COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON RULES Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, June 8, 2010 10:25 a.m. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN JAMES KENNEY, CHAIR COUNCILMAN DARRELL CLARKE COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN WILLIAM K. GREENLEE COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN BILLS 100199, 100200, 100222, 100287, 100311, 100367 and 100377 - - - 2
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. The Council Committee on Rules is now in session with a quorum, including Councilmember Miller, Goode, Greenlee, Clarke, and Vice-Chairman, myself, Councilman Kenney. The Clerk will read the Bill 10 No. 100287.
100287, an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Lindbergh Boulevard, 58th Street, Eastwick Avenue (extended), and 61st Street. (Witness approached witness table.)
Thank you very much. Mr. Kramer, please identify yourself for the record.
Good morning, 3 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. Chairman Kenney, 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 7 No. 100287, which was introduced into City Council April 29th, 2010. Bill No. 100287 amends the Philadelphia Zoning Maps for an area bounded by Lindbergh Boulevard, 58th Street, Eastwick Avenue, and 61st Street by changing the zoning designation from the existing classification of "G-2" General Industrial to a classification of "C-2" Commercial. The change is being requested in order to allow for the development of the site as a new church facility for the Open Door True Light Church. The proposal is for the construction of a new church facility housing a sanctuary, a family life center and providing for 350 parking spaces. The church will have a seating capacity of 1,500 members, as well as a 4 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. multi-purpose room with a commercial kitchen for church and community use. Anticipated in a Phase 2 aspect of the development is the creation of a family life center, which will provide a daycare center, job training and recreation facilities. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission at its meeting of May 18th, 2010 recommended that Bill No. 100287 be approved. This is the conclusion of my testimony. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you very much, Mr. Kramer. I also recognize the presence of Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds Brown as part of the Committee. Any questions for Mr. Kramer? (No response.)
Seeing none, thank you very much. Bishop Maureen Davis, please. 5 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Good morning, Mr. Chairman. My name is Darwin Beauvais. I represent Open Door True Light Church. I do have here to my left Bishop Maureen Davis and to your right, I have Elder George Davis. Before she gives her testimony, I just want to give some background as to the project. In 2008, the church, which currently sits at 52nd and Parrish, is now looking to move to 58th and Lindbergh. They purchased a nine-acre site that was formerly the Kempf Supply Company, which is the genesis of why we're here before you now, in order to convert the property from industrial to a more usable site. With that, yes, we're looking to do a 1,500-seat church, having areas for catering, for performances, and probably the jewel of the church will be our Phase 2, this family life center, 6 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. which will be in full partnership with the community. Now, in your package I did put together a rendering of the church, as well as a community letter, a support letter from the community. And with that, I'll just turn to Ms. Davis and she can read her testimony.
Bishop, before you start, could you please identify yourself for the record. State your name for the record.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. Again, I am Bishop Maureen Davis, the Pastor of the Open Door Mission True Light Church. Open Door began as a small Sunday school mission founded in 1966 by my parents, the late Reverend James 7 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. Ballard and Deaconess Lena Ballard. For four years, every Sunday and missing only one, my parents traveled from Washington, DC to the heart of North Philadelphia to 11th and Susquehanna to tend to the needs of a few children in that neighborhood. Not only did they tend to their spiritual needs of these children, but they addressed their physical needs by feeding, clothing, tutoring and counseling them. They taught them how to handle money, how to conduct themselves in public by taking them to restaurants and other public venues. As they got older, they paid their school tuitions, furnished their apartments, took them into their homes if they needed refuge and helped them obtain their business licenses, apply for jobs, and I could go on and on. Mind you, they did all of this for other people's children while having two children of their own. All of this was done with the money my parents earned from their federal government 8 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. jobs. Many of these children are productive, solid members of the communities you represent. They are pastors, lay people serving in ministry, business professionals and teachers. They have advanced degrees with good jobs and are raising families of their own. My parents are examples of true philanthropists, and it is their spirit that lives on in the mission of Open Door today. Their spirit of mission is what compels us as a church to do even more, because we see how the devastation of our communities and the destruction of our families adversely affect our children and our adults. From these few children, the congregation grew, causing us to move in 1993 to our current location in West Philadelphia, where we now have approximately 1,000 members. Our young people range in age from six months to 19 years old. All of our youth programs are 9 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. free and are administered under the Outreach to Youth program. We host a summer camp, vacation Bible school, Saturday empowerment class, junior leadership program, abstinence program, after-school tutoring/mentoring program, and Youth Stepping Up to Make a Difference. These youth programs, along with other adult and youth educational, enrichment and social activities, have caused us to outgrow our current facility. After a five-year search, we found our new location in Southwest Philadelphia located at 5800 Lindbergh Boulevard. We purchased this former industrial land with the intention of expanding our mission and to continue to serve the surrounding communities as well as all of Philadelphia. Today, Open Door Mission True Light Church seeks your approval of Bill 24 No. 100287 so that we may build on our 44-year history of serving the citizens 10 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. of the City of Philadelphia and fulfill the mission established by my parents to build up our people, our families and our communities. Our request stems from us proudly being able to finance and construct a building during these economic times, and we thank you and all the members of the Committee for listening to us today. Thank you very much for your time, and we'll be happy to take your questions.
Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for your investment in our city and your continued support and service to the citizens of the City. It's going to be a pleasure to vote this out of the Committee for you. Any questions for this witness? (No response.)
Just one final thing. I just want to acknowledge 11 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. several of the parishioners that just came in, if everyone could stand. (Parishioners standing.)
Thank you. And we just ask that the rules can be suspended on this.
Thank you. The next bill for consideration is Bill No. 100199.
An ordinance 21 amending Section 14-908 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Queen Village Neighborhood Conservation District," by deleting the provision which provided for the expiration of 12 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. Section 14-908 one year after it became law, thereby reestablishing on a permanent basis the Queen Village Neighborhood Conservation District, under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning, Chairman Kenney and members of the Rules Committee. I am William Kramer, Division Director of the Development Division of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here today to testify on Bill No. 100199, which was introduced into City Council March 25th, 2010. Bill No. 100199 affects the properties bounded by the north side of Washington Avenue, the properties on the north side of Bainbridge Street (inclusive), the east side of 6th Street and the west side of Front Street, with the exception of any property subject to the South Street/Headhouse Square Special Services District. This area is known as 13 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. the Queen Village Neighborhood Conservation District. The purpose of Bill No. 100199 is to reestablish the Neighborhood Conservation District for Queen Village which had expired on July 15, 2009. Bill 8 No. 080080-A, which established the Queen Village Neighborhood Conservation District, was approved July 15, 2008. It had a one-year expiration date. Bill No. 12 100199 was drafted in an effort to reestablish the district and remove any expiration date, making this district permanent. Additionally, Bill No. 100199 also removes the long and expensive procedures that are required when creating a new NCD, allowing this district to become effective immediately upon enactment. The removal of these procedures will only affect this reestablishment, and subsequent changes to the Queen Village Neighborhood Conservation District or the creation of 14 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. any new NCDs will require that the procedures to be followed according to the enabling legislation. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission at its meeting of April 20th, 2010 recommended that Bill No. 100199 be approved. That is the conclusion of my testimony. I will happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you, Mr. Kramer. Any questions for Mr. Kramer? (No response.)
Seeing none, anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, I ask the Clerk to please read Bill 22 No. 100200.
An ordinance 24 amending Title 14 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Zoning and Planning," by 15 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. amending Section 14-231, entitled "Residential District Rules and Exceptions," by providing for restrictions on placement, installation and maintenance of certain satellite dishes and antennas, under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning, Chairman Kenney and members of the Rules Committee. I am William Kramer, Division Director of the Development Division of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here today to testify on Bill No. 100200, which was introduced into City Council on March 25th, 2010. Bill No. 100200 amends the Philadelphia Zoning Code by amending Section 14-231, entitled "Residential Rules and Exceptions." The purpose of the bill is to establish parameters on the placement, installation and maintenance of satellite dishes and 16 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. antennas. The bill specifies that if an alternative location is available, without causing a significant cost to the building owner or tenant and without a reduction in service, satellite dishes and antennas are prohibited from being installed on a building front facade. Bill 100200 further provides that in instances where a satellite dish or antenna must be placed on a building facade, the equipment provider or installer must notify the Department of License and Inspections that an alternative location cannot be used. Additionally, the bill requires any antenna or satellite dish currently existing on the facade of a building must also be registered with the Department of License and Inspections and removed when no longer in service. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission at its meeting of May 18th, 2010 recommended that Bill No. 100200 be approved in concept. While the 17 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. Commission supports the goals of the bill, the Department of License and Inspections had some concerns regarding the notification and registration requirements. It is my understanding that within the last hours or so, 9 amendments to this bill have been worked 10 out between the Councilman's office and 11 the Department of License and 12 Inspections. All of the specifics I'll 13 defer to Mr. Haigler for. However, the 14 Planning Commission strongly supports 15 that and wants to go on record as saying 16 they are supportive of this bill and are 17 supportive of the concept that the 18 satellite dishes are a blighting 19 influence when placed on the front of 20 buildings. 21 Thank you. 22
Good morning, Chairman Kenney and members of the 18 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. Committee. I'm Otis Haigler, Jr., Director of Legislative Affairs for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. Today I'm here to provide testimony on Bill 100200, which, if enacted, will prohibit the placement of satellite dishes on the front facades of buildings unless the owner or tenant of the building has a certification from the satellite provider that the front facade is the only viable location in order to receive optimal reception and service. The Department supports enactment of this bill with amendments that will be offered by Councilman Clarke on behalf of the Administration. Thank you for the opportunity to provide the testimony on the bill, and I could go through the amendments, if you like.
