Thank you, Councilman Cohen. Indeed, were I not able to find flaws in everyone else's work, I wouldn't be able to make a living. Thank you.
Thank you very much. In addition to the Planning Commission and the Solicitor's Office being silent on this issue, we have not heard either from the Commerce Department or from the Mayor's Office. So we're not getting a lot of input from the government formally as to where they stand on this bill, and that's not a common practice.
We haven't gotten any position on either bill, have we, today?
Seeing none, we'll now move to Bill No. 030730, which is an 208 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 ordinance amending Title of the Philadelphia Code, entitled, "Zoning and Planning," by adding a new Section 14-1628 entitled, "District Special Controls," prohibiting certain uses in relation to the sale of malt and brew beverages, all under certain terms and conditions. Can we have Mr. Chapman, please? There's four people to testify from the community. I just want to let the community know that I've polled the Members of the Committee. All of the Members of the Committee are in favor of this bill, and we are going to vote to put it out of Committee today. So any comments you make, be made with the understanding that we're all voting yes on it, so you can save yourself some time and energy, but we love to hear from you anyway. Thank you. Mr. Chapman.
Good afternoon, once again, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Rules Committee. For the City Planning Commission, my name is Thomas Chapman. 209 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 This bill, Bill No. 030730, was introduced by Councilmembers Blackwell, Council President Verna, Councilmembers DiCicco, Miller, Nutter and Tasco on November 13th of this year. If enacted, this bill 7 would amend Title 14 of the Philadelphia Code by adding a new Section 14-1628, entitled, "District Special Controls." This bill would prohibit certain uses related to the sale of malt and brew beverages in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 8th and 9th Councilmanic districts. This bill, again, has not been considered by the Planning Commission. It's scheduled to be on our meeting agenda for next week.
Thank you. For those who were at the previous hearing, as you may know, we introduced a bill to have a pilot program in the 3rd District, but we're very, very pleased to have Councilman DiCicco approach us first and then other Councilmembers about being included in this whole issue of zoning for stop-and-goes. So 210 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 as was read, certainly my colleagues, Councilman DiCicco, Councilwoman Verna, Councilman Nutter, Councilwoman Tasco and Councilwoman Miller are all included in this legislation. Given the fact that I've had many people ask me, especially press, about our position on this, as all of us know and everyone who has the experience of living near a stop-and-go, realizes that we are interested in the more than 90 percent of great businesses that exist in our City, but certainly we want the ability to try to regulate as much as we can those who allow their establishments to be hang outs, who sell cigarette paper and loose cigarettes and have drugs and other illegal activities going on inside and out. That is our agenda only, to help to maintain and increase the quality of life for all who live and work in our City. We support great businesses and we don't support or respect those who do not work with the community. And this bill will permit every business to, in the future, to go apply 211 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 for a variance with zoning, which will allow the community the opportunity to participate in the process and have dialog with new stop-and-goes in their areas. That's what it's all about for us. Certainly to those who have come to testify, we will be having hearings later on in the month where we invite our state officials to talk about stop-and-goes overall and the bigger problem of regulation, how many there are, as much as they did liquor laws years ago when there were a lot of bars in one neighborhood. We'll have that discussion. We'll begin that discussion with hearings later on in the month. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Thank everyone for their patience. We know it's been a rough day.
Thank you very much. Is there any representative from the community who would like to go on the record for a moment? Please identify yourself. 212 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730
My name is Greg Spearman. I'm currently participating in a boycott up on 55th and Larchwood. I think we've been out 391 days straight today. I'm very much concerned about the quality of life issues in our community. Not only do we address stop-and-goes, we address concerns. Actually, I'm president of the 18th District Community Town Watch which, of course, these type of issues are paramount. And for us to be out there 391 days consistently from the time that they opened to the time they close, at least shows the commitment, and not only with me, but with my other members that we have to maintain a quality of life in our community. I think it's misunderstood by those Councilmembers of yours who haven't signed on to it because I think it will send a sign or show a sign of solidarity across Philadelphia. And being proactive instead of reactive to these types of establishments -- because it's documented throughout the law enforcement agencies and Councilmembers across 213 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 Philadelphia -- that these here types of business are nuisances. I'd like to applaud Councilman DiCicco for signing right on without any hesitation, because that shows the signs of leadership that's definitely needed in our community. We understand the teeth that are in this bill, instead of like some others like to say, lack of teeth in the bill, and it at least shows that the Members, the Councilmembers that signed on, are truly concerned and doing what they can to assist us. Because the signage that these type of establishments put up in their stores is offensive. They are just outright breaking the law by not having seating in their establishments. I can show you dozens -- and I'm not talking about one or two -- dozens in West Philadelphia alone. I can take you in North Philadelphia. That's why I'm truly concerned why Councilman Clarke didn't sign on before he did. I do believe that he is going to participate, and I hope it's true. Because 214 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 North Philadelphia is littered with these type of establishments. The types of products shows that they're target marketed to minority and economically depressed communities, and they are persistent on putting these type of products that we -- and I'm talking about responsible citizens -- do not buy. Blunt wraps, we don't buy blunt wraps. I'm not talking about Topp paper. Blunt wraps. The sole purpose of blunt wraps is to wrap marijuana. The tobacco industry found out that they can just sell the paper without the tobacco to the young kids for the wrapping of marijuana exclusively. Straight shooters, which are crack pipes. They call them roses. These types of establishments sell them. They don't hide them. They sell them. They have them sitting up in boxes. This is offensive. This is offending to us who go out and work every day. We jump on these buses. We are law-abiding citizens. And then to look up and see that we don't have no recourse. We already went through it where you 215 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 say the City, the City says the state, and we get caught in between to be sitting up here and know that there is an establishment that we are standing out in front of for 391 days that don't have seating, still don't have seating, never intended to have seating. They have seating in the back now to try to make one think that they had seating, but that's back in their work area. Never intended for the public use. No restroom. Just outright go into business to break the law. Going to compromise our safety. Shootings. Shootings are not uncommon outside of these establishments. And as we all know, we found out with the JBM that these here characters can't shoot. So we're talking about stray bullets flying across the street, down the street and hitting us. And the establishment that I'm talking about now, in their refrigeration, they have Hugs, the 22 cent drinks that the kids drink, sitting right 23 next to a row of 40-ounce malt liquor right 24 next to it.
