DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON RULES Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, February 22, 2012 10:05 a.m. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN WILLIAM K. GREENLEE, CHAIR COUNCILWOMAN CINDY BASS COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN BILL GREEN COUNCILMAN BOBBY HENON COUNCILMAN JAMES KENNEY COUNCILMAN DENNIS O'BRIEN COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN MARK SQUILLA BILL 120004 - An ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Torresdale Avenue, Megargee Street, Cottage Street... BILL 120021 - An ordinance repealing Bill No. 070955-AA (approved December 21, 2007)... BILL 120023 - An ordinance amending the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Chestnut Street, 2nd Street, Walnut Street... BILL 120024 - An ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Snyder Avenue, the Delaware River, Pattison Avenue... - - - DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com
Good morning, everyone. This is the Committee on Rules. For the record, we have a quorum with Councilman O'Brien, Councilman Green, Councilwoman Bass and Councilman Goode, and I know other members of the Committee will be coming, and myself, Bill Greenlee. Ms. Marconi, will you please read the title of the first bill before us today.
Bill No. 120024, an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Snyder Avenue, the Delaware River, Pattison Avenue and the Delaware Expressway. (Witness approached witness table.)
Mr. Kramer, please identify yourself and proceed. DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC.
Good morning, Councilman Greenlee, members of the Rules Committee. I am William Kramer, Division Director of the Development Division of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here to testify on Bill 8 No. 120024, which was introduced into City Council January 26, 2012. Bill No. 120024 amends the Philadelphia Zoning Maps in the area generally bounded by Snyder Avenue, the Delaware River, Pattison Avenue and the Delaware Expressway. The purpose of Bill No. 120024 is to rezone a number of sites currently being used for port-related uses from their existing zoning designations of "LR" Least Restricted to "PI" Port Industrial. This change will allow these properties to continue to be used for port-related activities while protecting the area from other noxious uses such as refineries and car-crushing facilities. Some vacant parcels will also be rezoned DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. to "PI" Port Industrial so they may be redeveloped for port-related use. Additionally, the new Zoning Code becoming effective in August of this year, Bill No. 120024 will help many of the existing uses from becoming considered non-conforming uses, which often require relief from the Zoning Board when they are expanded. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission at its meeting of February 21, 2012 recommended that Bill No. 120024 be approved. That is my testimony. If there's any questions, I'd be happy to try to answer them for you.
Thank you, Mr. Kramer. Any questions? Also please let the record reflect that Councilwoman Reynolds Brown is present. If you just hold one second, I think Councilman Green may have had a DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. question. Councilman Green.
Thank you, Mr. Kramer. Just a couple of quick questions. Have all of the property owners impacted been spoken to and are they okay with the changes that are being made to the zoning designations of the property?
It is my understanding that this was done in coordination with my staff and the Whitman Council and that the individual property owners were in fact contacted, but that was not specifically done by my staff. That was sort of a committee that was working within that area under the direction of current Councilman Squilla.
Okay. But don't you think we should know if the property owners, if you come before us and you're the only person testifying, if property owners are in favor of or against a change, a zoning designation to DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. their property? I'm very uncomfortable -- I mean, I may or may not think it's a good idea, but I'm very uncomfortable not knowing where a property owner stands on a change that affects their property, that impacts potentially the taxes they pay and that impacts their potential future uses.
It is my understanding that the proposed changes in here were specifically done for many areas that were under the Philadelphia Port and was done in coordination with them. This was certainly not done in a vacuum. Can I say that each and every property owner was specifically hand-notified? No, I can't. Typically what we also do is post these properties so that the bill is posted out there, and this was -- the young lady on my staff that has done this is currently out with surgery, so I can't contact her and say, Give me the DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. heads-up. But I do know that there were several meetings on this. This is something that went on for some period of time and there were public meetings in the community with regards to this as far as drafting this ordinance and putting it together.
So when you're changing a property from Least Restricted to "G-2," you're lowering the value of that property, aren't you?
I hesitate to say it's lowering or raising the value of a particular property. It depends on what you're using it for. "G-2" is a rather heavy industrial classification and most of the stuff that you can do in "G-2" -- the difference between the two classifications is not usually and vastly different. You can still do outdoor manufacturing in "G-2," which you can do in "LR."
Fewer uses are available, which, in theory, makes DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. the property less valuable.
