m. - - - BILL 000658 - Re Sidewalk Sales (vending). BILL 010065 - Striking portion of 13th Street. BILL 010066 - Extend compliance time of ordinance. BILL 010128, 130 (Companions) Re 7 new streets. BILL 010230 - Withdrawn. BILL 010234 - Withdrawn. BILL 010267 - No-truck-parking on Lancaster Ave. BILL 010268 - Adopt resolution vacating River Road. BILL 010336 - Re PF. Net, Inc. Telecommunications. BILL 010339 - Vacating of Byberry and Bensalem Rd. BILL 010342 - Water service to 4 East Sunset Ave. BILL 010343 - Strike 17 streets from City Plan. BILL 010344 - Vacate portion of Latimer Street. BILL 010345 - Re Global Crossing Local Services BILL 010346 - Re concrete planters on Arch Street. BILL 010350 - Re curb line of Arch Street. ) - - - PRESENT: COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO, Chairman COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN, Vice Chair COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. ) BILL 010370 - Re new sidewalk cafe - Oregon Ave. BILL 010375 - Re new Starbuck's Coffee cafe. BILL 010376 - Re curb lines of Spruce Street. BILL 010377 - Vacating Clarkson Avenue. BILL 010379 - Vacating portion of Lancaster Avenue. BILL 010380 - Revise curb lines, Schoolhouse Lane. BILL 010381 - Building addition on 57th St. footway BILL 010383 - Re southerly curb line, Race Street. BILL 010384 - Strike from City Plan Willard Street. BILL 010385, 386 - (Companions) Re Sunesys Inc. BILL 010387 - Re GPU Telecom Services Inc. BILL 010388 - Re CTSI Incorporated. BILL 010389 - Strike portion of Germantown Avenue. BILL 010390 - Re paving of Latimer Street. BILL 010391 - Re Williams Communications LLC. BILL 010395 - Meridian Partners bldg. encroachment. BILL 010396 - Construct electrified marquees. BILL 010397 - Re WXII/PHL Real Estate Ltd. Part. BILL 010398, 399, 400 - Companions - SAS-1600 Arch. ) 3 6/5/01 - COMMITTEE ON STREETS AND SERVICES I N D E X Bill No. 010267 Charles Denny, Streets Dept. . . . . 5 Bill No. 010065 6 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 7 Bill No. 010066 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 8 Judith Robinson, Concerned Citizen. . . 13 9 Bill No. 010128, 130 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 17 10 Martin Soffer, Planning Commission. . . 18 11 Bill No. 010268 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 20 12 Bill No. 010339 13 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 21 Martin Soffer, Planning Commission. . . 21 Bill No. 010343 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 23 Martin Soffer, Planning Commission. . . 23 Bill No. 010344 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 24 Martin Soffer, Planning Commission. . . 25 Bill No. 010350 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 26 Martin Soffer, Planning Commission. . . 26 Bill No. 010376 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 27 Martin Soffer, Planning Commission. . . 28 Bill No. 010377 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 29 Martin Soffer, Planning Commission. . . 30 Edward Turzanski, LaSalle University. . . ) Bill No. 010379 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 36 Martin Soffer, Planning Commission. . . 36 Bill No. 010380 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 39 Martin Soffer, Planning Commission. . . 39 Michael Baylor, Esq. . . . . . . 40 Bill No. 010383 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 53 Martin Soffer, Planning Commission. . . 54 Bill No. 010384 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 59 Martin Soffer, Planning Commission. . . 60 Katherine Levins, Temple Univ. Health System 60 Bill No. 010389 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 62 Martin Soffer, Planning Commission. . . 62 Bill No. 010390 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 63 Bill No. 010394 Paul Lonie, Streets Dept. . . . . . 64 Bill No. 010230 Kent Miller, Owner of 4 Sunset Road . . . 66 Bill No. 010342 Kent Miller, Owner of 4 Sunset Road . . . 67 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . 68 Bill No.
010346 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . 66 Bill No. 010370 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . 72 Bill No. 010375 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . ) Bill No. 010381 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . 77 Bill No. 010395 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . 79 Bill No. 010396 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . 79 Bill No. 010398, 010399, 010400 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . 82 Bill No. , Licenses and Inspections 85 Jerome Balka, Esquire . . . . . . 90 United States Vendors of Philadelphia Al Taubenberger, President. . . . . 101 Northeast Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce Noel Perloff, Owner, Country Club Restaurant 103 on Cottman Avenue Bill No. 010336 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . Net. . 137 Charles Hart, Project Manager . . . . 137 Bill No. 010345 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . 138 Bill No. 010385 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . 141 Bill No. 010386 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . 141 Bill No. 010387 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . 143 Carl Primavera, Esq. . . . . . . 145 Bill No. 010388 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . ) Bill No. 010391 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . 149 Charles Naselsky, Williams Communications . 151 Valerie McCaw, Williams Communications. . 151 Bill No. 010393 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . 152 Bill No. 010234, 010397 Peter Kelsen, for Archon Group. . . . 155 Nancy Sen, Streets Department . . . . 155 7 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010267 P R O C E E D I N G S
Good morning. This is the public hearing of the Committee on Streets and Services. We have a quorum here with Councilmembers Rizzo, Ortiz, Clarke, and including myself. We have a lot of bills today and we won't necessarily adhere to the order of the bills as they're listed on the public notice because we find that when we choose those bills off the list to go first that may not have any opposition or just a brief introduction and brief testimony, we get through the list a lot quicker. So with that, the clerk will read the title of the first bill to be heard.
