I assume that you wouldn't know what funds are these amounts to be budgeted? Where would they -- where would we 112 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 budget them? Where would the money come from. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: No, I do not.
Councilman DiCicco, your light's been on. Go ahead. The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco.
Thank you, Madam President. And good morning -- or good afternoon. And thank you for your testimony. It's quite thorough, and I do appreciate your response. Assuming we had money to hire the 160 police officers -- which, as the Council President was alluding to, there is no money in our Five-Year Plan to do that -- how long would it take to hire the 160 police officers that would be specific to this entertainment district? Because we're still needing to hire other police officers. As police officers retire 113 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 or leave service, there's always that need to fill those positions to keep our police personnel at a certain level for all other issues aside from casinos. So that becomes an additional 160 or so, so you have to kind of add 'em both together, I guess. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: Yeah, certainly that's what we would do. And, you know, without being able to have a crystal ball here and guess, I would say that with our recent recruitment drive, we would probably be able to do that in a timely enough fashion. To be very frank with you, that wouldn't be my concern. The training itself takes approximately seven months once hired. And then the training to do this particular kind of work would take, in my guesstimate, several weeks more.
I'm 114 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 sorry. I don't mean to interrupt.
But do you mind explaining how the training would be different from the regular policeman's training? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: It's not that it would be different; it would be focused. And we all know that we have a traffic district that works in this city. And certainly, our district police officers capably handle traffic. But when you have situations of very specific needs, it is better to have them trained by our traffic district so that they understand the concept of pulling traffic and opening up thoroughfares that need to be open. And there are certain skills that we would train these officers to have. Perimeter crime probably wouldn't require much except for 115 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 learning to ride the bikes, because the vast majority of the perimeter crime has always been envisioned to be bike officers. I've spoken to many of these community groups, and they all understand that that would be the way to handle our problem. And then, thirdly, the issue of crowd or pedestrian traffic will, quite frankly, depend on the location and whether or not we have people, for example, attempting to cross Delaware Valley and whether we have events at the venue that will require us to have a crowd-control issue. And so, while the training will be after that, which they get as basic police officers, I think that from talking to other jurisdictions that have these facilities, they have dedicated officers who understand the dynamic of having a gaming facility, and I would think that we would be remiss if we didn't train the officers 116 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 to do all three of those. And I'm not talking about extensive -- I'm not saying they're going to be to be in the academy another six months, but I would think two or three additional weeks would be required to have them ready.
Thank you very much. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: Mm-hmm.
Thank you again. I just want to go back to the issue of responsibility of police, Philadelphia police versus State police. I'm a little bit confused on this. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: Okay.
The casinos that I've been in, particularly in Atlantic City, where there's either valet parking or public parking garages that are attached to the facility, one 117 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 can exit his or her vehicle, walk through the parking garage, enter a set of doors, and literally be in the casino. Tropicana is a perfect example. If you've ever been there, it's top level, you walk in, and you're immediately in a forum, if you will, of restaurants and shops that ultimately are -- (Council President Verna advises Councilman DiCicco that Mayor Nutter has just arrived.)
Okay. I'll just ask this one question and then I'll hold the others. -- that ultimately are connected by difference kinds of corridors that lead you into the casino floor. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: Yes.
So I'm kind of taking a little bit broader view of this. So in effect, all of the 118 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 amenities or ancillary businesses that are involved with the casino all eventually lead onto the casino floor 'cause that's the whole purpose of why they're building that conglomeration. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: Correct.
Are you saying, then, as an example, that the parking garages or parking lots would not be the responsibility of the State police; they would be the responsibility -- and I'm not trying to split hairs here, but I'm trying to figure out, where do you decide whose jurisdiction begins at what point and ends at the other point? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: I -- let me say this. We've had the discussion with the State police and the State police have made it very clear that the gaming floor is exactly that. And unless the additional facility leads directly from the gaming 119 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 floor, that it would be the ultimate responsibility of local police. However, you know, let me be also fair about this. The discussions, as you know, since you've discussed how other gaming facilities do this, is the number of private security that are used within the area is usually the responsibility of that facility. And there have been expectations that that number would certainly suffice. I would expect that we would have some patrol need within the parking facilities, yes. Another reason for the bike patrols.
I have a couple more questions, but I understand the Mayor is here, and I will hold off on any further questions. And if you don't mind, would you please kind of stick around. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: Yeah, sure. 120 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 (Applause.)
Thank you. MR. McPHERSON: The next witness is the Mayor of the City of Philadelphia.
Good afternoon and welcome, Mr. Mayor. (Applause.)
Good afternoon, Madam President, members of this committee, Councilman DiCicco, Councilman Greenlee, and I see Councilman Jones here as well. My name is Michael A. Nutter, N-U-T-T-E-R, Mayor of the City of Philadelphia. (Laughter.)
You are supposed to identify yourself for the record, right? I do that a couple of times. Madam President and members of the committee and members of City Council, thank you for this extraordinary opportunity to come and share some thoughts with regard to 121 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 this particular hearing on what is generally known as the Foxwoods Casino. I wish to make four basic points. I want to provide some clarity as to where we are at this moment. As you well know, there has been a significant amount of information, misinformation, back-room conversations, and discussion with regard to this project. I think it's very important that we get some facts out on the table. First and foremost, I want to applaud this City Council and specifically Councilman DiCicco for his -- (Applause.)
-- Councilman DiCicco and the many members of this Council who have taken this issue very seriously. They've examined it in a forthright, thought-provoking, 122 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 in-depth, and comprehensive fashion. There have been two hearings to date; today makes the third. It's my understanding that in about another ten days or so, there will be a fourth. A tremendous amount of factual information has been placed on this record here in City Council, and I think that this information will help all of us in the decision-making process. And so with that in mind, the first point that I'd like to make is that I have not stated opposition to casinos in Philadelphia, but based on the information that has come forward thus far from these hearings and other sources, it is clear -- and I want to be very direct about this. It is clear that the proposed Foxwoods site is the wrong site for Philadelphia and for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. (Applause.) 123 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 (Cheers.)
Second -- and I will go into those reasons subsequent and you will hear other testimony certainly in the course of the day with much more specificity. The second point I'd like to make is that in light of the recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling, there are larger issues now here at stake in light of that particular ruling similar to the issues that were taken up with the other proposed casino site in a different manner. But the most recently ruling, I believe, goes to the heart and soul of what it is that we do, all 18 of us, on a daily basis, which is to do our best to represent our constituents, run the City of Philadelphia in a forthright, open, and transparent fashion. (Applause.)
That the 18 of 124 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 us have taken an oath to not only uphold the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, but also, near and dear to our collective hearts, is the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter. We are a city of the first class, we have a responsibility and an obligation to protect the best interests of the citizens of this city, and what has happened in the past few days is that the long arm of the judicial branch has reached into this City Council and snatched out this Council's will and ability and political responsibility to represent the interests of the citizens of this city, disrupting a legislative process that was in progress. And here we sit, trying to get information about a project that could have potentially enormous impact on the City of Philadelphia. And that process, at least as it relates to the 125 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 court, seeks to stop this Council from its rightful responsibility to the citizens of this city. And so, therefore, I would say again, thank you very much, even in light of the actions from the other day, for continuing these hearings. They are important, we are getting information that we need to try to make the best possible decisions that we can. But I would only suggest to you that the action that was taken and the ruling in this particular matter have potentially far-reaching impact on the future governance of this city and that somehow, some way, in contradiction to our responsibilities under the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court continues to seek to put its judgment in place of the legislative and executive branches here in the City while we're in the middle of 126 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 making decisions. No one was holding up anything; the process was ongoing. And my concern is for the future proper operations of the City of Philadelphia. The third point is, the City Planning Commission has made approval for what is characterized as Phase I of what has been laid out to the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board as a three-phase project. Only Phase I has been approved. There are -- and you will hear these concerns later. For any number of reasons, there are very serious concerns, since only Phase I has been approved, as to what the future will bring for Phases II and III. My deep concern, as mayor of this city, is that the City of Philadelphia not end up with what is charactered as a slot box, that there 127 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 is virtually a warehouse sitting at a location with 3,000 machines in it, and that's all that ends up coming out of this process. If... if... if we are to have gaming in Philadelphia, there is a way to do it, there is a way to do it right, that works for the citizens of this city, that works for the citizens of this Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and does not leave us with what has been characterized as a slot box. That doesn't serve anyone's interests at all. (Applause.) (Cheers.)
When you look at the issue of traffic, some have characterized this as, Well, you know, there will be such inconvenience. Or I've heard the further theory that somehow, some way, putting more cars on Delaware Valley will somehow solve the current problem. 128 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 (Laughter.)