Actually, I don't know if there's fewer or more, but the bigger headache is the fact that when you have "LR" versus "G-2," the "LR" uses are generally considered more noxious. In other words, the car crushing and the junkyards are not -- you don't have to do anything. You can just go in and store junk cars and crush them and do other things that are -- things that a city needs in terms of its use package, but you sort of have to be really careful as to where you put that.
For example, UPS, we're taking them from Least Restricted to "G-2."
I mean, UPS is a big employer in this city. Are they okay with that change?
It makes no 24 difference. The "LR" or "G-2" would permit the use that they're doing. DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC.
It permits their current use, but that doesn't answer my question.
I was at the meetings. I was President of Whitman Council at the time. We organized a meeting with the Planning Commission with all the landowners throughout this area. We invited all of them to the meeting. I would say 80 percent of them did come. We also sent them letters of what was going to happen, why the meeting was going to be taking place. This was a big community concern. Least Restricted, we believe that the community let the landowner have a lot of uses that the community wasn't comfortable with, and also we believe that as-of-right they were allowed to do a lot of things that we couldn't control DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. as a community. We talked to most of the landowners there, which is mostly port use in that vicinity, and we went through with the Planning Commission to come up with a design, with a lot of the property owners there at the meetings and even the PRPA at the time, and came up with this plan. And we thought this was the best plan for the community and the best plan moving forward. Not to say that the landowners cannot get a variance, but they would also have to involve the community and City Council in order to do that.
Okay. Well, I mean, my questions are really for Mr. Kramer. Just for future Rules Committee testimony, I'm going to want to know if property owners approve or disapprove. This is a down zoning of people's property, which, in theory, is a taking, which can result in the City having to DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. pay the difference between people uses if anybody brings a lawsuit. Now, it's very unlikely this has happened. Obviously Councilman Squilla has involved the community and given an opportunity for these people to say it, but between the Planning Commission and your testimony and future hearings, I want to know if property owners have actually been met with and if they approve or disapprove of a particular zoning change to their property. And that doesn't necessarily influence my vote, but I think that's something you should be prepared to tell us --
First, let the record also reflect Councilman DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. Kenney is present, the Vice-Chair of the Committee, and Councilman Henon, a member of the Committee, and we already heard from Councilman Squilla. Councilwoman Reynolds Brown.
Good morning. Good morning. Some of the questions raised by Councilman Bill Green are very well taken in that too often we arrive at this place to discover that those -- Councilman Goode firmly acknowledges it doesn't have to be uniform agreement, but it's imperative that community members that are going to be impacted are informed. So, Councilman Squilla, in your remarks, I couldn't get a handle on where you are with this proposed initiative.
I'm in favor of this initiative. As the President of Whitman Council, we met with the community, had several meetings over this. This was an eight-month process that we took going forward to meet with DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. all the landowners and the community over this. This had started because of some of the property in that area as-of-right were allowed to be strip clubs.
"LR" Least Restricted. And the property owned by these individuals, we could not argue them, we could not fight them. As a community, we had no say. And also as a community, we had a lot of workers who worked in the port area and we thought that the longshoremen, the teamsters and the people like that, we should have their back too and protect them to make sure these grounds were used for the proper use. And, again, if a variance would be requested, us as a community would have a say, along with City Council, to make sure as-of-right people just don't put an incinerator or a strip club or anything like that on the property. DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC.
And for my own understanding of the process in your department, "posted" means what? Talk through what that looks like.
It's a white poster. It's roughly 11-by-17, maybe a little bigger than that. It's printed actually by the Clerk's Office with a lot of blanks, that we then put in the bill 11 number, the date of the hearing and the boundaries of the particular rezoning bill.
Absolutely. I've done that for -- I've been doing these for 20-some years and we've done those in a lot of neighborhoods.
I will tell you we've gone out and posted and in some of the larger areas, you can post and by the DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. time you get to finish, as you're driving back to the office, you can find half of them are gone, but you do the best you can with it. And these are never done without meeting with the community and having community support. Not only does this Council ask those questions, but also does my Commission, and they will put us on the hot seat if we don't do these with community support. I'm not going to tell you we have 100 percent community agreement.
Well, truly, but as you would say, you do have to notify the community of what you want to do and why you want to do it.
Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Kenney. DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just to give you some historical perspective, when I first started dealing with the port, which is over 30 years ago, the port's zone was traditionally right south of Penn's Landing proper all the way down to Packer Avenue and around towards the Navy Yard. As development increased over the years and more and more residential and recreational uses became apparent in the port zone, the port activities were shifted further and further south. So that initially you'd say the border was Christian Street, then it became Washington Avenue, then it became Tasker Street, and now it's almost Oregon Avenue. And I think what Councilman Squilla and the community and even the port folks want to do is maintain areas of land that are port-related, period. I'm ambivalent about a strip club being there. Probably it's better it's there than it is in somebody's DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. neighborhood, because there's nobody living there, but could that land have been better used for car storage or for -- I know, for example, there's a plan that's not been completed yet, but a planned construction of one of the largest robotic refrigerated warehouses in the country in the old Food Distribution site. That would certainly inure to the benefit of the port, because we'd have more opportunities for imports than we do today. So I think in order to make sure that we have port-related businesses and a place for them to be, this type of legislation preserves that opportunity and doesn't allow those properties to be used for non-port-related purposes. So I think overall in the long term, it's a safety valve or safety net for port jobs and for teamster jobs and for longshoremen jobs. So, I mean, I think that the legislation is pretty sound, and if you DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. look at some of the land that's being rezoned, there's not been a plan of action on those parcels for quite some time, and maybe creating this requirement that it's port related will bring some port-related planning to those sites. Thank you.
Thank you, Councilman, for that background. Councilman Green.
Thank you. Actually, most of the land is already zoned port and most of it -- and very little of it is being rezoned port. It's going from "LR" to "G-2." But I understand your basic point, and it would be a good one if the Port Authority of Philadelphia was even aware of this change. However, I mean, I'm not opposed to this. My only point is to the Planning Commission, which is in the future when you testify before me anyway and you want to change the zoning DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. designation of someone's property, I want to know whether they approve or disapprove of that change. That's all. Thank you.
Thank you. And, Councilman Squilla, I assume you want this to move with a suspension of the rules?
Thank you. Any other questions or comments? (No response.)
Seeing none, thank you. Ms. Marconi, will you please read the next bill before us.
Bill No. 120023, an ordinance amending the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. located within an area bounded by Chestnut Street, 2nd Street, Walnut Street and 3rd Street, all under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning, Councilman Greenlee, members of the Rules Committee. I am William Kramer, Division Director of the Development Planning Division of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here today to testify on Bill No. 120023, which was introduced by Councilmember Squilla January 26, 2012. Bill No. 120023 amends the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by amending the zoning designation of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Chestnut Street, 2nd Street, Walnut Street and 3rd Street. The purpose of this bill is to rezone the property at the corner of 3rd Street and Chestnut Street from "REC" DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. Recreation to "C-3" Commercial zoning. The property will be owned by the National Center for the American Revolution. That ownership dictates a change in the zoning designation because the Recreation classification of the Philadelphia Zoning Code only allows land owned by the City, State or federal government to be zoned "REC" Recreation. The developer plans to demolish the existing structure to construct a museum dedicated to the American Revolution. The plans for the building have not been completed. However, massing studies and agreements with the National Park Service have allowed a degree of certainty that the "C-3" Commercial designation will be adequate for the proposed development. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission at their meeting of February 21, 2012 considered Bill No. 120023 and recommended that it be approved. That concludes my testimony. I appreciate the opportunity to appear and DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. will answer any questions you may have.
Thank you, Mr. Kramer. Any questions for Mr. Kramer?
Thank you. I'm sure the novelty of being on Rules will wear off on me, Mr. Kramer.
My question is this: A museum use is permitted under its current Recreation zoning.
So why does the developer need this to be a commercial zoning if the use is currently permitted?
Because of the nature of what Recreation is written as, wherein you have to be a city, state or federal museum in order to be a qualified DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. use in Recreation. If you are an outside agency, which is a private-interest agency that is proposing this new museum, then you would wind up in front of the Zoning Board because the L&I Department would not issue a permit based on the fact that the ownership is not a municipal, state or federal institution. So subsequently in order to avoid having to go to the Zoning Board, you change the classification to "C-3" Commercial. It permits the museum use, and the use is consistent with the park land. And because this is park land, the Park was involved in a land swap deal. You may have remembered this was originally something proposed in the Valley Forge area and was back and forth in the papers. I'm sure Mr. Sklaroff can explain a lot better than I can what that is.
It's under the DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. jurisdiction of the National Park Service.
I could be wrong on that one. I haven't checked that, but Mr. Sklaroff I'm sure would be able to answer that.
Gee, you thought you might not have to testify today.