That's why we're here. 25 We went over it, but once you stand 216 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 outside an establishment and go through these frustrating tactics that they try to put you through, this is just minor. m. m. 6 This bill will not address the 7 issues that we're here for. We're here fighting for other communities that will go through the same type of disrespect that this business has shown us in our community. That's what we're here for. I said in the past, the last time that I was here, there is a new tactic that they have going on now, they have included with the stop-and-goes, bars. So they have bars. They actually cut the bars in half, so it's half the volume. So you can sit at the bar. You got the stop-and-go in the front or in the back. On the 1500 block of South 16th Street they have one. They got Plexiglass up to the bar so the ones sitting in the bar, they're sliding drinks through. The 5200 Block of Girard Avenue, they have one, yet kids are still allowed to go in there. What I'd like to say to the other 217 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 Councilmembers who didn't sign on, such as O'Neill, Krajewski or whoever else it is, with the implosion of these high rises and with the scattering of these here tenants of PHA and what not, they're moving into your community and so are these stop-and-goes. So it still will affect you just the same. If you think you're excluded, you're not. And if we, an organized community, have to stand outside of an establishment for 390-something days, just think about the communities that don't have the ability to mobilize or organize such as we. It's overwhelming. Not only that, it's insulting. I truly feel insulted and disrespected by the financiers, the business owners and those who think it it's just acceptable for these type of businesses and practices to happen in our community. I truly feel insulted. And there's no reason not to sign to this bill and show the solidarity that is needed for the liquor industry to know that it's not acceptable just to come in and destroy the quality of life of our communities 218 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 here in Philadelphia. It's not acceptable. At one time it was acceptable to take and put -- it was not acceptable and felt disrespected to slide your food or money through a hole in the store. Now it's become acceptable. Now they're trying to force it to be acceptable to slide a drink through a hole. Well, we took an organized (sic) around a bar on 54th and Spruce. They had the store configuration to set up for a stop-and-go in the front and a bar in the back. And we stopped that. We still got our eye on them because we found out one of common denominators in these types of establishments is that they will say anything to get what they want. Once they get inside, they do what they want. I'd like to thank you.
Good afternoon to the Committee. My name is Elder Pamela K. Williams. I'm here representing the Kim Denise Williams Foundation, which is a non-profit organization from West 219 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 Philadelphia. After hearing the statement of Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell, I would like to commend the Committee for its anticipated approval of this bill, and we would hope that the upcoming hearings would allow the community an opportunity to voice their opinions on the restructuring of how we deal with the violators of this bill, and how we deal with the laws that have been on the books for years in reference to the locale of these stop-and-goes and the quantity of the stop-and-goes within our community. Let me say as a representative of a portion of the West Philadelphia community, that we do commend you voting on this and we look forward to the upcoming hearings that we'll be able to voice our opinions and assist you in making adjustments to the bills so that the community will have a greater voice in structuring these facilities in our community. But we do thank you and appreciate your anticipated approval.
Thank you for 220 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 your attendance and your patience in waiting. Please identify yourself for the record.
Hi. I'm Tracy Gordon. I'm a community organizer in Southwest Philadelphia. One of the things that I also wanted to emphasize is I'm happy that you're going to put a freeze on the bills, but the stores that they have existing now are just gateway houses for drugs. If you look at the configuration, you'll see that in the windows, they'll have the blunt paper right next to the sunflower seeds and the fish, and like he said, the Hugs. And I think that's a violation because if minors aren't allowed to go into bars -- and I guess that was because of the alcohol -- then we're thinking that maybe they shouldn't be allowed to even go into these stop-and-goes because you have the potato chips in the window right next to the drug paraphernalia. Everybody knows that blunts are drug paraphernalia. Another thing that they're violating 221 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 is our quality of life with the unsightly, disrespectful nudity signs that's placed in these windows. You'll have scantily clad women with the 40 bottles in the windows with neon signs. I think that we should look into the reconfiguration of these stores. Lastly, I wanted to say is these stores, everybody knows they're hangouts for drug dealers. If I can see it when I'm walking by, how in the world if I own the store, don't I see it. For the most part, they don't even live in our community. They live in other communities that don't even allow it. So I just wanted you all to also consider us passing a law to restructure how they present stores in our neighborhood.
Thank you very much. Thank you for your testimony. As I said before, the Committee will be voting this bill out with a favorable recommendation and a Rules suspension to allow for final passage the week after this Thursday. Councilmember Clarke. 222 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, there will be an amendment to the bill.
Okay. So, Councilman Clarke, you'll be amending your district into the bill?