That seems to defy all ends of anyone's logic. I've actually been on Delaware Avenue at Saturday at 1:30 in the afternoon; I cannot imagine how the additional traffic is going to make things better. I'm not a terrific engineer; I'm just a motorist, and I've had a license for a long period of time, and that seems to defy any notion of motor vehicular logic. So it's not just a simple issue with regard to traffic. And whether it's changing the timing of lights, going through the Planning Commission process, the additional costs of infrastructure that have been estimated with no idea where those dollars are coming from. Deputy Commissioner Fox was here at the table when I came in. The additional police and other personnel costs, none of which are outlined in our budget or Five-Year Plan, none of 129 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 which we should have to pay for as the City of Philadelphia. (Applause.) (Cheers.)
And, Madam President and members of this committee and members of City Council who are here, let me conclude with my fourth point, which is that this City Council again is to be commended for this process. We will collectively engage in a thoughtful, legitimate planning process as we move forward to get to the heart and soul of what these issues are about, get the truth on the record, so that we utilize our best judgment as we move forward in this process, and we will see where it eventually leads. But we have an obligation to the citizens of this city and the residents of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania that if there is to be casino gaming in Philadelphia, that it is done properly, it is done 130 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 respectfully, it is done thoughtfully, and that we use the best land use principles and not allow ourselves to be run over by the various interests who have their interests, not our interests at heart. Thank you, Madam President. (Applause.) (Cheers.)
Do any members of the committee have any questions?
I can't think of any other questions to ask, but I just want to thank you, Mayor, for your coming here today. As you know, these issues are not easy. You've dealt with issues when you were a Councilperson before you became mayor, and we're going to have to continue to deal with these things, and I think that you hit on 131 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 all of the points that these hearings have been discussing and even prior to these hearings and committee meetings that I've conducted throughout my district over the last three-plus years. And as I've said and you've said, this is not about casinos coming to Philadelphia; it's about if we have casinos, that we want them to be operations that we can be not only proud of but will be to the benefit of all of us, because I have said repeatedly, if we're going to have casinos, I want them to be successful for a whole variety of reasons. And your coming here today, I think, just reinforces that in the minds of other folks that we're not playing games here; we are really serious about this. And I think what the Supreme Court did was a travesty in terms of justice, but the Supremes, they 132 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 usually rule, and they've made these decisions in the past. But, again, I'm glad that you're here, and it helps us get our message out to let everyone know that we're not obstructionists, although as I said in my speech yesterday, if protecting the citizens of this city and protecting the jobs along the waterfront and future development of our central Delaware waterfront suggests that I am an obstructionist, then I wear that label proudly. But thank you again for being here.
Thank you, Madam President. And I certainly agree with what Councilman DiCicco just said and, Mr. Mayor, what the -- the concerns 133 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 you raised about the traffic and the public-safety issues and all, you know, I think concern all of us. You know, I certainly agree with you. And I agree that I think the Supreme Court decision was wrong that was given yesterday or, I guess, two days ago. But I guess my only question is -- and it might be too early to ask this and I guess you guys are trying to figure this out, but the decision is the decision, you know? I mean, the Supreme Court did make a decision, whether we agree with it or not. And, I guess, where do we sort of go from here? I mean, I think we still keep asking questions, I think we still raise our concerns but, I mean, just as a city, you know, we had the highest court in the state give a decision. Where do we go with that? And, again, I might be asking this too early.
I understand. 134 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028
I appreciate your question. We're reviewing, of course, the decision. We're exploring all of our various options, and I look forward to continued conversations with City Council as we develop future plans for how to deal with this. But, again, I would, of course, respectfully suggest that even the process that Council is continuing to go through right now is a very important component of how we move forward. And as I said in my opening statement, I've not said that I was opposed to casinos in Philadelphia, but I did hopefully make it fairly clear that I think this is a bad site for Philadelphia and for Pennsylvania for all of the reasons that I laid out, including even financial reasons. 135 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 I don't necessarily know that this site would maximize the revenues both to the City and to the Commonwealth, which has a larger interest as it relates to property tax relief and, of course, wage tax relief. So I think that our options are varied, and we will explore them and then announce them at a subsequent point in time. But I think that there are still many miles to go before this particular activity reaches a conclusion. The decision the other day was the decision. The last I checked, the 18 of us are still in charge of the City of Philadelphia. (Applause.) (Cheers.)
I'm going to -- we -- all of us took the same oath on January 7, 2008, and I meant it when I said that I was going to discharge the 136 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 duties of my office with fidelity. That's what I'm going to do.
Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. We appreciate your coming up to testify.
Madam President, thank you very much for this opportunity. I also want to just lastly say thank you very much for all of the support and cooperation that we have received throughout the administration Terry Gillen from my office, a special advisor to the Mayor on this particular issue, coordinating with your respective offices and other departments and agencies within the government. I think this is the kind of cooperation that citizens have wanted 137 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 for a long time, have come to expect, and we will continue to provide that level of cooperating as we together try to provide high-quality service to the citizens of this city. Thank you.
Deputy Commissioner Fox, would you please come back to the witness table. (Deputy Commissioner Fox returns to the witness table.)
Thank you. I believe Councilman DiCicco would like to ask you one more question, if you don't mind.
Thank you again. I have one -- we'll wait a couple of minutes for the folks to leave the chambers. 138 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 (Proceedings momentarily halted.)
Excuse me, everyone. Could we have your attention. Thank you. That's a very powerful speech to follow, but in any event, the plan that is laid out is the ideal plan, if you will, that would give the best protection to citizens and people who would frequent these casinos, assuming they're built, but understanding that we do not have in our Five-Year Plan -- and I can't speak for the other members of Council -- I conceivably can't figure out where we come up with this $17 million in the first year and $12 million a year thereafter. Is there a backup plan? Is there a plan or has there been some discussion on the what-if we're not able to fully fund the ideal situation that we would like to have in place 139 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 but realistically we won't? How would we handle these issues? Given the number of police personnel that we have today, how does that change things within your department? And has there been any thought given to that? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: Well, quite frankly, the current police commissioner and I have not had the what-if discussion, but I can tell you this, that independent of a facility and the IT needs of that facility, if our estimates are correct and there would be 65 officers needed to be assigned full-time to Foxwoods, we would have to find 65 officers. Our responsibility, as we see it, is public safety and is an improved quality of life for the citizens of this city, and that would be our responsibility to ensure. And so if the traffic details and the projections for crowd or 140 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 pedestrian traffic and perimeter crime continue to be as they are, then somewhere in our department, we would have to find the 65 officers for that detail. Where we would house them and how would with manage that, I don't know, but I can't imagine that we would be able to put together a plan that would not involve dedicated officers to the area that, I think, would be necessary.
Okay. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: And so, quite frankly, we would go out and we would find 65 officers that were doing something else and they would be placed into that detail.
So it's fair to say that those 65 officers would be redeployed or deployed to the central Delaware waterfront, the casino district, if you will, from other districts throughout the City, 'cause 141 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 there's no other place to get them from, I mean, unless we hired 65 more. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: Right.
But we still would not get to the 160-plus that, in your department's estimation, would be needed to have a -- to patrol the area in an adequate fashion. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: Yeah, I can't imagine being able to do it in any other capacity, without sitting down and having long discussions with members of our police department that we could do this in any other way but to siphon those officers off.
And how many police districts do we have currently citywide? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: Patrol districts, we have patrol 22 districts. 23
Okay, 23 districts, so simple math says if you took 3 from each, you'd get your 65. 142 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 Just simple math. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: If you wanted to do the math that way.
Each police district would be down a minimum of -- down by at least three officers -- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: Or a special unit would decrease.
Or a special unit details. I have no further questions. And thank you again for your testimony. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOX: Mm-hmm.
All right. The committee will stand in recess until 1:15. Thank you very much. (Applause.) 143 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 (Committee stands in recess.) * * * (Proceedings resume.)
The committee is now back in session. Our first witness will be the Fire Commissioner. (Witness comes forward.)
Good afternoon. FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: Good afternoon, Councilwoman.