Good morning. My name is Neil Sklaroff. I am an attorney and I represent the National Center for the American Revolution. One of the reasons for the rezoning is that "REC" is defined and DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. designed for lands that are publicly held, whether by the City, by the State or in this case by the federal government. Now, the federal government is not controlled by the City zoning ordinances and build a building there. In order for a private entity, a private landowner, to develop or operate other than exactly the way that the National Park Service has operated the property, we need to have a zoning that allows private uses. And after meeting with the Deputy Mayor and Commerce Director Alan Greenberger, we agreed that most of the properties in the area that were privately owned were zoned "C-3." A few properties are zoned "C-4," but we didn't believe, following our negotiations with the National Park Service, that we needed that kind of expansive use and so "C-3" was fine with us.
Given the neighborhood and the concerns that would probably exist in the community if this DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. were to be anything other than a museum, are there height restrictions there? Are there limitations on the "C-3" use that would -- I mean, can you go up stories 6 if we rezone it "C-3" and put residential 7 on top of a museum? What happens if the 8 museum doesn't get its funding and this 9 property is now "C-3"? 10
There is an 11 intricate deed and set of deed 12 restrictions that are incorporated within 13 that deed. The National Park Service, in 14 accordance with the National Historic 15 Preservation Act, went through a Section 16 106 process, which required outreach to a 17 vast array of stakeholders. 18
I don't want 19 to know the process. I just want to know 20 what will be permitted there if we make it "C-3."
And, therefore, what came out of that was a set of massing restrictions, and also if we don't develop it for a museum, they have DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. a right of first refusal to purchase the property back from us. And the fact that given within the massing restrictions that are in the deed, there's little else we can do. Plus our mission is education about the American Revolution and, therefore, we're not in the business of doing anything else. However, when it comes down to it, could the property be sold? Yes. While it's in the borders of the Independence National Historic District, it is not strictly controlled by the National Park Service or the federal government. It has -- there's still some private property rights, and we do have those. But our intention is and we have -- we're almost two-thirds of the way funded. We've been working on this for more than a decade, and we will have the only museum in the United States dedicated to telling the story and the legacy of the American Revolution.
Mr. Kramer, DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. are there massing restrictions in the deed that you're aware of, and what would they permit?
I'm not aware of the deed restrictions involved with this property. That's been an ongoing discussion between the National Park Service and Mr. Sklaroff and his client.
But we have provided to the Planning Commission the massing studies that are based on that --
It's 80-some feet, I believe. Do you have the massing studies?
To the rear of us is the Customs House, which is a DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. building that's much taller.
Obviously we're across from the Second Bank, I think it is, and our cornice line very scientifically has been lined up with that. Then we go a little higher as we step back. There is a lot of process that went into what the massing study would be, and we do have an illustration, if I may approach. This illustrates the massing included in the deed.
If I may, to answer your specific question about "C-3," specifically under the current code, "C-3" does not have a specific height limit. It is limited under FAR and it's either 450 or 550 percent of the square footage of the lot, is what's permitted in a "C-3" district. And that difference is depending if it's all commercial use, you can have a bigger DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. building. If it's got a combination of residential, it's 450. And so that means if you were to go property line to property line, the most you could do is like four, four and a half stories in terms of height. Now, you can certainly wedding-cake it in and have a higher building if that's what you wanted to try to do, but the practical side of this, this site is about 180 by a little more than 200 feet. By the time you put in an elevator core, you're not going to be able to go up that significantly higher.
Is "C-3" required? Is that the minimum zoning designation?
For the site for a private property owner doing a museum?
I'll answer that. It is. For the massing studies and the proposals that they've put forward, yes. It is also consistent with a lot of the DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. zoning classifications in that area.
In the Old City area, which this abuts, it's mostly "C-3." Most of the area is already "C-3."
If I may, the deed restrictions will follow the property, and if we were to sell the property, the deed restrictions would still be there. Only the National Park Service could relieve the property owner from those restrictions.
So who do we rely on -- the National Park Service has to enforce these restrictions or they're not enforceable by any other party and --
If you're not a museum and they don't exercise DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. their right of first refusal, do these restrictions go away or do they stay?
It would be my position that the National Park Service is the only one who can enforce the restrictions. Now, separate from this and as a result of the Section 106 process, the National Park Service entered into an agreement, a programmatic agreement, with a number of stakeholders, including the City of Philadelphia, so that they have certain responsibilities with regard to enforcement. And I don't want to speak to that agreement. We're not signatories to that agreement, but there are many signatories to that agreement, and the things that are included in the deed, including the treatment of historic and national resources that are underground, are rather extensive. But I would imagine that somebody under the programmatic agreement would have some leverage on the National Park Service to enforce what's DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. in the deed.
