Seeing none, thank you. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Mr. McPherson will please read the title of Bill No. 080437. MR. McPHERSON: An ordinance 129 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. approving the thirty-seventh amendment of the redevelopment proposal for the Model Cities Urban Renewal Area, being the area beginning at the northwest corner of Front Street and Spring Garden Street, including the twenty-ninth amendment to the urban renewal plan and the twenty-seventh amendment to the relocation plan, which provides, inter alia, for the additional land acquisition of approximately 11 properties for residential and related uses; the provision of certain relocation services, as required by law, and declaring that condemnation is not imminent with respect to the project. And our first two witnesses are Michael Koonce and Deborah McColloch. (Witness approached witness table.) MS. McCOLLOCH: Good afternoon.
Good afternoon. Kindly identify yourself for the record. 130 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. MS. McCOLLOCH: I'm Deborah McColloch, Acting Director of Housing. I have copies of my testimony.
I think it has already been distributed. MS. McCOLLOCH: Fine. I wasn't sure. Good afternoon, Council President Verna and members of the Rules Committee. My name is Deborah McColloch and I'm Acting Director of the Office of Housing and Community Development. I am here today to testify on Bill No. 080437, which was introduced by Councilmember Clarke on May 1, 2008 and would authorize the Redevelopment Authority to acquire 11 properties in Strawberry Mansion. Since January, as part of the Fiscal Year '09 budget and preparation of the NTI Program Statement and Budget, this Administration has sought a full accounting of the NTI program expenditures. In the process, we have discovered program oversight, project 131 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. management and accounting deficiencies. While at this time we are not prepared to support Bill 080437, we look forward to collaborating with the Council as we work through the process of a preliminary audit and financial reconciliation of NTI acquisition funds. Until the Redevelopment Authority completes this preliminary audit, any additional acquisitions further increase the City's potential financial liability. We look forward to resolving this issue as quickly as possible so as to continue our support for this and other critical redevelopment projects. Thank you for allowing me to testify today. I'm happy to answer any questions.
So your request is? MS. McCOLLOCH: We are not supporting the bill moving forward.
The Chair recognizes Councilman Greenlee. 132 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc.
Thank you, Madam President. Ms. McColloch, on these particular properties, are you aware of any problem at all? I mean, I know your general statement, but I assume these things have been worked on for a while. Are you aware of any particular problem with these properties, this particular acquisition -- MS. McCOLLOCH: No. 13
-- in and of itself? MS. McCOLLOCH: It and of itself, there are no particular issues with this acquisition or this development. It's that continuing to acquire properties before we've completed the financial reconciliation would only further deepen the City's potential liability.
All right. I appreciate that, but I just want to get on record there's nothing 133 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. wrong with this particular acquisition, in and of itself. MS. McCOLLOCH: Not that we know of, because the audit has not been conducted yet.
Thank you, Madam President. Good morning, Ms. McColloch. MS. McCOLLOCH: Good morning, Councilman.
Let's talk about the two projects in question. One project, the one at 10th Street, which is known as the Apollo housing -- part of the Apollo housing project? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
It's my understanding -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- that the development, the actual building of the structures, the money for 134 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. that development will come from money that was gotten as a result of the Apollo development agreement where Temple University contributed money in an agreement that was reached with then-Councilman Street in the community to provide funding to build affordable housing? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes. The development funds for the proposed development would be supported by the Temple-Apollo money.
So that's not City money? MS. McCOLLOCH: That's not City money. Well, it's City money now because it's now been turned over to the City, but its source was the Temple-Apollo agreement.
So would you say that the ability to acquire these sites would allow us to leverage a million and a half dollars of private money -- 135 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
And that traditionally doesn't happen. We normally depend on essentially all government funding. MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
Right? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes. I mean, the private funding we normally have is private mortgages for homeowners.
That's the individuals. That's not our money. MS. McCOLLOCH: Correct.
So this is an abnormal deal where we actually have an outside source contributing to affordable housing? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
And that's a good thing? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes. 136 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc.
All right. Okay. Have you had any conversations with representatives from the local community development corporation or the consultant and State Senator Shirley Kitchen on this project? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
And what was your -- MS. McCOLLOCH: I've had many conversations with them. I've been working with them to develop a development plan that would create some commercial space, some market-rate units and some affordable housing units.
And at that meeting -- and I wasn't actually in that meeting, but at the conclusion of that meeting, was it understood that Senator Kitchen was going to get some dollars outside of the City's -- I'm sorry. I'm 137 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. wrong. There were some dollars outside of the 5th District acquisition funding, then some City Significant dollars that were going into the project. MS. McCOLLOCH: I'm not sure -- I'm trying to understand your question, but the NTI bond proceeds that were to be committed to this acquisition that -- we're not withdrawing that -- were City Significant funding, City Significant.
And a portion, 300,000, of 5th District dollars, right? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes; a piece of 5th District, a piece of City Significant.
And at the conclusion of that meeting, was it understood and was it told to Senator Kitchen and the participants in that meeting that that's something that we will be proceeding on? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
Okay. The 138 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. other project, 31st Street, which is in Strawberry Mansion? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
There is a developer, the Friends Rehab, to develop -- MS. McCOLLOCH: Friends Rehab Program, yes.