Commissioner, please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: Okay. Thank you. Good afternoon, Council President. Good afternoon, Councilman. I'm Fire Commissioner Lloyd Ayers, City of Philadelphia. I submit the following testimony regarding the impact of the gaming on 144 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 the Philadelphia Fire Department operations. This is a preliminary-needs assessment for the Philadelphia Fire Department regarding appropriate response to each proposed gaming site. These projections are based on providing service immediately. To conduct accurate assessments for the future five years and five and ten and fifteen years, a more thorough and sophisticated analysis must be undertaken that would include measuring response times and evaluating staffing redundancies. As the Philadelphia Fire Department is currently configured, we can provide suppression services to each of the proposed locations with our current complement of fire stations and apparatus. When evaluating the emergency medical service capabilities, it seems fairly consistent that we could 145 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 anticipate increased call volume from the gaming sites that are ultimately built at any location. Therefore, an additional EMS unit would be required in the area of any gaming facility that is built. And in an attempt to provide some very preliminary figures that establish a basic idea of the financial impact anticipated, I am including the costs associated with each item that would be required to provide adequate emergency services. An EMS unit, $123,000; that's for the vehicle and supplies. Fire service paramedic salaries, $58,000 times 4, or $232,000. It is anticipated that at least one of these units will be needed to be deployed in close proximity of any eventual site. One propose proposed handle their own 9-1-1 emergency medical 146 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 emergency service calls, but this is not a viable solution for the City of Philadelphia. The Philadelphia Fire Department, in conjunction with the Department of Public Health, is responsible for handling 9-1-1 emergency medical services calls that fall within the borders of the City, as outlined in Executive Order No. 11 7-88. At this time, if you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer those.
Thank you very much. Commissioner, you testified that the cost for creating an additional EMS unit within the Fire Department is approximately $455,000; that's the equipment and supplies. Does that also include fringe benefits? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: This evaluation included the fringe benefits 147 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 for those persons.
Also, you state that one of the proposed casino developers offered to provide its own EMS needs but this was not a viable solution. Would not it make sense to accept such an order to supplement the City's capabilities to respond to an emergency medical condition? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: As far as to allow them to do that?
Mm-hmm. FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: We felt like, based on the executive order, the level of fire-based EMS, that the City of Philadelphia would that person or that unit to respond.
Also in your testimony, you state that the existing Fire Department resources are sufficient to provide fire-suppression services to each of the proposed casino 148 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 locations. However, you also state that a more thorough and sophisticated analysis must be undertaken that would include measuring response times and evaluation of staff redundancies. Does this mean that the Fire Department can currently suppress fires on vacant lots but that studies must be done to determine what services and equipment will be necessary to control fires once the casino facilities are constructed? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: That is correct. We see -- have seen some proposals, but we have not seen what that final unit would be or what the future is. Based on five-year -- five- and ten-year studies, we'd have to see what's there, what the volume is, what calls that come in, all of those types of things.
Can you tell us how will additional 149 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 construction in the areas to be served create redundancies in staff? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: Well, one of the things that when we stop and we look at what's being built, what those calls would be coming into that area, we would see if -- over measured time, we would see if more staffing is needed, another unit that may be needed, we would see what that volume is, and we cannot measure it until it actually presents itself.
Can you further tell us the current status of the analysis that, quote, must be taken, end of quote? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: The current status of the analysis is that we've looked at what's being proposed and we've just projected, based on that, that we know immediately we'll need at least this. And, of course, we would measure it as it's built out, as it's opened, as we see volume, traffic, 150 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 et cetera.
Commissioner, I know that you and we have been very concerned about EMS units. FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: Yes.
If, in fact, the casinos were to be constructed, how would you ever be able to get a unit together in a timely fashion? How long does it take for delivery to be -- to be made of whatever equipment you need such as the vehicles? And, again, it would be advertising, testing, training; how long does all of that today? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: Well, our initial projection was for a year, because we don't know exactly what the time frame would be, but within a year, we could say that we would be able to have back-filled in members and also -- and equipment to start the immediate service to that area, but it's only 151 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 based on the proposal and what we see. So we would still have to analyze and go forward, but it would only be for what's presented to us now. I would take a year is what we're looking at.
For an EMS unit to be in place? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: To be in place. Immediately, we would do it with details and do it with taking equipment from another area or -- not taken from another area. Let me say this:
Please. FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: Equipment that's backup equipment from another area and place it in service and use details and overtime just to temporarily set up so that we could immediately operate. It would take a year to actually back-fill those folks in and get the equipment built and on 152 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 site to replace what we're doing and actually have an operation that's not details and not borrowed equipment from another battalion.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco.
Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, Commissioner. I know you have another appointment so I'll try to be as brief as I can. Your testimony speaks to EMS units. Would that be one per casino? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: That is one per casino.
Where would they -- assuming the casinos are built at the proposed current locations, where would you house these units? Do you have a facility in which you can house them? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: We 153 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 have facilities that we could put two other units in right now. We would probably look at an analysis and look at the runs for that unit. And if they needed to be adjusted, we would probably move them to other areas. Engines --
In what proximity to the proposed sites would these units be positioned? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: Within and one within about a one-, one-and-a-half-mile radius.
And when you do your analysis -- or maybe it's not in your analysis yet, but given the anticipated increase in traffic that these facilities will bring to Delaware Avenue, has that been taken into consideration as it relates to response time at the locations that you're talking about these units being placed 154 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 a-mile-and-a-half radius? Are you taking into consideration the length of the response time, which, I guess, one would have to be in a situation to really understand it, but given the analysis and the figures that we've given about the increase of traffic, one would have to assume that it's going to be taking a little bit longer than normal to get from Point A to Point B, Point B being the casino, and then back to the hospital or wherever. FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: Absolutely. The traffic concerns us. And we know that running into the traffic -- again, the traffic that we have today on Delaware Avenue is an issue, which is why we wanted to use the closest stations that could house an EMS unit with the current apparatus and equipment that's there. We looked at those and said we'd try to get that unit stationed in 155 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 that area. That was the best that we could do for now.
As it relate to the Foxwoods site, where would the unit be located? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: We would try to like at Engine 53 Station --
Fourth and Snyder? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: Yes. Also, we talked about Engine 3. And also, there's a few other stations in the --
Is there room in those facilities? Would there be room in those facilities for another vehicle? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: For one. We're looking at Engine 3 for 156 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 one.
But Snyder Avenue wouldn't be able to accommodate -- FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: I beg your pardon?
Snyder Avenue wouldn't be able to accommodate another vehicle, would it? (No immediate verbal response.)
That's fine if you don't know. FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: Yeah, I'll double-check on that, but --
That would be helpful. FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: -- all of those stations across that corridor were stations that we looked at, and we tried to --
East side of Broad Street? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: 157 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 Exactly.
Where's Engine 3 located? FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: That' s at Washington Avenue, Third Street.
Okay. Are there any other questions? (No further questions.)
Okay, thank you, Commissioner. FIRE COMMISSIONER AYERS: Okay, thank you very much.
Our next witness? MR. McPHERSON: Pennsport Civic Association and Whitman Council. (Witnesses come forward.)
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is John Moraski (sp?). I live at 110 McKean 158 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 Street.
My name is Lou Carberry (sp?). I live at 1929 East Moyamensing Avenue.
I'll be going first. Thank you. The reason why I was called here today was to speak about the water damage that has been done to my house since I bought the house in 2002. My wife and I were married in '02 and we bought the house really before we were married. The house needed extensive work. We put a new front on the house, a new back on the house. Luckily, my father's pretty 159 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 handy so him and I did much of the plumbing and the electric in the house well. In 2004, it was a proud moment. I had my basement finished, so I had a guy's place to go to. We have hardwood floor all through our house except for in the basement, so I thought it would be a great place to roll around with the boys when they came and things like that. So my wife was pregnant at the time and we were expecting our first son. And in 2005, we had a large storm in April. And we were walking down the street up to our knees in water. I live at 110 McKean, so I'm just a little bit before the halfway point on the block. So there was some water damage to cars and things like that, but then my basement had about a foot-and-a- half of water in it and my rugs were destroyed, my furniture had some water 160 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 and things like that. We tried what we could to have the rugs repaired. We had the Shop Vac that we rented that night. We had them steam-cleaned after that. We thought that the problem may have been in our plumbing 'cause my father and I had done it ourselves, so we had some professionals come out and look at the water lines, the sewer lines. We had a bathroom in the front of the basement, and to our surprise, none of those things -- the plumbing that we did was faulty in any way. The professionals came out and told us about some preventative measures. We can put some shutoff valves in certain places, black-flow preventers, which we did. We wrapped our sewer pipes with some preventative wrapping. And in the summer of 2005, June and July, we had our second and third water damage take place. So at 161 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 that point, we had to take our carpets up. There was -- they weren't able to be saved at that point. Our insurance company came out and advised us -- well, they gave us some money for some repairs, and they advised us not to put carpets back down there obviously. I installed a vinyl tile floor and a new hardwood in a small office area that I have for myself. The City came out and cleaned the sewers at that point after the neighbors called and complained, and we hoped that that would solve most of the problems with the water in the basements for myself and many of my neighbors. So in -- we lived with that for quite a while. We didn't have any water damage over the winter and into much of the summer and some of the summer in '06, so we purchased a new rug, almost a large area rug, we put 162 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 that down there. And our idea was to roll it up during the summer months, when the water usually came in. So in -- again, in June and July of 2006, we did get water damage. We kind of anticipated at that point, June and July being the months where we received the most water, so we were kind of prepared at that point, although there was no way to take up the hardwood floor that I put in my office as a preventative measure. So that was destroyed at that point as well. At this point, we still don't have any indication of where the water's coming from. As I said, we've done a lot of preventative measures. We've also had to replace a washer and dryer because of water damage. We've had to, as I said, replace rugs, replace hardwood flooring and things like that. As I said, we thought we had 163 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 it figured out with the water damage happening during the summer months, but just this past March, on March 8th to be exact, we found about a foot of water in our basement during a rain storm.