We have 19 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. them. That's fine. Is there anything other than technical in nature?
There's nothing really anything other than the technical portions of the bill. The registration part has been now eliminated so that we can effectively deal with this just through the certification being maintained on the premises, and if our inspectors are there for any reason whatsoever, we would cite the property owner if they couldn't produce the certification.
Thank you. Any questions for these witnesses? (No response.)
Seeing none, is there anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, I will ask the Clerk to please read Bill No. 100311. 20 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc.
An ordinance 3 amending Bill No. 090296 (approved by Council on May 21, 2009 and signed by the Mayor on June 3, 2009), 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 Front Street, Lombard Street, 2nd Street, and Pine Street, under certain terms and conditions," by extending the expiration date of the Ordinance, under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning, Chairman Kenney and members of the Rules Committee. I am William Kramer, Division Director of the Development Division of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here today to testify on Bill No. 100311, which was introduced into City Council on May 6th, 2010. Bill No. 100311 extends the 21 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. expiration date of Bill No. 090296 from June 30th, 2010 until June 30th, 2011. The original bill rezoned the block bounded by Front Street, Lombard Street, 2nd Street, and Pine Street from a zoning designation of "C-2" Commercial to a designation of partly "C-4" Commercial, partly "C-2" Commercial and partly "R-10A" Residential in order to facilitate a development known as Stamper Square. There was an expiration date placed on the original legislation which the development team has asked to be extended in order to further attempt to attain the required financing for the project. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission at its meeting of May 18th, 2010 recommended that Bill No. 100311 be approved. That as the conclusion of my testimony. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you 22 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. very much. Any questions for Mr. Kramer? (No response.)
Seeing none, I'd ask the Clerk to read Bill No. 10 100377.
Bill 100377, an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Norris Street, 9th Street, Berks Street, and 10th Street, by amending Section 14-304 of The Zoning Code, entitled "C-3" Commercial District, by amending Section 20 14-1402 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Parking in Residential Districts"; and by amending Section 23 14-1405 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Off-Street Loading," under certain terms and conditions. 23 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Alan Greenberger, Deputy Mayor for Economic Development. Good morning, Councilman Kenney and members of the Rules Committee. I am here to testify on Bill 11 100377, which was introduced into City Council on May 20th, 2010. Bill No. 100377 will rezone an area bounded by Norris, 9th, Berks, and 10th Street from the existing zoning designation of "G-2" General Industrial to a mix of "G-2" General Industrial and "C-3" Commercial. The line of demarcation between the two classifications is a railroad right-of-way. The industrial zoning will remain on the west side of that railroad. The commercial zoning will be created on the east side. Additionally, certain 24 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. exemptions from the Zoning Code will be given to this newly rezoned commercial parcel. The genesis of this project was in July of 2009 when the City of Philadelphia issued a request for proposals for the parking lot that is adjacent to the Temple Rail Station and currently used for Philadelphia Gas Works vehicles. The City selected APM and Jonathan Rose Companies to be the developers of the property. This team was chosen because, combined, they bring both decades of experience working with the City in this specific neighborhood and a strong reputation in the green building industry. This project will be a significant investment in the neighborhood, with total project costs of just under $50 million, with more than half of that being provided by private lenders and investors. The developers, the APM and Rose Companies, are proposing a 25 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-oriented development for the 9th and Berks site. The program includes retail and community computer training uses on the ground floor, with rental apartments above, approximately 164 units, 44 of which will be affordable to people earning 80 percent of AMI, and 75 parking spaces in a grade-level garage that is not visible from any of the adjacent streets. The site is immediately adjacent to the Temple University Station on the SEPTA Regional Rail system, the fourth busiest station in the City. The design of this building and the site location are consistent with the principles of transit-oriented development, sometimes referred to as TOD. The building will contain one, two and three-bedroom units and include tenant amenities like community and fitness room. The apartments will open onto a series of landscaped terraces that will provide both passive recreation 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. space as well as provide green roofs. The building will also include such measures as sunshades to mitigate solar gain, a green roof, photovoltaic solar panels, rainwater collection and the use of local recyclable and renewable material. LEED certification will be sought. A comprehensive storm water management plan will include at-grade filtration, detention planters and cisterns for retention and potential rainwater reuse. Besides the change in zoning designation for this property, certain technical changes need to be made to the "C-3" Commercial district in order to facilitate this proposed development. Such changes include an increase in the amount of lot area that the building may occupy, reductions in the spacing of legally required windows and courts, and changes in the parking ratios and loading requirements. Significantly, the parking ratio for this site will be reduced from 27 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. one space per dwelling unit to four spaces per ten dwelling units. Such technical changes are justified by the proximity of this site to the Temple University Rail Station and by the numerous green elements incorporated into the design. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission will review Bill No. 100377 at its meeting of June 8th, today, this afternoon, with a staff recommendation of approval. That's the conclusion of my testimony. I'll be happy to answer any questions of the Committee at this time.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Greenberger, good morning.