Bill No. 010267, an ordinance establishing a no-truck-parking regulation on Lancaster Avenue, from 52nd Street to 63rd Street, both sides.
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon. My name is Charles Denny, the Assistant Chief Traffic Engineer, 8 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010267 Streets Department, and I'm here to testify on Bill 3 010267. The Streets Department has no objections to this bill. We do recommend that regulations be imposed under a trial ordinance and a hearing can be held in six months, and the area residents and businesses would have an opportunity to comment on this regulation at that time after seeing how the regulation operates. The actual test of the posting will be no tractor-trailer or truck parking at any time. We can have the signs posted within four weeks with Councilman Nutter's approval.
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify? The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter for a brief testimony.
Absolutely. With regard to Lancaster Avenue, one -- thank you, Mr. Chairman -- how long will it take to get the signs up once the bill is approved? 9 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010267
We could do this under a trial ordinance and feel we can have it up in four weeks, approximately four weeks.
We have to make the signs and make sure we have all the poles we need out there.
If you could expedite that, it would be greatly appreciate that, and until we have signage, we can't get enforcement from the police department. So is it just a sheer production problem? Why does it take four weeks to make a note tractor-trailer sign?
We have to write work orders and get approval for erections of any poles. We're going to try and do it in four weeks. We'll see if we can get it done quicker.
Thank you. The clerk will please read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 010065, an ordinance amending Section 2 of an ordinance (Bill 10 No. 990337) approved July 1, 1999, authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 207 by striking from the City Plan and vacating 13th Street from Wagner Street southwardly to a SEPTA right-of-way and by striking from the City Plan Duncannon Avenue from Wagner Street to 13th Street, under certain terms and conditions, by extending the period for compliance with the authorization conditions therein.
Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Lonie. Would you please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to 11 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010065 offer the following testimony on Bill No. 010065: This is not an Administration ordinance 4 but an ordinance requested by Reverend Harry B. Steward of the Fair Havens Baptist Church. The purpose of this ordinance is to extend the compliance time for an ordinance approved July 1, 1999. The purpose of that ordinance was to legally close 13th Street to allow an expansion of the church. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Thank you. Any questions for this witness? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wish to see testify on this bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 010066, an ordinance amending Section 2 of an ordinance (Bill 24 No. 980717) approved March 23, 1999, entitled "An ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and 12 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010066 grades on portion of City Plan No. 128 of an area bounded by Cambria Street, 19th Street, Indiana Avenue, and 17th Street, by striking from the City Plan and vacating 18th Street from Cambria Street to Indiana Avenue, and reserving and placing on the City Plan a certain right-of-way for drainage purposes and water main purposes, under certain terms and conditions," by extending the period for compliance with the authorization conditions therein.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 010066: This is not an Administration ordinance 18 but an ordinance requested by Larry Anthonsen, President of Concord Products Company, 1951 South Broadway, Camden, New Jersey. The purpose of this ordinance is to extend the compliance time for an ordinance approved March 23, 1999. The purpose of that ordinance was to legally close 18th Street to secure a site for the proposed new manufacturing facility for Concord Products. 13 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010066 This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Ma'am, would you please approach the witness table and identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. (Witness comes forward.)
My name is Judith Robinson. I guess it's not so much testimony as 14 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010066 questions that I have to be answered. In this same perimeter is a prison that the community was really not given as much information as we think we should have on it so I thought that possibly I could get some information here as to whether this changing of the street, etc., was in relationship somehow to that prison being there. So if I could ask this gentleman if he knows anything about that?
I'm not -- I don't think that this bill has anything really to do with that but, Mr. Lonie, could you shed some light on that?