So there's agreements with the City of Philadelphia that are not presented to us with respect to consideration of the zoning change. Once again, Mr. Kramer, I'd ask you to please make sure our file is full before you come before us. Thank you.
I'm not sure anybody other than the National Park Service and the programmatic signatories to that were aware of the programmatic agreements. There is a deed in the file 16 that we provided that has the -- would verify the massing studies.
Before I recognize Councilwoman Bass, could we have a copy just for the record so everybody is comfortable with what you presented here?
Mr. Sklaroff doesn't have that original. My office does, and I will make certain that that DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. gets to you. That's not a problem.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Councilwoman Bass.
Good morning. I just have a couple of questions. Can you tell me what the existing structure is? What is the building that's there now?
The existing structure was originally a visitors center. It is not considered one of the more attractive buildings in the City, and it was used for archeological storage of materials, and the archeological team from the National Park Service diligently worked there and now across the street in the Bank Building. It was originally designed as two kind of movie theatre DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. sections to it and a large open area in the middle, which had been cut off somewhat into offices and to work areas for the re-creation of the archeologists that put together a lot of fragments.
It was not generally open to the public, though they allowed, I guess, tours.
Okay. And as far as changing the zoning from Recreation to Commercial, is that something that you would normally talk to the City's Parks and Recs Department about that change or is that something in which you would notify them about a change such as that?
We went to the Councilman, we think was the most appropriate person. We didn't go to DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. the -- I don't know that Parks and Rec has any -- had no authority over the federal government, and they're probably, if they had knowledge, it would be incidental. When it became private property, there was a need to change that on your part.
Not necessarily in terms of having authority but just information, is just what I was thinking.
We would normally make sure that that would happen if it were actually under the jurisdiction of the Rec and Park Department. We would definitely have had those conversations.
But if it's not directly under their jurisdiction, even though it's zoned Recreation, you don't really --
Right. Not all DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. land zoned Recreation comes under the Rec/Park Department. In this instance, it's under the National Park Service. That's who Mr. Sklaroff and his clients were dealing with. And if it had been a City-owned piece of land or structures, then the discussion would have been with the City departments and whoever would have been involved.
Thank you, Councilwoman. Just one question, Mr. Sklaroff. I know all the details aren't finalized. Is there a timeframe you're working on where you'd actually like to see the building existing?
You'll see from DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. the project fact sheet, about two-thirds, a little less than two-thirds of the funds have been committed. We continue to raise funds. We're in a design process. The firm of Robert A.M. Stern, which was working with us in Valley Forge, continues to work with us, but we're not yet ready to put a design out there. When we are, I think maybe if Council was interested, we invite you all down to the current center and ask you to see what we have. We have been in communications with the local civic association, from whom we have a letter of support for this rezoning, but we intend to make it a very public process. It's been a very public process up to now.
Okay. Thank you. And it seems like a pretty good location for such a museum.
Any other questions or comments? DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. (No response.)
Seeing none, Ms. Marconi -- thank you. Anyone else here to testify? I'm sorry. (No response.)
Bill No. 120021, an ordinance repealing Bill No. 070955-AA (approved December 21, 2007), entitled "An ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Burholme Avenue, Napfle Avenue, Burholme Avenue, Hartel Avenue, Hasbrook Avenue, Central Avenue, Cottman Avenue, Fillmore Avenue and Shelmire Avenue (Extended)."
Good morning, Chairman Greenlee, members of the Rules DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. Committee. I am William Kramer, Division Director of the Development Planning Division of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I'm here today to testify on Bill No. 120021, which was introduced into Council January 26, 2012. Bill No. 120021 repeals Bill 9 No. 070955-AA, which was approved December 21, 2007. The original bill 11 approved the expansion of the Fox Chase Cancer Center's Institutional Development District into Burholme Park. The sale of this property to the Center never went through based on legal action that prohibited the sale. Bill No. 120021 will effectively repeal this IDD expansion into the Park and will result in the Master Plan for this area to be invalidated and the zoning returned to its previous zoning designation of "REC" Recreational. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission at its meeting of February 21, DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. 2012 recommended that Bill No. 120021 be approved as an item in accord with previous policy. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
And I know Councilman O'Neill has representatives here and I assume he's in support of the bill. Thank you. Any questions or comments? (No response.)
Seeing none, anyone else here to testify? Mr. Maurer, I think you're on the record here. (Witness approached witness table.)