-- affordable housing in Strawberry Mansion. Has the City committed funding to that particular development? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
And the City sent letters to PHFA or did whatever we do when we support a development to PHFA as one of the priority projects in the past? MS. McCOLLOCH: The City sent letters indicating the commitment of funds to the development. There are HOME funds committed and Housing Trust funds committed. This is simply to request that this be postponed until the audit 139 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. could be completed.
I understand what you're requesting. Did we walk that site, actually myself included, two, three times, along with PHFA staff? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
To your knowledge, have we had community meetings, any of which you've attended and staff members, in support of the Strawberry Mansion housing plan which this was a part of? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
All right. So you would -- MS. McCOLLOCH: Some of which I attended, yes.
So you would say that this was something that we, the City, was interested in and got a sense that the community was very supportive of this? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes. 140 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc.
The developer has, to my understanding, submitted at least twice for funding from PHFA? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
And they are prepared to submit this round for NRI dollars, which is a variation of Homeownership Choice? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
And if they cannot show site control for this particular development, will it decrease the chances of them receiving funding? MS. McCOLLOCH: I believe so.
So if we do not move this forward today, would they not be able to submit their application, show any levels of site control for the properties that are in this bill? MS. McCOLLOCH: The City will not be able to demonstrate site control for the application that's due in July, that is correct. 141 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc.
Thank you. Thank you, Ms. McColloch. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. Any further questions or comments? (No response.)
Thank you very much, Ms. McColloch. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Please approach the witness table. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Good afternoon. Kindly identify yourself for the record.
My name is Myong Duck Yoon. I'm at the 2010 North 10th 142 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. Street on the property. MR. McCONEGHY: Good morning, Madam Chairman. Good morning, members. I'm Gerald McConeghy. I represent Mrs. Yoon. I'm her personal counsel, and she has asked me to address Council as to her issues and concerns. On the bill before you there's two sets of properties, as Councilman Clarke mentioned. One of these sets of properties is on North 10th Street. Mrs. Yoon owns all of those properties. They're contiguous and there's one sort of continuous structure on those properties. She operates an ongoing and vibrant retail food market in the property at 2010-2018 North 10th Street and she's operated that for 14 years, and before that there was another person that owned the store and operated a grocery store. Mrs. Yoon has been approached by various groups over the last couple 143 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. years asking about development and redevelopment and so on. She herself has been quite interested in trying to develop the area and improve the appearance of the area. Three of her four buildings are not put to good use at this point. There is a laundromat that went out of business and it's closed. There is a garage that's used for storage and there was another empty building. So she's quite anxious to do something. In November and December of 2006, she worked with an architectural firm to try to set up a plan for building multiple housing on the site, and we got the plans and we received estimates. Since that time, we have been trying to work with the southern neighbors, the southern property owners; that is, the property owner that owns the property on 10th Street and Norris, which is just south of ours, and also with the property owner to the north of us that owns the properties up to Diamond Street. We have 144 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. not been able to reach any type of an agreement as to a global redevelopment, but it's not for lack of trying on our part. Mrs. Yoon has access to private funds, but she's reluctant to get involved with redevelopment if the other areas contiguous to her, and including the properties in the back on Alder Street, are not going to be redeveloped. Here before the Council is a proposal to take just one piece of land, this piece in the middle that belongs to Mrs. Yoon, and give that to the Redevelopment Authority. What about all the other land on the whole block? How can you redevelop an area and take just one little piece in the middle? Hence, we believe that the ordinance at this point and the proposal is premature. We're very willing to work with the Redevelopment Authority and try to work with those other parties that have properties contiguous to us and to try to 145 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. work out a plan for redevelopment that meets the goals of the City and the Redevelopment Authority. And we would request that Council defeat this ordinance at this time and we will work with the Redevelopment Authority, as I said, to try to accomplish the goals that Councilman Clarke has set. I have nothing further. Thank you.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam President. Good morning. MR. McCONEGHY: Good morning, sir.
Can you give me the dates again? You said you had selected an architect to -- MR. McCONEGHY: That was November and December of 2006. 146 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc.
The building in question or the potential building that, if things worked out correctly, you would have built, are they zoned residential or are they parcels? MR. McCONEGHY: The whole area is zoned G-2 at this time.
So any development of a residential nature would have required zoning? MR. McCONEGHY: Definitely, sir.
Had you reached out to any of the local community groups or local residents to talk about your proposal since it would have required zoning; therefore, required some level of community support? MR. McCONEGHY: We talked with 147 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. the local community group about redeveloping, and the plan that they had proposed was that Mrs. Yoon --
The plan that Mrs. Yoon proposed, you talked to them, to the community, about that proposal, the 2006? MR. McCONEGHY: We talked to our southern neighbors and our northern neighbors. We did not talk to the community groups.
Well, who are your southern neighbors? MR. McCONEGHY: Community Outreach is the name of the group that owns the property to our south.
Does somebody live there? MR. McCONEGHY: No. It's vacant land, sir.
So there's nobody there physically? MR. McCONEGHY: Correct.
The way 148 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. your testimony is giving the impression that you're actually talking to people who live in that community. What you did, you talked to the property owners of vacant land? MR. McCONEGHY: Yes. The property owners do happen to live in the community and they're patrons of her store and they talk frequently, and we have met with them. They are interested, they say, they have told us, in setting up either a church or a school on that property.