Absolutely. The prison is located approximately two blocks, I think --
It's at 17th, so one block over. This has absolutely nothing to do with the prison at all. What we originally requested was that -- there's apparently a vandalism problem in that street and the only thing that's there are three factories now, I believe -- Concord Products and a 15 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010066 theatrical design firm. The only reason they had asked to close this street was to secure parking for their employees in the beds of the street. All they had planned to do was basically put a gate across the ends of the streets and not really have anything to do with anything else. And I think if, you know, you have questions, Mr. Anthonsen is in the building on the east side of 18th Street up at the north end there, and that's Concord Products. You can go and ask him anything. I mean, he's the one that started this, and whether this is actually going to go through, I'm not really sure because they're having trouble getting agreements from even the neighbors there.
Okay. I think maybe that's the reason why, because the neighbors are concerned that they aren't getting full disclosure. So I hope I didn't digress too far from what your hearing is about today, but it's unfortunate that some folks aren't represented as others and we have to come to a public hearing to get information, but I appreciate the time.
Well, you called my office earlier today? 16 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010066
And I apologize that I wasn't able the get back to you. My chief of staff said she did speak with you.
Excuse me. Let the record reflect that Councilman Cohen is here, I think, for this meeting. I know he's lobbying for another bill, but I believe he's a part of this committee as well. Thank you.
Bill No. 010128, an ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on portion of City Plan No. 319 of an area bounded by Rhawn Street, Dorcas Street and the New York Shortline Railroad by striking from the City Plan and vacating portions of Stanwood Street, 17 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010128, 130 Pennway Street, and Solly Avenue; by placing on the City Plan Meadow Brook Drive, Peach Tree Lane, Apple Blossom Way, Cherry Blossom Way, Apple Blossom Drive, Rose Petal Way, and Rose Petal Drive, and by placing on the City Plan two rights-of-way for drainage purposes, all under certain terms and conditions, including the dedication of the City free and clear of all encumbrances of the beds of Meadow Brook Drive, Peach Tree lane, Apple Blossom Way, Cherry Blossom Way, Apple Blossom Drive, Rose Petal Way, and Rose Petal Drive. And companion bill, Bill No. 010130, an ordinance authorizing the paving of Meadow Brook Drive, Peach Tree Lane, Apple Blossom Way, Cherry Blossom Way, Apple Blossom Drive, Rose Petal Way, and Rose Petal Drive, under certain terms and conditions.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 010128: This is not an Administration ordinance 25 but an ordinance requested by Mr. Bienenfeld, 18 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010128, 130 Champion Development Corporation, 828 Red Lion Road, Philadelphia. The purpose of this ordinance is to add seven new streets to the City Plan to allow for the construction of 85 detached single-family dwellings on 87 lots. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action. Concerning Bill No. 010130, this is not an Administration ordinance but an ordinance 11 requested, again, by Mr. Jack Bienenfeld of Champion Development. The purpose of this ordinance permit the Streets Department to enter into a private paving agreement with the developer to pave the streets to allow for construction. This ordinance 16 is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Martin Soffer from the Planning Commission. The placing of these new streets will allow for the construction of 85 single-family detached dwellings. The Planning Commission approved a preliminary plat of the subdivision on 19 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010128, 130 November 2, 2000. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends approval of Bill No. 010128. Thank you.
Any question for this witness? Councilman O'Neill, do you have anything? Councilman O'Neill, do you wish to speak on this bill or no?
As far as I'm concerned, everything's been worked out and ready to move it and suspend the rules. Thank you.
Thank you. And how many new homes are being built there?
85, thank you. Any other questions for these witnesses? (No further questions.)
Anyone else here who wishes to testify? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 010268, an 20 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010268 ordinance authorizing the Board of Surveyors to adopt a resolution vacating River Road from a point approximately ten feet southwest of the Philadelphia and Montgomery County line, northeastwardly to the Philadelphia and Montgomery County line.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets, and the Department would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 010268. This is an Administration ordinance 13 requested by the Streets Department. The purpose of this ordinance is to grant the legal authority to vacate a portion of River Road to allow for physical closing of the roadway. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Anyone else here who wishes to testify? (No response.)
Hearing none, the 21 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010339 clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 010339, an ordinance authorizing the vacating of Byberry and Bensalem Road from South Hampton-Byberry Road to the Philadelphia and Bucks County line and the vacating of Burling Avenue from the Roosevelt Boulevard to a dead-end approximately 3,900 feet southeast of the Roosevelt Boulevard, under certain terms and conditions.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets, and the Department would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 010339. This is an Administration ordinance 17 requested by Mr. Roger Fickes, Director of the Pennsylvania Bureau of State Parks. The purpose of this ordinance is to obtain the legal authority to vacate these streets from the City Plan. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name 22 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010339 is Martin Soffer from the Planning Commission. The purpose of this ordinance is to remove the legal encumbrance of two roads and permit the development of the Benjamin Rush State Park. Therefore, by action at its meeting on May 24, 2001, the Planning Commission recommends that Bill No. 8 010339 be approved. Thank you.