Fred Maurer. I have written testimony for the Committee and for the --
It will be distributed. Go ahead. DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC.
I'll read my testimony. On behalf of Save Burholme Park and 4,000 petitioners and all public park users, I welcome this repeal motion to remove the technical IDD faults placed on the City Zoning Map and I support this repeal motion of Ordinance 55-AA. At long last, the 30 years effort of a private party goal is to take this public park to a now end, and I thank Councilman O'Neill for this repeal introduction. I am sorry I cannot thank City Council or the last Mayor Street or the present Mayor Nutter or the host of City officers who violated their oath of office to uphold the laws faithfully. They all willfully conspired or made conscious mistakes against the public rights, that public parks are for the public welfare forever. That rights of public welfare was vested when William Penn planned City parks before the first City Charter of DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. 1701 and it was placed in the City consolidation map of 1854 and also placed in the Cities of First Class laws. It was your elected duty to maintain public parks for the people's use only. Most of you are lawyers or in the practice of creation and applying the laws, but when it came down to speak or vote on these matters, you all put private motives against the rights of the people. It was not a valid councilmanic prerogative on public parks. City Council chose to enrich a few patrons to take away land that was dedicated as public land to be held in parks perpetually. And I ask, do you know that fact? When we citizens appealed to protect our parks, everyone on the City payroll voted against us. The City Planning Commission cheated. Even the City Solicitor compromised on the truth. And I ask, do they know the DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. laws? I make this testimony a teaching moment for you. The unpaid volunteers to support our park bore an undue burden. We were even slapped with a $10 million lawsuit. City Council changed the laws twice to oppose us. Governor Rendell had created this situation when he conspired to take Burholme Park and he gave $10 million of public funds for this private party's inside plan. Even ex-Governor Mark Schweiker spoke against us. Both Governors violated the State Constitution of Bill of Rights, Article 1, Section 27, I think it is, on public lands. When Judge Herron ruled in the Estate of Robert Ryerrs, Orphans Court, DE 1896, the ruling was on December 9, 2008, he denied the City to take any park lands; that once it is a park, it stays a park. All appeals have now been sustained, but the City neglected to do DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. this fix or the records until now. It is time to end this six-year battle and restore Burholme Park in whole with this repeal. This battle we had was with the institutions of Fox Chase Cancer Center and the partnership of Temple University. We have prevented a major default. The delusions of Dr. Young in his years 11 dream plan was based upon future 12 unlimited funding, but it has fallen 13 flat. We now know they need financial 14 rescue, because they overreached. 15 If we did not oppose you in 16 court, this park jewel would have been 17 lost and replaced with a monstrosity 18 failure. 19 I think we, Save Burholme Park, 20 merits public thanks and restitutions. In the future, I advise City Council to honor the words of Park Director Phil Goldsmith who said that parks are for the people. Thank you. DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC.
Thank you. And you certainly have the right to your opinion. I was a member of Council at that time, and without going into a long rehash of it, let me just say I disagree with many of the things you say. And that monstrosity, I just will add, and what was going to happen in there was, people were going to try to cure and fight cancer. So just for the record. You have your opinion; we have ours. Thank you, Mr. Maurer. Thank you.
Since you made your statement, please give me a chance to respond to your statement. That was a 20-year plan, 20-year plan of a billion dollars. You thought you were going to get money. That was never funded. And with that coming in, you would have torn down all the trees and put in new roads and we'd have lost all the green space that was dedicated to be public parks forever. DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. Unfortunately, you made a mistake, Mr. Greenlee, and --
I would have chatted with you and informed you about more of the details of what was behind it.
I was aware of the details, sir. Thank you. Any other questions or comments? (No response.)
Anybody else here to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, I assume we want a suspension of the rules on this, too. Thank you. Ms. Marconi, will you please read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 120004, an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Torresdale Avenue, Megargee Street, Cottage Street, Placid Street, Frankford Avenue and Tolbut Street.