At this point, I'm 30 years old, I've lived on McKean Street my entire life. My wife and I are seriously considering moving out of the community. It's not noting that I want to do but it's getting difficult making all of the repairs in my home and convincing my wife that this is a good place to stay, considering the things, the water damage and the problems that we're having, considering our two boys now with the mold problem that may be occurring in our basement.
Again, we're at 110, and the sewer would be in front of 164 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 100, so we're fairly close to the sewer. My neighbors -- all of my neighbors leading up to my house get some type of water damage. When I've gotten the damage in my basement, they've gotten theirs as well. Some of them have sump pumps, some of them have other measures that they take. But actually, most times, as I said, we have water in our basements. We also have flooding on our street. And the cars, when they come down, create a type of wake, and it pushes the water into some neighbors' basement windows, things like that, so we have sand bags down there, and it kind of looks like a disaster area when it rains.
Has the Water Department been able to ascertain why you get the flooding?
No. As I said, we've had professionals out, we've had 165 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 the Water Department come out to come to clean the sewers. Certain friends of ours who work for the Water Department stop by and try to take a look and things like that. The funny thing also is that the water, after a certain amount of time, maybe a half hour or so, it just dissipates, so we don't have to actually pump the water out of our basement, where some of our neighbors do. Ours dissipates, and I'm thinking it probably dissipates into my neighbors' basements, who then pump it out with their pumps.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon. Did you have any flooding this past summer, '07?
In '07? No, we didn't have any in '07. That's when I 166 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 said I thought it was done with. And then in March, we did.
And then more recently, a month or so ago, we had a heavy downpour over one weekend; did you have any flooding then?
Okay, 'cause a lot of the stuff -- I don't know if you attended the Pennsport meeting that I put together, I think maybe a year ago already; I lose track of time. I noticed a lot of the problems that we were having south of you seemed to have been somewhat corrected as a result of main that we put in on Snyder Avenue.
There's a lot more work that will be done. I've been working with the Water Department, 167 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 and you will probably, in the next few days, maybe a week or two, you and the rest of your neighbors will have a list of what was already corrected and the anticipation for the further reconstruction of sewers in and around your community. I'm not saying your block, 'cause I don't have the list in my head, but there's a significant number of sewer improvements that we're going to continue as a result of these problems that we've been having, so I just wanted to let you know that.
And you will have a list sent to you by my office shortly.
Good afternoon. 168 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028
Hello. Since -- I've lived in this property since 1977. I never really had any significant water problems until about 02 or '03. At that time, I started to get a little now and then, and then it got progressively worse. And the thing that was really confusing was that on the same row I'm on, it would skip houses; everybody didn't get it. And I'm probably two full blocks west of John. I never got it. However, then it started, and once it started, I kept getting it more and more often; not every time but more and more often. Till finally, in June of '06, we actually had a total backup of the sewer, and everything was in my basement, like shin-deep. And I mean everything: human feces, used condoms, old rags. It just backed up through the system and came into my house. 169 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 At this point, I had a choice of either fixing it or getting out, because you can't live under those conditions. At that point, I brought in a contractor to pump out the basement along with us and had work done. Since I've had the work done, I haven't had a problem, but it cost me $9400. I -- you mentioned the Snyder Avenue. Myself, the time may be coincidental, but I attribute the Snyder Avenue, whatever they did there, diverted something to the avenue where I live, because I don't remember having a problem before that construction was being done on Snyder Avenue. Now, I'm not really sure of the dates, but it seemed, in my mind anyhow, the more I thought about it, the more the Snyder Avenue construction was there and the more I 170 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 got water. So I mean, it was just -- and it just became -- once you got what I got the last time, you had to make a call -- either fix it or get out. And I was lucky enough to have the resources to fix it. But some people still in my area are still getting some water. And the other thing is, west of me, just across the street, they don't seem to have the problems we have on the east side. Now, I may not be a hundred percent correct about that, but it doesn't seem like they're putting out the same trash that the people on my side of the street are putting out.
'06 was the last major flood and then you hired a plumber to fix --
I had a plumber -- I had a contractor who actually dug out into the street and 171 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 connected into the soil pipe totally new.
And I don't know if you -- I had two or three public presentations by the Water Department in your community, one at Pennsport Civic, one at Our Lady of Mt. Carmel, and I think I did one a little west of your community. But, you know, the Water Department went out and we -- they put robotic cameras through the systems. A lot of the problems were attributed to the way, years ago, plumbers installed the lateral pipes below where they should have been, and that 172 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 has to do with the elevation. So it's not unusual that you may get flooding, but the persons next door, on either side of you, don't experience any of it. That is one of the issues. I think what may have happened -- you didn't have any flooding in '07, right?
I think, obviously, your directions were probably helpful, but I think when the flooding was in relationship to your concern about the Snyder Avenue project, that may have caused it because that was always a problem because the main was too small for the system. Now that the larger main has been installed, I'm hopeful for you and the rest of your neighbors that that situation has been remediated, 173 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 but we will know, and hopefully, with any heavy downpours over the spring and summer, you won't experience it. But I think that's -- it was probably at the same time that they were doing the work you were getting the flooding. I don't know if it was a direct result of the work that was being done.
But it was probably a result of the system that was in place being too small for the capacity to -- handle the capacity that is now in that community. So hopefully what we've done -- and you'll have a list. By the way, your community pretty much up and down Second Street from Moyamensing east will have a breakdown of all of the work that's been completed and the work that we anticipate over the next several months.
Well, let me say 174 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 this: I was at a meeting at Furness High School. I think you were there.
And at that point, we questioned -- the Water people there -- about that. And I'll say this to you: I don't know -- I work on the waterfront. They negated that the tides and the rain had anything to do with this. Now, I worked at one point at Pier 34, 36, which would be a little north of Christian Street on Delaware Avenue. When they were building those new homes there -- which, to me, tells me what I see, not what they're telling me -- they had a hell of a time keeping water out of those first levels for about two years. So them 175 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 telling me that the rain and the high tide doesn't play a factor doesn't mesh with that I see physically.
Yeah, I kind of agree with you 'cause I went to more of those meetings than I care to remember, but more recently, a few weeks ago, there was -- the Water Department again went to the Sharswood School, and, I guess, the upside for me was, when i went there, there were only a handful of people, which tells me that a lot of the problems that we had a few years ago may have been resolved. I assume that's why there was very little attendance. But, again, not to belabor the point, we're getting to continue to work to correct those problems where the old systems are, upgrading systems. It's very costly, as you know, and time-consuming, but we are -- the emphasis is pretty much in your community right now and all the 176 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 way up the river, up through Northern Liberties as well.
Let me say this: Had I known about the Sharswood Meeting, which is my fault -- I didn't -- I would have been there, because this isn't -- it's not something that's ended, I don't think, especially --
I'm not -- I only asked for purposes of were you there --
Oh, no, I wasn't, but I wish I had been and I'm sorry I wasn't.
No, that's okay, that's okay. There were quite a few people that came to all three of those presentations, and it was very enlighting, and we took a lot of complaints, the Water Department took complaints. And so far, I think that we've corrected a lot of problems. We're 177 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 not out of the woods yet, I understand, but we're still working on it. I just want to give you that reassurance that we're not done yet.
Good afternoon, President Verna, Councilmembers. My name is Kerry Nelson, and I really appreciate the opportunity you're giving us to give testimony on this issue. I will give a disclaimer up front that I am not an engineer and don't even play one on TV, but I did work for the Environmental Protection Agency for seven eight years and spent a good amount of my time on sewage issues. So when I heard that there were going to be very large sort of mega-developments happening on the waterfront, it was of some concern to 178 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 me, because I know that already, the City of Philadelphia has significant issues with sewage not getting where it's supposed to be, or staying where it's supposed to be in many cases. And I think as we just heard, you know, the City Water Department does go around and give presentations and is actively working on this topic, but I always find it interesting that the presentations given are always entitled "storm water-something" or another are. And, really, that's a bit of a euphemism, because while it's true that storm water or wet-weather events often act as a trigger for the problems that are inherent in the system to manifest themselves, really, the bigger part of the issue is, actually, human feces. And storm water triggers it, but the human feces, the actual sewage, really is the bigger problem that the City 179 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 already has. It gets out of the pipes, it backs up in streets, it backs up in people's basements, it goes into the river. And so, sort of -- just as a preface there, I think the 800-pound gorilla in the room is sewage. So if I may, I'd like to give you a handout, if possible, if that's acceptable?
