a more comprehensive report on crash and violation data. Otherwise, at some point 29 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. AAA will consider withdrawing its support for the program. Right now the program has our support, but I'm here today to simply raise these yellow caution flags as the program moves forward. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Do you have copies of your testimony?
I do. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: If you would -- you do have it, you said? Okay. What I will do is, this Committee will obviously have access to that. We'll hand those out, and going forward, I will read through that. I think there's some points that you raise that I would certainly agree with as it relates to the timing of traffic signals. That's a Streets Department issue. Not getting the Parking Authority off the hook with that, but it is their issue, and we've raised that on a number of different occasions, especially in the Columbus Boulevard/Delaware Avenue area. 30 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. I think they've made some adjustments there. But I will take this testimony that you've offered today, go through it and take any comments from my colleagues on this Committee as well, and submit them to the Parking Authority. Mr. Fenerty looks like he's anxious to respond, so if you'd like to come up, Mr. Fenerty.
Can I ask just one question? COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I'm sorry. Councilwoman Quinones.
Thank you for your testimony. You mentioned about other cities who have lost some credibility with their management. Can you give us an example of a city who is doing it badly and, at the same time, a city that publishes its data in a more responsible, more comprehensive way? Do you have that?
Sure. Washington, 31 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. DC is an illustration of a city that has extreme difficulties with its red light camera program. Part of that has to do with yellow light timing issues. Part of it has to do with camera placement issues. If you Google news articles about it, they'll come up left and right. They have moved forward with speed cameras, which have only exacerbated the red light camera issue there. There have been lots of issues in Washington, DC. I don't have an example of a jurisdiction that's published a report. I'm sure it exists, but I can't think of one off the top of my head that has a comprehensive report. The more public disclosure and transparency there is with this kind of program, the better it is. Motorists and pedestrians want to know that this is strictly about safety and not about revenue. Where vendor fees in some jurisdictions are paid per citation, that's where we see a lot of problems. 32 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. And that's part of the issue in Washington, DC.
Thank you. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Again, as I said, there are questions coming already from the Committee, and then we'll give Mr. Fenerty an opportunity to respond. And I appreciate your comments about the timing of the lights and the impact that it may have on motorists, but I've been the Chairman of this Committee since I came to Council in 1996, and the Streets Department, without trying to be too critical, has always -- the emphasis of the Streets Department has always been on vehicular traffic and ways in which they can make it more convenient for people to use vehicles. I, on the other hand, think that we need to have a greater emphasis on pedestrians and pedestrian safety. And some of the things you mentioned might be accurate as to the placement of these cameras and 33 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. some of the other things that you talked about, but it's not just about moving cars. And I appreciate AAA's concern, because you're about cars, but for me, it's more about pedestrians. In other countries, pedestrians have the right of way. It's not made for the convenience of automobiles. You step out off a curb in Italy, traffic stops. They come to a screeching halt, the traffic, but they do stop to let people go. So for me, this was about public safety, about pedestrian public safety. And everyone knows you're not supposed to go through a red light, and as Councilman Kenney acknowledged, sometimes that does happen. But this intersection, which I've been working in this building for 13 or 14 years now, is a very scary situation, and for some unknown reason, there have not been any fatalities that I am aware of. There may have been, but I'm not aware of them. It 34 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. is a very dangerous situation. When I cross over to go to -- when my car was parked at Macy's, people coming around City Hall traveling north see that light and they immediately accelerate. They're doing over 40 miles an hour, no exaggeration. So maybe this is a deterrent, maybe it isn't, but I think they should be made aware -- "they" meaning the motorists -- that you got to obey the laws of the road.
If I may. I'm nodding my head because AAA agrees with you and pedestrian safety is also a priority. We realize that we do have to change the behavior of motorists in Center City. It is dangerous. We agree that the cameras are probably necessary and will be a good deterrent, but it's also important to look at the timing of the yellow lights to allow for -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: You get no 35 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. argument from me on that one. Thank you. Councilman Jones and -- I'm sorry. Councilwoman Miller first and then Councilman Jones.