Good morning, Chairman Greenlee and members of the Rules Committee. I'm William Kramer, Division Director of the Development Division of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I'm here to testify on Bill No. 120004, which was introduced into City Council January 26, 2012. Bill No. 120004 amends the Philadelphia Zoning Maps in the area generally bounded by Torresdale Avenue, Megargee Street, Cottage Street, Placid Street, Frankford Avenue and Tolbut Street. The site in question was the former location of the Liddonfield DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. Apartments, which housed approximately 412 residential units in over 40 structures. These structures have been demolished and the site is currently vacant land. Bill No. 120004 will rezone this site from its existing zoning designation of "R-11A" Residential to a new zoning classification of "R-9A" Residential. The new classification of "R-9A" Residential mirrors the zoning of the areas immediately adjacent to this property and would only permit the construction of single-family dwellings on the site. Additionally, to fully develop this site, we expect that other councilmanic actions would be necessary, an example being the placement of new streets on the City Plan. It should be noted that this property is owned by the Philadelphia Housing Authority and is currently the subject of a request for proposals. Depending upon what type of development is chosen, a second rezoning bill may be DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. necessary. However, while this interim zoning change will make the zoning designation of the property more consistent with the surrounding neighborhood, to approve it at this time would possibly influence the selection process ongoing at PHA. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission at its meeting of February 21, 2012 requested an additional 45 days for consideration of Bill No. 120004 in order to allow the PHA selection process to be completed. That completes my testimony. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you, Mr. Kramer. I just want to add for the record that this bill and the zoning change is a simple zoning change that conforms with the adjacent neighborhood. DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. I understand that they are currently -- the PHA is in the current process of an RFP, which, by the way, isn't out on the street. The RFP has been -- the deadline was in early January. So this is after -- I waited until after the process of the RFP being submitted to the Housing Authority. I met with the Housing Authority Executive Director Mike Kelly last week, let him and his staff know that I'm willing to work with PHA and the surrounding communities, as always, once a bidder has been selected. To this point, they haven't selected any kind of -- they haven't selected a builder for any of the development as it stands. I thank you for your testimony today, especially the part where you say that it is a -- the zoning conforms with the existing adjacent neighborhood. So all this does is keep it kind of vanilla until a developer has -- and I'm willing to work with anybody moving forward. DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC.
And I assume, Councilman, that the community is obviously in favor of this bill, because it does keep it consistent with the rest of the community.
Absolutely. It was a reaction and a request from the communities, in consultation with the Philadelphia Planning Commission's Planning and Strategy Pilot Program that you've been performing throughout the City. So it conforms with their wishes and their great work that they've done with the Planning Commission moving forward.
I would add to that, sir, that the Holmesburg Civic Association was at our meeting yesterday afternoon and did testify in support of this legislation.
Oh, okay. Thank you. DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC.
And my understanding is, Councilman, you would like the bill to move forward today without a suspension to give a little more time for discussion; is that correct?
I would like the bill to move forward and be voted out with a favorable recommendation without suspension of the rules, correct.
Right. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions, comments for Mr. Kramer? (No response.)
Anyone else here who would like to testify or say anything? (No response.)
Okay. That concludes our Committee on Rules today. I'll just warn the Committee, usually we don't get done in an hour, but DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. just be prepared, as the Councilpeople who have been on the Committee know. The meeting of the Committee will proceed momentarily. Thank you. (Pause.)
Thank you. This is now the meeting of the Committee on Rules, and the Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney regarding Bill No. 120024.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No. 14 120024 be moved out of Committee favorably and a rules suspension to allow first reading at our next Council session. (Duly seconded.)
Hearing DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. none, Bill No. 120024 is reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and with a rules suspension to allow for first reading at our next session. Councilman Kenney on Bill No. 7 120023.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No. 10 120023 be reported out of this Committee favorably and a request made for rules suspension to allow first reading at our next Council session. (Duly seconded.)
Hearing none, Bill No. 120023 is reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation with a rules suspension. The Chair recognizes DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. Councilwoman Reynolds Brown regarding Bill No. 120021.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 120021 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move for the suspension of the rules. (Duly seconded.)
The record will reflect Councilman Kenney voted no. Bill No. 120021 reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation with a rules suspension. The Chair recognizes Councilman Henon regarding Bill No. 120004.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I recommend that Bill No. 25 120004 be voted out of Committees with a DiscoveryWorks Global 888.557.8650 www.dw-global.com 2/22/12 - RULES - BILL 120004, ETC. favorable recommendation with no 3 suspension of the rules. (Duly seconded.)