The next bill 11 for consideration is 030670, which is an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by 2nd Street, Turner Street, Hancock Street and Oxford Street. Mr. Chapman, please, first, Planning Commission. Please identify yourself.
Good afternoon once again, Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Committee. For the City Planning Commission, I'm Thomas Chapman. This bill was introduced on October 16th of this year by Councilmember Mariano. It would rezone the block bounded by 2nd 223 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 Street, Turner Street, Hancock Street and Oxford Street from the existing G2 General Industrial, to RC1 Residential. This rezoning has been requested to allow the development of this site with a residential 30-unit new construction residential for elderly and disabled persons. This rezoning proposal is scheduled to be considered by the Planning Commission at its meeting of December 9th, 2003. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Any questions for Mr. Chapman? (No response.)
Seeing none, please come forward. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Council. My name is Richard T. Mulcahey Jr., of the Schubert, Bellwoar firm. I represent the buyer of this property, Sicilian Housing Corporation, which is a non-profit housing organization 224 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 established by the Sisters of Saint Joseph in Chestnut Hill. With me is Sister Barbara Ann Winnells (ph), who is the treasurer of the Sisters of Saint Joseph, and we do have a short proposal to show you, a short presentation. The sisters are going to request approval to construct a 49-unit, Section 20 Housing for the elderly. They have two similar projects; one in Flourtown, Montgomery County, close to the campus at Chestnut Hill; and they have another project similar in McSherrystown, Adams County, Pennsylvania. HUD has given superior ratings to both projects. And what the sisters would like to do is take the former site of Mrs. Restler's Food Products, which is now a vacant lot with a burned down building, demolish the existing structures and put up a new structure. And I do have plans just to show you, if you care. Mr. Chairman, the three plans show a site plan, what the building would look like, and the third is a floor plan. HUD has approved a grant to the Sisters of Saint 225 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 Joseph in the amount of $5.899 million to construct this at the site. And as I said, there will be 49 one-bedroom apartments, and there will be rental assistance that will be granted of approximately $900,000 dollars over the next five years. That is the basic presentation for the project. And I do have Sister Barbara Ann Winnells here who could talk about the discussions that she had with the neighborhood groups in support of this project.
Sister, would you please identify yourself for the record?
My name is Sister Barbara Ann Winnells, Sister of Saint Joseph. We had been looking for a possible site, and after conversation with Scott Christian, the executive director of Kensington South, he encouraged us that this was a dream that they had. And what they were going to was to look to use this site and to go after tax credits. However, we felt we could work together since we already had the funding from HUD. 226 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 We met with Scott on two occasions, August 12th and 18th, and went over the proposal. He then introduced us to the zoning group of Kensington South, and we met with the representatives from their zoning group. We then went out to the neighborhood. They received it very favorably and they really feel this will be a gift to their neighborhood. On September 3rd we met with the neighbors and everyone was very positive and everyone voted for it that evening. At that point we just came with the idea. We had no 15 drawings. And we encouraged them, that if we went to our architect and got drawings, that they would have a better sense of what was going to happen. So we did that and then we met again on October 7th. And at that meeting we had many neighbors from the neighborhood, the extended neighborhood as well as the immediate neighborhood, and there was 100 percent in favor of moving ahead with this proposal.
Thank you very 227 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 much for your testimony. Are there any questions for the witnesses? (No response.)
Seeing none, thank you for coming. I'm sure the bill will get approval. The plan will receive approval of the Committee and final passage within a week from this Thursday by the full Council. Thank you for your work in the community. Anyone else to testify on this bill?
Seeing none, we will now go to Bill No. 030709, an ordinance 16 approving the fourth amendment of the redevelopment proposal for the Point Breeze East Urban Renewal Area, being the area generally bounded by the southerly side of Washington Avenue on the north, the westerly side of Broad Street on the east, the northerly side of Moore Street on the south and the easterly side of 20th Street on the west, including the fourth amendment to the Urban Renewal Plan and the second amendment to 228 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 the relocation plan, which provides, inter alia, for the additional land acquisition of approximately three properties for residentials and related uses; the provision of certain relocation services, as required by law and declaring that condemnation is not imminent with respect to the project. Mr. Wetzel.
Good afternoon. My name is Herbert Wetzel, Executive Director of the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia. Mr. Chairperson and Members of the Committee, I'm here to speak in support of Bill No. 030709, the fourth amended redevelopment proposal and fourth amended Urban Renewal Plan for the Point Breeze redevelopment area and the Point Breeze Urban Renewal area. This bill would authorize the Redevelopment Authority to acquire three vacant lots for institutional development. The properties to be acquired are located at 1208, 1210 and 1212 South 15th Street. 229 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 Acquisition funding will be provided utilizing bond proceeds from the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. These properties will be acquired on behalf of Citizens Acting Together Can Help, Inc., or CATCH, a non-profit social service provider. CATCH focuses its efforts in four primary areas; mental health, developmental, disability services, continuum of care for the homeless and management services. CATCH will use this site to construct a new facility to replace an outdated nearby facility. Mr. Chairperson and Members of the Committee, I respectfully request favorable consideration of Bill No. 030709, and would also ask for the suspension of Council Rules to allow first reading on December 4th, 2003.
Yes. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee. I'm Richard Redding from the City Planning Commission and I'm Deputy Director of Community Planning testifying in favor of Bill 230 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 030709. It's an amended redevelopment proposal for Point Breeze East Urban Renewal Area authorizing acquisition of three properties for a group home to be occupied by CATCH organization. The Planning Commission approved this at its October meeting. Thank you.