Thank you. You actually answered part of my question as it related to the timing issue and the red light cameras. I would think that the red light cameras are a deterrent to someone speeding, because they know a camera is there. And one of the things that we did several years ago was to put those pedestrian countdown timers on the lights surrounding City Hall, and I remember that when we met with the Streets Department originally, they did not want to put those lights around City Hall. That was not on the list. So I was really happy to see that on the list. I cross the same place Councilman DiCicco crosses, and it is pretty dangerous, but I would see it as 36 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. more of a deterrent than a way to make money. I mean, certainly you're going to make money from the fines, but I was wondering -- and you did answer the question, though -- how the credibility management issue impacts the timing of the lights. I know that they put -- I think they changed the timing on the traffic light here at this corner here, Market, and it really changes my ability to get across the street now as a pedestrian. Prior to putting that light up, it was somewhat easier, but this is interesting. I'd also be interested in the data. Thank you. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Councilman Jones.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Rossi, I took a second look at all of your key points and don't particularly have a lot of argument for many of them. But not just in Center 37 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. City, but I mentioned a couple of streets in my district, from Parkside Avenue where we have motor races, drag races across Belmont Avenue -- and Belmont Avenue is no small street -- to race to the light and have people at the other end to determine the winners and losers. The losers are the people who have to walk that street corner in fear of their life. Or Ridge Avenue where about a year, a little more than a year ago, a young lady was the victim of a hit and run driver, and we didn't have any documentation of a camera or red light or whatever to at least give us a hint to who that was. Or Henry Avenue that is the Indianapolis speedway of the northern part of my district. As you come through there, you have people moving at tremendous speeds, gaining velocity, and if they see a yellow light, tend to accelerate as opposed to decelerate. So know this one program in and of itself doesn't replace the need for 38 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. education by way of the drivers. It doesn't replace any of those things, but it adds one more component that may serve as a deterrent. And, yes, I hate a traffic jam more than anyone, because I always have some place to go and something to do, but if we take a little more time and are a little more cautious, I think at the end, it outweighs -- definitely outweighs to me -- some of the possible shortcomings of the camera program. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Any other questions from this Committee? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Mr. Fenerty, I understand you would like to comment.
The goal really, I 39 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. think, is -- and I know the Parking Authority is on the same page with AAA. The goal is to reduce the number of people running red lights and to reduce pedestrians and to reduce injuries. So to the degree that we can show that that's occurring, that's a win-win. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Mr. Fenerty.
Mr. Chairman and Councilmembers, I'd just like to reply to a few of the comments that Ms. Rossi made. A few I agree with, a few I may disagree with. We would like to be able to disclose on a monthly basis the number of citations which are issued. We're prohibited from doing that by State statute. I testified on behalf of wanting to give the information out and so did Ms. Rossi and so did, as a matter of fact, the newspaper lobbyists last year. We were unsuccessful in getting that ability. It's not part of the open 40 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. records law. It has an exemption in it in law that we can't upon request give the data out. That's the wisdom that came from Harrisburg. There are three red light camera reports which are on the website. We have to make a report to the House Transportation Committee. Each year a copy is sent to City Council. In each of those reports, the number of citations are reported. We've been given permission from the Legislature to publish that report on our website. We do do that. To Ms. Rossi's credit, I will admit that in each year, we put each year's data. We don't do accumulative data. So someone could easily look at the data for the fiscal year that the report is on. I can gladly for next year's report, which would be posted sometime next June, include all of the previous year's data so it would be easily available. But the data is on 41 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. there. The other times that I am permitted to release information is such as when you asked me, your office asked that I bring the data with me today for the number of citations issued, and I did provide that to the Committee, and that will be part of my public testimony today, so it can become public record. Just to go through it, if each Councilmember has it, beginning at Grant and the Boulevard, during the warning periodic -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Vince, excuse me. We do not have the -- we'll make copies. I'm sorry. I have it; the Committee doesn't. We'll make copies.
I thought I gave you enough copies. I apologize. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: No 22 problem.
At Grant and the Boulevard, the first month we were there it was 2,498. The highest month was 42 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. three months later right -- it used to be a 90-day warning period. Warning notices were going out. People were still running it. At Grant and the Boulevard, the highest month we have for citations was 4,362. The last month we have reported here would be 9/23 to 10/22 of '08. There were 325 citations. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Four thousand less?
That's about, a fast calculation, a 92 percent decrease. At Red Lion and the Boulevard, the highest number issued were in the third month, which were 1,702. There are 232 in the lowest month. And the lowest month is -- it's declining each month. At Cottman and the Boulevard, the high month was 1,735 and the low month was 636. Broad and Oregon in South Philadelphia in your district, Mr. Chairman, the high month was 2,520, the low month was 458. 43 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. At 34th and Grays Ferry -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Excuse me one minute. (Pause.)