And the name of the group again is Community? MR. McCONEGHY: Community Outreach.
The properties in question, to your knowledge, how long have they been vacant? 149 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. MR. McCONEGHY: I'm sorry, sir?
The properties in question, how long have they been vacant? MR. McCONEGHY: How long have they been what?
Vacant. MR. McCONEGHY: The grocery store has been vacant probably for about four or five years. It was -- I'm sorry. I meant the laundromat has been vacant for about four or five years. At the local housing, they had set up their own laundry facilities or something, so the business just died and it was closed up. So that's been vacant about four or five years. The garage has always been in use, but it's only in use for storage. And then there's another building in the middle that's been vacant for as long as she's owned it, and she uses it for storage of some stuff from her store.
As long as 150 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. how long? MR. McCONEGHY: That would be about years it's not been used. 5
Fourteen 6 years it's been vacant? 7 MR. McCONEGHY: Yes, sir. 8
And the 9 vacant lots on both sides of the 10 property, Mrs. Yoon's property, have been 11 vacant for approximately how long? 12 MR. McCONEGHY: I can't answer 13 that. I don't know. 14
You don't know? MR. McCONEGHY: Before my time anyway. More than seven years.
So those properties, you say a minimum four years ago, five, six maybe, best case, have been vacant for at least more than four or five, six years and the adjacent properties have probably been vacant for double-digit years, ten years or more, and one you said has been vacant for 14 151 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. years? MR. McCONEGHY: To my knowledge, yes.
That particular community has over the last few years experienced significant development, would you say? MR. McCONEGHY: Yes, sir, definitely.
So, therefore, wouldn't you think that if someone -- I don't want to imply that you're not attempting to. Wouldn't you say that there was a stronger possibility of developing that land than in other parts of North Philadelphia where there's not necessarily as much development? If somebody aggressively sought to develop that site, that probably could have happened? MR. McCONEGHY: Yes, that's true. That's why she's been trying to develop it.
But she 152 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. wasn't able to do it. Okay. MR. McCONEGHY: The neighbor to the north, sir, has had their property for sale for a long time and they've been trying to sell it and they've also been discussing with us about developing the property.
Okay. We're going to actually have some residents who live a block away that will be talking to the condition of that, because I'm very familiar with this site and I don't recall, first of all, a "for sale" sign on the northern part. I do recall a sale sign on the southern part that came up shortly after the Redevelopment sent notice that we're interested in the property, but all right. MR. McCONEGHY: I've never seen a sale sign on the southern part, sir. They tell me it's not for sale, but on the northern part, there has been long --
I'm sorry. 153 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. You're right. It is the northern part. I'm sorry. My fault. You're right. I'm a little turned around. Okay. But you have not met with any of the local residents who actually live there on any potential development since 2006, knowing that you -- MR. McCONEGHY: Well, we met with the group that has been working with Shirley Kitchen, and we discussed some things with them, but the proposals that they had working through their -- I believe he was an architect, was that Mrs. Yoon surrender her property and then they go into some type of community ownership with Mrs. Yoon of a strip that's on Diamond Street. We were not agreeable to surrendering our property. We wanted to develop our property.
My question is, have you talked to the local community about what you propose since 2006? 154 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. MR. McCONEGHY: No, sir, not other than the property owners that I mentioned.
Okay. All right. Thank you. MR. McCONEGHY: Any further questions?
I beg your pardon? MR. McCONEGHY: Any further questions of me?
Thank you. Do we have anyone else to testify? 155 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Whoever is testifying, please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon, Madam President and to members of the Rules Committee. My name is Lamar Wilson and I'm the principal of Wilson Associates. I'm a local development consultant with a practice in community development, with a focus on affordable housing and neighborhood revitalization. First of all, I'm here in support of the ordinance. In 2005, I was retained by Metamorphosis Community Development Corporation, a three-year-old neighborhood-based, non-profit organization serving the North Philadelphia community, bounded generally by Broad, 10th, Norris and York Streets, to assist them in completing pre-development activities for the 156 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. eventual redevelopment of this largely vacant block in North Philadelphia bounded by Diamond, 10th, Norris and Alder Streets. In sponsoring this project at 10th and Diamond, Metamorphosis proposes residential uses as the predominant use. Current plans call for approximately 35 mixed-income homeownership units, with a possibility of small-scale neighborhood convenience retail uses. Preliminary site and unit design plans, which have been completed, Metamorphosis is presently in early discussions with potential developers experienced in this type of development, the joint venture, given that Metamorphosis does not have any real estate development experience. We, in conjunction with a developer that we will select through a competitive RFQ, request for qualifications, initially and then subsequently a request for proposals process, we're going to look into the 157 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. possibilities of, in addition to the Temple-Apollo funds that have been committed to this site, other resources through the local Housing Trust Fund, through PHFA's NRI program, which is a component, as you know, of the Homeownership Choice Program. One of the goals of this single-family sales housing project is to encourage young families who have grown up in this area and moved away to pursue educational and/or career opportunities to move back to the community. That's one of Metamorphosis' primary goals here. Metamorphosis believes that the ability to attract this market of potential home buyers is a function of having high-quality, affordable, modern homes on a site, with access to a broader area by way of the seven regional rail lines that service the Temple University Station one block away at 9th and Berks. In addition, the project is part of a parallel process to identify 158 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. transit-oriented development opportunities around the Temple Regional Rail Station. On both the development project and on the transit-oriented development project, we've been working very closely with City Councilman Clarke's office, with State Senator Shirley Kitchen's office and with the surrounding community. I'd like to just say in terms of the previous testimony, the owners of the site that's in question here, I personally met with them on at least two occasions and before I got involved in this project, there was at least an understanding or at least a possibility that the existing owners of the convenience store might participate in the development of this overall development. So initially when the Redevelopment Authority responded to the request of the community to acquire all the other sites but for the convenience 159 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. store site and the adjacent properties, there was a clear, at least a hope, that there might be a possibility of the existing owner and the neighborhood organization coordinating their activities together. We've engaged a professional architect. We've got a market analysis.