Mr. Pescatore, please identify yourself for the record. MR. PESCATORE (ph): Yes. I'm Pescatore. I'm CEO of CATCH, Incorporated. This proposal is to replace an existing residential facility literally across the street from the acquired lots.
Thank you. Thank you for your organization's fine work in our neighborhoods, especially in South Philly for many years now.
Good evening, Members of the Committee. My name is Kathleen Murray. 231 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 I'm here to represent Council President Anna Verna. She has asked me to convey her strong support for this bill to you. CATCH did try and purchase the properties, but because of various questions of powers of attorney, have not been able to do so.
Thank you for your testimony. Any questions? (No response.)
Thank you very much. Thanks for coming in and thanks for your patience in waiting. Anyone else to testify on this bill? Seeing none, we will move to Bill 17 No. 030721, which is an ordinance approving the second amendment of the redevelopment proposal for the Jefferson Square Urban Renewal Area, being the area generally bounded by Washington Avenue on the north, South 4th Street on the east, Dickinson Street on the south and South 6th Street on the west, including the second amendment to the Urban Renewal Plan and the first amendment to the 232 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 relocation plan, which provides, inter alia, for the additional land acquisition of approximately properties for residential 5 and related uses; the provision of certain 6 relocation services, as required by law and 7 declaring that condemnation is not imminent 8 with respect to the project. 9 Please identify yourself for the 10 record. 11
My name is Herbert 12 Wetzel, executive director of the 13 Redevelopment Authority of the City of 14 Philadelphia. 15
Good evening, Mr. 17 Chairperson and Members of the Committee. I'm 18 here to speak in support of Bill No. 030721, 19 the second amended redevelopment proposal and 20 second amended Urban Renewal Plan for the 21 Jefferson Square Redevelopment Area and the 22 Jefferson Square Urban Renewal Area. 23 This bill would authorize the 24 Redevelopment Authority to acquire 25 25 properties, 22 occupied structures, one vacant 233 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 structure and two vacant lots on behalf of the Jefferson Square Community Development Corporation. This project will complete the City's commitment to acquire property for the Jefferson Square Neighborhood Revitalization Plan, which will result in the development of 93 units, 63 new construction market rate units and 30 affordable units, of which six are rehabilitation and are new 12 construction. 13 The project is located in the area 14 bounded by South 4th Street, South 5th Street, 15 Federal Street and Reed Street. 22 properties 16 are occupied and will require relocation 17 assistance. As of this date, 16 of the 18 existing homeowners, according to the 19 developer, have already selected Jefferson 20 Square homes as their replacement house. 21 The acquisition cost is estimated at 22 $1.75 million. 50 percent of this cost will 23 be financed with CDBG funds and 50 percent 24 will be financed with state funds. Mr. Chairperson and Members of the 234 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 Committee, I respectfully request favorable consideration of Bill No. 032721, and would ask for the suspension of Council Rules to allow first reading on December 4th, 2003.
Nothing to add. The Planning Commission approved this at its October meeting, so we're testifying in favor.
Great. Thank you. I understand there may be a couple community witnesses. Is there anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Good evening, everyone. My name is Joanna King. I was living in the 1300 block of South Leithgow Street for about 43 or 44 years. I liked it there. When this company came through, Jefferson Square, it was hard for me to understand, but finally I did. I 235 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 did what I thought was best for me to do. I voluntarily agreed for my house to be condemned. They promised me a new home and they also promised me that I could live in my old home until the new one is complete, then we'll move out of my old home into the new home. And Jefferson Square, everything they told us yet, so far they did it. And they were very cooperating to us. They help us out wonderfully. And I want to give thanks to Jeremy Newberg, Grant and my Councilman, Frankie DiCicco. I was in my street for, like, 40-some years. All my kids grew up on the street and, like, the elementary school, they graduated, they got married and everything on that street. It was hard for me to give it up. But when I thought about the thing that was best for me, I did. I'm glad I did. I want to thank each and every one who made this a success. We had a meeting, I think it was the day before election, and some of the Jefferson Square members were there, and they talked to 236 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 us and what they said they would do, they did it. We really appreciate that. We really appreciate that.
We love you. And if there's anything we can do to help because you help us out wonderfully, Mr. Newberg, Grant and my Councilman, Frankie DiCicco.
I watched this process go forward as almost an observer from the very beginnings with Councilman DiCicco and Jeremy and the neighbors, and it was a very difficult process because people were losing their homes. As you said, 45 years you used to live there. But it really is nice to see with persistence from my Councilman too -- he's also my Councilman -- persistence and patience and working with people. You have a smile on your face and you're telling us you love us, which is very frightening to us because that doesn't happen to us often. Usually people are saying other things about us. I'm glad that everything worked out for you. 237 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 I want to recognize Councilman DiCicco and thank him for all his work.
So it's four years since the first condemnation. And the mood in this room, with the exception of I think one or two people, is entirely different now than it was then. I want to thank you and the rest of the neighbors that I know are here today, not only the time you put in today, but for the four or five years -- actually almost seven years from the date of its inception when you looked at me and said, who is this man that wants to take my home, to accepting what we offered and moving that community in the right direction. We haven't let you down on any promises since then and I assure you going forward, we will live up to all the promises we've made and continue that relationship. 238 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 Thank you for being here and thank you for your kind words. You're allowed to call me Frankie. She's the only lady who calls me Frankie.