At 34th and Grays Ferry, that has a varied history, because the technology had to be adjusted for the left turns. Our highest month there was 1,713, the lowest is 242. At Mascher and the Boulevard, in Councilman Clarke's district, it was 4,587. It's now 1,783. At Levick and the Boulevard, it was 3,910. Most current is 1,351. Rhawn and the Boulevard was 1,038. Most current month is 304. Welsh and the Boulevard, the high month was 560. Most current month is 306. And I'm just glancing through these. Previous month low was 302. And when we get to the final intersection, I have a report, on glancing through, it seems the high was 787, the low is the most current month, is 489. 44 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. This is not a revenue-driven program. This is a safety-driven program. And I think by the statistics that I have shown you today, it has shown at each and every one of the ten intersections that the data is here, that it has been a success. Additionally, we have done two reports, which include crash data, injuries, fatalities, one in 2007, one was done in 2008. It was done by Nastel Consulting. The most previous was presented to our Board yesterday. It was presented to us in late winter. We released it to our Board yesterday. In addition to that, each of the Councilmembers know of what happened with the three-tenths of a second being lost last September where we refunded it. We did a full investigation into that, and we're taking remedial measures to make sure that never happens again. The problem was corrected. The Parking Authority admitted that it was partially 45 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. human error on my staff for not detecting it and human error on the part of the contractor for not having the technology set with the three-tenths of a second when the conversion was done from wet film to digital technology. The Parking Authority is proud of it, and we looked at some of these intersections where you have 90 percent reductions. Just common sense would show if 90 percent of those people had kept running those intersections, how many rear-end collisions would there have been, how many accidents would there have been, how many injuries would there have been and how many fatalities. Definitely within these statistics it shows that the Boulevard is a much safer and much tamer place to drive, and only our Lord would know how many lives were saved. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Ms. Rossi, if you have an extra copy of your testimony, I would suggest 46 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. you give it to Mr. Fenerty. He did a good job in critiquing as much of what he could remember of your testimony, but I think it would be important and fair to him to have a copy of it.
And, you know, Philadelphia's program, red light camera program, is a model program. We have testified before other states who are starting red light camera programs and held up Pennsylvania's and Philadelphia's as a model. AAA stands behind all the caveats that were built into the program at the State level and how the Philadelphia Parking Authority has done a good job in executing the program. As we move forward with expansion, we think it's important to raise some of the cautionary flags so that it stays a model program, and that's part of why I offered what I did today. We look forward to getting a 47 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. copy of the report that was given to the Board yesterday. I'm sure it will continue to show declines, but putting those numbers out there for public consumption is also important. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I agree. Thank you. Councilwoman Quinones.
Yes. Mr. Fenerty, is there any way to cross reference that with the Police Department on these intersections in terms of can we do a comparative analysis of at this red light, there were so many accidents, now there's less?
Yes. That was done in the report that we did in 2007 on three intersections, and it is also included in the report that was done in 2008 on five intersections. I'll make sure that each Councilmember gets a copy of that.
But we don't do that as a regular part of our 48 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. monitoring?
We're going to pick intersections and do studies with crash data. It's a very cumbersome analysis, because when the consultant gets it -- I'm just going to pick an intersection. Let's say we pick Grant and the Boulevard. Each and every report has to be read, if it's a Police 48, if it's a AA-45. Each has to be read to see if it was an intersection-based accident or if the police officer responding may have wrote -- I'm just saying 9600 on the Boulevard, and that could be a block on either side, or they could write 1300, that could be a block on either side of the intersection. So it's very cumbersome for us to do that. So we do pick analysis of certain intersections, and we did it on five. And we also did what's called a study of the halo effect of red light cameras. A halo effect means the intersections adjacent approaching and 49 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. after a red light camera intersection also became safer, because motorists are aware to slow down. It's what's called the halo effect. It's for surrounding intersections, and that is also included in our report.
So this has to do with the way the Police Department gathers and maintains its data which is why it's cumbersome to you?
It's cumbersome for us to do it that way, but we feel it's our responsibility to study at least five intersections every year, and we will be doing that and we will be giving -- I had intended to distribute the report to City Council, just as I did to City Council what had happened with the seconds being off.
