COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING COMMITTEE ON STREETS AND SERVICES - - - - Room 696, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, February 17, 2004 10:00 a.m. - - - - BILLS 040006, 040025, 040026, 040027, 040032, 040033, 040058, 040061, 040062, 040063, 040065, 040067. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO, Chair COUNCILMAN DARRELL CLARKE COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN JUAN RAMOS COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO - - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 I N D E X BILL 040058 PAGE CHRISTIN DELROSSI, Streets Dept........ CHARLES DENNY, Streets Dept............ BILL 040032 PAUL LONIE, Streets Dept............... BILL DOBO (ph), Lawncrest Com. Assoc.... ARTHUR KRAMER, Lawncrest Com. Assoc.... BILL 040065 PAUL LONIE, Streets Dept............... MARTIN SOFFER, City Planning........... KENNY POLLOCK, National Chemical Lab... 11 BILL 040025 WILLIAM MAUTZ, Streets Dept............ 12 BILL 040026 13 WILLIAM MAUTZ, Streets Dept............ 14 BILL 040027 WILLIAM MAUTZ, Streets Dept............ 15 BILL 040033 WILLIAM MAUTZ, Streets Dept............ JEROME BOCA (ph), United Vendors....... BILL 040006 OTIS HAIGLER, JR., L&I................. 30 BILL 040061 OTIS HAIGLER, JR.,L&I.................. 33 GERALDINE JOHNSON, L&I................. 34 JEROME BOCA, United Vendors............ 40 BILL 040062 OTIS HAIGLER, JR.,L&I.................. 60 BILL 040063 OTIS HAIGLER, JR.,L&I.................. 62 BILL 040067 OTIS HAIGLER, JR.,L&I.................. 64 3 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040058
Good morning, everyone. The Committee on Streets and Services, the public hearing is now in session. We have a quorum: Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller, Councilman Frank Rizzo, Councilman Juan Ramos are in attendance. They're all members of this Committee. The Clerk will shortly read the title of the first bill.
Bill No. 040058, an ordinance establishing a no truck parking regulation on the 2800 block of East Allegheny Avenue, both sides.
Anyone who's testifying, would you please come up to the witness table and identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony?
My name is Christin DelRossi. I'm District Traffic Engineer for the 3rd Traffic District of the City.
Please proceed with your testimony. MS DELROSSI: I'm here today to offer testimony on Bill No. 040058, a bill 4 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040058 establishing a no truck parking from 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. regulation on Allegheny Avenue from Richmond to Bath Street, both sides. The Streets Department has no 6 objections to this bill. We are posting this under a trial ordinance, and we can have the signs posted within three weeks.
Thank you. Any questions for this witness from the Committee? Councilman Rizzo.
From the Streets Department perspective, when we do this no 15 truck parking, who are we trying to satisfy? Obviously, we're displacing people that for some reason desire to park in these locations. I'm not asking this question about this location; just in general, could you explain why we're doing this? Is it because we have the community that's complaining about truck parking? Where do the trucks go? Again, there's a ripple effect. And from the Streets Department perspective, what are we really creating here every time we do 5 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040058 one of these ordinances? MS DELROSSI: Well, this is an ordinance because there's businesses in the vicinity. Usually, it's for residents that have a problem with people parking trucks and they don't want them parked on their block. The ordinance was passed because there's businesses in the district but there's also residents in the district that have a problem with the trucks being parked on their block.
Where are they going to go? MS DELROSSI: That, I don't know.
Maybe I can weigh on this, being a District Councilperson. I often get similar requests. Many of the neighborhoods, residential neighborhoods, if you will, over the years have seen an increase in vehicular parking. More people own homes, have more cars. People come home from work at a certain time and they find it very difficult to find a parking space. Often what happens is either a resident of the block or a business who is in close proximity to a 6 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040058 particular street decide that it's okay to leave their truck on the street hours a 4 day, 7 days a week. And I think there's an 5 aesthetic issue as well as a safety issue in 6 many cases where you have a large truck that 7 is parking there, it kind of creates a very 8 unsafe environment along that block, along a 9 sidewalk where people could behind that truck. 10 It's a lot more -- it probably has as much to 11 do with appearance as it does with logistics. 12 We're allowing for the residents who come home 13 at the end of the day, come home from work to 14 have at least a reasonable opportunity to park 15 close to their residence. 16 The question on what do they do with 17 the trucks, most of these commercial trucks 18 should, in my opinion, at least find 19 alternative parking either in a garage or 20 someplace that is away from a residential 21 community. My district has many neighborhoods 22 that where residential property owners are 23 competing for the same spaces that commercial 24 property owners are and it does create a problem. 7 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040058 This is by request. I assume the Councilperson whose district it is introduced this because the neighbors were concerned.
What I would appreciate getting a little education on is what is a truck. Every vehicle that I understand that has a truck tag does not fall into this category. If you're Joe the plumber, and you have a company truck that you're allowed to take home with you, you may not be restricted from parking here. An example, no trucks on the Drives, Kelly, West River Drive. But I learned that a pick-up truck is exempt from that; they can park there. So I would like to know, so I can intelligently communicate, what vehicles does this really -- when you say no truck parking, what vehicles are excluded from this regulation? Is it everything with a license plate that says truck? I've been led to believe that that is not the case, that there are vehicles that are under a half ton GVW that are allowed to use the Drives are allowed to park in these 8 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040058 areas overnight. And I think we also have an obligation to educate the people that live in these areas so they really no the rules. Because I get phone calls, District Council People, I'm sure, get phone calls saying, "You have no truck parking signs and there's a truck parked here and the police won't give it a ticket." They think that there's some conspiracy, but apparently there's something in the fine print. And I think you're about to tell me, right?