Anyone else here who wishes to testify? (No response.)
Bill No. 010343, an ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No.'s 296 and 240 in the vicinity of the Schuylkill Valley Nature Center by striking from the City Plan various unpaved and unopened streets and placing on the City Plan a certain right-of-way for drainage purposes and water main purposes. 23 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010343
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets Department, and the Department would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 010343. This is a Councilmatic ordinance 8 requested by Councilman Nutter. The purpose of this ordinance is to obtain the legal authority to strike these 17 streets from the City Plan. This ordinance 11 is supported by the Department of Streets and recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Martin Soffer from the City Planning Commission. The purpose of this ordinance is to remove 17 new streets to consolidate the Schuylkill Valley Nature Center. Therefore, by action at its meeting of May 24, 2001, the Planning Commission recommends that Bill 010343 be approved. Thank you.
Anyone else here 24 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010344 who wishes to testify? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 010344, an ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 308 by striking from the City Plan and vacating Latimer Street from Darien Street to Schell Street by striking from the City Plan and vacating Schell Street from Latimer Street to a point approximately 39 feet southwardly therefrom, and by placing on the City Plan a relocated Latimer Street from Darien Street to Schell Street, under certain terms and conditions, including the dedication to the City, free and clear of any encumbrances of the bed of relocated Latimer Street.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets, and the Department would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 010344. This is not an Administration ordinance 25 but an ordinance requested by Mr. Carl Zucker, 842 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010344 South Second Street, Philadelphia. The purpose of this ordinance is to legally reconfigure these streets to allow for onsite parking purposes. This ordinance is supported by the Streets Department is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Martin Soffer from the Planning Commission. The proposed ordinance authorizes the realignment of two minor streets in the Washington Square West neighborhood. This is to allow the development of a 39-unit expansion of the St. George Senior Housing and to include a 40-space parking lot. Therefore, by action at its meeting of May 23, 2001, the Planning Commission recommends that Bill 17 No. 010344 be approved. Thank you.
Thank you. Any questions for these witnesses? (No questions.)
Is there anyone here to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010350 clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 010350, an ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 307 by relocating a portion of the southerly curb line of Arch Street between 16th Street and 17th Street, under certain terms and conditions.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 010350: This is not an Administration ordinance 15 but an ordinance but an ordinance requested by Mr. Dennis Martin, Esquire, President of SAS-1600 Arch Street General Partnership. The purpose of this ordinance is to reconfigure the curbs located at 16th and Arch Streets. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Martin Soffer from the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. 27 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010350 The purpose of this ordinance is to better define the intersection controlling traffic and accommodating pedestrian street crossing. Therefore, by its action at its meeting of May 24, 2001, the Planning Commission recommends that Bill 7 010350 be approved. Thank you.
Anyone have any questions for these witnesses? (No questions.)
Anyone else here who wishes the testify on behalf of the bill or against the bill? (No response.)
Bill No. 010376, an ordinance authorizing the revision of City Plan No.'s 43 and 269 by relocating portions of the curb lines of Spruce Street from 34th Street to 38th Street, under certain terms and conditions.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of 28 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010376 Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 010376: This is not an Administration ordinance 5 but an ordinance requested by Titus Hewryk, University Architect, University of Pennsylvania, 3451 Walnut Street. The purpose of this ordinance 8 is to reconfigure the curb lines of Spruce Street to comply with the University's plans for landscaping redevelopment. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Martin Soffer from the Planning Commission. At its meeting of May 21, 2001, the Planning Commission staff had recommended that Bill 19 No. 010376 be approved. Thank you.
Anyone else here who wishes to testify on this bill? 29 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010377 (No response.)
Bill No. 010377, an ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 178 by striking from the City Plan and vacating Clarkson Avenue from Wister Street to 21st Street; by reserving and placing on the City Plan a right-of-way for drainage purposes, water main purposes, and public utility purposes within the bed of Clarkson Avenue; and by striking from the City Plan 21st Street from Belfield Avenue to Clarkson Avenue, all under certain terms and conditions.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 010377: This is not an Administration ordinance 22 but an ordinance requested by Brother Michael McGinniss, President of the LaSalle University, 1900 West Olney Avenue, Philadelphia. The purpose of this ordinance is to legally close these streets to 30 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010377 improve quality of life for the students, employees, and residents of LaSalle University and their neighborhood. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Martin Soffer from the City Planning Commission. At its meeting of May 21, 2001, the Planning Commission staff recommended that Bill No. 13 010377 be approved. Thank you.
You stated that this ordinance was requested by LaSalle University. Is there someone here from LaSalle to speak on the matter?
There is an individual here, I believe, yes, sir. Let me bring him up. (Witness comes forward.)