Ms. Rossi also mentioned making available through your website additional data. What of that data can you put up on the website? 50 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc.
What I can do today is, I will post my testimony today, which would include the statistics which were released with the testimony. That would be for public consumption, this data, which we have up until the end of September. And so Council understands why we only have it until September is, there's discovery of the license plate, you have to -- we do discovery of who the owner is, the citation process, and everything has to be sorted out, and then we have it. It usually runs two to three months behind for a report.
I know we all agree that this is a public safety measure, not an income-generating one, but how much is this program costing us and is it self-sustainable through the violations?
The program costs -- I believe the per camera cost is 4,895 at each intersection, and the program is self-sustainable. And off the 51 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. top of my head -- and I will send you the exact figure -- I believe there have been over $4 million forwarded to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation from the profits from this fund. The money doesn't go to the City. It goes to the Department of Transportation for use by the Department of Transportation in safety.
So in one calendar year, you're saying $4 million went to PennDot?
Four million dollars covered a period of three years. And it's escalating each year as we build intersections.
The Parking Authority puts up the front money. They deduct all of the costs related, including staffing, and then the profit is what it forwarded, right?
Thank you, Mr. Fenerty. 52 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc.
You're welcome. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Any other questions or comments? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Seeing none, thank you both.
Thank you. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I'll ask Mr. Abernathy to read the title of the next bill and to also acknowledge that Councilman Greenlee, a member of this Committee, is also present.
Bill No. 080945, an ordinance amending Chapter 12-2400 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Towing and Immobilizing of Parked or Abandoned Vehicles," by changing the fees for damage to vehicle booting devices, all under certain terms and conditions. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Mr. Fenerty, you have written testimony, so, if you would, unless you feel otherwise, would you please summarize 53 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. your statement.
Okay. Mr. Chairman, Councilman DiCicco, we're asking that Bill No. 080945 be given a favorable recommendation for the following reason: Currently, the fine for tampering or destroying a boot, removal of a boot improperly, is $300. This bill calls for a fee to be raised to $600. We have asked Councilman Kenney to ask that to be amended to $700 in committee today, and the reason we have asked it to be raised from $300 to $700 is, this fee and fine has been the same for, as far as I can look back, more than a dozen years. The cost of a boot is $475. The cost of the safety lock is $150. The freight on each boot is $40. That brings it to $665. For a wide-body boot, the cost is $585, lock is $150 and the freight is still $40. That brings it to $775. Since we use many of the $665, we rounded it together and we're asking the Committee to approve an increase to 54 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. $700, so when someone cuts a boot off with a torch or however they may do it, when we retrieve the car, we can collect the money that the Parking Authority is out due to the boot loss. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Councilman Jones.
In Fiscal Year '06 to '07, there were 240 instances, and in Fiscal Year '07 to '08, there were 282 instances. In this year, our fiscal year, which ends March 30th, we think the incidences will be somewhere around the 350 range.
There is a criminal penalty associated with if the person is arrested. It's under the crimes code. It's called interfering with a governmental function or act. The individual, if it can be proven they 55 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. actually did the act themself, can be charged with theft of City property.
And does your calculation of $700 include the time of your employees at all?
So arguably, if we chose to, it would be safe to do it at $1,000?
Yes, sir, it would. I just brought this -- I'd be most happy if you could do that, but I brought what I thought would be reasonable to the Committee.
I bend to the will of the Chairman. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Do you have an amendment to this bill? Is there going to be an amendment?
Yes. I believe Councilman Kenney. I had a question. What is the process? How do you prove that someone did the tampering so that -- we don't 56 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. automatically assume it's the car owner?
No, we don't. The only time we would get -- when it happens, we make a record of it against the tag of the vehicle which was immobilized. Hopefully our booting crews will come across that vehicle again. When we mobilize it again, we immediately would impound it, and the car owner would have to come in, and in most cases, when we say, This is what it is, you owe us for the boot, they pay for the boot, because two and two equals four.
So if I got booted and there was damage to the boot, you put that sort of as a lien, and then you do one of those sweeps, you pay it all or you don't get your car back?
But, again, who does the investigation to determine who did the damage to the boot?