And I will tell you I am not graphically-inclined at all, so these are not my visuals; these are actually part of a presentation that the Philadelphia Water Department is going around giving. This one was done March 13th, I believe. But just very, very quickly looking at the first page, and it sounds perhaps like you folks may be more knowledgeable than even I am, having probably spent an awful lot of 180 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 time dealing with these issues, but it sort of shows the issue; that in some parts of Philadelphia, where we have separate sewers, if there's a wet-weather event, what you have running out, getting into people's homes, et cetera, is pretty much limited to, quote, storm water, what we think of as storm water, something that comes off your roof, something that may run down the street. But if you look at the diagram on the left, what happens in areas where the storm water system is not separate from the sanitary system, there is only a given amount of capacity in those pipes. And when the pipes are full, either, you know, Joe Tasker can't get his sewage into the pipe that runs in the front of his house and then continues on its trip to the sewage treatment plant; or, if Joe Tasker wants to get his sewage in, the pipe has to give up sewage to 181 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 somewhere, and sometimes that means that it goes out into a river, sometimes it means it pops up in the street, sometimes it means it ends up some somebody else's basement. So the really issue here is what happens when you don't have adequate capacity. In this area of South Philly, there are a variety of the problems, as Councilman DiCicco was referencing earlier, having to do with systems that are old and perhaps not put in with the best engineering to begin with, but what I'm not entirely clear about is whether there is simply adequate capacity to keep all of the material that needs to stay in the pipes in the pipes. What the City has proposed, I gather, is on the second diagram, and that shows a section of South Philly with blue lines, I believe. And, again, this is not my graphic, but the blue lines, as far as I know, 182 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 represent existing sewer lines. And sewage generally flows towards Columbus Boulevard, and once it reaches the large pipe there, the interceptor goes south to the plant. If there is not adequate capacity at any point along the line, then there's going to be either an inability to put material in, or there has to be, quote, relief. So the Water Department is proposing a system that will, quote, relieve, as you see at the top of the page, relieve some of the existing hydraulic overload. What I found interesting in talking with the Water Department on one or two occasions is the Water Department's recognition that there is a significant problem, but their belief that the answer to the problem is not to keep the water -- keep the sewage in the pipes and take it down to the sewage treatment plant and 183 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 treat it, but to have it go to the river. About a little over a year ago -- I don't know -- again, I lose track of time, but there was a symposium held down in South Philly at one of the schools there, and a number of people came the Water Department. Joe Fiola, who is, I believe, the head of the Water Division at DEP's Conshohocken office was there, various people were giving presentations. And what was interesting to me, at a break, a few different guys who work for the Water Department came up, you know, to have a conversation with me, and they were absolutely adamant that their job was not to keep the sewage in the pipes, but their job was to get the sewage from South Philly into the river, without treatment.
They were absolutely, positively adamant about that and 184 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 could not be shaken, the reason being, according to them -- and it's a practical consideration -- is it's got a long way to go. It's got to turn, it's got to get in every pipe along the way, and there has to be adequate capacity in every single pipe along the way. So if you want a fast fix, the fast fix is, don't treat it, just relieve it and have it pop out somewhere else without treatment. So what I'm sort of hoping from this process and from any legislation that may result from it is that City Council will require, before any -- particularly any mega- developments occur, that the Water Department find a way to get the sewage that already should able to fit into the system actually to the sewage treatment plan and not add hundreds and hundreds of thousands of gallons to a system that already is not 185 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 working. I'm hoping that improvements, if there are any, can be done so that not only would they address any mega- development on the site but would also help adequately address the sewage issues that already occur in that area. People, I don't think, really like to think about sewage very much. One of the reasons that it often is not on the forefront of, you know, government's agenda until it starts back up into people's homes, but it is sort of key. The job of the government is to protect the public's health, safety, and welfare, and the first of those three is the public health. Again, it may not -- I may be telling you things that you already know, but sewage -- medicine will often tout its many advances, but engineers will tell you that it is not 186 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 medicine that's responsible for saving the majority of lives in the past 150 years; it's sewers. Keeping human feces away from humans is absolutely essential. You know, sewage is full of things. You probably already know of fecal coliform, but there are other types of bacteria like e coli, which can be extremely debilitating, can in some instances lead to kidney failure. There are viruses hepatitis A that's primarily transmitted by contaminated food or water. There are parasites like giardia that can end up dehydrating a person to the point of death. There's cryptosporidium, which is life-threatening for anybody that doesn't have a truly healthy immune system. I used to work on the City of Pittsburgh's sewer system. They also have a lot of locations where there is raw sewage entering their waterways 187 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 totally untreated, and they're trying to take actions to address that. But there was a particularly sad event while I was working on this matter, where there was a significant rain event. There were some people, I guess, that needed help because of flooding. First responders were out all over the place. And one of the guys that responded was a guy in his fifties. He was a volunteer firearm who was going out to help people during the flood. He helped the people out, but in the course of doing that, he came into contact with sewage-contaminated water. And, unfortunately, he contracted an infection, the pathogens got the better of him, and he eventually died. This is a matter that, although often unseen, is probably more important than sometimes we want to admit. One way that we could 188 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 hopefully ensure that any sewage from a newly-built mega-complex, whether it's a casino or anything else, but something that's going to add an enormous new strain to our already overburdened system would be to require that facility to express-sewer their waste down to the sewage treatment plant. Again, I'm not an expert on the Philadelphia system, but my understanding is that the sewage treatment plan has pretty adequate capacity.
And if you can actually get the sewage there, it will probably get treated and probably get treated pretty well. The issue is getting there. You can require that it gets there; you can simply require that they build a sewer that takes all of their waste there without any points where it's going to come into contact with the rest of the system, overload 189 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 that system, and cause anything to discharge out into the waterway or into somebody's basement or somewhere else. In the absence of that, I would hope that any legislation that comes out of this requires a full and adequate characterization of the system from some short distance upstream or up sewer shed, as we say, from the new facility and all the way down to the sewage treatment plant, taking into account the hydraulics along the way discharges and any overloads, the amount of discharges that currently occur. There are what they call "relief points" or CSO's all the way along the whole step to the sewage treatment plant, and there are discharges from there. So I would hope that that system would be truly adequately characterized, and I would suggest that any contribution that the 190 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 facility would make to that would not only keep all its storm water out, which I understand is a part of the proposal, and that is a good thing, but also, I would suggest that there be sufficient reduction in what they're going to put in so that it will not increase any flow or discharges, any discharges below the point that that construction enters the system. And I would, again, suggest that the way that is managed and any contributions that go in, the reduction portion of that be maximized at times of highest flow. So, for example, you could require that they build holding tanks so that they're holding all of their actual sewage during times when the system is being overloaded, so that at the time there is a hydraulic overload in that pipe, they're going to hold in a tank and they're going to wait until the level 191 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 in the pipes goes back down, and then they can start releasing back into the system. I would also hope that any contributions that the facility is going to make to a separate storm water system, leaving the sewage aside for just a moment, would be monitored for PCBs, because that is a pollutant for which there is what they call "a TMDL," total maximum daily load limitation in the Delaware River. So it ought to be tailored for any TMDLs that exist, and that any discharges from that storm water system be given actual numeric discharges for any pollutants that are likely to be in that storm water. At base, you know, I guess what we know is, the system in that area is already hydraulically overloaded, it's already taxed, we're already spewing sewage out into our environment. 192 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 We know that when humans come into contact with raw sewage, untreated sewage, it poses a severe health risk, and we know that there's a proposed contribution of hundred of thousands of gallons of additional raw sewage into a system that already doesn't have capacity. So whatever legislation results from this I hope would include significant characterization and waste minimization requirements. Thank you.
Any questions or comments from the members of the committee? (No questions.)
Our 193 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 next witness? MR. McPHERSON: Is the Water Commissioner. (Witnesses come forward.)
Good afternoon, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: Good afternoon.