Good afternoon and please identify yourself for the record and proceed 31 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010377 with your testimony.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Edward Turzanski. I'll spell the last name. It's T-U-R-Z-A-N-S-K-I. I'm the Assistant Vice President for Government and Community Relations for LaSalle University.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Turzanski, can you tell us the basic purpose of this bill, which is one step on the road to the use of this land. Can you tell us who owns it now and what purpose it's going to be used for by LaSalle and its importance to LaSalle University as well as to the community.
Thank you, Councilman. Currently, Clarkson Street comes from Wister Street into the LaSalle University campus. LaSalle borders the street on the north and on the east and a portion of the Fairmount Park known as Wister Woods Waters on the south. The purpose in striking the street for 32 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010377 LaSalle to be able to erect a security barrier, an arm at Clarkson and Wister so that some of the problems we're experiencing with illegal short-term dumping and the leaving behind of abandoned and stolen vehicles does not occur. Also, as a measure to provide security for students who reside in the San Miguel Townhouses, which are on Clarkson Street. In terms of the street itself, what you referenced, Councilman Cohen, is a project that the University has proposed to the Fairmount Park Commission and which Fairmount Park has approved in concept to take the Wister Woods, to clean up the area to, provide fencing and security. And eventually, the University will move tennis courts and erect a jogging and walking trail through this area.
And what will the University do with the land which is currently being used by the tennis courts and any other portion that the University intends to move to the Wister Woods area?
The University will erect a science facility, a new science center, on the site of the campus where we currently have 33 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010377 tennis courts. And in terms of the Wister Woods area, besides tennis courts, there will be a play and practice area which will be along the Belfield Avenue portion of the property, and we are going to erect a jogging and walking trail through that portion of the woods that's not covered by the tennis courts with a play and practice area.
And will the area that is developed, the Wister Woods area in general, be available for use by the residents in the area?
Yes, Councilman. The University currently allows neighbors in the three zip codes contiguous to the University to use tennis courts and a jogging track that we have surrounding our football team from dawn till dusk. The only requirements are that people need to register at least once a year so that for insurance purposes, we know who is coming to the area. And, currently, we have 351 individuals from the neighborhood who use the facilities. Those policies will continue for this Wooster Woods area.
Good. And initially, you talked about security 34 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010377 needs. Could you explain some additional detail what those security needs are for the closing of Clarkson Street?
What we need to do there, Councilman, because of vehicular thefts we have and also because of short-term dumping that is taking place in the area, including the leaving behind of vehicles that have been stolen or burned out, what we need to do is to secure that area so that we can control access into Clarkson Street. The plan is to provide 60 parking spots which are not currently there so that University students can park in this area and thereby alleviating problems of parking on neighborhood streets.
Will there be any building of fences or anything of that sort?
There's going to be one of those security arms at the street to make sure that vehicles will have to enter through Olney Avenue, through the University access at Olney Avenue, and that will be strictly for egress, to leave the area.
Will the University be prepared to discuss these issues with the 35 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010379 community in the area?
We have, Councilman. We have a group neighbors that we've been meeting with on a regular basis. This was presented to them, they were supportive of it, and the same was expressed to Councilwoman Miller.
Any other questions for this witness? (No further questions.)
Anyone else here who wishes to testify on behalf of this bill? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk will please read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 010379, an ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 161 by striking from the City Plan and vacating a triangular-shaped portion of the southerly side of Lancaster Avenue from 56th Street to a point approximately 391 feet westwardly therefrom and by reserving and placing on the City Plan a certain right-of-way for drainage 36 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010379 purposes, water main purposes, and gas main purposes and by placing on the City Plan a certain right-of-way for drainage purposes, under certain terms and conditions.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 010379: This is not an Administration ordinance 12 but an ordinance requested by Mr. Steven Pollack of Ciccone & Pollock, Attorneys at Law, 1717 Rittenhouse Square, Philadelphia. The purpose of this ordinance is to grant the abutting property owners the ability to expand their parking facilities and develop a shopping center. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Martin Soffer from the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. The Planning Commission has previously 37 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010379 approved this City Plan change and recommends that Bill No. 010379 be approved. Thank you.
Anyone else here who wishes to testify on or against this bill? Councilman Nutter.
I appreciate the opportunity. Mr. Soffer's correct. A previous bill 13 was done with regard to this location. That proposal did not go forward at that time, but in my capacity as the District Councilperson and also on behalf of the surrounding neighborhood community, we're looking forward to success at this time with this proposal. Mr. Broverman (ph.) has been a good corporate citizen in the community and we're excited about the prospect of this development taking place on Lancaster Avenue. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As far as I can 38 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380 tell, there's no aggrievement in this matter. Thank you.