Good morning, Chairman, Committee Members. My name is Charles Denny, I'm the Assistant Chief Traffic Engineer. The specific ordinance for the no 17 overnight truck parking deals with trucks that have a capacity over a quarter ton. So any pick-up truck that has a quarter ton or less capacity is exempt from the ordinance.
So if I work for a plumber, air conditioning contractor, and I have the name of the company on the side and I have a van, is that exempt?
It depends on the 9 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040058 capacity of the truck.
I'm trying to picture -- I can't calculate exactly what kind of vehicle would be allowed to park there.
Basically the small pick-up trucks are allowed. Most of the large pick-up trucks have over a quarter ton capacity. I don't believe the police enforce most pick-up trucks. The ordinance was passed initially, I believe, in 1964, and the capacity of trucks have increased since then.
Thank you. Let the record show that Councilman Clarke, who is also a member of this Committee, is now in attendance. Any other questions for these witnesses from the Committee? (No response.)
Anyone else 10 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040032 here who wishes to testify for or against the bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, the Clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 040032, an ordinance repealing an ordinance (Bill No. 10 030249), authorizing and directing the revision of lines and grades on a portion to City Plan No. 253 of the area lying generally northwardly from the intersection of Unruh Avenue and Oakley Street by striking from the City plan a portion of Kerper Street and Kerper Place; by placing on the City Plan certain portions of rights-of-way for drainage purposes and water main purposes; by striking from the City Plan and abandoning a certain right-of-way for drainage purposes and water main purposes, under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, my name is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager with the 11 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040032 Department of Streets, and the Department would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 040032: This is a Councilmanic ordinance 6 submitted by Councilman Brian O'Neill. The intended purpose of this ordinance is to repeal Bill No. 030249. The Streets Department takes no position on this ordinance.
Any questions for this witness from the Committee? (No response.)
Anyone else who wishes to testify for or against the bill? Please come forward and have a seat at the witness table.
Thank you, Councilman, my name is Bill Dobo (ph), I'm President of the Lawncrest Community Association, I'm also Democratic Ward Leader of the 35th Ward. And under advisement, we would like this bill to be held in your Committee. We're trying to sit down with parties involved and work this out. 12 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040032
Is this the bill that was introduced by Councilman O'Neill but later found it was Councilwoman Tasco's district now?
She did indicate holding the bill. But you have some testimony, I understand, or no? Do you want to give any testimony on this now?
My name is Arthur Kramer. I am the Chairman of the Zoning Committee with the Lawncrest Community Association. The purpose of removing these streets was that the Philadelphia Protestant Home could buy this and construct a 60-bed personal care facility. And there's some questions about access to the property because right now there's only access from Kerper Street, which is a small street, and the neighbors are concerned about fire and the amount of traffic coming into this lot. Presently, the other exit of this lot would be 13 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040032 Hasbrook Avenue and it's removed from the City Plan. So if something could be done to get some access to this property from Hasbrook Avenue, the neighbors might be a little more agreeable to the plan of the Philadelphia Protestant Home. So at this time, we would like to see the Kerper Street and Kerper Place remain on the City Plan. And if we come to some other negotiations with the Protestant Home, it can then -- the ordinance that has been passed could take effect.
Protestant Home, Philadelphia Protestant Home. They're located on Martinsville Road.
Okay, so noted. And we will hold the bill at the request of the sponsor. Thank you. Thank you for coming in today. Any other questions for these witnesses? (No response.) 14 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040065
Anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against the bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, the Clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 040065, an ordinance authorizing and directing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 58 of an area bounded by Ninth Street, Tenth Street, Callowhill Street and Noble Street, under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee. My name, again, is Paul Lonie, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets, and the Department would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 040065: This is not an administrative ordinance, but an ordinance requested by Mr. Alfred Pollock & Company. The purpose of this ordinance is to devise lines and grades of 15 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040065 these streets for business expansion, construction of a warehouse. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your Committee for a favorable action.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Streets and Services Committee. My name is Martin Soffer, City planner, and I'm here today to testify on behalf of the City Planning Commission. The proposed ordinance authorizes the striking from the City Plan and the vacating of two minor unneeded streets located in the Callowhill Industrial District of North Philadelphia. This action will permit National Chemical Laboratories to expand their business. The Planning Commission will recommend approval of this action at its meeting on February 17, 2004. Thank you.
Good morning, my name is Kenny Pollock, I'm representative of National Chemical Laboratories. We manufacture cleaning products and also package 16 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040065 cleaning products at our facility at 10th and Callowhill. We recently acquired some properties both north and east of our current facility and we wish to expand our warehouse. We currently have all the properties surrounding these two minor streets that we wish to have vacated. In order to do a proper expansion, we'd like to have these streets vacated. And if I'm permitted, can I step forward with a map?
Basically this is 10th Street, Callowhill Street, and Ninth Street. Our current facility is all this space that's in white. We recently acquired everything that you see in pink. We would like to have Percy Street vacated, Callowhill up to the other side of the former Reading Railroad property and this little bit of Hutchinson Street. And we plan on expanding our business so we would have a new warehouse that would go from Callowhill to New Vale to Ninth to our 17 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040065 current facility. We do not own this little property right here.
There's no activity. This is not a through street. This part of Percy Street between the former Reading Railroad. And Noble Street was vacated in the '40s, so it's not a through street. Hutchinson Street its vacated. This used to be a former brewery, and Hudson was vacated many years ago also. But it's vacated up to what is now Reading property. So we're asking to have this bit right here vacated.
