Committee Hearing, November 30, 2005

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON STREETS AND SERVICES - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, November 30, 2005 2:20 p.m. - - - PRESENT: COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO, CHAIRMAN COUNCILMAN JUAN RAMOS COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE BILLS 050859, 050860, 051072, 051073, 051098, 050857, 050861, 050862, 050863 050864, 050949 and 050952 - - - 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 2

Good afternoon, everyone. This is the public hearing on the Committee of Streets and Services. My name is Frank DiCicco. I'm the Chair of the Committee. To my immediate right is Councilman Juan Ramos, who is the Vice-Chair of the Committee. Councilman Nutter and Councilman Darrell Clarke are here as well. They're members of the Committee. We do have a quorum. What we're going to do is take several of the bills that we believe are the least controversial to get those out of the way and then deal with the two bills that will have more of the testimony and question and answers, which is the, for lack of a better way, the bill that talks about the elimination of the handicap parking spaces for the motor scooters and the regulation for the tour operators. We'll take those at the end. The other stuff should move rather quickly. I would ask the Clerk to read 3 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. the title of the first bill.

Bill No. 050861, an ordinance amending Section 5 of an ordinance, Bill No. 050468, approved June 16, 2005, entitled, "An ordinance 7 granting permission to Marie Bontiago, owner of Tabula Rasa Cafe, tenant of the property located at 944 North 2nd Street, Philadelphia, to operate and maintain an open air sidewalk cafe on the northwest corner of North 2nd Street and Laurel Street, under certain terms and conditions," by extending the period for compliance with the authorization conditions therein.

Please proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon, 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. 050861. This bill will amend Section 5 4 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. of an ordinance, Bill No. 050468, approved June 16, 2005, by extending the period for compliance with the authorization conditions stated herein. The time period for compliance with Section 5 of the ordinance will be extended by 240 days until February 10, 2006. The Streets Department has no 11 objections to the passage of the bill.

Any questions for this witness from the Committee? (No response.)

Is there 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. 050859, an ordinance establishing a no truck parking and tow away zone regulation for an area 5 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. bounded by and within Vine Street to Haverford Avenue, 54th Street to 60th Street.

I haven't seen you for a while. How are you?

Fine. How are you?

Good. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

My name is Kristin Del Rossi and I am the District 1 Traffic Engineer for the Streets Department. Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I am here to today to offer testimony on Bill No. 20 050859, an ordinance prohibiting tractor-trailer parking for an area bounded by and within Vine Street to Haverford Avenue, 54th Street to 60th Street. The actual text of the posting will be "no tractor-trailer or truck 6 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. trailer parking any time," with a "tow away zone" rider. The Streets Department has no 5 objections to this bill. We have prepared work orders, and they will be completed in about six weeks. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.

Thank you. Any questions for this witness from the Committee? (No response.)

Anyone else here who wishes to testify on or against this bill? (No response.)

Seeing none, I'll ask the Clerk to read the title of the next bill a little bit slower than you did the previous bill.

Bill No. 050857, an ordinance amending Section 2 of an ordinance, Bill No. 020429, approved November 13, 2002, entitled "An ordinance 7 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 258 by striking from the City Plan and vacating Brill Street from Torresdale Avenue to Harbison Avenue, by striking from the City Plan and vacating a certain triangular section of Harbison Avenue and by reserving and placing on the City Plan a right-of-way for drainage purposes, water main purposes and gas main purposes, under certain terms and conditions."

Thank you. Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Frank Morelli, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 050857. This is not an administrative 8 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. ordinance, but an ordinance requested by Mr. Charles Garuffie, Paintarama, 5223 Torresdale Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19124. The purpose of this ordinance is to extend the time period to strike and vacate Brill Street from Torresdale Avenue to Harbison Avenue and to remove unneeded land from the Streets Department's infrastructure and responsibility. The date in Section 2 of this ordinance needs to be amended to November 13, 2007. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your Committee for favorable action.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Streets and Services Committee. My name is Martin Soffer. I'm the Director of the Development, Planning and Zoning 9 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Division, and I am here today to testify on behalf of the City Planning Commission. This bill authorizes the striking of unneeded streets and placement of a right-of-way for drainage and utility purposes. The purpose of this ordinance is to allow for the adjacent property owner, Paintarama, to construct a parking lot adjacent to his existing business. The Planning Commission approved this action on July 17, 2002. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that Bill No. 050857 be approved. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions for these witnesses? (No response.)

Anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against the bill? 10 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. (No response.)

Seeing none, I'll ask the Clerk to read the title of the next bill.