Is there anyone outside the community who is aggrieved? That's more important. I got to have fun, you know, 'cause it's going to be a -- I better get my laughs in now 'cause I think Thursday's going to be rough. But anyway, the clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 010380, an ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No.'s 162 and 310 by revising the curb lines and grades on a portion of Schoolhouse Lane from Henry Avenue to Cresson Street, by placing on the City Plan Schoolhouse Lane from Cresson Street to Ridge Avenue, by revising the lines and grades of Ridge Avenue from a point approximately 120 feet southeast of Schoolhouse Lane to a point approximately 500 feet northwest of Schoolhouse Lane, by vacating that portion of the open and traveled Schoolhouse Lane lying between the existing open and traveled lines and the lines as proposed to be displaced under the 39 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380 authority of this ordinance, and by reserving and placing on the City Plan a right-of-way for drainage purposes, water main purposes and public utility purposes within the bed of Ridge Avenue and a portion of the open and traveled Schoolhouse Lane, under certain terms and conditions.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 010380: This is an Administration ordinance 14 requested by the Streets Department. The purpose of this ordinance is to facilitate the reconstruction of Schoolhouse Lane, and this ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Are there any questions for these witnesses? Marty, I'm sorry. You didn't testify yet.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Martin Soffer from the Philadelphia City Planning 40 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380 Commission. At its meeting on May 31, 2001, the Planning Commission staff recommended that Bill No. 5 010380 be approved. Thank you.
Anyone here who wishes to testify on this bill? (Witness comes forward.)
Good afternoon sir, please approach the witness table. Please identify yourself for the record.
Thank you. I appreciate being allowed to testify today, but I would like to say that even though the Schoolhouse Lane neighborhood and myself and several others of us have been acting as spokespeople and leaders that we had no notice of this hearings whatsoever. The Streets Department has known of our interest, we've met with the Streets Commissioner many times, and we had no notice of this hearing 41 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380 until one of our neighbors heard thirdhanded last night that this may be happening today. I eventually was put in touch with Miss Schatz, and she very kindly and graciously invited me to come over and testify. And I just find that difficult to believe that in a democracy, we would have no notice of a hearing like this. Secondly, I would like to --
I think that there is proper notice and it generally is done by way of the print media. I think we're required, if I'm not mistaken, by the City Charter to do that. So if someone missed it and did not -- or just, for whatever reason, didn't read it in the paper, I mean, that's unfortunate. But to my knowledge, public notice was given.
Well, certainly, Mr. Nutter has known of our concern and opposition to this project for many years, for seven years plus. But I'd like to move into the substance of the testimony, if I may.
Councilman Nutter. Excuse me, sir. Councilman Nutter. 42 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that. One, naturally, Mr. Chairman, you are absolutely correct: The public notice is provided for every bill and any resolution heard here in City Council. Secondly, there are supporters and opponents to a potential project on Schoolhouse Lane Mr. Baylson is absolutely correct that I did not notify him directly or personally, nor did I notify any of the supporters of the proposed project directly, indirectly or in any other way, shape, or form. This is, quite honestly, in the scheme of things a rather routine matter and there are many other facets to this particular project and proposal, this being one of the elementary parts of it. And so, no, there was no personal notice but I do trust that our Chief Clerk's Office did provide the proper notification, as they probably did -- I'm sure they did -- for the other 41 bills on today's hearing schedule. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And you're correct, 43 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380 and if that notice had not been properly advertised, we wouldn't be hearing this bill today, because we've had a couple of those instances in the six and a half years that I've been here. Very few, but occasionally, that does happen.
Well, I'm not -- I don't have any knowledge about the advertisement, and all I'm saying is that as a matter of just -- it would seem to me as knowledge that there's a very concerned citizens group that has been fighting this for over seven years, that something would have been done to let us know specifically that this was coming on for a hearing other than just the routine publication in the newspaper. But I would like to move on if I may.
We had had many discussions with the Rendell Administration about Schoolhouse Lane. When the Street Administration came into office, we set up meetings with the new Streets Commissioner, Mr. Johnson, and expressed to him our views about Schoolhouse Lane. He eventually told us to communicate with Kenneth Trujillo, the City Solicitor. 44 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380 We had a meeting with Mr. Trujillo on February 7th, and I confirmed that meeting by writing, and Mr. Trujillo agreed to have a mediation between the Schoolhouse Lane neighbors who were opposed to this project and the City Streets Department, and I confirmed that arrangement in a letter to Mr. Trujillo the same day. And I also said in that letter, which had specifically discussed that we have agreed that the City -- and I'm quoting. We have greed that the City and Schoolhouse Lane neighbors will adhere to a 90 day standstill during which time City will not move forward on Schoolhouse Lane reconstruction project (including any forwarding of materials to PennDOT). The Schoolhouse Lane neighbors will not institute any litigation and the City will agree that latches is not run during this standstill period. During this 90-day period, the City and Schoolhouse Lane neighbors will mediate that dispute, and then I went on with some details. Mr. Trujillo at that meeting had thrown out the suggestion of former federal Judge Edward Cahn, C-A-H-N, being the mediator. I then wrote to Mr. Trujillo on February 20th, 13 days later, and 45 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380 said we accept the concept of Judge Cahn as the mediator with respect to Schoolhouse Lane, and I never heard back from Mr. Trujillo. At the end of the 90 --
Mr. Chairman, I'd be intrigued to know whether or not any of that correspondence as well as the meeting that took place, I believe it was mentioned February 7th -- was the Councilperson notified of any of that material? Was any of that material shared or the opportunity to participate in the meeting, since there are so many complaints apparently here on the record about who's sharing what information with whom.