We just assume 57 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. that someone that had the legal operation of the vehicle did the damage before we do it. If there would be --
Until the next time there's a booting issue. If the car was reported stolen -- and we've had cases many years ago like that, someone's car was stolen, it was booted, and we look and we get the police report, the person is not held responsible. Generally in that one instance I'm thinking of that happened many years ago, the person was very thankful that we booted the car because we recovered their stolen car, which we do quite often.
Okay. I just want to make sure there's some sort of recourse if folks are not -- 58 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc.
Okay. You guys are trying to up this fee and I want to be part of that conversation, too. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: We'll wait for you. Any other questions for this witness from the Committee? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against the bill? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Seeing none, Mr. Abernathy, the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 080946, an ordinance amending Title 12 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Traffic Code," to establish towing zone locations and hours in the University City area, all under certain terms and conditions. 59 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Again, Mr. Fenerty, unless you see otherwise, would you please summarize your statement since we have written copies.
On Bill No. 7 080946, the Parking Authority met with Councilwoman Blackwell. This is for towing zones in her district. If she disagreed with it, naturally she wouldn't have introduced it. This is to unify the tow zones in University City. There are many of them now which have passed by Council. We have encompassed all of them together, with some new ones, so we can clean out by towing, clean out some of the congestion in University City by towing those individuals who are in loading zones, passenger zones, no 20 stopping and no parking zones. All of those areas will be posted before there's any towing. That concludes my testimony. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Fenerty? 60 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Anyone else here who wishes to testify on the bill? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Seeing none, for the record, Bill No. 080935 is being held. We will now go into the public meeting.
Mr. Chair, I recommend that Bill 080948 be moved out of Committee with a favorable recommendation -- (Off-the-record discussion.)
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill 080948, Bill 18 080950, Bill 080931, Bill 080945 and Bill 19 080946 be moved out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. (Duly seconded.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: We have to do 080945 separately since there's an amendment. So I'll take a motion on the other bills that have been read into the 61 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. record, that it's been recommended that these bills be reported out favorably with a rules suspension. All those in favor? (Aye.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Those opposed? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: All right. Now we'll go to Bill No. 080945.
The amendment has been circulated. It's a part of everyone's package, and I move for the adoption of the amendment. Wait. Actually, we're going to change the amendment. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Where is the amendment? Last page.
The last page of the pink sheets. 62 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: The amendment that we have in front of us under Section 12-2406.2, Section 2, reads, "Notwithstanding any other provision of this Title, any person violating Section 12-2406.2 (1) shall be subject to a fine or penalty of $700," which would be eliminating the current $300 -- replacing the current $300 fine. I believe that there may be an amendment to the amendment.
Right. There is an amendment to the amendment to change the $700 to $1,000. (Duly seconded.)
Can we have a discussion on that? I have a problem with giving the Parking Authority more money than they're asking for without us -- I mean, if we want to be considerate of staff salaries, then I'd like them to show us the data. But I have a problem with that. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Councilman 63 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. Jones.
Recognizing the sincere wishes of my Councilperson, I still want to move forward with $1,000. We have not considered staff time in this, and it just makes sense not to revisit this thing this year, next year and the following year. And I think if we set it right at about $1,000, that that's a safe bet, keeping in mind the people that do this are destroying public property and also violating our laws, and we should not make it more profitable for them to take the risk than it is in a penalty, and that's just my point. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Any other comments?
I just think that to come up with a figure without some sort of analysis for it, given all of the fees and fines that we have raised over the last 90 days, I have a concern about. So I would vote against the increase to $1,000. 64 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: So noted. There's been a motion for the amendment to Bill No. 080945 that has been read into the record. All in favor of the amendment signify by saying aye. (Aye.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Opposed?
Nay. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: One nay. Councilwoman Quinones-Sanchez voting in the negative. Now move for a motion to approve the bill, as amended.
Motion for Bill 080945, as amended, be voted out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, and I believe they're asking for a suspension of the rules so it could be heard at our next public session. (Duly seconded.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: It has been properly moved and seconded that 65 1/27/09 - STREETS - BILL 080931, etc. Bill No. 080945 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Those opposed? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: The bill 12 is approved. This concludes the public meeting on the Committee of Streets and Services. Thank all members and the public for attending. (Committee on Streets and Services adjourned at 2:10 p.m.) - - - 66 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings, evidence and objections are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the foregoing matter on January 27, 2009, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. ______________________________ MICHELE L. MURPHY RPR-Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)