I'm not going to recognize you soon with the weight you're losing. COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: Good afternoon, President Verna and members of the Rules Committee. My name is Bernard Brunwasser and I am the Water Commissioner for the City of Philadelphia. To my left is Mr. Steve Furtek, who serves as the Water Department's chief engineer and is also the general manager of planning and engineering. I'm here today to present testimony regarding the proposed 194 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 Foxwoods Casino development project and its impact on the City's water, waste water and storm water and infrastructure. As you may know, the Water Department reviews all new developments to ensure that adequate water, waste water, and storm water infrastructure is available to support the proposed development or that provisions are incorporated into the project that will provide for such infrastructure. It also reviews the development plans to ensure that the plans comply with Water Department standards and regulations. In the case of the Foxwoods development, there is currently adequate water infrastructure adjacent to the proposed site to support all phases of this development for both potable water supply and fire protection. The proposed development would connect to the existing water 195 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 system without significant modification. The Water Department realizes that some neighborhood areas near the proposed casino site have experienced basement flooding during recent very intense rain events. The Water Department has been studying the sewer system to determine what can be done to address basement flooding during and following these events. We have now identified sewer improvements that will alleviate flooding in the Tasker Street and Reed Street sewer systems. These sewer improvement involve building additional sewer capacity from the Delaware River west to Broad Street. Foxwoods has agreed to construct a portion of this new sewer as part of its development project. This construction would increase sewer capacity and improve the system's ability to convey storm water away 196 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 from the neighborhood. The Water Department would subsequently extend the new sewer further into the neighborhood to provide additional relief. The casino is expected to construct a 7-foot-by-14-foot sewer in Reed Street or Tasker Street from the river, across Columbus Boulevard, and terminating at the intersection of either Water Street or Front Street and Dickinson Street. This portion of the overall flood-relief project for these sewer sheds is estimated to cost approximately $10 million, of which the casino will bear the cost of the first $5 million. The Water Department would be responsible for constructing the remainder of the sewer improvements which extend to Broad Street. The estimated cost of these improvements is $30 million. The overall estimated cost for 197 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 the flood-relief sewer improvements for the Tasker Street and Reed Street sewer sheds is the total of the two, or approximately $40 million. These estimates are planning- level estimates and do not take into account any significant construction hurdles that may be encountered. In addition, the department has required Foxwoods to manage all storm water on the proposed casino site. All storm water from the development will be treated onsite and discharged directly to the Delaware River. This will ensure that storm water from the casino site does not flow into the City's sewer system and, therefore, would have no negative impact upon the sewer system's capacity. This concludes my testimony. And Mr. Furtek and I would be happy to answer any questions that you may have. 198 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028
Thank you very much, Commissioner. The Chair recognizes Councilman Greenlee.
Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, Commissioner. As far as the costs that you talk about here towards the end of your testimony, first on the 10 million, you say the portion of the overall flood relief project is estimated to cost 10 million, which the casino would bear the cost of the first 5 million. Is that kind of a common way this is done? Is this a -- is the casino paying a higher portion than they usually would in -- I'm just thinking when there are other big projects, is what I'm trying to get at. How does this kind of compare?
Steve Furtek, General Manager of Engineering for the 199 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 Water Department. Without the casino, for instance --
-- the City of Philadelphia would bear the cost, the Water Department would bear the first cost.
Okay. But if the casino wasn't there, would you have to do as much; you know what I'm saying? COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: Well, I think this piece I could say.
Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: The department is prepared to do what it needs to do to address basement backups in that area --
Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: -- whether the casino is there or not.
Okay. COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: In 200 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 either case, the department is ready to address those problems.
I see. COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: In fact, I know Council President knows that about two-and-a-half years ago, the department embarked upon a detailed engineering study. And, yeah, for flood relief, particularly when it comes to basement backups in area of South Philadelphia, Northern Liberties, Washington Square West, and that study has now been completed, and I think we're about to release it as early as today. And one of the projects would be to -- for this neighborhood to also get that problem relieved. As you can see, it's -- $40 million is the total project estimate, so we're talking but a considerable amount of money, but we have reserved these monies for future -- in the future capital budgets of the department. 201 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028
But those improvements also, you're saying, would improve the existing residents' situation, right? because of the -- COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: Yes, yes. What we're attempting to do, we cannot -- no city can afford to, in theory, you know, dig up all of its sewers and make them larger.
Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: You would have to have capacity in the street, which we don't have.
Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: The way to do it, and every place can be a little bit different, but the way to do it in this particular neighborhood or this area is to run a large intercept -- new intercepting sewer --
Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: -- from Broad Street, which is the high point in South Philadelphia. 202 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028
Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: And to take that all the way down to the river. And you have to build that pipe at such a capacity that it will relieve flooding even in those very intense rainstorms that we had between 2004 and 2006. So we're doing it in that area, and we're going to do it in the other areas that we've studied as well green.
Okay. I guess what I want just to be clear on is that you're doing this -- a lot of this is to deal with the properties that are already there. COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: Yes.
Whether the casino would be there or not. COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: Yes.
Is that what you're saying? COMMISSIONER BRUNWASSER: Yes. 203 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028
You're welcome. Commissioner, does Foxwoods' agreement to construct a new portion of a sewer adequately compensate the City for extending sewer services to their property?
The cost of their connection to the sewer system is separate from this construction and is being borne by the casino.
And how much is that? Is that included in the --
It's not included in the $5 million estimate. However, I don't know that cost.
But it's not included in the $5 million that you're referring to.
Thank you. Any other questions? (No further questions.)
Thank you very much. Our next witness? MR. McPHERSON: We're waiting for the Streets Department. (Proceedings momentarily halted.) MR. McPHERSON: We have a witness from Pennsport Civic that wasn't present this morning. Please come to the table. (Witness comes forward.)
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. MR KERLIN: Good afternoon, Madam Chair and Councilmembers. My name is Ed Kerlin. I'm a lifelong resident of Pennsport Civic 205 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 Association. I am the counterpart to Rene Goodwin, who spoke earlier on public safety. I have some prepared comments. Since the State Supreme Court rulings, the hearings now take on the aspect of a scene from "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" where Randall MacMurphy is watching the World Series on a TV screen that has gone dead, so I guess we're here pretending anyone actually gives a damn about what's going to happen to our communities once this casino is up and running, now that the Supreme Court and the Governor and Quincy Jones and Ron Rubin and Ed Snider and Harold Katz are ramming casino down our throats. Everybody who's looked at this site with any objectivity has concluded that these sites only make sense in the context of political payoffs. When catastrophe visits Delaware Avenue because of the siting 206 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 of this casino -- and catastrophe will visit -- you can be sure none of the politicians that sold us that will be around to face the families of those who are injured or those who suffer from the placement of this casino. However, in that through this hearing you are seeking input on the expert analysis on the impacts of this casino, we repeat our community's insistence of true community representation on every independent review panel involved and that there be public meetings sponsored by the panels so that they may hear from the communities before they begin their work and that they report back to the communities directly with the findings of their work. I know traffic has already been heard at a previous meeting, but traffic is among the chief concerns of ours with respect to public safety concerns. A couple weeks ago, we had 207 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 a Foxwoods traffic engineer in here whose expertise seemed more to be the engineering of the data rather than the engineering of the traffic. To this date no one has undertaken to verify any of the assumptions and the assertions made by Foxwoods on their traffic and other mitigation proposals. Under the heading of "public safety," no one has undertaken an evaluation of the effects and the dangers created by adding possibly as many as 10,000 pedestrian crossings of Delaware Avenue on busy days. On every subject under the heading of "public safety," what we in the community want to see is an honest and verified analysis of the high probability of system failures caused by the presence of this casino. There's much more at stake than the success of this casino. It's the success of the city that's at 208 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 stake, and it's about the success of our new mayor, Mr. Nutter, and it's also about the success of the families that live in the shadows of this casino. What our community expects is that any studies of the health and public-safety impacts include community participation in the planning, conducting, and reporting of the panel's findings. For today's hearing, it's our objective to suggest to this Council areas of information and analysis that need to be explored and prepared for in relation to the placement of a casino at this site, which, if left unprepared for, may cost the City and the casinos and the communities far more than anyone has calculated. There are many things we need to know, that the City needs to know to ensure and prevent catastrophic incidents and promote general safety. 209 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 We do not believe that all of the impacts of this casino have been honestly presented or honestly evaluated to date. We believe, if the harmful impacts of this casino were considered, no official sworn to protect the City's residents would allow this casino's placement at this site.