This is a $50 million project? 28 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc.
Yes. And if I may, would you like to -- if I may defer to Peter Kelsen, who is representing APM, to describe that to you.
Good morning, members of the Committee. Peter Kelsen on behalf of the APM/Jonathan Rose Company group. Councilman Goode, to answer your question, an economic opportunity plan has been submitted. It was submitted prior to today's hearing, and that plan, if you would like, we can go through the ratios very quickly. Bear with me one moment. Participation ranges and goals: Demolition and construction employment 29 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. opportunities -- I won't read everything, but I'll just give you the highlights, if that's okay -- work hour goals of 30 percent. This is, as I said, indicating full MBE, WBE, disabled. Contract opportunities: Construction management, at least 35 percent participation, with percent by 10 MBE, eight percent participation WBE and 11 two percent DSBE. 12 Architectural engineering and 13 other professional services: 25 percent 14 MBE, not less than eight percent 15 participation by WBE, not less than two 16 percent participation by DSBEs. 17 Demolition and construction: 18 25 percent MBE, eight percent WBE and two 19 percent DSBE. 20 Those are the highlights of 21 the -- 22
Thank you. 23 Do you have copies available for the 24 Committee? 25
I believe we have 30 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. extra copies, yes.
I would like to give a very brief overview and then we have Nilda Ruiz, we have our architect and we have Paul Freitag. As the Deputy Mayor has said, the goal of this is to establish a transit-oriented development project. I won't go through the specifics of it because you've heard it, but what it will do is strengthen this community base at a very important intersection of the City. This is a very active transit stop, and what we will do is by creating a project containing approximately 200,000 square feet of space, we will make it a gateway to this neighborhood, strengthen this neighborhood and allow it to continue to 31 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. grow in the way that we want it to be. The programming that is included will be community-based programming as well as community-based retail, an essential component to strengthening the community. The level of occupancy in terms of our residential component is targeted to income levels that will be supported by the rents. They will be 30 percent of the units devoted to 60 percent of AMI. The balance of the units, workforce housing, 80 percent. I would tell you that this can serve as a template for further development in the transit areas. We hope it will. We expect it to. And we expect this to be a model for green and sustainable development throughout the City. That concludes my testimony. If we have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them.
Thank you 32 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. very much. Just one issue relative to the green roof. I assume that the developers are aware of the business privilege tax credit of up to $100,000 for the installation of the roofs?