Yes. I want to congratulate the neighbors and Councilman DiCicco in achieving a solution here that makes everybody happy. If I recollect correctly, I was being my usual obnoxious self at the hearing --
-- fighting on behalf of something I hadn't heard about until the hearing date and for the rights of the tenants. And Councilman DiCicco, while he hated me for doing it, was very cooperative in agreeing to meet with everybody. It's been a long, hard process, and I'm delighted it's worked out to everybody's advantage. So to the neighborhood it shows, don't give up on the City even when we seem to be unreasonable. 239 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 To ourselves, congratulations for a job well done, Councilman DiCicco. (Applause.)
My name is Jeremy Newberg. I'm the director of the Jefferson Square Community Development Corporation. I want to thank the City, because the only way a project of this magnitude can occur is with all the resources of the City coming and coordinating to make it happen. It's the Redevelopment Authority for land acquisition. It's OHCD for innovative funding. But deeper, it's L & I for cooperation in dealing with demolition. It's the City Solicitor in dealing with properties with back taxes. All those elements were just so critical. Personally, I want to thank Herb Wetzel and Michael Kuntz (ph) and his staff, because without them we couldn't be here. So thank you.
Thank you very much. 240 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 Sir, could you please identify yourself for the record.
Yes. My name is Joseph J. Getka. I am the owner of record of 1230, 1232, 1234 South 5th Street, as well 504 Titan Street, which is a connecting and adjacent property. This is the first notice that I received in the mail, as well as one that's at the post office now, which I haven't had a chance to pick up yet because I wasn't home when it was delivered, that there was a meeting on condemning my properties. On the first condemnation proceeding, we never knew about it until a friend called me and told me, your name is in the paper. They condemned your properties. So I just want to make note that that is how this happened. Since I owned 1234, and 1234 was not condemned, and I own 504, which the yard is connected, and that was not condemned, only 30 and 32 was condemned, and 32 was already half built as a duplex -- I believe it was 241 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 going to be a triplex -- and I gave that to my son, who is Drexel University student. And he was going to finish fixing upstairs, rent it out to friends, and it was going to pay for his tuition. As a result of the City taking this property, he has not been able move anybody in it upstairs, and we've had to pay his tuition out of our pocket all these years. He is still living there. Now, because you took 30 and 32, which I bought legitimately from the City of Philadelphia sometime before this taking, I -- and had not taken 34 -- I was forced to hire an attorney and go to court to try to save the two properties, since they were in the middle of the L shape that I already owned. So when you look at this parcel and look down the years -- and I always thought this neighborhood was going to do well, which is why I bought those properties. I'm a retired police officer. I'm currently a school police officer. I've done all the my work on all my properties after work at the expense of my family. These 242 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 places had been on fire when I was able to get them, and I had to repair all that damage and I did it all myself. So because, again, the two properties were taken and not the L, I went to court to try to fight the taking of those two properties because I wanted to develop those two properties. I told them I was going to build a house that was like the one at 2nd and Catherine, on the corner property, which was a vacant lot with off-street parking, and then finish rebuilding the center one, and I would have owned that. Somewhere down in the future, after I'm dead, my family could have knocked down all four of the houses and built a nice mansion if they wanted to because it would have been a lot size. I've been talking to Mr. Newberg and the gentleman from the Redevelopment Authority. I'm supposed to meet with him Wednesday. But we want to make sure that we get compensated. Because 1234, we didn't know until last week that that was being taken until it appeared in the paper and I got the 243 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 letter in the mail. We assumed all along that, okay, my son will get another property to move into and he could stay where he is now until it's built.
Just to break in, my name is Damon Getka, and I live at 1232 South 5th Street. I've been living there for about three-and-a-half years. I was living there before it was taken. I don't have a story like Mrs. King over there. I have not had a good experience with this, simply because it kind of broke my dreams down because I was finally going to be a property owner. I had a place I was living in. I moved in there and I was fixing up the second and third floors. We were in the middle of trying to get a kitchen when somebody called us and said, your property has been taken. And I've continued to live there. It was listed as blighted, and I can't really argue with that too much for the second and third floor. We were initially offered about $6,000 for the house. I think we paid about 244 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 $13,000 to the City to buy it. And it's just really not fair. We're kind of getting strong-armed out of our apartments and our property. That's where I've been living all this time. I don't know what's going to happen as soon as the construction is ready to be done. Are they just going to kick me out on the street? At one point, supposedly they offered us -- they said they would give us -- since we had a vacant lot and a house, they were going to give us one of the other houses that they were building in the area. Meanwhile, we were fighting the taking, thinking that we could actually keep it because it made no sense to take those two properties without taking 1234, which is the issue of today. And then when we went back and said, all right, well, let's talk about where my house can be. They said, well, I'm sorry, that window of opportunity is closed and we'll no longer offer you a house. So where am I going to live now?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. When were these properties purchased?
I didn't get a chance to stop at my attorney's and get the notes of testimony. I took the case to court and we lost in Common Pleas Court. Then I appealed it.
When you purchased in the late '80s, what was it then?
Yes. Is it a vacant lot today because the City knocked the 246 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 house down.
So you purchased it as a vacant lot; is that correct?
A single family dwelling, three stories, four bedrooms, occupied.
It's been occupied for the past ten years. 247 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709
A single family dwelling, occupied as well for about the same amount of time as 1234. We got them around the same time.
You mentioned 1230 and 1232, your desire to turn them into a duplex or a triplex?
Yes. I was going to reduce it back to a duplex with a first-floor apartment, where he is. And the second floor would have been three bedrooms, or two bedrooms on the third floor and a den in the rear of the second floor.