That not only will it help them expand their business, it's very unsafe the way that stuff has been there. It's a dead-end street so...
Any other questions for these witnesses from the Committee? (No response.) 18 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040025
Anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against the bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, the Clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 040025, an ordinance granting permission to Nehal Desai and Raju Desai, owners of the newsstand at the corner of 13th and Market Streets, to construct, use and maintain an electrical conduit with an electrical service line and a telecommunications conduit with a telephone service line in and under the public rights-of-way for the purpose of supplying electrical service and telephone service to the newsstand, under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning, chairman and Members of the Committee. My name is William Mautz, and I'm a construction engineer with the Streets Department. I'm here to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 19 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040025 040025 on behalf of the Streets Department: Bill 040025 grants permission to Nehal Desai and Raju Desai, owners of the newsstand at the southeast corner of 13th and Market Streets to construct, use and maintain an electrical conduit with electrical service line and a telecommunications conduit with a telephone service line in and under the purpose rights-of-way for the purpose of supplying electrical and telephone services to the newsstand. The Streets Department has reviewed the construction plans for this project and has no objection to the passage of the bill.
Anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against this bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, the Clerk will read the title of the next bill. 20 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040026
Bill No. 040026, an ordinance amending Section 1(a) and (c) of an ordinance (Bill No. 030344) approved July 31, 2003, entitled an ordinance granting permission to Ride the Ducks International LLC, to remove an existing wood and metal newsstand located on the west sidewalk of South Independence Mall West (formerly Sixth Street) between Ranstead and Chestnut Streets and erect a new prefabricated metal ticket booth kiosk with signage, including an electrical conduit with an electrical service line and a telecommunications conduit with a telephone service line in and under the public rights-of-way for the purpose of supplying electrical service and telephone service to the ticket booth kiosk, under certain terms and conditions, by enlarging the ticket booth kiosk with the conditions stated therein.
Good morning, Chairman and Members of the Committee. My name is William Mautz, and I'm a construction engineer with the Streets Department. I'm here to offer the following testimony for Bill No. 21 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040026 040026 on behalf of the Streets Department: This bill amends Section 1(a) and (c) of an ordinance, Bill No. 030344, approved July 31, 2003, by granting permission to Ride the Ducks International LLC to remove the previously approved ticket booth kiosk which was foot long, 4 foot wide, and 9 feet 9 inches high, and erect a larger ticket booth 10 kiosk 13 feet long by foot wide by foot 3 inches high at the same location. In addition, this bill includes the retail sale of Ride the Ducks merchandise within the new ticket booth kiosk. The Streets Department has reviewed the revised plans for this project and recommends passage of the bill.
Thank you. Any questions for this witness from the Committee? (No response.)
Anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against the bill? (No response.) 22 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040033
Seeing none, the Clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 040027, an ordinance granting permission to Robert Bitros, owner of the property 931-933 North Second Street, Philadelphia PA 19123, to operate and maintain an open air sidewalk cafe on the east sidewalk of North Second Street, under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning, Chairman and Members of the Committee. My name is William Mautz and I'm a construction engineer with the Streets Department. I'm here to offer the following testimony for Bill No. 17 040027 on behalf of Streets Department: This bill grants permission to Robert Bitros, owner of the property 931-933 North Second Street to operate an open sidewalk cafe on the east footway of North Second Street adjacent to the property. Ten tables are proposed which will leave 8 feet of clear unobstructed footway. No rails will be used. 23 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040033 The Streets Department has reviewed the cafe plan and has no objection to the passage of the bill.
Thank you. Any questions for this witness from the Committee? (No response.)
Anyone here who wishes to testify for or against the bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, the Clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 040033, an ordinance authorizing 111 South 15 Street Associates LLP, 232 North 22 Street, Philadelphia PA 19103, its successors and assigns, to construct and maintain a marquis, raised planters and rigid awnings on and over the public footways on Chestnut Street, South 15th Street, and Sansom Street adjacent to the property, under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning, Chairman and Members of the Committee. My name is 24 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040033 William Mautz, and I'm a construction engineer with the Streets Department. I'm here to offer the following testimony for Bill No. 5 040033 on behalf of the Streets Department: This bill authorizes 111 South 15th Street Associates, LLP, owner of the property 111 South 15th Street to construct and maintain a marquis, raised planters and rigid awnings on and over the public footways of Chestnut Street, South 15th Street and Sansom Street. All proposed encroachments will provide adequate horizontal and vertical clearances for pedestrian passage. The Streets Department has reviewed the plans and has no objection to the passage of the bill.
Thank you. Any questions for this witness from the Committee? (No response.)
Anyone else here who wishes to testify? Please step forward. Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record and 25 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040033 proceed your testimony.
Mr. DiCicco, my name is Jerome R. Boca (ph). And I'm here on behalf of the United Vendors of Philadelphia. The east side of 15th Street between Chestnut and Sansom has been authorized for one or two vendor locations. And my question to the Committee and to the previous witness is whether the planters that they intend to put up will interfere with the ability of those vendors to continue to operate?
Do you have any knowledge of that? This is not my district, so I can't speak to it.
I don't have any knowledge of that. I could provide a plan that was submitted to me for ordinance 20 purposes which would show where these planters are at. I do not have that with me at this time.
I respectfully request that the Committee defer action on this until that plan can be reviewed and until the 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040033 Committee can be made aware of whether or not there will be any interference with the vendor locations from the previous ordinance.