And the focus was to sort of redo effectively as we plan new housing on that site, townhouses and condos, that we would focus on the northern portion of the site, the portion of the site that fronts on Diamond, as perhaps a more realistic site for a convenience store, grocery, sit-down, family-oriented restaurant in a much higher quality product to that community, integrated with not only the housing development on this particular site but also the surrounding community. And I know this is not the forum for kind of a debate in terms of what that meeting was about, but what I can tell you is that we reached 160 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. out as Metamorphosis and my representative -- being a representative of Metamorphosis, we reached out to figure out if there's an opportunity for the owners of that site to work with us, and they essentially indicated, as I think they indicated here, that they were going to pursue some of their own plans, they were going to bring in their own architect and essentially try to develop their site within the existing site or existing footprint versus a notion of trying to relocate the retail to a portion of the site that seemed to make much more sense from a land use standpoint. So there are representatives of Metamorphosis here, but I just wanted to mention that, again, my role here is to sort of work with the organization. I've been working with the RDA, with OHCD and the Planning Commission over a period of two or three years to, again, move this project forward to sort of position it to 161 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. acquire the necessary resources, starting with the land and then moving forward with the resource side. One other point and then I'm going to turn it over to my client. One of the important reasons for having site control, overall site control for this site, we've conducted a Phase 1 environmental analysis about a year and a half ago. As you know, a Phase 1 is a very early analysis. You look at records and figure out whether there are any particular potential environmental hazards based on previous uses and based on the records review of all the uses over time. It was discovered that there's potential for asbestos, lead in soil, lead paint, and other environmental hazards. In order for us to sort of refine our cost estimates on the development site, we need to do a Phase 2 analysis and really figure out what is happening much more subsurface through testing. We're not authorized, and our 162 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. conversation with the RDA, we understand the legal limits. We are not authorized to go on the site and perform the environmental Phase 2 with our environmental engineer until and unless we have site control of the entire site. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Thank you. Any questions or comments from members of the Committee of this witness? (No response.)
Good morning, Madam Chairman, Councilmembers. My name is Sam Dowling. I'm President of Metamorphosis Community Development Corporation. Normally my voice is a lot more boomery than this and you can hear me 163 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. easier. As we said, what Metamorphosis is trying to do in a sector of North Philadelphia is impacted by certain elements that are hurting the community. We're trying to bring empowerment to the community through our organization for education and commercial use, as well as bringing senior citizens into the 21st century. We have done certain things in our short time. We have developed a computer school, which we have after-school programs. We have adult searching, computers for job search and what-have-you. I say this to say that in looking to be ongoing in our organization, the 10th Street project was looked at a while ago. As Mr. Wilson said, we tried to include the only person that was there, who was a store. In our endeavor to include them, we shared with them some of the blueprints. They seemed 164 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. acceptable at first. Then, as you said, in '06 all of the sudden they decided to go their separate ways. We would truly appreciate the Council consideration on this project of ours and this bill. And I'm not going to say too much more. I can answer any questions you have.
Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record.
Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Dowling, I know that you've been a resident in that area a block or so away. 165 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc.
And I didn't ask you to give your age, but to your knowledge, the vacant land, how long has that land been vacant, both on the north and the south side of the building, the current building?
The land that we're speaking of has been vacant for 12 years. 13
Thirty 18 years. And on numerous occasions I think 19 that you probably called my office -- I 20 can actually remember you calling me telling me that somebody has short dumped on the lot, can I please send somebody out from the City to pick up the debris and cut the weeds that were on the lot.
The lot 166 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. basically -- the only exterior, outside of the store, the only exterior improvements to that ground has been simply blacktopping a portion of the properties.
There's been no 9 rush out there. The City has cut the grass in most cases.
Other than that, there's been just shudas (ph), as we call the youth. She has blacktopped a portion of the property she acquired. There's been no endeavor to improve that property at no time.