Are you aware that each of these four properties are currently zoned single family? You would have to go, if you maintain ownership and if you were able to continue to own these properties, that you would have to go to the Zoning Board 248 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 of Adjustments for a variance?
I was going to get the variance to go from three to two, which I understand is more desirable than going from two to three.
I can tell you that it's been my practice since I've been in Council for eight years to oppose any multi-family dwellings within the middle of any block.
It's not being used now. You said he was the only one living in there.
When we bought 1234 it was occupied. It was a triplex, but after we bought it was pretty much by that time vacant, so I moved in.
1234 is a single family dwelling. That's what's occupied. We're talking about 1232 where he's living, and he has been living there all this time.
On the first floor? 249 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709
He's living on the first floor and he has all his stuff upstairs. He does computer repair and also has a work-out room upstairs. He was using the whole place basically.
You would not be legally allowed to convert that into a multi-family dwelling until you go to the Zoning Board of Adjustments for the variance.
It has been abandoned. The use has been abandoned for three consecutive years. The legislation I did in 1996 changed the classification for that property, and mostly all the properties in that general vicinity, so you would not be entitled to a multi-family dwelling as a matter of right. I'm not suggesting that you wouldn't get the approval from the Board.
I can live with 32 being a single family dwelling. And I was going to build a single family dwelling, like I said, like the one at 2nd and Catherine on 250 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 the corner property with off-street parking.
Why have you waited since the late '80s until now to decide to develop this site?
I've been developing. When 1230 was a three-story building, it was set on fire by the junkies. I have been boarding that place up, and you can bring in all the neighbors and tenants of mine to discuss it. I have been cleaning and boarding when that corner store that used to be there was a butcher shop or something.
When was it torched? MR JOSEPH GETKA: It was torched twice. It was torched before I got it. So what I did was, I put $800 down to force a sheriff's sale on the property because there was too much taxes owed on it. I was in the process of getting that when they came and started to knock it down. I then called a lot of people and I said, hey, I want to fix this place up. It is not structurally unsound. They said, oh, 251 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 yeah, it's structurally unsound. I said, well, stop at the first floor and I'll go from there, because they had already started taking it out from the third. So I could not stop the demolition because these guys got their money and they were going to knock that place down at any cost. So I had to let that go.
But L & I determined that it was structurally unsound?
Somebody did. Then I end up with a dirty, rotten vacant lot. I have letters that I wrote to Ed Rendell at the time about this vacant lot. And I was cleaning the lot. And again, you can ask the neighbors. I can bring them in. I was cleaning that lot for years. Then I said to myself, you know what, why am I cleaning this lot? Why don't I just put a sheriff's sale on it? I went down and got the sheriff's sale on that. People bid against me, but I won the bid. That is how I acquired 30.
Five years or so ago, the last time the building was set on fire, you proceeded to board up the property 252 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 and maintain it?
I care about all of that. I thought I was doing the City a favor. I care about litter. I care about all of that, so that's why I was doing it.
Is it true that you have had some conversations with Mr. Newberg of the Jefferson Square CDC? And is it not true that you have been trying to negotiate a more reasonable, in your opinion, settlement on monetary compensation?
Since we basically lost the case in Superior Court -- I appealed it to Superior Court. It cost me thousands of dollars to get this stuff printed up and all that. And they turned it down.
You were given an offer, and you don't believe that the offer is sufficient?
No. No. No. I 253 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 haven't been given an offer yet. This all happened in the last week.
No. I haven't received nothing in writing, nothing at all as to what it is. We are willing to sit down and talk, if that's the case.
Again, I don't want to lose because of what I have invested here. I have myself and my sweat. Like I said, instead of going home every day, I was going down there and working every night, giving up time with my family. That's what I've been doing with these properties, and I continue to do it because I have another property I'm working on.
You said 504 is occupied? 254 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709
You're not working in that property. What property are you working in every night that you say you've given up this time with your family?
We didn't hire a construction company. We did the work ourselves. We lifted all the sheet rock. We did all the fixtures.
That's what I'm saying. When I leave my regular job, I would do that work. I do all that work.
So we're still negotiating on the acquisition price. Okay.
Also, one of the points that we had was simply that, like I said -- I'm sorry that we keep bringing 1230 and 1232, but the simple fact is we were never notified. They claim that we could not be found, even though we have our name on the titles. 255 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709
What is the mailing address for taxes and water bills and whatever for those properties?
Also, it's on the latest letter for this hearing, which I never received for the first hearing. I would have been down here for that, as you well know. Again, we never thought 34 was at issue because they didn't take it, even when the judge at the trial said, well, why are you taking Mr. Getka's 30 and 32, when you're not taking 34. They didn't come out with a good answer. I should have won the case on that basis alone.
Well, the answer is, when we did the first condemnation many years ago, four years ago, the redevelopment at that time under the directorship of Mr. Noah Eisenstat believed there was not enough money to do the entire 256 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 condemnation. I wish it would have been done then because we wouldn't have to be here today.
Exactly. And so, does Council understand the money I had to spend on the attorney to fight for the first two? Do you understand that, that I could not just lay down? What were they going to do with it, knock down 32 and put one rinky-dink house on two lots by 60 feet? 12
It's not a 13 rinky-dink hose because my house is 16 by 30 14 feet, actually, which is smaller. I don't 15 consider that to be rinky-dink. 16
In Thursday's paper, 335 Wharton Street, I believe, just sold for $220,000. I bought these properties because I knew its proximity to Center City, and it would be lucrative for me. I'm 62 years old now. I'm getting prepared to retire, and I fully expected to retire on the income from those properties, and that's why I'm telling you, I don't want to lose here. That's my position. 257 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709
We'll continue the conversation. Thank you for your testimony.