I would suggest that you speak to the sponsor of the bill, Councilman Clarke who's also a member of this Committee, and this Committee will certainly accommodate Councilman Clarke if that's what his desire is. My question again to the City is, I assume that this request is being made by the owners of the properties.
Do you know if these planters -- would you happen to know if these planters are in the location where there presently are vendors?
I'm not aware of present or existing vendor locations. I have no 21 information on that.
Thank you. The attorney who represents the vendors has asked for no action on this bill. Councilman Clarke. 27 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040033
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, actually, I just want to check with the Council President. Technically, the Council President represents this portion of Chestnut Street now. And I inadvertently got the bill from the Streets Department, I assume, because of the change in boundaries as of January 1. So she not knowing that there was any controversy associated with that indicated that it was okay for me to pass the bill on her behalf. But if there is some concern as a result of the potential vendor location then --
Councilman, I wouldn't want to characterize my presence as generating controversy; it's a need to generate information, first of all. There is at least one vendor location, maybe two, authorized for the location where these planters are going in. And I'm just trying to find out whether it's going to affect the ability of those vendors to operate; and then if so, whether we can make some allowance for them to continue. 28 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040033 One I know operates at the southeast corner of 15th and Chestnut, and the other maybe at the northeast corner of 15th and Sansom. My request, Councilman Clarke, is only to defer action on this until we can review the plan and everybody can be on board as to what exactly is happening.
Normally, I think that's a reasonable request, but there is potentially one problem. I'm not sure what our Calendar will look like as it relates to our ability to have hearings. We will shortly probably within the next 30 days receive the Mayor's budget, and it's not clear how many Streets Committee hearings we will have in order to discuss the bill. So I have to check with the Chair. I can say to you today that maybe we could pass the bill out of Committee and agree to hold it on the Calendar, after discussion with the Council President, until you can have whatever interaction you need to have with her office. And if it's felt --
I understand. And if you will hold it and let us get a handle on 29 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040033 exactly what is happening.
We will not ask for rule suspension to give you time to have that discussion with her. Mr. Chairman, is that okay with you?
That's fine. Thank you. Any other questions for this witness from the Committee? (No response.)
Anyone else who wishes to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, the Clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 040006, an ordinance amending Title 9 of The Philadelphia Code by amending Section 9-205 (Sidewalk Sales), by prohibiting vending on certain portions of Chester Avenue, Kingsessing Avenue, 53rd Street and 54th Street, under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning. 30 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040006 Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good morning, Councilman DiCicco and members of the Committee. I am Otis Haigler, Jr., Legislative and Regulatory Affairs Manager for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. Today, I'm here to provide testimony on Bill 10 No. 040006, which, if enacted, will prohibit vending or portions of Chester Avenue, Kingsessing Avenue, 53rd Street and 54th Street. The Department offers no objections to the enactment of Bill 040006, as this is within Council's prerogative under section 17 9-205, Subsection 8, Subsection P of The Philadelphia Code. The Committee and Council should, however, be mindful that continued limitations placed on locations where vending is permitted will impact on this type of activity in the City since legal locations to conduct vending will be at a premium. Thank you. I'll be happy to answer 31 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040006 any questions at this time.
Any questions for this witness from the Committee? (No response.)
Oh, I'm sorry. With me is Ms. Geraldine Johnson and she is the assistant chief of our business compliance unit.
Anyone else here who wishes to testify? Ms. Johnson, a few months ago we had a meeting about the vending carts on Ninth Street. Were you at a meeting with me South Philadelphia?
Did you ever get the names -- I know it's unrelated to this 32 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 bill. I'm going to go off the record on this for a minute. (Discussion held off the record.)
Any other questions for these witnesses from the Committee? (No response.)
Anyone else who wishes to testify for or against the bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, the Clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 040061, an ordinance amending the ordinance approved January 3, 1992 (Bill No. 1205-AA), which, pursuant to Subsection 9-204(8)(a) of The Philadelphia Code, designates the locations in Center City at which vending is permitted, by providing that all permitted vendor locations on both sides of 11th Street between Arch Street and Chestnut Street shall be assigned only to vendors licensed to sell prepared food, all under certain terms and conditions. 33 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061
Good day, Councilman DiCicco and Members of the Committee. I am Otis Haigler, Jr., Legislative and Regulatory Affairs Manager for the Department of Licenses his and Inspections. Today, I'm here to provide testimony on Bill 040061, which, if enacted, will amend section 9-204(8)(a) of The Philadelphia Code to only permit sidewalk vending of prepared food on both sides of 11th Street between Arch and Chestnut Streets. In general, the Department offers no 15 objections to the enactment of Bill 040061, however, the Committee and Council should be mindful that to enforce the provisions of bill 18 040061, the Department will have to expend its limited resources to evict and relocate vendors who may have operated legally for sometime at the locations in question. Additionally, the Department will have to revise our processes for licensing vendors to accommodate the enforcement of this bill as it relates to product sales in a very 34 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 confined area instead of the overall regulating of vending activity. Thank you for the opportunity to provide the Department's testimony. And I'll be happy to answer any questions at this time.
Thank you, Mr. Haigler. In your testimony, you mention the fact that the Department may have to expend considerable amount of resources for possible relocation of vendors who may have to be relocated off of these particular blocks. Do you happen to know how much time and resources the Department is now spending trying to get these vendors to abide by the regulations that are now on the books?
I will defer that to Ms. Johnson who is here with me today, since her operation is directly responsible for the enforcement of this type of activity.