Bill No. 050949, an ordinance amending Section 2 of an ordinance, Bill No. 040505, approved June 21, 2004, entitled "An ordinance 10 authorizing the striking from City Plan Nos. 270 and 258 of Sanger Street from Tacony Street to the westerly Pierhead Line of the Delaware River, under certain terms and conditions," by extending the time for compliance with conditions stated therein.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Frank Morelli, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 050949. This is not an administrative ordinance, but an ordinance requested by 11 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Mr. Mark Hankin, Legend Properties, 625 Ridge Pike, Suite A-107, Conshohocken, PA 19428. The purpose of this ordinance 6 is to extend the time period to remove Sanger Street from the Frankford Arsenal Business Center to facilitate economic expansion. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your Committee for favorable action.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Streets and Services Committee. My name is Martin Soffer, Director of the Development, Planning and Zoning Division, and I am here today to testify on behalf of the City Planning Commission. The purpose of this ordinance 23 is to strike from the City Plan an unneeded paper street to allow for the construction of a retail shopping center 12 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. in the Arsenal Business Center. The Planning Commission has reviewed and approved this action on June 15, 2004. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that Bill No. 7 050949 be approved. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions for these witnesses from the Committee? (No response.)

Anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against the bill? (No response.)

Seeing none, I will ask the Clerk to read the title of the next bill.

Bill No. 050952, an ordinance authorizing and directing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 271 by placing on the City Plan Florist Street from a point on 2nd Street approximately 131 feet north 13 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. of the north side of Race Street to a point on 3rd Street approximately 157 feet north of the north side of Race Street, under certain terms and conditions, including the dedication to the City, free and clear of all encumbrances, of the bed of Florist Street.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Frank Morelli, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 050952. This is not an administrative ordinance, but an ordinance requested by Mr. Daniel Reisman, Eckert Seamans Cherin and Mellott, LLC, 1515 Market Street, Ninth Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19102, who represents Second and Race Street LP. The purpose of this ordinance 24 is to place Florist Street on the City Plan to facilitate the development of a 14 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. new condominium complex. This ordinance needs to be amended to include Section 2(c) limiting the dedication to 24.50 feet above the present grade of the bed of Florist Street. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your Committee for favorable action.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Streets and Services Committee. My name is Martin Soffer, Director of the Development, Planning and Zoning Division, and I'm here today to testify on behalf of the Planning Commission. The purpose of this ordinance 20 is to place on the City Plan the existing Florist Street. The staff of the Planning Commission has reviewed and tentatively approved this action. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that Bill 15 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. No. 050952 be approved as amended. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions for these witnesses from the Committee? (No response.)

Anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against the bill? (No response.)

Seeing none, I will ask the Clerk to read the title of the next bill.

Bill No. 050860, an ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 299 by striking from the City Plan Domino Lane from Henry Avenue to Hagner Street, under certain terms and conditions.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Frank Morelli, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department 16 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 050860. This is not an administrative ordinance, but an ordinance requested by Mr. Glen Falso, Wigard Development, Post Office Box 315, Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462. The purpose of this ordinance 11 is to strike Domino Lane from the City Plan to facilitate the development of a new housing development. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your Committee for favorable action.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Streets and Services Committee. My name is Martin Soffer, Director of the Development, Planning and Zoning Division, and I'm here today to testify on behalf of the City Planning Commission. 17 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. This is an unneeded paper street that needs to be removed to allow for the construction of 35 new single-family homes on a new City street. The Planning Commission has reviewed and approved a subdivision plat on December 14, 2004. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that Bill 10 No. 050860 be approved. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions for these witnesses from the Committee? (No response.)

Is there anyone here who wishes to testify for or against this bill? (No response.)

Seeing none, I will ask the Clerk to read the title of the next bill.

Bill No. 051098, an ordinance authorizing Temple University Health System, Incorporated and Hunting 18 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Fox Associates, III, L.P. to construct and maintain a pedestrian bridge over and across Stokley Street, southeast of West Hunting Park Avenue, under certain terms and conditions.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Frank Morelli, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 051098. This is not an administrative ordinance, but an ordinance requested by Mr. Joseph Callaghan, PE, 1655 Suburban Station Building, 1617 JFK Boulevard, Philadelphia, PA, on behalf of Temple University Health Systems. The purpose of this ordinance 21 is to construct a pedestrian bridge spanning across Stokley Street south of Hunting Park Avenue to connect three parking lots. This ordinance is supported by 19 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. the Department of Streets and is recommended to your Committee for favorable action.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Streets and Services Committee. My name is Martin Soffer. I'm Director of the Development, Planning and Zoning Division, and I am here today to testify on behalf of the City Planning Commission. The purpose of this ordinance 14 is to allow for the construction of a pedestrian bridge to connect three parking lots, which are currently on both sides of Stokley Street. The parking lots were built to service the Temple University Health Systems business offices located at the site. This was reviewed and tentatively approved at the Planning Commission staff meeting. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that Bill 25 No. 051098 be approved. 20 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions for these witnesses from the Committee? (No response.)

Anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against this bill? (No response.)

Seeing none, thank you, gentlemen. Seeing none, I will ask the Clerk to read the title of the next bill.