Madam President, I'm a member of Metamorphosis. My name is Ronald Armour. And certainly with all the 167 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. development that has taken place in North Central Philadelphia, we're very fortunate. You heard the numbers that was given out, 30 years of vacancy. We certainly -- we're going to co-exist, and we certainly are going to co-exist. At the early stages of this idea bringing it into a reality of stages, we extended the invitation to the businessperson. That person attended the meeting there. And Metamorphosis is all about bringing the transition, because it means transition. We included the owner of the business to come to our meetings. She came to one meeting. And even saying that, even with all development and her plan, it still can be worked out. And Metamorphosis' organization is about bringing the businesspeople, the community itself together to make sure that this initiative comes into existence. There's no problem, there's no 25 situation in the community in the years 168 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. that we're in now and the development that's taking place in our wonderful City of Philadelphia, we can resolve this. So the only thing what we're saying to the businessperson, once again, attend our meetings. And there's something else that was said here in this Chambers today that is a key point. It is our job, Metamorphosis' job, to make sure that everyone in that community is informed with the flyers and things so they can be a part of it, so now you have a community development. And I would say to the businessperson behind me, once again, we are going to co-exist. We are not -- I'm certainly not suggesting or Metamorphosis has never suggested to just take someone's property, because we've been there a long time. But we are saying, now is the time, let us come together, put all the resources available and this thing can be a wonderful project. Not only will the community benefit by it, 169 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. but the City itself will benefit by it, too. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Any questions or comments for this group? (No response.)
Thank you. Do we have anyone else to testify? (Witness approached witness table.)
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is Alfred Laurie, Jr. I'm also a member of Metamorphosis organization. I also lived in that community for 32 years, and in 32 years in that area, which I seen a lot of 170 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. development, the community is starting to grow. Outside there's still just one eyesore in the community, which I'm talking about the 10th Street. I've been there 32 years. I seen change. At one time it used to be a candy store at one time. Then it transferred over, grocery store, laundromat, but still there's no 10 improvement in that area. I also served in Vietnam, come back to the states side. I'm tired of seeing slum in the community. Community need to grow, just like the people in the community need to grow to expand, to achieve. This is what I'm looking for. That's all I have to say.
Thank you. Thank you. Any questions or comments? (No response.)
Thank you very much, sir. We appreciate your coming in to testify.
Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Seeing no one, I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 8 080469. MR. McPHERSON: An ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by State Road, Poquessing Creek, the Delaware River and Grant Avenue. (Witness approached witness table.)
Good afternoon, Chairman Verna and members of the Rules Committee. I am William Kramer, Division Director of the Development Division of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here today to testify 172 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. on Bill No. 080469, which was introduced into City Council May 8, 2008. This bill will amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning of certain areas of land bounded by State Road, Poquessing Creek, the Delaware River and Grant Avenue, this land also being known as the Glen Foerd estate. The zoning will change from the existing designation of R-2 Residential to a new zoning designation of REC Recreational. The zoning change will reflect the fact that Fairmount Park is the trustee of Glen Foerd. The City Planning Commission will consider Bill No. 080469 at its meeting of June 17, 2008 and our recommendation will be delivered shortly thereafter. The Planning Commission staff is recommending approval for this zoning change to the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. This is the conclusion of my testimony. I will be happy to answer any 173 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. questions of the Committee.
Good afternoon, Council President Verna. Mark Focht, Executive Director of Fairmount Park. Members of the Committee, I am pleased to appear before you today on behalf of Fairmount Park in support of Council Bill No. 080469 to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designation of a parcel of land located at the confluence of the Delaware River and the Poquessing Creek, commonly referred to as Glen Foerd, from R-2 Residential to REC Recreational. Before I describe the purpose of the bill, it's important to provide you with a brief history of the property. 174 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. Glen Foerd was a private residential estate until 1971 when the property was conveyed to the Lutheran Church and America's trustee. In 1984, the City of Philadelphia Fairmount Park Commission was appointed as substitute trustee of Glen Foerd by the Orphans Court. In 1985, City Council authorized acceptance of the property by the City in the name of the Fairmount Park Commission. Since 1985, the property has been successfully managed and maintained through a lease with the Glen Foerd Conservation Corporation, whose members are made up of representatives of the East Torresdale Civic Association and the community surrounding the property. Glen Foerd is host to special events that offset the cost of maintaining and preserving this historic structure and grounds. The historic mansion and museum is available for scheduled tours and community events, and the grounds are open and used by the 175 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. community for passive recreation. Glen Foerd has remained zoned R-2 Residential and is the only property within the Fairmount Park system and under the jurisdiction of Fairmount Park that is not zoned Recreational. This mismatch of zoning and use has resulted in the need for the Conservation Corporation to expend precious resources to go through the inefficient process of acquiring a series of permits and variances for things such as signage, parking and other uses which are in accordance with our mission and are needed to operate and maintain the estate. Rezoning the property from R-2 Residential to Recreational will make the zoning designation at Glen Foerd, number one, consistent with the zoning for the rest of the Fairmount Park system; two, appropriate for the use of property; and, three, more efficient and effective, enable the Glen Foerd Conservation Corporation to preserve and maintain both 176 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. the structures and grounds at Glen Foerd for passive recreation, cultural and educational program, and to host events at this historic property. Fairmount Park's ten-year strategic plan completed in June 2004 requires the Park to develop and implement a property management plan to improve past management approach for our historic assets. The Fairmount Park staff takes its charge very seriously and in accordance with the strategic plan, we are striving to perform our mission more appropriately and efficiently. We believe that this zoning change will advance the goal of addressing a recommendation of the strategic plan, help the Conversation Corporation ensure the future well-being of Glen Foerd for Torresdale and Philadelphia and do so in accordance with the legal responsibility as substitute trustee. I appear before you today to support the pledge of Fairmount Park for 177 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. this legislation and respectfully ask this Committee's favorable recommendation of Bill No. 080469. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Any questions or comments from the Committee? (No response.)