My name is Nilda Ruiz and I am the President and CEO of APM. APM has been in this community since 1970. This year we're celebrating 40 years, and it started out as -- APM stands for the Association of Puerto Ricans on the March. So it was a group of advocate Puerto Ricans at that time that felt that the neighborhood was ignored, dismissed, marginalized. And they started out with social services helping the community. Twenty years 33 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. later we realize that there weren't affordable options, so we started 4 years ago in community development, and 5 since then, we have been leading the way 6 in this community. 7 Today, we have built over 400 8 units of affordable housing, have 9 literally taken families from 10 homelessness to homeownership and always 11 responding to the community needs. And 12 we also have the Bolincan (ph) Plaza 13 where we have built a supermarket in the 14 area that provides cultural food for the 15 mixed income. 16 The neighborhood has evolved. 17 It's a very diverse, mixed neighborhood, 18 and today we have -- we continue to 19 respond to that. 20 We have a financial -- one of the things that we believe is in economic mobility. We brought TruMark last year, which is a financial institution, and this transit-oriented development, it's part of our whole mission of improving 34 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. the quality of life, and our mission today is to help families reach their highest potential. So this transit village that we're looking to do is part of our whole goal of creating green, sustainable communities and it's right in line with what we've been planning. Many studies have shown that when you improve the area around a transit, you also improve the ridership of that, and that, in turn, some low-income families pay more for their automobiles than they do for the actual homes. So this allows our families to have more disposable income and, again, to our mission of improving the economic mobility portion of it. So we're really excited to bring this project. We have a great partner that we brought from New York that embraces the same vision and values that we do in Jonathan Rose. I'm going to let them give more of the specifics of the project and the greening elements of 35 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. that. So with that, Paul from Jonathan Rose. Oh, unless you have some questions. I'm sorry.
My name is Paul Freitag. I'm the Director of Real Estate Development for Jonathan Rose Companies. Jonathan Rose Companies is a mission-based for-profit real estate planning, development, owners representative, and investment firm. We are a leading green urban solutions provider, and we're currently managing over $1.5 billion worth of work, almost all of it in close collaboration with not-for-profits, universities, towns, cities and local housing authorities. The mission of Jonathan Rose Companies is to repair the fabric of communities by focusing on dense, diverse, green development around transportation nodes. We believe that this model is not only 36 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. equitable but also more cost effective to communities. Jonathan Rose Companies began conversations with APM almost three years ago around the potential to develop a green, mixed-income, mixed-use, transit-oriented development. We are so excited to be moving closer to realizing the development, which we believe will serve as a model for transit-oriented development not only for Philadelphia but across the country. That concludes my testimony.
We have our project architect available, but unless there are questions of the Committee, I think you've heard the presentation.
Hi. Good morning. 37 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc.
I have three questions. One is in regards to the development. You have down here that you're going to have -- that you reduced the parking spaces to one space per four units -- per ten units. So what are the other alternatives to parking? I mean, suppose people that live there have cars.
Councilwoman, we've thought this out and we have three or four solutions to having one-for-one parking. One, because we are literally right against the transit stop, a tremendous number of our residents and those who visit will be taking public transportation to the site. In addition, we will facilitate car-share services within the garage and within the project so that people will have access to a car on site, but will not have the burden of ownership, as Nilda has indicated. In addition, when we've looked 38 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. at the demographic as well as the fact that the urban populations and the need for parking, we have found that it's tremendously reduced from what the Zoning Code originally contemplated, that being one for one, and, therefore, we believe that the ratio that we're proposing for this development, because of its location and because of the other alternatives we're providing, will be more than sufficient in terms of parking.
And these are one, two and three bedroom units for families or are these for student housing?
Okay. I know I've gotten off there in the past years ago.
It's literally 39 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. behind, if you will, the project that you're hearing today. The station is literally there.
I have a couple more questions, and I guess Mr. Greenberger can answer these. The Temple U Station is the fourth busiest station in the City. What are the first and second? Is it Center City?
The Center City stations, Market East, Suburban, 30th Street.
And are there any other transit-oriented development projects that have happened in the City of Philadelphia other than this one?
Well, I was going to say you could argue that almost every project in Center City at some level is a transit-oriented development.
In neighborhoods. 40 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc.
No. This is, as far as we know, this is the first major one that has declared itself to be that and has adjusted its goals to be consistent with transit-oriented development; for instance, the things that Mr. Kelsen was just describing.
At one point years ago they did a study to do transit-oriented development in my district on Allegheny Avenue at 22nd. So maybe we'd like to talk about that again.
Yeah. And there is also in your district a proposal from Mount Airy USA to do a transit-oriented development at the Washington Lane Station.
Something that we are very excited about. Obviously they have to work out financing.
Financing 41 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. is the big problem for that particular site. Okay. But hopefully this will spur neighborhood TODs.
We are believing that having a living example of what this can do in the City will encourage other people to do similar things at other major transit nodes, and we are working, as you know, through changes in the Zoning Code that we intend to have reflect these kind of both incentives and opportunities.
And the other 50 percent of the 50 million is coming from?
I guess the unique financing available for this project is, there are now funds available specifically for TOD development that are coming from -- we were just given an 42 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. earmark yesterday from Senator Casey around the fact that the project is TOD based.