Good morning. We regulate Center City. We have two inspectors that are assigned to Center City on a permanent basis and they monitor Center City 35 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 daily. But one thing I did want to point out is that when we relocate these vendors, what's going to happen is we're pushing them either west of where they are or east of where they are. And usually, what happens is when we relocate these vendors, the business owners, because there wasn't a vendor there before, we're bombarded with phone calls from business owners wanting to know why all of a sudden there's new vendors in their location. So it is kind of -- we did 10th Street and we relocated those vendors. And now to have to relocate all of these vendors, it would be a hardship for the Department because now we're relocating them, we're redoing their licenses, and the vendors do not willingly give up -- I mean, they don't want to give up their spaces. They've built businesses at these locations. We do spend a lot of time in Center City monitoring the regulation.
And I do respect the fact that some of these vendors have established a business, as you say, and 36 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 become accustomed to using that particular location. The problem I have is that probably as many business owners call me up to complain about the vendors and the manner in which they are operating their businesses. Eleventh Street in particular is probably one of the worst of the blocks between Chestnut and Market. You can go out there today because it's a fairly nice day and on the east side of the street there is a vendor who parks a van hours a day, 7 days a week, has all kind of 13 graffiti on it, uses the van as a shed to 14 store his wears and the tables and everything 15 else that he vends on. And nothing has been 16 done about that. And this has gone on for 17 years. I mean, I sat on Bill 658 probably for 18 three years now because I think I'm a fairly 19 reasonable person. I try to allow for the 20 fact that people have to earn a living and 21 they're in business. But there is really no 22 cooperation from the vendors but for the 23 majority of the vendors who do cooperate are 24 the people who sell food. The other vendors, the guy who sells the eyeglasses on the 37 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 southwest corner of 11th and Market, no regard for the regulations that are on the books. He's got a card table out there half the time. Just yesterday, on the northeast corner of 11th and Market, there is a vendor who had all of his merchandise on the sidewalk, on top of the cart. If you measured the distance from the payment to the top of the cart with all the suitcases and all that were piled on top of that, it was probably 10, 12 feet high. The guy is out -- he's not in regs. I don't want to waste the Department's time to go back to the same people, these aren't new people who don't understand the game or the Rules of the game. These are people who have been vending there who continually scoff the law. And they're causing a lot of public safety concerns for me and some of the other people who were there, in addition to total disregard for all the laws. I mean, we get people who come in, we encourage people to come to shop in the City. They park at a meter. If a meter goes 38 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 over one minute, even with our more friendly parking authority, they're whacked with a $25 ticket, but a vendor can stay there all day, feed the meter when they see an enforcement officer coming, and nothing happens to them. And they're vending illegally from a van. And I'm not being critical of the Department. I know what you guys and ladies go through. I'd rather you be paying attention to buildings that are going to fall down than be out there. And this has gone on for years. I've been in this Council for almost nine years now, and it's the same people who have continually scoffed the law. And I know their attorney is going to tell me that William Penn owns the streets and everything else. So we got in the last time. But these are people who just don't get it. And I've waited probably three years since we had that last Bill 658 was introduced, maybe four years. Nothing's changing. It's just as bad out there today as it was four years ago when they filled this Chambers with 400 people who were accusing me 39 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 of being anti-business and not caring about people and that other nonsense that was going on in here. So again, I'm not being critical of you. I'm venting a little bit because it's frustrating. It's been four years. Nothing's changed. In fact, it's getting worse. It's getting worse.
Again, Councilman, as our testimony indicated, in general the Department offers no objections to the enactment of the bill. We just needed to point out some of the other particulars that's involved with the enactment of the bill.
And I appreciate that; I really do. And maybe I need to know where those potentials relocation areas are within my district anyway. Because I certainly don't want a problem from one location and create a problem for someone else. That's the last thing I want to do. None of us need that aggravation. I'm going to move these bills. I'll hold it until we have some time to talk about 40 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 what the alternative relocation sites are. I'm sure, sir, you want to testify here.
Thank you Mr. DiCicco. I mean, no offense, but you remind me of my wife. She's always telling me what I'm about to say or what I think. And she's got about a 50 percent score card. I agree with you, Councilman, that the situation on 11th Street is intolerable. And I think I have always agreed with you and always said that. But isn't -- if these people are violating the law, and I say they are just as you say they are, then isn't it a question of enforcement of the law? L&I can chase them; L&I does not. That's what the problem is here. To blanketly say everybody between Arch and Chestnut Street who doesn't sell food is out of there is overkill. If you want to say between Market and Chestnut, yeah, that will chase all those people. I think a better way is for you to use the prestige and strength of your office to pressure L&I to enforce the law. 41 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 Now, I want to talk about Bill 61, 62 and 63 because they all basically deal with the same thing. The people that are going to be mostly affected by this bill are blacks and Asians who are the merchandise sales people at these locations. They're not aware of this hearing. I have attempted to make them aware of it by contacting Asian Americans United. Unfortunately, your advertisement appeared, I think, in Friday's newspaper and Monday was a holiday, and it's very short time. As to the other areas, 8th and 9th, 12th, why? Why do we want to chase the merchandise vendors out of there? Is it a question of the Gallery? Is it a question of David slaying Goliath? I don't understand what we're trying to accomplish, Mr. DiCicco.