I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 080491. MR. McPHERSON: Bill No. 080491 is an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Harbison Avenue, Tulip Street, Harbison Avenue, Eadom Street and Bridge Street. (Witness approached witness table. 178 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc.
Good afternoon, Chairman Verna and members of the Rules Committee. I am William Kramer, Division Director of the Development Division of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here today to testify on Bill No. 080491, which was introduced into City Council on May 15, 2008. This bill will amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Harbison Avenue, Tulip Street, former Harbison Avenue, Eadom Street and Bridge Street. The zoning will change the north portion of the existing designation of C-7 Commercial to a new zoning designation of G-2 General Industrial. The purpose of the change to G-2 General Industrial zoning is consistent with the existing use of the property and will allow the current operators to continue 179 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. operations here without the need to constantly apply for zoning variances. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission will consider Bill No. 080491 at its meeting of June 17th and the recommendation will be delivered to Council shortly thereafter. The Planning Commission staff will be recommending approval of this bill to the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. That is the conclusion of my testimony. I will be happy to answer any questions of the Committee.
Thank you. Mr. Kramer, what is the current use of this property?
It's a manufacturing and processing of dairy products. Primarily they take milk and turn it into cream cheese at this location. And this was anticipated that Harbison Avenue here would go commercial, which is why it was changed to C-7, and 180 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. this manufacturing facility remained in existence and has stayed there and has put up with being zoned C-7. So they came to us and said, Can you change us back to G-2, which is really the history of where this came from.
Great. Thank you. Any questions or comments from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Thank you, Mr. Kramer. Our final bill, I hope. Mr. McPherson, kindly read the title of Bill No. 080527. MR. McPHERSON: An ordinance 19 amending Section 14-2007 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Historic Buildings, Structures, Sites, Objects and Districts," to permit the historic designation of the public interior portion of buildings, and making technical changes, all under certain 181 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. terms and conditions. Our first panel of witnesses are John Farnham, Sam Sherman, Lewis Rosman, Gary Jastrzab and Sharon Pinkenson. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon, Council President Verna and members of the Rules Committee. I am Jonathan Farnham, the Executive Director of the Philadelphia Historical Commission. With me is Sam Sherman, the Chair of the Philadelphia Historical Commission. I am here today to testify on Bill No. 080527, which was introduced into City Council on May 22, 2008. This bill would amend the City's historic preservation ordinance, Section 14-2007 of The Philadelphia Code. 182 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. Currently, the historic preservation ordinance authorizes the Historical Commission to ensure the preservation of historically significant buildings, structures, sites, objects and districts. The Historical Commission identifies and designates buildings, structures, sites, objects and districts as historic, listing them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. It regulates their preservation through the City's building and other permitting processes. Under the current ordinance, the Historical Commission regulates the exterior envelopes of buildings and structures, as well as their sites and appurtenances. This bill would expand the Historical Commission's purview, additionally authorizing it to designate and regulate interior portions of buildings and structures that are or were designed to be customarily open or accessible to the public by invitation or otherwise. 183 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. More than any other American city, Philadelphia is endowed --
Excuse me. Could you please slow down just a little bit so that we can take this all in.
Certainly. More than any other American city, Philadelphia is endowed with a wealth of irreplaceable historic treasures. As the Historical Commission preserves Philadelphia's past and safeguards its unique heritage and treasures, it fosters civic pride, provides educational opportunities, promotes healthy and sustainable communities, enhances property values and attracts new residents, businesses and tourists. Philadelphia's historic treasures not only document its past, but also propel its 21st century economy. Like the historic buildings, structures, sites, objects and districts that the Historical Commission already protects, the public has a vested 184 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. interest in the preservation of historically significant publicly accessible interior spaces, which have great value as both reminders of our past and as economic engines for our future. Preservation agencies in many large American cities, including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston, San Francisco and Washington, DC, have exercised similar authorities over interiors, in some cases for decades, and have successfully protected both the public's interest in historic resources and the rights of private property owners. The Chair, Mr. Sherman, and I appreciate this effort to enhance the Commission's ability to protect historic resources and we support Bill 080427 in principle. However, the Chair and I cannot speak for the Historical Commission itself, the 14-member body, which has not had an opportunity to assess the bill and issue an official position on it. The Historical 185 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. Commission was unaware of the bill's impending introduction when it last met on May 9th, and moreover, neither the final text of the bill nor a thorough analysis of it was available for distribution to the Historical Commission for its upcoming meeting on June 13th, this Friday. Nonetheless, the Historical Commission will discuss the bill in executive session at that meeting on June 13th. Significant questions about the bill remain open, especially those regarding developing appropriate designation and regulation procedures and re-allocating the Commission's resources. The Historical Commission will review this bill and may or may not take an official position on it at its June 13th meeting this Friday. If it delays making a final decision on this bill to collect additional information, undertake additional analyses or hold public discussions, it would not have another opportunity to take an official position 186 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. until July 11th, its next monthly meeting. Of course, the Historical Commission will promptly report on its deliberations to this Committee. This concludes my testimony. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today and we would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
I'm sorry. When did you say that the Commission would be meeting?