Gentlemen and Council, I'm Melvin Hampton, and I'm here to testify regarding my property at 1215 South 4th Street. First there's a procedural matter. I came home from New York about, oh, six o'clock and I got this memo or this letter. That was Friday. And then I opened it, had no 17 one to consult with. So Monday, today, I read I had to appear -- well, I could appear -- at this meeting at one o'clock. So I think that's a procedural matter that I'd just like to put on the record. I had no time to formulate my thoughts, formulate the issues that I have about 1215 South 4th Street. Nevertheless, I have had -- I have not had a chance to separate all my issues. 258 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 However, there are several issues -- or maybe just two -- that are most important to me. The fair market value of the property, I seem to have an understanding that that can be settled. I don't know, but that's the understanding I got from Jeremy Newberg. And the procedure, if they go south, that means if you vote to have the property taken, I can still challenge the fair market value. I gave the offer paper to my attorney that Jeremy Newberg and I were going over. I've had at least, oh, about three weeks of negotiations. My attorney, Mr. Krakower, could not be here today. He is reviewing the papers, and I'll get an answer as to his view as far as what are the contents and what have you. I was to get back with Mr. Newberg -- this was about three weeks ago -- this week, I presume. I had a mishap last week and I could not do it last week. So this week I was supposed to get back with Newberg in terms of the appraisal of my property. Now, I have an idea was this is all about. But I'm 259 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 totally caught off guard or unprepared to discuss my property in terms of your desire to take it or to prove the billing. Now, I wonder what will happen to my property agreement with Jefferson Square regarding the land of my father and mother. I here testimony at night -- well, several testimonies -- but my parents owned that property for 65 years. And I don't think that it will come down to my getting some monies for the property. I see it as a family estate, and I still want to stay there as a family estate. I still want to have the property as a family estate. That's all I have.
Have you been in continuing discussion with Mr. Newberg and/or Mr. Wetzel? Mr. Newberg you've been talking to?
We were moving, yes. This is prior to the condemnation. As I said, 260 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030709 my brother died in the week between this. And two weeks before that, I said, okay, we're getting closer. He gave me the papers. The only thing I asked him, will I get my own appraisal. I not only got one, but I got two. And I gave them my one paper that indicated the appraised value, and now I'm getting another. I assume he didn't put it in writing, which I think, you know, we should have done, or maybe I thought he would have done, but this was supposed to be this week. All of a sudden, I get this notice Friday evening, and Monday I'm here. And I had to take off from my place of employment in New York.
I understand. So you are going to continue your conversation 261 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030730 with Newberg?
Thank you very much. Anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, I want to go back to Bill No. 030730. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Clarke to describe a proposed amendment to Bill 030730.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, we're essentially amending this particular bill to incorporate the 5th Councilmanic District. Section 1, 14-1628 will be numbered as Number 7, prohibited uses in the 5th Councilmanic District, the sale by a restaurant of malt or brew beverages for consumption off the premises shall be prohibited in the 5th Councilmanic District, notwithstanding any other provision of this code to the contrary.
Thank you very much. 262 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030740 Are there any questions on the proposed amendment? (No response.)
Mr. Witt, would you please come up to the witness table? This is relating to Bill No. 030740, regarding a description of a deed restriction, a proposed deed restriction, for the aforementioned parcel of land. Please identify yourself for the record.
Thank you, Mr. Kenney. I'm Tom Witt of Wolf, Block, Schorr & Sollis-Cohen. We're counsel to the Wolfson Verecchia Group. We have worked out with the district Councilman a more precise and somewhat amended statement of the proposed restriction that was discussed more generally in the earlier testimony today. This restatement accomplishes three things. Number one, it specifically names someone who has the benefit and can enforce the restriction. 263 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030740 Number two, whereas we had proposed something which would have the duration of 4 years, this has an unlimited duration. 5 Number three was, we had proposed a 6 restriction which would apply to Wal-Mart and 7 its affiliates. This applies to everyone. 8 The text which has been handed to you, and 9 which we'd like to be on the record, is as 10 follows: "This deed restriction is for the benefit of an incorporated civic organization. We suggest PRIDE, but if PRIDE declines, then another shall be selected by the district Councilperson." Then we have the text of the restriction. "So long as the property is used as a general merchandise store, discount store, department store or similar use, no 20 more than 10 percent of the floor area of the building will be used for the sale of food - this will permit the property to be a food supermarket, but not a so-called "Super Center". And for the record, the words "super center" are in quotation marks and have 264 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030740 initial capitals. Returning to the text, "Food for this purpose is food for human consumption off premises. Food for this purpose does not include candy, gum, nutritional bars, nutritional supplements, vitamins and pharmaceuticals. The organization which has the benefit will have the power to enforce the covenant."
Obviously, Wal-Mart can deal with that organization and convince them at some later time to change the restriction. I thought you were talking about putting in a restriction that had some meaning to it, not one that fools people.
Thank you very much. Anyone else to testify on any of these bills? 265 12/1/03 - RULES - BILL 030740 (No response.)