Couple of quick questions/statements, one to follow up on Councilwoman Miller's question with respect to parking. I got to tell you, as an obvious strong supporter of the project from its inception, I am a little concerned about the ratio as it relates to parking, but contrary to today's statements, I actually think that there are probably going to be more student housing in the development than you're letting on today, because I don't know 43 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. how you, frankly speaking, prohibit students from going in that. As you know, we're suffering with some challenges around the perimeter of the Temple campus. So I think that in itself will probably not create as much demand for parking in the area, because I think it's going to be a lot of student housing. And, Nilda, as the person who obviously runs the organization, that's going to be essentially in your lap since you're a partner. So when the community starts complaining about some of the, quote/unquote, unruly students, I'm going to send them to your office. With respect to that surrounding community, I do want to say the fortunate thing and what normally happens -- let me take a step back. When we have these developments where there are parking challenges, it's usually the adjacent neighbors who don't have the ability to park, because of all these 44 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. folks either coming in or visiting, whatever. But in the case of this particular development, with the exception, I think, on a few properties on 8th Street, most of the development that APM has actually sponsored, you're getting up close to 200 units of housing, have off-street parking. So those people who live in that community essentially have their own parking opportunities on the site, on their own site. So it won't be as much of a challenge. So I want to say that's one thing that will benefit that opportunity. As it relates -- I don't know if this came up, because I was across the hall in a meeting. The construction side of this, has that been discussed at all?
The 45 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. construction side of the development, has that been discussed? I'm sorry, because --
No. Not here, no. 7 What would you like to know about it? Timing?
That's kind of construction. Are we at a point where we have a sense of who the construction entity might be?
You're going to do an RFP? And they will be 46 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. fully engaged and adhering to the goals of the EOP? Because I know you guys are from out of town. I'm assuming you have certain requirements up in other areas where you develop. We're very, very serious about that.
And we've done actually a great deal of working with housing authorities, and with them we also have very strict Section 3 requirements, and we absolutely comply with them.
Okay. Great. That's pretty much it, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Yes. Councilman Clarke actually addressed my issue and you shook your head yes, so we didn't hear yes on the record. So my question was, the back story on EOPs, because every EOP arrives 47 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. at its destination differently. And shall we presume that you had a conversation with the District Councilperson regarding this EOP?
I think you walked in late. We did submit an EOP plan, a copy of which I think was given --
My question is, every EOP becomes what it is differently. Each one has its own back story. So I want to know what the back story is on the development of this final document.
Well, this was created, Councilwoman, in conjunction with other similar plans that have been submitted to Council recently, with 48 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. consultation with the District Councilman's office. And having said that, APM has a marvelous track record with regard to equal opportunity plan participation in their developments, and as Councilman Clarke has indicated, they've developed well over 200 units of affordable housing in the immediate area, with full commitment to MBE, WBE participation.
I have no 13 question at all about APM. I know of their rich track record and strong history. I don't know the developer. So my question was really to the developer and his history and experience with regards to EOPs.
And in this context, we have APM and the Rose are the developers. They are joined in a venture. The Rose Company, as was indicated, has a wealth of history in terms of development of projects very similar to this throughout the country 49 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. and full commitment to EOP participation within those developments on behalf of housing authorities, not-for-profits and other governmental agencies. I can assure you, there will be meaningful and significant efforts in the area as laid out in our EOP plan that we've submitted. This is what we do, and this is our give-back, if you will, to the community that we build these projects for, both on behalf of APM and behalf of the Jonathan Rose Companies.
Thank you very much. Any other questions for these witnesses? (No response.)
I would just ask 50 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. for a suspension of rules.
Unless we need to hold something for further consideration, it's a blanket request.
Thank you very much. That's it, then. Thank you very much.
An ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Hunting Park Avenue, Henry Avenue, Roberts Avenue, and Fox 51 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. Street; and amending Sections 14-304 and 14-309 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled, respectively, "Area Shopping Center District" and "'C-3' Commercial," by providing for additional permitted uses; all under certain terms and conditions.