And not enough public noticing going around on one side but --
I assume that the meeting with the City Solicitor was a private meeting?
I had no knowledge of it. 46 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380
As the chair of this committee, I have no knowledge of any correspondence from the community group or the law office concerning this bill.
Okay. We had set up our -- we had initiated our discussions with Mayor Street's administration through the Streets Department and Commissioner Johnson, and those meetings were attended by Commissioner Johnson personally, by other people in the Streets Department, by a representative of the Managing Director's Office and several of us. We did not specifically notify Councilman Nutter or anyone else.
Don't you think that that would have been the appropriate thing to do since the Councilman is the person who is 47 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380 directly responsible for introducing legislation and/or making adjustments and amendments to that bill.
Well, we had no idea legislation was pending. No, I didn't see any need for it but, you know --
You testified that for seven years, this has been a pending issue.
And you were concerned and upset that there was not public notice, at least public notice directly, to your Friends group or your organization. I would just think that if it was in my district, I would be a little bit offended that no one contacted me and who subsequently accuses me of not properly notifying them so --
We have had many meetings with Councilman Nutter, and he has consistently and adamantly supported the Streets Department and their proposal to widen Schoolhouse Lane despite our 48 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380 giving him --
I am not going to sit here and listen to false testimony. Now, there is no proposal to widen Schoolhouse Lane. Mr. Baylson is very clear and knows that the travel lanes on Schoolhouse Lane will remain at eleven feet in both directions. With regard to notice to groups or organizations, there is overwhelming support in the larger community for a proposed project. This bill 15 does not make a project go forward. There will be no work done tomorrow or next week as a result of this particular bill. But the gentleman has a right to have meetings with whomever he chooses to have meetings with. Whether or not I'm notified --
-- is immaterial. Whether or not other people in the community who care about this particular project are notified of meetings that the gentleman has either with the 49 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380 Streets Department Commissioner, City Solicitor or whomever, that is, again, his prerogative. The concern was suppressed about today's hearing and proper notice. We absolutely advertise our meetings. That did not take place in the previous situation. And whatever the agreement, quote/unquote, agreement was with the City Solicitor, that was made with the City Solicitor and that has nothing to do with the particular legislation in front of us today. I was not a part of that meeting, that discussion, or that agreement, and so I have no information as to what the gentleman is testifying to about whether there should be a project or not and who made what agreements with whom, because I was not a part of that process. Lastly, the gentleman's absolutely correct. I have been in favor of the reconstruction of Schoolhouse Lane. It is a mess. The reconstruction comes as a response to continual complaints over the past seven years and the obstructions that have taken place over that time in opposition to the mere reconstruction of a street that is in horrible condition, has no drainage, has 50 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380 no shoulders for motorists to ease their car out into from side streets and is not a proper street under any circumstance and condition. We have patched it on numerous occasions; it does not work. And the gentleman is opposed. I understand that. And the fact that we would be at a point to have a former federal judge mediating a dispute about whether or not a street should be reconstructed for the safety of pedestrians, motorists, cyclists and college students at Philadelphia University is beyond the pale.
Yeah, you can continue as long as your comments are germane to the bill that's in front of us.