We will now move from our public hearing into a public meeting. - - - - 266 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC MEETING COMMITTEE ON RULES - - - - Monday, December 1, 2003 - - - - Public meeting conducted by the Committee on Rules, held in Room 696, City Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on the above date, to consider action on the following: BILLS 030645, 030670, 030709, 030721, 030730, 030740. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN JAMES KENNEY, Chair COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO COUNCILMAN BRIAN O'NEILL COUNCILMAN MICHAEL NUTTER COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN DARRELL CLARKE 267 12/1/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING
The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco for a motion on 030740.
This is the ordinance which would rezone areas of Port Richmond bounded by Allegheny Avenue, Collins Street, Westmoreland Street and Tulip Street for proposed development by Wal-Mart at that location. Councilman DiCicco.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chair, I move that Bill 030740 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Council Session.
Moved and seconded. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Cohen. 268 12/1/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING
Mr. Chairman, I strongly speak against this motion. I would rather move to hold this bill until all the questions about it are raised. I think it's important for the community not to be thwarted by City Council, but to be supported by Council. Just because we've just been elected for four years doesn't give us the right to ignore the community's feeling. And I think the community spoke loud and clear today. It has many, many reservations about this. Everybody who knows anything about Wal-Mart knows that it's not a company that any neighborhood is happy to have. Whether or not it's worth having at all could be questionable. But I don't think we ought to do it under the guise of we've got to do it quickly because the term is ending. There's a new term beginning on January 5th, five weeks from today. Let's give it the necessary thought. We don't need employers that don't provide insurance, health benefits and just provide minimum wages. And I don't think that 269 12/1/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING Philadelphia City Council ought to say yes to sort such an organization in face of the concerted opposition by the Port Richmond community. So I urge my colleagues to substitute a motion to hold the bill, and I would move, sir, that this bill be held for further study.
There is no 11 second to that motion. (Duly seconded.)
The Chair notes that there's a motion on the floor to approve the bill and suspend the Rules. It's been moved and seconded. All in favor? (Aye.)
Let the record note that Councilman Cohen has voted no on Bill No. 030740, but it will be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, and a request will be made for Rules 270 12/1/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING suspension to allow for first reading at our next Council Session. Bill No. 030645, which is an ordinance amending Title of the 6 Philadelphia Code relating to zoning and 7 planning by amending Chapter 14-1600 entitled, 8 "Miscellaneous," by adding a new Section 9 14-1628 entitled, "Zoning and Construction 10 Permits for Retail Stores." For want of a 11 better term, this is a super center 12 restriction of 10 percent of food items in 13 anything above 90,000 square feet. 14 In the Chair's opinion, we don't have a lot of information from the City Solicitor, the Commerce Department, the Mayor or the Commerce Director. Forced to vote on this Bill tonight without that information, I would have to vote no. I don't really want to vote no on it, but would want a little more information from those particular people. Because we don't really have many instances where the Administration and four major sections, including the Planning Commission of the Administration, are silent on a bill. The 271 12/1/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING sponsor is not here to ask for that consideration for additional information. So if it's the Committee's pleasure, we can hold it or not. It's up to the Members of the Committee. If there's no motion to approve it, I will deem it request to held. (No response.)
Since there's no 10 motion to approve it, we hold the bill to the call of the Chair. Bill No. 030730, which is an ordinance amending Title of the 14 Philadelphia Code entitled, "Zoning and Planning," by adding a new Section 14-1628 entitled, "District Special Controls," prohibiting certain uses in relation to sale of malt and brew beverages. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Clarke for a motion to approve the amendment read into the record in the public hearing.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, it's actually been told in the additional language. It should 272 12/1/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING also be added to the amendment on each individual number in the Section 1, "In each district there should be language that incorporates at the restaurant." It should say, "or take-out restaurant." And after the word brewed, it should say, "brewed or alcoholic beverages."
So the sentence would be, "Sale by a restaurant or take-out restaurant of malt or brewed --
"Alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises." So every number 1 through 6 -- which would actually be now 1 through 7, you're adding the 5th in with the same language. That would be the amendment?
Just one last question. I'm assuming just for consistency you're going to put the 5th in right after the 273 12/1/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING 4th, which means we need to re-number and and make them and 7? 4
Actually, in the 5 public hearing I actually incorporated it as 6 number 7, not knowing that they corresponded with the Council districts. So I would like to, Mr. Chairman, amend that language to insert the 5th Councilmanic District as number 5.
And the 8th would be number 6, and the 9th would be number 7.
Okay. So there's actually two amendments; one clarifying the ban of the sale, and the other one is to conclude your district. Is there a second? (Duly seconded.)
There are none opposed. 274 12/1/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING The amendment will be approved accordingly. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Clarke on a motion on Bill 030730 as amended.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I make a motion that Bill No. 030730 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and a request for a suspension of the Rules. (Duly seconded.)
There are none opposed. Bill No. 030730 as amended will be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and a request will be made for Rules suspension to allow first reading at our next Council Session. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Cohen for a motion on Bill No. 030670 with a 275 12/1/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING Rules suspension.
I move that the bill be reported out with a favorable recommendation and with a request for a suspension of Rules to permit first reading. (Duly seconded.)
There are none opposed. Bill No. 030670 will be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and a request will be made for Rules suspension to allow for first reading at our next Council Session. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Nutter for a motion on Bill No. 030709.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill 030709 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and a further recommendation 276 12/1/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading next Session. (Duly seconded.)
There are none opposed. Bill No. 030709 will be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and a request will be made for Rules suspension to allow first reading at our next Council Session. The Chair recognizes Councilmember DiCicco for a motion on Bill No. 030721.