I think I'm trying to address some of the issues that you raised, that many of these cases, these people, are not obeying the law. And you're saying we should use the powers of L&I and L&I aren't doing their enforcement. You know what? I'm tired of calling L&I and they're 42 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 tired of hearing me complain to them. They're spending -- it's the same people. See, if I go out there or L&I goes out there and says, "You know, Mr. DiCicco, you're not allowed to keep your merchandise on the sidewalk. You're not allowed to stack it on top of your stand. This stand is not within the code. It doesn't meet the regs," and all those things and I site you and give you a warning. And a week later I come back and the same thing is still occurring and a week later and a month later and a year later and four years later --
And they do it. And while I acknowledge and we agree with 11th Street between Market and Chestnut, which is a bad scene, it's not a bad scene on the other streets. Those people are not breaking the law.
I just want -- 43 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 for the record, I understand that you pointed out that a majority of these vendors are either African American and/or Asian. I had a similar problem on the 2000 block of South Broad Street about six years ago where we had vendors who I worked with for over two years to try to establish some sort of a vending district, if you will. L&I worked with me over those two and a half years to put a limit on the number of vendors who should be there. I even worked and talked about raising money to come up with a uniform vending stand. So that you'll know, eventually when they didn't abide by the rules and regulations, we eliminated them completely. Two of the people who were vendors there were relatives of mine and neither of them were Asian or African American. So I just don't want anyone to think that this is some attack that I'm perpetrating on people of color or minorities. I'm very colorblind when it comes to that stuff. I look at the situation.
That's not your motive, but that's the effect of it. 44 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061
It could be the effect. But the effect is that two relatives of mine, two cousins of mine were basically put out of business because they were not paying attention to what we were trying to do out there either.
But the people on 12th Street and 10th Street and the other streets that you're involved here are paying attention. They are not the culprits. It's three or four people on 11th between Market and Chestnut that are the culprits. I'll do anything that I can to assist in cleaning up that situation. I've even considered suing the City to compel the City to do it, except, unfortunately, under the law, I don't have standing to do that.
I just wanted to respond so that the record is clear. The Department does enforce provisions of the Code related to vending. As Mr. Boca, I'm sure, is aware, he has represented many a client, I'm sure, at the L&I Review Board when we have 45 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 revoked licenses of vendors, when we have gone out and exercised our enforcement powers to enforce laws that are on the books related to vending. We have in the past, if there are continued operations, continued violations on a particular property that we are aware of and that our inspectors observe at the time that they are there we will take action, we will cite the responsible party, we will take it through the proper enforcement channels to try to get that situation rectified. It's not the Department's position to not enforce the laws related to vending, but we do have to go through a certain process in order to do that, to legally when we stand before a judge to indicate what we have found. We have to legally identify and also document what we have done so that we don't fall into other issues that we have to deal with.
I absolutely acknowledge that the Department does a very large job in enforcing the vendor ordinances. Ms. Johnson and I are at each other throats regularly about that. 46 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 I'm only pointing to one location. One location and that's the location you're pointing out Mr. DiCicco. And for some reason there's never been any enforcement there, and you know it and I know it. I don't know what to do about it.
Well, that's what I was attempting to do with this bill, to do something about it.
But your bill goes all the way from Arch Street. How about the pocketbook seller that's up between arch and market?
That is the guy who had suitcases stacked on top and he always has them out there. That's a disgrace what he does. If someone bumps into that stand the wrong way, they're going to wind up in the street. You have a public safety issue out 47 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 there as well. Forget all the other issues about who is paying taxes, who isn't paying taxes and the competition with the Gallery. When people get off the bus at 11th and Market or come out of the subway or enter the subway entrance at 11th and Market, there's very little room for those people to be able to move around, especially during the holidays. It's disgraceful what's going on out there. And I'll tell you we've been down this road before, you and I. And I held up to my end of the bargain and I said I wouldn't move those bills, I'd keep them out there as a wedge or hammer, some leverage, if you will, to see if they would get their act straight; and they didn't. But I want to go one step further because I am, I think, a reasonable person. I'm going to move these bills, as I said earlier. I'm not going to call them up for final reading. I'm going to hold the bills after they're voted out of this Committee. I'm going to work with the Department. We're going to talk about possible relocation areas, 48 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 and I may not move the bills at all. But what I want to do is figure out a way of cleaning up 11th Street between Market and Chestnut. And if it means eliminating all or some of those vendors, that's what I'm going to ask this Committee to support me and approve. That is the worst area. There's no 9 question about it, and I think we agree on that. Something needs to be done there.
I do have a problem on the other side of Market on the north side of Market in particular with the pocketbook seller, as you call him.
If you tell me where you have a problem, my organization will bring sufficient pressures to clear that problem. I cannot accomplish that on 11th Street between Market and Chestnut. I've tried. We've been ignored just like Ms. Johnson's been ignored -- the Department, I don't mean Ms. Johnson.
And I appreciate the fact that we're finally 49 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 agreeing that we agree that is the biggest problem of all. And we're going to figure out how to clean that up. There are some other issues, and if you went out there you today, the pocketbook seller, as you referred to that person, you will see that if L&I went out there today, they would probably give him six violations just immediately.
Eleventh Street, the northeast corner of 11th and Market.
I go out on Market on my way home or wherever I'm going. Nine out of ten days I'm out there. And it drives me nuts. It drives me crazy. What's driving me nuts is the retailers are calling 50 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 me constantly complaining.
Well, about the condition of the vendors and the way they don't maintain the sidewalks and the fact that people can't traverse the sidewalks. There's a public safety issue. And especially during the holidays. It's horrible out there. You've got to wiggle your way through these carts.
We will see that that pocket vendor cleans up his act and we will see that anybody else that I'm made aware of that's violating --
I'm not going to be labor this record any longer. I want to believe you, but it's four years and nothing really has changed.
You never told me about that. 51 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061
Okay, all right. Any other questions for these witnesses?