We are not sure what makes us more nervous, the things that we do know or the things that we don't know. For instance, we know that the State needs some $8 billion for road repairs and is ranked last in the country for road repairs needed. We know that we had a near catastrophe last month on I-95. And a couple of years ago, one of our piers collapsed into the river. So generally, when we're talking about safety, there's an undercurrent in the neighborhood and a real fear, you know, about the uncertainties and the unanswered 210 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 questions. Public emergencies happen every day -- heart attack, car accidents, schizophrenics going on gun rampages. Add million to an area 7 and they happen more. To date, there 8 are many public-safety questions we 9 don't have answers to. If a little knowledge is, indeed, a dangerous thing, then the conditions in our communities are extremely dangerous because no one can get consistent, honest information from this casino. Besides traffic, as we've just heard, there's some questions we don't think we want to know the answers to, like how many times does a house have to flood with sewage before that house becomes unfit for habitation? We've had two symposiums, and no expert seems to want to answer the question as to what point, where is the tipping scale where, you know, five, six, 211 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 seven times you've had sewage in your basement, the mold and all the other things. At some point, if it's ten or it's twenty times, that house is not saleable or not liveable. So as I conclude, I just want to go over an incomplete list of public-safety subject matters that we've discussed among ourselves and matters we would like to be honestly explored, honestly costed out, and honestly presented to the families being forced to live with the spillover scum factor that these casinos will produce. It is our hope that this Council explores some of the findings of the experts that we haven't heard from. We are concerned that this Council is not hearing from the DRVPC. The DRVPC did an impact of gaming on the Greater Philadelphia area, and they talk about things like crash clusters. They mentioned that there 212 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 were 287 crashes in the vicinity, and of course, the more traffic and the more people you add to an area, the incidents and the probability of failure in systems goes up. So just -- and no water and just generally descriptions of numbers of events under various categories, it's these crash clusters that we would like to have ready explored. The number of crimes in the central district. I mean, I think that in the Central District and the Southern District, there's over 25,000 violent crimes committed per year for the last two years. We're not real sure of the number of police that we have in Districts 3 and 4. The anticipated increase is needed to accommodate the casinos. We've talked about some of that this morning. And, also, there's the fact, you know, of our prison systems and the justice system, as Rene talked 213 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 about, but we have some 100,000 people in Philadelphia, parole and pretrial supervision. About 1 in 15 people residing in Philadelphia is currently in trouble with the law. Another 30,000 are behind bars and soon will come out. Philadelphia has never done enough to help keep this group heal its own victimizations and to become law-abiding citizens. So the point there is that there are a lot of criminals on our streets, and this casino is going to become an attractive nuisance for them, and so it's very likely that the crime rate in the vicinity will go up. You can count on probability of continued community opposition to this facility on the day it opens and for all of the days that it remains open.
Moving 9 million people in and out of Foxwoods increases the probability of fatalities and serious injury from accidents and crime on 214 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 Delaware Avenue simply on the basis of volume of people present. Is the City prepared for all the possibly emergencies that come along with moving million people a year through 7 a congested corridor? 8 What are the possibilities of 9 drunk drivers among the 9 million more people coming to and from Foxwoods once this thing is built? It would be useful from our perspective if the independent review panel would avail themselves of the Pennsylvania DUI enforcement associations whose experts will come in and tell you that for every 10,000 drivers, there's a certain percentage that are driving impaired. They will also tell you -- or the DVRPC that when you increase the traffic volume, you increase the likelihood of car accidents. We would also like to have the Council and the independent panels avail themselves of the expertise of 215 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 the national insurance study programs. You know, if there's anyone who knows about probabilities of accidents and disaster, it's the insurance companies. The Gaming Board is inviting million guests into our neighborhood 9 uninvited, so we have the right to disinvite them. So when the police do their estimates of costs, I hope that they will include the estimates for the cost of riot police and crowd control for the protests that will happen on opening day. Thank you. ) MR. McPHERSON: Our next department is the Department of Streets. )
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon. 216 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 My name is Frank Morelli. Good afternoon, Council President Anna Verna and members of the committee. My name is Frank Morelli, Survey Bureau Manager for the Department of Streets. Joining me is Dave Perry, Chief Engineer of the Survey Bureau and Design. The Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on the related measure, Bill 12 No. 080083, which also pertains to the Foxwoods Casino. Bill No. 080083 is not an administrative ordinance but an ordinance requested by Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel, LLP, 1617 JFK Boulevard, 19th floor, Philadelphia, PA, 19103. The purpose of this ordinance 21 is to authorize various revisions to the City Plan, as requested by the developers of Foxwoods Casino, in order to facilitate the design of the proposed development. The ordinance, 217 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 as introduced, differs from Foxwoods' approved plan of development. The bill authorized the striking from the City Plan and vacating of Tasker Street from Christopher Columbus Boulevard to a dead end approximately 710 feet eastwardly and reserves a right-of-way for drainage purposes, water main purposes and gas pain purposes and public utility purposes within the lines of Tasker Street. The approved plan of development, however, retains Tasker Street in its current location and converts it is from a two-way street to a one-way eastbound street and includes a 24-foot-wide driveway for westbound traffic on private property adjacent to the north side of Tasker Street. To mirror the approved plan of the development, Tasker Street would need to remain on the City Plan, and a 218 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 separate ordinance would be needed to change Tasker Street east of Christopher Columbus Boulevard to a one-way eastbound street. The necessary traffic ordinance would require concurrence with Wal-Mart Corporation. And in addition, Foxwoods would need to provide a traffic easement to allow return westbound traffic across the casino site's private driveway. The bill authorizes revisions to the curblines and grades of Christopher Columbus Boulevard from a point approximately 900 feet south of Spruce Street to a point approximately 1,200 feet south of Tasker Street and the curblines and grades of Tasker Street from Christopher Columbus Boulevard to a point approximately 250 feet westwardly. This is consistent with the approved plan of development. The bill also authorizes the striking from the City Plan and the 219 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 abandonment of an existing 50-foot-wide right-of-way for water main purposes within the lines of former Dickinson Street from Christopher Columbus Boulevard to the pier headline of the Delaware River. This is consistent with the approved plan of development. Finally, subject to the determination of the Water Department as to necessity, the bill authorizes the placing on the City Plan of either a 20-foot wide right-of-way for drainage purposes extending from Christopher Columbus Boulevard to the pier headline of the Delaware River and adjacent to the southerly side of a certain right-of-way for drainage, water main and gas main purposes within the lines of former Reed Street or a 250-foot-wide right-of-way for drainage purposes extending from Christopher Columbus Boulevard to the pier headline of the Delaware River 220 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 and adjacent to the northerly side of Tasker Street and the northerly side of a certain right-of-way for drainage purposes and water main purposes extending from the easterly dead-end of Tasker Street to the pier headline the Delaware Avenue. The plan of development does not include the drainage right-of-way at the specified location. This concludes our testimony, and we're available for any questions.
Thank you very much. Are there any questions from members of the committee? (No questions.)
Thank you, sir. MR. McPHERSON: The Philadelphia Entertainment and Development Partners. (Witnesses come forward.) ------------------------- 221 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028
Good afternoon, Madam President members of the committee. Carl Primavera again. Pennoni Associates is setting up. We have Carl St. Pierre and Mark Cilloni from Pennoni Associates, and we're going and show the detail of the storm water upgrades, which we hope will alleviate the concerns that have been mentioned. In the meantime, we're also going to hand up to the committee some brochures that will be able to track the larger exhibits which Mark will use. My suspicion is that they're going to be smaller versions of what you're seeing with the larger boards. While they're setting up, I just want to take a moment just to clarify for the record, since we have heard a lot of discussion from various witnesses regarding where we are with the Supreme Court, and just for the record, again, we want to confirm 222 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 that, as Councilman Greenlee correctly noted, the Supreme Court has ruled, and as a result of that, we have our zoning, we have our supporting ordinances, and we have the approved plan of development. We intend to honor the rule of law and we hope that the neighbors will ultimately honor the rule of law and the City, and obviously the City Council as well, which has been very helpful throughout these proceedings to allow us the opportunity to present what we believe to be the facts and the real truth about the improvements that will accompany this project. So we're here for information's sake. We're going to continue both in this chamber and outside of this chamber to communicate with Council and with the community groups. We did not seek legal action to block these hearings, as we could 223 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 have. We intend to fully follow the rule of law. And, again, we hope that ultimately, with all of the facts in hand, that we'll be able to move forward cooperatively. So that's our statement. And with that, I'm going to introduce Mark Cilloni and Carl St. Pierre from Pennoni, who have been working from the beginning of this project to make sure that not only the water and storm water but also the sewage issues have been totally addressed. Also, one final comment. Councilman Greenlee asked a very pointed question, and for some reason, the answer didn't seem to be as pointed in return. The answer is, the $5 million was a requirement from the City in the nature of a gift, that basically the improvement that we're doing over and above our own site improvements is making the 224 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 infrastructure more conducive to improvements as the Water Department does its capital improvement project. But they said, Since you guys are working in the area, we would love for you guys to make this gift to us. And that was a part of the development agreement. We don't benefit from it. So your question was very perceptive. I think that the Commissioner, in all the excitement, didn't understand exactly what you were asking, but that $5 million contribution is soley for the benefit of the City, and we're happy to do it and we're legally obligated to do it. So with that, Mark, I'm going to hand it off to you.