Yes. First of all, just to set the record straight, the Streets Department proposal is to widen Schoolhouse Lane. It is a reconstruction that includes widening the curb-to-curb width, and that is in the Streets Department proposal. Secondly, when we met with Mr. Trujillo, we advised him that Councilman Nutter was our 51 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380 representative and that Councilman Nutter had supported the Streets Department for many years, and we made that very, very clear. And we also told Mr. Trujillo that there were other people in the community who were in favor, although we made it clear, and I'm going to present for the record, that 100 percent of the homeowners who live on Schoolhouse Lane between Henry Avenue and Gypsy Lane, which is the great majority of this area that's being reconstructed, are opposed to this, and they have signed petitions, which we have consistently presented to Councilman Nutter, Mayor Rendell, Mayor Street and the Streets Department. And the last thing I would like to say, and I appreciate your giving me this time, is that after this 90-day standstill, we then found out that despite the absolute agreement of Mr. Trujillo to a standstill, including not forwarding plans to PennDOT, that the Streets Department had done specifically what Mr. Trujillo had agreed the City would not do: They had forwarded the plans to PennDOT, and we did not know that, and PennDOT approved them in April of this year, which I just got by a letter from PennDOT, which I am also going 52 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380 to respectfully ask be made a part of the record. So we think, respectfully, that our rights have been violated, that the City has not lived up to the agreement it made through Mr. Trujillo. We think mediation is a very good idea. It has been suggested by Mayor Rendell, it's been suggested by Senator Specter, who has also attended some of these meetings, and we are still willing to do it as long as the City willing to refrain, because this project is not necessary for the safety of Schoolhouse Lane. There have been no 13 accidents here. What they want to do is widen Schoolhouse Lane, Mr. Chairman, and all of the engineering studies show that widening streets make motorists go faster. And when they go faster, there tend to be more accidents. And our engineer who we hired, a former PennDOT official and executive director of the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, has written numerous reports, the latest of which is attached to the materials I'd like to submit, saying that this reconstruction, the widening, is not necessary and will make this street less safe. And we are respectfully opposed to the 53 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010380 bill and we appreciate the opportunity to be heard. If I may have this group of documents marked for the record and included in the record, I will appreciate.
It will be so noted. Any other questions for this witness? (No questions.)
Anyone else here who wishes to testify? (No response.)
Hearing none, the clerk -- thank you, sir, for your testimony.
Bill No. 010383, an ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 307 by relocating a portion of the southerly curb line of Race Street between Independence Mall East and Independence Mall West, under certain terms and conditions.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman 54 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010383 and members of the committee. My name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 010383: This is not an Administration ordinance 7 but an ordinance requested by Miss Emily Bitten bender of the Bourse Building, 111 South Independence Mall East, Philadelphia. The purpose of this ordinance is to create a protective lane on the south side of Race Street and part of the construction of the new Constitution Center. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets Department and is recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Martin Soffer from the Planning Commission. At its meeting on May 31, 2001, the Planning Commission staff recommended approval of Bill No. 010383. Thank you.
Any questions for these witnesses on this bill? (No questions.) 55 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010383
Anyone else here who wishes to testify? Before we get into the next bill, Councilman Nutter wants to be recognized, and I believe he has a request question for Mr. Lonie on the previous bill.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Lonie, could you just make the record clear as to some of the testimony that was given earlier with regard to the provisions of the proposal with regard to the reconstruction of Schoolhouse Lane and provide some clarity to the record with regard to what the project is about and what it is not about.
I'd be glad to. What this project is about is to make it a safer street. Is the project widening Schoolhouse Lane? No. The answer is, we're actually narrowing it. We could build Schoolhouse Lane legally down to Gypsy Lane at a width of 40 feet wide. Because of the neighborhood opposition to some of those, it's part of compromise and we've narrowed that down to 28 feet. 56 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010383 What we're doing is revising the lines and grades to match the smaller street, in a way protecting some of the interests of these folks so that we can never, without going back through Council, widen it up to its full width again. As far as the meeting between the City Solicitor and the Streets Commissioner, no one else from the Streets Department attended that meeting, as far as I know. And there's constant correspondence back and forth between PennDOT and the Streets Department. As far as, you know, if everything had to stop, I don't know as far as that agreement goes, but I'm sure there was correspondence, as there is every single day between the State and the City on any construction project. There just has to be. But, again, we are trying our best to make this the safest street we can under the circumstances. It's -- whatever problems in reconstruction could save us because the design flaws that exist out there now, one bad accident, two bad accidents, the City would lose a fortune on bad design claims. So we are trying our best to do that, and I believe that's what we're going to 57 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010383 accomplish. Thank you.
Thank you. Lastly, Commissioner Johnson found himself in a situation where he was in a meeting, I assume, with the City Solicitor where there were no 8 other Streets Department employees involved; is that correct?
As far as I know, there was no one else from the Streets Department except for our attorney, Gerald Clark.
Okay. Do you have any reason to believe that prior to his time as Streets Commissioner, during the six or seven years of this proposal for a project has been going on, do you have any reason to believe that Commissioner Johnson would have any previous knowledge about the history and the complexity of this particular project before he came to that meeting?
Functionally, I'm sure he did, I'm sure he's heard horror stories about --
-- the problems of Schoolhouse Lane. 58 6/5/01 - STREETS & SERVICES - 010383
-- and the design problems that have gone over the years, but I'm sure he did not have an intimate knowledge of the project itself. Unless you were working on it for those seven years, it would be impossible to do that.