Alan Greenberger, Deputy Mayor for Economic Development. Good morning, Councilman Kenney, members of the Rules Committee. I am here to testify on Bill No. 100222, which was introduced by Councilman Jones on April 8th, 2010. The ordinance will amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of land bounded by Hunting Park Avenue, Henry Avenue, Roberts Avenue, and Fox Street. This ordinance also amends Sections 14-304 and 14-309 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled, respectively, "Area Shopping 52 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. Center" and "'C-3' Commercial," by providing for additional permitted uses; all under certain terms and conditions. The purpose of this bill is to allow the redevelopment of historically industrial lands for commercial and mixed-use purposes in accordance with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission's Hunting Park West Industrial Area Study. The proposed zoning changes from a mix of "G-2" General Industrial and "C-3" Commercial to Area Shopping Center and "C-3" Commercial zoning districts positions nearly 60 acres of vacant and underutilized land, including the former Tasty Baking Factory and distribution buildings and portions of the Budd Company site, for commercial redevelopment. The amendments to Area Shopping Center District and "C-3" Commercial with the zoning remapping boundaries of Hunting Park Avenue, Henry Avenue, Roberts Avenue, and Fox Street allows for 53 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. commercial development in keeping with regional shopping centers while maintaining the urban walkable character of the City by limiting the number of drive-through uses. These parcels lie within the 4th Councilmanic District in an area greatly underserved by commercial development, particularly supermarkets. The communities such as East Falls and Allegheny West typically go outside their neighborhoods to find basic goods. The adoption of this ordinance will help fill the community's vision set forth in the Hunting Park West Industrial Area Study and Councilman Jones' pursuit for a commercial developer and supermarket tenant for his constituents. The City Planning Commission recommended approval of Bill No. 100222 at its meeting of May 18th, 2010. This concludes my testimony. I'm happy to answer any questions.
Any 54 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. questions for Mr. Greenberger? (No response.)
Anyone else to testify on this bill? Please come forward. (Witness approached witness table.)
Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good morning. My name is Marjorie Greenfield. I am First Vice-President of East Falls Community Council and I am here today to speak on behalf of the Multi-Community Alliance, which is an alliance of more than 15 neighborhood organizations. We met with the proposed developer and we have talked to our Councilman about it, and we have proposed and our Councilman has supported amendments which, by and large, track what Mr. Greenberger stated, but I would like to hand up the amendments. 55 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. They are as follows: With regard to the proposal to limit the restaurants to four drive-throughs, the community feels that that limitation should be as originally drafted, limited to four take-outs, because you could have take-out restaurants and four of which 9 were drive-throughs, and we think it's 10 preferable to say that there is a limit 11 to four take-out restaurants. 12 The community specifically 13 wanted the additional amendments that 14 there shall be no outdoor advertising on 15 the site and no billboards, no -- any 16 hotel on the site shall be full service, 17 including an interior corridor with 18 access to guest rooms. No guest rooms 19 should be accessed from the street 20 parking lot or other outside area. In other words, we do not want motels. Having been very concerned about the Youth Study Center in our neighborhood, we want to make it clear there shall be no penal institution, 56 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. holding facility or a facility to which any person may be sent by a court as a result of a criminal charge or because the person, adult or juvenile, may pose a danger to himself or the community. This prohibition shall include juvenile facilities to which persons considered juveniles under the Pennsylvania law are sent or committed, such as, but not limited to, the Philadelphia Youth Study Center. And, finally, we ask that the amendment include no casinos, whether or not attached, as part of any other use. We have been told that the state might override this, but we believe it is very important that this be included in the bill as a statement of the community's very strong concerns and desires. With these amendments, the Multi-Community Alliance is happy to support our Councilman's bill, and I would just ask if there are any questions. That concludes my testimony. 57 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc.
Based on the issues you raised in the amendments, I see a sheet here that's preliminarily complete which addresses the issues that you've raised. I think there's some technical amendment that needs to be -- technicalities that need to be changed within the amendment, but each of the amendments covers the areas that you spoke about.
Do you know who the supermarket operator is going to be?
And as was said earlier, the community is really, really happy about a proposal to have a supermarket there and is very delighted to know that it will be Brown's. There is a real dearth of supermarkets in the 58 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. area. City Planning study said it could support four supermarkets. This is number one. So that will be terrific.
I should add, Councilmember, that the developer is in sort of a due diligence phase here, so we're trying to get this thing to a state of financeability and closing, but we're not there yet. But this will help finance the project by having clarity on the zoning.
Are there any questions for these witnesses? Councilmember Brown.
I don't have a question. I want to make a 59 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. statement.
Hi. Thank you. I know that this area has desperately wanted a supermarket for many, many years, and this is not my Council district, but we're right up the street, across the street. Many of the residents that will use this shopping center live in the 8th Councilmanic District. So I'm just happy that we're finally at a place where we can actually really talk about a development, stores coming to that particular area, and I just wanted to make sure that I made that statement.