It will discuss this bill in executive session at that meeting, but the meeting materials went out to the Commission members, were sent to the Commission members last week before we had the final version or the proposed changes to the language available, and we have been sending those electronically to the Commission members 187 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. and will continue to do so if it continues to change. So the Commission members will have some material before them to review prior to the meeting, albeit they'll only have a few days to review it. They will hold a discussion, but they won't have the advantage of a comprehensive analysis from the staff of the Historical Commission and others at that meeting. It's just too short a time for us to prepare that for them.
So your consideration will be made in August? The vote will be taken by the Commission in August?
Well, I think the Commission itself will decide how it wants to deliberate on this issue. It will have an opportunity to come to a conclusion this Friday, June 13th, but as I say, I don't know that they have all the information they need to reach a conclusion that soon. Their next opportunity would be Friday, July 11th, 188 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. will be the next monthly meeting of the Commission.
Mr. Farnham, although I realize that the Historic Commission has not yet met to consider this bill and make any recommendations, your testimony seems somewhat questionable. Although you support it in principle, you state you have significant questions about the bill. Have you had a chance, because I certainly have not, had a chance to review the amendments that Councilman Green intends to offer today, and if so, do you have any comments on those amendments?
Well, I have not seen those amendments in writing, but they have been conveyed --
Dr. Farnham, 189 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. I'd just like to clarify something about your testimony. Isn't it true that since this bill was introduced three weeks ago, members of my staff have been communicating with you on almost a daily basis? They have had numerous meetings with you and the Law Department to discuss the amendments. I just want to be clear for the record that the amended version of the bill represents the collaborative efforts between my office, the Historical Commission staff and the Law Department.
Okay. Thank you for the point of information, Madam President.
Councilman Green, maybe it would be a nice gesture to offer a copy of the amendments --
He has them, Madam President. 190 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc.
Well, I have the amendments as of Monday. I understood there was --
Yes, then I do have what's the latest version. Yes, I have that before me.
Well, I'm sure you've had a chance to review the amendments. Do you have any comments about the amendments as being proposed today?
Yes. The amendments that are proposed and have been proposed since the bill was introduced do address the concerns that the staff of the Historical Commission raised and also the attorney in the Law Department who represents the Historical Commission raised. I have not discussed one particular section with my attorney. 191 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. I didn't have a chance to in the last day, but -- and I'm not here to comment on the legality of it. I'm not an attorney, but from an Historical Commission process perspective, I think that they do address the primary concerns raised by the staff of the Commission.
Thank you, Madam President. Actually, the question -- because we're talking on your question about the time and when it might be considered. I don't know if Mr. Sherman is going to give separate testimony, because I was going to ask him as the Chair, maybe you could talk about the time frame a little better than --
I can address that. My name is Sam Sherman. I'm the Chairman of the Philadelphia Historical Commission. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak, Madam President and Councilmembers. 192 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. Yes. I was made aware of this legislation approximately three weeks ago and it was relayed to me via e-mail from John Farnham, from his office. At that time, I downloaded it and printed it and reviewed it. And I believe that was on or about May 22nd. I think that was about the day that I received it. And subsequent to that, there were either one or two amendments that had come through, or possibly just one, that I did have a chance to look at and review. My main concern is the fact that this information has been held primarily between Mr. Farnham and myself and Councilman Green and his staff and members of City Council. Although I am the Chairman of the Commission, it is, by no means, a dictatorship and I am uncomfortable with the fact that we have not as a group had a discussion about the intent and content of this legislation, as we are going to be the body that implements its rules and regulations. I 193 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. feel it necessary to have an open dialogue with members of the Commission in order to have everybody understand the implications and how it's going to impact not only our public meetings and the potential for cases coming before the Commission, but also the potential work that's going to have to be performed by the staff at the Commission itself. That being said, after reading the legislation and meeting with Councilman Green last Friday, I too do not oppose this bill in its principle, but I will not offer support of the bill 16 at this time based on the fact that I have not had the opportunity to have a discussion of the bill with the rest of the Commission members. Not to say that I will not support the bill once that vetting process has been completed, but there will be potentially unintended consequences that come out of any legislation that's passed by this body. We all know that. And what I offered to 194 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. Councilman Green was a compromise, that we take the version of the bill that he is going to present for passage and he gives the Commission the summer to take a case study, preferably a publicly held building, that what's good enough for a private property owner should be good enough for the City government, in my opinion. We take a public building and we take the bill and we apply it to a specific test case so that the staff can work through the mechanics of the bill, understand how it's to be administered and rise to the surface or bring to the surface any potential issues that may arise, because I understand that it's important to protect our interiors, but I also understand that if the issues come up after final passage of the bill, then we're coming back and we're doing amendments to the bill. I would rather have people directly affected by the implementation of the bill work it through and take a case study, and I 195 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. would hope that that will be acceptable to both Councilman Green and this Committee.
So I'm clear, Mr. Sherman, you're suggesting that when you say "take a case study," of one particular property; is that what you mean?
Well, my suggestion -- and I spoke to John Farnham about this -- is that we identify a building that would be an obvious candidate for interior designation.
How about the Boyd, just throw it off the top of my head?