Just quick. You mentioned that you have a location that you can't do anything -- repeat the location that you've tried to clean up and can't.
No. Of my organization? No, they're not members of the United Vendor. There is one who is a food vendor and his operation is good and clean. That's not a problem. The guy selling the watches, you know, the guy selling the music on the other side of the street. No. 22
If they were, we would deal with it. 52 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061
Is L&I familiar with these vendors that we're talking about? Well, why aren't you doing something about it?
Because -- it's like a continuous battle, but we do have the authority to revoke the assignments. And even though we didn't want to go that way, maybe that will prevent you from having to pass the bill. We'll just begin to revoke the assignment.
I think you really should use the power of the Department because if these people don't believe that you're going to do anything, they're not going to clean up their act. And I think you hear the frustration on the Association side, the Council side. We really need you as the enforcement arm to do something to correct this. You have the power; please use it.
This issue will be taken up with the Department Commissioner Verdi, and I'm sure there will be some action that would be taken on this. 53 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061
Thank you. And you or Dominick Verdi will get back to us on the --
Okay, thank you. Any other questions for these widths? (No response.)
Anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against this bill? Darrell, do you have a question? I'm sorry.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Actually, not on this particular issue but somewhat related. Can you at some point give me a status of the Germantown Avenue situation, Germantown and Erie to Lehigh. I know that we had a hearing, we passed a bill and you were supposed to meet with them.
We all were supposed to meet. I think we haven't really sat down 54 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 to do that yet. And also we've been in discussions with the Law Department because they had some suggestions for certain types of amendments, but I'll talk to you maybe a little bit later.
Yes. That's a little while ago. And it's getting ready to be warm in a couple months and I don't want to have the store owners calling me because we hadn't acted and they held off whatever protest that they were going to do based on the passage of the bill. But if we're not going to implement --
There has been some discussion with the Law Department. And I believe there's discussion --
Yes, L&I and the Law Department, and I believe it's going to be your office as well.
But has anybody -- because they were supposed to bring the vendors in to talk about the -- to determine, 55 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 first of all, who was legal before we started assigning spots and locations and then subsequently would work on a strategy to carve out the specific locations for a number vendors on that corridor.
And I believe there has been a meeting that had taken place, as I recall, there was some sort of meeting that you all had with people in the Germantown.
Prior to the passage of the bill, I did meet with the community and the vendors. But when the bill was passed, I have not been aware of what happened after that.
Well, I mean if you're not aware, nothing happened because you're the responsible agency.
I need to believe that. I don't want the spring to come and have the business owners calling me and saying, you know, "You said you were going to pass a bill to curtail the type of activity 56 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 that was going on," and then I pass a bill and in good faith they back off and allow the process to take place, and nothing happens. So can you like at a minimum --
I was just informed that the Department did go out and verify which vendors were licensed in the area. But as far as the actual relocation process, they haven't gone forward with that yet. But we'll sit down and make sure that that process moves forward.
I would say very shortly. Within the month. I'll sit down with somebody.
You will have had the meeting, determination of licensed vendors, the number of spots that will be allotted for that corridor?
I'll talk to the Law Department's representative today right after I leave here. We'll sit down and go over the -- I believe they wanted to do this by 57 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 ordinance. We'll discuss possibly ordinance 3 and regulation so that was one of the issues.
Whatever I need. At the end of the day, I want to have some order out there. I would prefer not to get any calls from any business people, any of the store owners about continued concerns as it relates to the operation of the vendors.
Excuse me, Ms. Johnson. You need speak into the microphone.
Vending was prohibited on along a stretch of Germantown Avenue from Lehigh -- actually, it was maybe York to Butler. And there had been vending over the last 10 years, albeit unauthorized. And I didn't want to put people out of business, but I said in exchange for 58 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040061 authorizing vending we had to have some sense of order. We had to have structured vending comparable to what we had in Center City. The number of locations, designated locations. We also said you couldn't sell the same product --
-- of a vending stand in front of a store owner. So I didn't want a sneaker guy selling sneakers in front of the sneaker store and he can sell them for half the price. It's very specific in detail, and you guys were then supposed to work on the strategy to implement that from a regulatory standpoint.
And I'm hearing that nothing is happening, and I'm a little concerned about that.
When you said that, I remember that the vendors were checked to make sure which ones was licensed. And I think a list was compiled, but I'll have to -- I'm not 59 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040062 the supervisor in charge of that area. A list was compiled of those vendors, but I think what kind of put us at a halt is we were waiting for further instructions. And plus, the fact that your bill have vendors selling the same merchandise as the business can't be placed there, so it's going to take some maneuvering. But I'm pretty sure that we do have a list of the people that are eligible.
Well, I would like to see that maneuvering take place soon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Bill No. 0400062, an ordinance amending the ordinance approved January 3, 1992 (Bill No. 1205-AA), as amended, which pursuant to subsection 60 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040062 9-204(8)(a) of the Philadelphia Code, designates the locations in Center City at which vending is permitted, by providing that all permitted vendor locations on both sides of Eighth Street and Ninth street between Arch Street and Market Street shall be assigned only to vendors licensed to sell prepared food, all under certain terms and conditions.