Hearing none, Bill No. 120004 is reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation. There being no further business, I appreciate everybody's participation today. Thank you. com CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings, evidence and objections are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the foregoing matter on February 22, 2012, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. -------------------- MICHELE L. com vacant 3:25 49:6 vacuum 6:17 valid 43:12 Valley 23:18 38:7 valuable 8:2 value 7:12,14 valve 17:21 vanilla 51:23 variance 10:13 13:19 vast 26:17 vastly 7:20 verify 33:17 versus 8:6 vested 42:24 Vice-Chair 12:2 vicinity 10:5 violated 42:17 44:15 visitors 34:17 35:14 volunteers 44:5 vote 11:15 43:10 voted 43:22 53:10 56:18,25 W W 1:9 waited 51:7 Walnut 1:20 20:3 20:21 want 10:21 11:10 15:18,19 16:21 18:25 19:2,9 26:18,19 32:15 47:19 50:22 wanted 30:9 warehouses 17:8 warn 53:24 Washington 16:17 wasn't 9:22 way 16:8 25:10 27:20 51:4 wear 22:11 wedding-cake 30:8 Wednesday 1:6 week 51:12 welcome 42:6 welfare 42:22,23 went 7:4 10:5 26:15 29:12 35:23 40:14 we're 8:17 27:8,19 29:5 32:15 38:5,9 we've 14:20,24 27:20 white 14:6 Whitman 5:14 9:10 12:22 willfully 42:19 William 1:8 3:4 20:10 40:2 42:24 48:12 willing 51:13,24 WILSON 1:9 wind 23:5 wishes 52:13 witness 2:21,21 24:12,12 41:17,17 words 8:8 45:22 work 35:4 38:8 51:13,25 52:14 worked 13:14 34:23 workers 13:13 working 5:18 27:20 28:22 37:19 38:7 written 22:23 41:22 wrong 24:6 Y Yard 16:9 year 4:6 years 14:20 16:6,10 42:10 45:10 yesterday 52:21 young 6:23 45:10 Z zone 16:6,13 zoned 18:14 21:10 25:17,18 36:23 37:2 zoning 1:14,15,19 1:19,22,22 2:16 2:16 3:11,18 4:4,9 5:9,25 10:23 11:13 18:25 19:24 19:24 20:18,19 21:2,6,8 22:16,20 23:6,11 25:6,12 30:16 31:2 33:6 35:16 39:14,14 40:21,22 42:8 47:25,25 48:19 49:7,9,11 50:3,3 50:23,24 51:21 $ $10 44:7,11 0 070955-AA 1:17 39:11 40:9 1 44:16 10:05 1:6 10:55 57:19 100 15:12,15 106 26:16 32:8 11-by-17 14:7 120004 1:14 3:1 4:1 5:1 6:1 7:1 8:1 9:1 10:1 11:1 12:1 13:1 14:1 15:1 16:1 17:1 18:1 19:1 20:1 21:1 22:1 23:1 24:1 25:1 26:1 27:1 28:1 29:1 30:1 31:1 32:1 33:1 34:1 35:1 36:1 37:1 38:1 39:1 40:1 41:1 42:1 43:1 44:1 45:1 46:1 47:1,23 48:1 48:16,18 49:1,6 50:1,12 51:1 52:1 53:1 54:1 55:1 56:1,22,25 57:1 57:12 120021 1:17 39:10 40:6,8,17 41:2 56:3,5,18 120023 1:18 19:22 20:14,17 21:22 55:7,10,22 120024 1:21 2:14 3:8,10,15 4:6,13 54:11,14 55:2 1701 43:2 180 30:11 1854 43:3 1896 44:20 2 2nd 1:20 20:3,21 2/22/12 3:1 4:1 5:1 6:1 7:1 8:1 9:1 10:1 11:1 12:1 13:1 14:1 15:1 16:1 17:1 18:1 19:1 20:1 21:1 22:1 23:1 24:1 25:1 26:1 27:1 28:1 29:1 30:1 31:1 32:1 33:1 34:1 35:1 36:1 37:1 38:1 39:1 40:1 41:1 42:1 43:1 44:1 45:1 46:1 47:1 48:1 49:1 50:1 51:1 52:1 53:1 54:1 55:1 56:1 57:1 20 26:5 45:10 20-some 14:20 20-year 46:18,19 200 30:12 2007 1:17 39:12 40:10 2008 44:21 2012 1:6 3:9 4:13 20:16 21:22 40:7 41:2 48:17 50:11 58:7 21 1:17 4:12 21:22 39:12 40:10,25 50:10 22 1:6 58:7 26 3:9 20:16 40:7 48:17 27 44:16 3rd 20:4,22,24 30 16:6 42:10 4,000 42:5 40 49:3 400 1:5 412 49:3 45 50:11 450 29:21 30:3 55-AA 42:9 550 29:21 80 9:15 80-some 28:18 9 44:20