But that suggestion was made, that the Boyd could be a test case, but because that's 196 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. privately owned, I didn't want to have any kind of insinuation that what we were doing as a test case could then be extrapolated into putting some restriction on the new owner. And I understand that that is the flash point of this issue right now, believe me. We move to designate the historic facade of the building. And I appreciate the intent of Councilman Green, and I'm not here arguing the nature of the bill. What I'm really arguing is the mechanical implementation of the bill as it moves forward. That's what I'm arguing.
Just for the record, Mr. Sherman used to be a committeeman in the 15th Ward and he confused me at a few meetings, too. So this isn't the first time.
Oh, 197 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. okay. Just kidding. Just kidding, sir.
The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, Madam President. I think Mr. Sherman probably answered all of the questions that I would have asked. And as a member of this Committee and as someone who has been the recipient of the Preservation Alliance award a couple years ago and whose district probably has the majority of historic buildings in the City of Philadelphia, I certainly appreciate the intent of this bill as well. My only concern was the collaboration between Mr. Farnham and staff and Councilman Green's office. Not that there's anything wrong in that collaboration, but I was not a party to that, nor was any 198 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. member of my staff. And this is an opportunity, I think, to do something that is right for the City and our historical buildings and I think it's important that when we do it, we get it right and not have to continue to come back to try to tweak it. So I would offer the suggestion to the sponsors of the bill that we should take the summer to look this bill over, and either test cases or some further discussion I think needs to be had. Unless someone could demonstrate to me that there is, aside from the Boyd, that there is some other property or building that is in imminent danger of somehow being destroyed between now and the time we get back, I'd like to know what building that might be, if there's something we can do to prevent that, but absent that, I would also suggest that we just take the summer to figure this all out. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank 199 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Good morning -- or good afternoon. Just for my own knowledge base here, having heard the testimony that the Commission members have not had a chance yet to look-see, deliberate, et cetera, I'm just curious to know of those in the audience here, how many are Commission members? (Commission member raising hand.)
Very well. What's the composition of your Board in terms of skill set?
The Historical Commission has six ex officio members, City officials, who bring skills from Department of Public Property, Licenses and Inspections, City Planning and other 200 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. offices that have direct interest, Commerce Department, and eight appointed members. Of those eight members, six are required to have specific skills or represent specific constituencies. There is an historian, an architectural historian, an architect, a developer, a representative of a community organization and a representative of a community development corporation.
Okay. What is the standard operating procedure with regards to District Councilmembers having a say in deliberations that involve historic buildings in their councilmanic district?
Well, the Historical Commission endeavors to notify the public and Councilmembers about its agenda items so that Councilpeople who have specific interest in applications appearing before the Commission certainly have an opportunity to weigh in on those, and especially regarding designations and 201 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. especially district designations, the Commission looks to involve the Councilpeople, the District Councilpeople, before those designations move forward.
And that is a standard operating procedure where at all times District Councilmembers are alerted and informed of potential action around a building in their district?
Well, yes. By e-mail to staff members, I believe that that does happen through our interested parties list. We try to have Councilpeople's staff members on that list. When we're discussing historic districts, which have greater implications, we inform the Councilpeople directly in writing. We certainly could implement a system where we do that with individual designations as well. The Commission is designating very few properties at this point, so 202 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. it's not a circumstance that we find ourselves in all that often, two or three times a year, and we'd be happy to extend the district notification procedure to the individual designations and notify you and other Councilpeople directly in writing.
Again for my own knowledge base, in the time that you've served in leadership, you and/or the Chairman, have there been any instances where the view, the perspective, the opinion, the wish of the District Councilperson takes precedent over actions of the Commission?
I can only speak to my term, which started in February, and as far as I know, that has not occurred in my tenure so far.
I've been 203 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. employed at the Historical Commission since 2002 and was Acting Director since 2005, and I know no instance in which that has occurred.
So is it safe to assume then that the good news is that actions rendered by the Commission have been acceptable to District Councilmembers? COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Not always.
For the most part since 2002? COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Not always.
I wouldn't be comfortable saying that it would be acceptable, but if lack of complaint or lack of phone call is any indication, I would assume that we've been doing what we're supposed to be doing.
Okay. With regards to this particular bill -- or in your mission statement someplace, 204 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. you're very clear about -- you get into the historic building structure, object of land, period. Any considerations ever given to size of a historic piece as a factor when seeking to take action on anything?
No. The Philadelphia Historical Commission within the historic preservation ordinance 11 determines whether or not a property is historically significant and worthy of designation using ten criteria that are laid out explicitly in the ordinance.
And the property or anything to be designated, building, structure, site, object or district, must meet at least one of those criteria before it can be designated. And the Historical Commission holds at least two public meetings -- in the case of districts, usually many more than two -- to discuss precisely that, whether or not the structure or site proposed for 205 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. designation in fact meets one or more of those designation criteria, and it's advised by an expert committee as well.
Okay. All right, then. Thank you for your testimony. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Jones.
First of all, thank you, Madam Chairman, for appointing me to this Committee one day and one day only. When it sunsets, I will respectfully not do this again. But while I'm here, I'm going to say something. Is it not -- and good afternoon. Is it not true that at the, I want to say, Conversational Hall in this building in City Hall was at one point covered over and split into office space with low-hanging ceilings and kind of art 206 6/11/08 - RULES - BILL 080080, etc. deco design to increase the amount of office space --
-- at one point, and then we discovered its beauty and decided to revert it back to its original character?