Because we strongly support the development. And I've been to some of the meetings with the planning group and my staff has been to most of those meetings. So I just want to stay that I support this. 60 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc.
If I could also, if you would indulge us, Councilwoman, just put on the record that -- I may not be getting the name right, but the allied community groups that have been involved in this plan and Tasty Baking have been extraordinarily cooperative in sort of taking advantage of an opportunity that came up in the midst of our planning process, so we're very happy about that.
Thank you very much. Anything else for these witnesses? (No response.)
Thank you. Anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, the Clerk will please read Bill No. 24 100367.
100367, an 61 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. ordinance to amend the Institutional Development District Master Plan of Saint Joseph's University, by allowing for the construction of a new student residence hall at the corner of City and Cardinal Avenues.
Good morning, Chairman Kenney and members of the Rules Committee. I am William Kramer, Division Director of the Development Division of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here today to testify on Bill No. 100367, which was introduced into City Council on May 20th, 2010. The purpose of this bill is to approve an amendment to the Institutional Development District Master Plan for Saint Joseph's University. This same Master Plan amendment was considered and approved by the Philadelphia City Planning Commission on May 18th, 2010. Bill No. 100367 amends the 62 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. Institutional Development District Master Plan for Saint Joseph's University in order to permit the construction of an approximately five- to six-story, 115,000 square foot structure to be used as a new student residence hall on what is now a guest lawn. The new residence hall will house approximately 413 beds, designed for freshmen students and will contain amenities such as central common areas, study lounges, a fitness center, offices and guest suites. Additionally, the project will include a gateway plaza with seating and an open green space with landscaping. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission at its meeting of June 8th, 2010 will recommend approval of Bill No. 20 100367 as an item in accord with previous policy. That is the conclusion of my testimony. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you 63 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. very much. Any questions for Mr. Kramer? (No response.)
Anyone else to testify on this bill? Mr. Kramer, you may want to get over there. Thanks. I'm sorry. Mr. Kramer, Councilwoman Brown has a question for you.
Good morning. Just as a matter of record, what is the involvement of your office when it comes to the construction, development and/or discussion around EOPs?
There generally is not a discussion at my office with regard to that. We are involved with the site planning and aspects of that nature.
Okay. I simply wanted that for the record. Thank you very much.
Thank you 64 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. very much. Whoever is going to begin testimony, please identify yourself for the record and proceed.
Good morning. My name is Christopher Cummings, an attorney representing Saint Joseph's University and its development manager, Campus Apartments. With me to my left is Waddell Ridley, Vice-President of Saint Joseph's University. I'm promoting you.
I just want to make a couple of quick points. First of all, that this project addresses a critical need of the University, and, that is, to provide more on-campus supervised housing for its students. We believe that need also benefits the community by getting students out of unsupervised community-based housing. The second point I want to make 65 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. is that the University, in consultation, coordination with Councilman Jones' office, has for the last two months been meeting with the civic associations, including the Wynnefield Residents Association and the Overbrook Farms Club. Those discussions have resulted in a letter of support, which should be in your package, from the Wynnefield Residents Association, and we are very close to reaching agreement with the Overbrook Farms Club on a number of the points that they've raised with us. In addition to Mr. Ridley, I also have Kevin Robinson on his left from Saint Joseph's University, as well as pretty much everyone else on the University and Campus Apartments project team in case the Committee members have any questions.
Councilmember Brown, your light was on first. Are you ready?
Yes. 66 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. Good morning. First tell me the composition of your Board of Trustees.
You're going to have to pull the microphone close and identify yourself formally for the record.
This is Kevin Robinson, Vice-President for Administrative Services at Saint Joseph's University. I'll certainly try my best. There is approximately 32 trustees. Several Jesuits make up the Board.
Persons of 67 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. color? One person of color -- two people of color. Sorry.
I know one has been on the Board for at least a year and a half now, and the other a year.
I don't know that answer. We can certainly supply that to you.
Okay. That's question number one. You say that you are very close to reaching an agreement with the Overbrook Farms Club. What does that mean?
There have been, I believe, four meetings with the Overbrook Farms Club, either community meetings or with the executive association. There have been drafts that have been exchanges of letter agreements 68 6/8/10 - RULES - BILL 100199, etc. and memorandums of understanding. There's about ten issues all together that the parties are discussing, and I think we've reached agreement on those ten, but until the words are on paper and everyone agrees with the exact verbiage, I can't say for sure. But certainly a huge amount of progress has been made in the two months that they've been discussing and meeting.
Have they been a part of this landscape or discussions going down this road?