Good day, Councilman DiCicco and Members of the Committee. I am Otis Haigler, Jr., Legislative and Regulatory Affairs Manager for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. Today, I'm here to provide testimony on Bill 040062 which, if enacted, will amend section 9-204 (8)(a) of The Philadelphia Code to only permit sidewalk vending of prepared food on both sides of Eighth Street and Ninth Street between Arch and Market Streets. In general, the Department offers no 23 objections to the enactment of Bill 040062. However, the Committee and Council should be mindful that to enforce the provision of Bill 61 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040062 040062, the Department will have to expend its limited resources to evict and relocate vendors who may have operated legally for sometime at the locations in question. Additionally, the Department will have to revise our processes for licensing vendors to accommodate the enforcement of this bill as it relates to product sales in a very confined area instead of the overall regulating of vending activity. Thank you for the opportunity to provide the Department's testimony. I'll be happy to answer any questions at this time.
Any questions for this witness from the committee? (No response.)
Anyone else here who wishes to testify? (No response.)
Seeing none, the Clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 040063, an ordinance amending the ordinance approved 62 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040063 January 3, 1992 (Bill No. 1205-AA), which, pursuant to subsection 9-204 (8)(a) of the Philadelphia Code, designates the locations in Center City at which vending is permitted, by providing that all permitted vendor locations on both sides of 12th Street between Arch Street and Chestnut Street shall be assigned only to vendors licensed to sell prepared food all, under certain terms and conditions.
Good day, Councilman DiCicco and Members of the Committee. I am Otis Haigler, Jr., Legislative and Regulatory Affairs Manager for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. Today, I'm here to provide testimony on bill 0400063 which, if enacted, will amend Section 9-204 (8)(a) of The Philadelphia Code to only permit sidewalk vending of prepared food on both sides of 12th Street between Arch and Chestnut Streets. In general, the Department offers no 23 objections to the enactment of Bill 040063. However, the Committee and Council should be mindful that to enforce the provisions of Bill 63 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040067 0400063, the Department would have to expend its limited resources to evict and relocate vendors who may have operated legally for sometime at the locations in question. Additionally, the Department will have to revise our processes for the licensing of vendors to accommodate the enforcement of this bill as it relates to product sales in a very confined area instead of the overall regulating of vending activity. Thank you for the opportunity to provide the Department's testimony. I'll be happy to answer any questions at this time.
Any questions for this witness from the committee? (No response.)
Seeing none, the Clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 040067, an ordinance amending Section 9-205 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Sidewalk Sales," by prohibiting sidewalk sales on portions of Franklintown Boulevard. 64 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040067
Good day, Councilman DiCicco and Members of the Committee. I am Otis Haigler, Jr., Legislative and Regulatory Affairs Manager for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. Today, I'm here to provide testimony on Bill 040067 which, if enacted, will prohibit vending on portions of Franklintown Boulevard between 18th and Callowhill Streets. The Department offers no objections to the enactment of Bill 040067, as this is within Council's prerogative under Section 15 9-205 (8)(p) of The Philadelphia Code. The Committee and Council should, however, be mindful that continued limitations placed on locations where vending is permitted will impact on this type of activity in the City since legal locations to conduct vending will be at a premium. Thank you. I'll be happy to answer any questions at this time.
Any questions for this witness from the committee? 65 02/17/04 - STREETS - BILL 040067 (No response.)
Seeing none, that have concludes the public hearing on the Committee on Streets and Services. - - - - 66 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC MEETING COMMITTEE ON STREETS AND SERVICES - - - - Tuesday, February 17, 2004 - - - - Public meeting conducted by the Committee on Streets and Services, held in Room 400, City Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on the above date, to consider action on the following: BILLS 040006, 040025, 040026, 040027, 040032, 040033, 040058, 040061, 040062, 040063, 040065, 040067. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO, Chair COUNCILMAN DARRELL CLARKE COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN JUAN RAMOS COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO 67 02/17/04 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING
We will now go into the public meeting. The Chair recognizes Councilman Ramos.
Mr. Chairman, I recommend that Bill No. 040058 be voted out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the Rules of Council be suspended. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill 040058 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, and a further recommendation that the Rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The bill is approved. Bill No. 040032 its being held at the request of the sponsor. Councilman Ramos. 68 02/17/04 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING
Mr. Chairman, I recommend that Bill No. 040065 be voted out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the Rules of Council be suspended. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill 040065 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, and a further recommendation that the Rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
Mr. Chairman, I recommend that Bill No. 040025 be voted out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the Rules of Council be suspended. (Duly seconded.)
It has been 69 02/17/04 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING properly moved and seconded that Bill 040025 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, and that the Rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
I recommend that Bill No. 040026 be moved out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the Rules of Council be suspended. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill 040026 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, and a further recommendation that the Rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. 70 02/17/04 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING (Aye.)
I recommend that Bill No. 040027 be voted out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the Rules of Council be suspended. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill 040027 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, and a further recommendation that the Rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The bill is approved. The Chair recognizes Councilman Ramos.
Bill No. 040033 71 02/17/04 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill 040033 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
That Bill No. 18 040006 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the Rules of Council be suspended. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill 040006 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, and a further recommendation 72 02/17/04 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING that the Rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
I recommend that Bill No. 040061 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill 040061 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The bill is approved. 73 02/17/04 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING Councilman Ramos.
That Bill No. 4 040062 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill 040062 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
That Bill No. 20 040063 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill 040063 be reported out of Committee with a favorable 74 02/17/04 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
That Bill No. 12 040067 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the Rules of Council be suspended. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill 040067 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, and a further recommendation that the Rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
Those opposed? (No response.) 75 02/17/04 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING
The bill is approved. Thank you everyone. This concludes the public meeting on the Committee on Streets and Services. (Council adjourned at 11:45 a.m.) - - - - 76 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of February 17, 2004, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. RE: COMMITTEE ON STREETS AND SERVICES _________________________ Lisa C. Bradley, RPR