Good afternoon, Madam President and Councilmembers my name's Mark Cilloni. I'm a civil engineer from Pennoni Associates. Pennoni Associates is a multi- disciplined engineering firm, with our 225 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 headquarters located in the City of Philadelphia for the past 42 years. I've been a civil engineer practicing land development at the firm for years, and the majority of 7 my land development experience is with 8 projects in the City. 9 We're very happy to be a part 10 of the Foxwoods project, and I'm here 11 to describe the project in detail and 12 answer any questions that you have and 13 assure you that it's a responsible 14 development from the safety, health, 15 and welfare of the general public in 16 terms of the civil infrastructure. 17 What I'd like to do -- if 18 you'd like, I have background on our 19 company and also a resume if you'd 20 like that submitted for information.
If there's a 226 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 microphone, it might be easier to walk up to the plan.
If there are mics available for Mark to use the boards, that would be super. MR. McPHERSON: They're fixing them now.
I want to give just a little bit of background. We started the project in terms of looking at the land development infrastructure improvements back in October of 2006. So it's been more than a year that we've been at the permit applications. And a lot of engineering work has progressed. There have been a lot of meetings with the City of Philadelphia, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, and also the Army Corps of Engineers to make sure that we've identified all of the permits and 227 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 improvements that are necessary for a facility of this size. We've had a dozen meetings and we've gotten a lot of good review comments. We've had a lot of working meetings. To date, all of the technical problems that we've received on our applications have been addressed, everything that's been identified to us. What I'd like to do is start out with an overview of the proposed water, sewer, and storm water management systems that are highlighted on the colored plan here and that you also have in your booklet. First, the water is fairly straightforward, the water connections. We have a connection for domestic service that goes down into Tasker Street and a fire connection that goes northward into Reed Street, 228 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 and you heard the commissioner say it's minor modifications. And we've already received a letter from the Water Department stating that they have adequate water supply, confirming that they can service this site for both the fire and domestic needs. Second, the sewer, sanitary sewer connection, we currently have a 12-inch connection to Reed Street that's shown in green on the plan. And we also have a 12-inch connection to Tasker Street, which is also shown in green coming down southward. That permits requires approval by the City also for collection, conveyance, and treatment capacity, and we've worked with the Water Department. And although we haven't received any permits because they're subject to some of the zoning issues of this hearing, all of the comments that we've received have been addressed in that application, and so 229 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 we anticipate its issuance. Last, I'd like to talk about is the storm water and we heard a lot from the civic association and the Water Department about the existing conditions in the area. And when we first met with the Water Department back -- I think it was in March of 2007 to review the storm water management for our department, they alerted us to the flooding conditions in the Pennsport section of the City, and they asked us to work with them to coordinate the improvements of this project such that they would complement the City improvements that they were undertaking and proposing as part of their study. After hearing their concerns, we made a conscious decision to deal with our storm water in what we felt was a proactive way to not exacerbate the flooding condition that exists in Pennsport. 230 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 The exhibit here, there's two pictures. The top picture or graphic indicates where the storm water goes today from our site. It's approximately -- a little over a 7 20-acre site, and you can see the 8 areas that are shaded in brown. This 9 portion currently gets into the Reed 10 Street sewer system, which is a 11 combined sewer system, which has the 12 sanitary, sewer, and the storm water 13 runoff in one pipe, and then there's a 14 portion on the south site that gets 15 into the Tasker Street sewer. 16 The middle portion of the site 17 that's green basically flows from 18 Christopher Columbus Boulevard east 19 directly into the river.
20 With the plan of development, since we were recognizing the issues with flooding in the community, we thought the best thing that we could do is not put any of our storm water into that pipe since it was during 231 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 storm events is when they were experiencing flooding conditions. So what we did is took the plan, we collected all of the roof runoff and all of the runoff from the remainder portion of the site, which is highlighted in green, and directed that directly to the river. That will ensure that none of the storm water from the Foxwoods site will get into the City's system and have a chance to exacerbate the flooding condition. It's the best thing that we could do for the storm water for our site There are also other best- management practices that were employed to meet the 2006 City storm water ordinance. We have a green roof as part of the project. We have hydrodynamic separators, which collect the suspended solids that's in the first flush of the runoff, and we collect that at two chamber locations, one at the end of Reed Street, one in 232 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 between two of the existing piers. And what we do is, we take out all of the -- 80 percent of the suspended solids that's in the storm water runoff. We capture it and then discharge the cleansed water into the river
So let me see if I can just clarify that in layman's terms. So with your system, less storm water will go into the public system, correct?
And of the storm water that goes into the river, it will be gray water, it will be cleaned. So that, as you call it, the suspended or the solids will be filtered out?
So, in effect, although some people don't want to believe our project is actually green 233 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 in the sense that it will improve after development the condition from what it currently exists today.
Yes. One of the initiatives of the Water Department is to separate storm water from the sanitary sewer, and our project accomplishes that. The one thing I'd like to comment on is, as part of the proposed ordinance, there is a condition to have an independent engineer review the storm water management design. And, you know, I took a look at that condition, and in our opinion, it's really not warranted. What we have is a very basic, simple system for the storm water collection and runoff. And since we're not putting any of the storm water into the City's system, it's pretty clear that we're not going to exacerbate the flooding condition. The Water Department 234 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 essentially agrees with that, has written a consistency letter, and forwarded it to the DEP for the issuance of our storm water management permit. And it's really the first time in my experience in the years 8 working in the City that there's been 9 a request to have an independent 10 engineer review the plans for this 11 type of development. 12 The Water Department, along 13 with the DEP and the Army Corps of 14 Engineers, have sufficient staff and 15 competent staff to make that 16 independent review. 17 Just as a background and 18 overview of the Dickinson Street 19 flooding history, like I said, it was 20 actually February 2007 when we sat down and met with the Water Department face-to-face to show them what we were proposing for a storm water management plan, and that's when they indicated to us that they were going to go 235 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 through sewer improvement projects to relieve the flooding along Reed Street and Tasker Street by constructing a new sewer in Dickinson Street. When we heard that, we worked with them to ensure that whatever we were doing was going to be consistent with their plan, and I wanted to show you how we've incorporated what their -- how their sewer improvement project has been incorporated to the design of our project. The first thing we did, since they were proposing a very large sewer, 7-feet-by-14-foot reinforced concrete-box culvert, it's a very large facility. We had to make sure there was room to get that sewer pipe from Columbus Boulevard through the site and out to the river. In order to accommodate that, what we're proposing is a right-of-way addition along Reed Street. There's currently a 50-foot-wide utility 236 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 right-of-way that exists on feet on each side of the property line, for a total of 50 feet. And we're proposing an additional feet on our side of 6 the property that basically is 7 restricted and reserved for the sewer 8 improvements. So that's property that 9 we restricted in order to benefit the 10 City's flood improvement project. 11 In addition, not only did 12 Foxwoods agree to the right-of-way 13 addition, but they also agreed to 14 design, get permits, and construct the 15 last portion of the sewer improvement 16 project that's been described by the 17 Water Department Commissioner. 18 The last leg of that basically 19 runs from Christopher Columbus 20 Boulevard right adjacent to our site, out to the river. And we've, in concept, come up with a plan that the Water Department has agreed to will meet their needs. There's a lot of details that need to be worked out, 237 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 but in concept, we've come to an agreement, and that's what was entered into the development agreement, that we would build this portion, since it's in direct proximity to our site, the portion of the sewer that would connect back to Water Street. As part of that sewer improvement -- and it's fairly significant. You heard the estimate. We think it could be in the range of 10 to $14 million.
Part of that is not only the box culvert edition; right now, there's an existing box culvert, and we're going to place one beside it that will probably more than double the capacity of the existing sewer, but we're also going to construct a new intercepting chamber, which will increase the capacity of water that can be converted back to the intercepting sewer that takes the raw sewage or untreated sewage down to the southeast water treatment plan. 238 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 And I think, as Carl said earlier, the flood improvements were not required. Where these improvements are being added to the project, they're not really required to benefit the casino site. In other words, we could build the casino without these improvements, and there's sufficient City infrastructure to service the casino. But these additional improvements -- the land and the sewer construction -- was offered in good faith in terms of getting the development agreement accomplished. So I think they've done more than their fair share in terms of helping the City and the community.
And just -- there was one comment we heard from the Streets Department. Can you just confirm if it's accurate? Our plan of development, as approved by the Planning Commission, is the development 239 4/4/08 - RULES COMMITTEE - 080027, 080028 that we plan to build. There was some, I guess --
-- alternative scheme that was discussed or something like that.