Bill No. 050863, an ordinance amending Section 12-1117 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Physically Handicapped and Disabled or Severely Disabled Veteran Parking," by amending the provision relating to metered parking for physically handicapped persons and severely disabled veterans, and making such amendment contingent on the enactment of an ordinance relating to the establishment of parking for motor-driven 21 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. cycles and similar motor vehicles, all under certain terms and conditions; and Bill No. 050864, an ordinance 5 amending Title 12 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "The Traffic Code," by providing for the establishment of parking for motor-driven cycles and similar motor vehicles; adding new definitions; providing for civil penalties for violations; making such amendments contingent upon the enactment of an ordinance relating to metered parking for physically handicapped persons; and making certain technical changes; all under certain terms and conditions.

Before you start, Mr. Dickson, is Mr. Mercuri in the audience? (No response.)

Vincenzo is not here. Is he coming in? You don't know, okay. Because I asked him to come to the witness table. 22 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Thank you. Good afternoon, gentlemen. Mr. Dickson, are you going first?

It's up to you, Mr. Chairman.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Dickson. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

My name is Richard Dickson. I'm the Senior Director of Strategic Planning for the Philadelphia Parking Authority. About three years ago, Council enacted an ordinance which limited the privileges afforded to people with disabilities for parking at meters. As part of the negotiation to address the abuse of parking privileges for people with disabilities, it was agreed that one meter on every metered block would be reserved for the exclusive use of people with disabilities. Almost immediately after we 23 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. began installing those meters, we were contacted by Center City business people requesting that that policy be reevaluated because many of those spaces were empty for almost all day and they felt it was taking away valuable parking resources that could be used for their businesses. While no one wants to make it more difficult for people with disabilities to find places to park, we believe that the enactment of this ordinance will not negatively impact their ability to find parking spaces. At the request of the Chairman and some Center City business associations, the Authority conducted surveys of all those spaces in Center City in about the last three months. Our surveys found that between 40 and 60 percent of the spaces were vacant, depending on the area of Center City that was being surveyed. We don't believe that it's an appropriate use of the very 24 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. scarce parking resource to reserve spaces for people that do not need them and are not taking advantage of them. On the other side of the issue, there have been several requests to provide specially reserved spaces for motorcycles and motor scooters, particularly as the price of fuels increase, that people are opting to use more fuel-efficient vehicles. We support the ordinance which would replace up to half of the meters that are reserved for people with disabilities and replace them with multi spaces for motor scooters or motorcycles. The Authority would work with the disabled rights community, particularly the Mayor's Commission for People With Disabilities, to determine the most appropriate place to remove those reserved spaces so that we are avoiding places like hospitals and rehabilitation centers where those spaces are needed. So the Parking Authority 25 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. supports the enactment of these two ordinances.

Thank you, Mr. Dickson. As you know from the previous legislation of three years ago, this is a very sensitive issue and it's an important issue, because we certainly do not want to in any way restrict the ability of folks who are truly handicapped from coming into the City, using valuable parking spaces, but giving them obviously the opportunity to shop and take care of their personal needs, whether it's doctor visits or shopping in commercial corridors, what-have-you. And you probably recall there was some concern, rightfully so, from the folks from the ADA a few years ago when we crafted that bill that there would not be enough spaces left under the current legislation, which provides for, I think, one handicapped metered space on every unit block. Correct me if I'm wrong. 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

Every hundred block.

Every hundred block. And as your testimony points out and from personal observation -- because I think I was the person who actually made the call initially to ask the Authority to do a survey, because most of the time that I'm out, and I'm out often, I see either both of those spaces on a unit block that has two meters, one on either side of the street, either unoccupied or maybe one space being occupied and one empty or both being empty most of the day. And as you can testify to is, that within the first month of the enactment of the current legislation that no longer allowed for folks with handicapped placards or plates to park all day free at meters, there was a significant uptake, not only in revenue, because that was not the driving force, but as you testified, that the retailers 27 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. and the businesses seen also an increase in the volume of business, which is healthy for our economy, and with no real impediment, if that's a correct word to use, for folks who are truly handicapped and need to use on-street parking as an alternative to parking garages. I mean, it's kind of following up on your testimony. Is that a fair assessment of where we are today?

Yes. A few things happened after that ordinance was enacted. First, the people that were parking at parking meters with credentials for people with disabilities were generally parking at those meters all day, so instead of four or five people having the opportunity to have those parking spaces that were monopolized by one person. As a result of the ordinance, there were some blocks in Center City that were 40 percent occupied. Forty percent of the metered spaces were 28 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. occupied with people with plates or placards for people with disabilities. After the ordinance was enacted, that number went down to percent. 6 The other thing that happened 7 was, by reserving spaces exclusively for 8 people with disabilities, they did not 9 have to compete with everybody else to 10 find those spaces, and we also made time 11 limits on them so that even those spaces were required to turn over a certain number of times during the day, but we provided an extra hour accommodation for people that have mobility impairments. The third thing that happened was, lots of garages felt like they never need -- though they're required by law to set aside spaces for people with disabilities, they were never used, because no one would go park in a garage and pay when they could park free all day on the street. As a result of the change, those people that were there all day began to move into those garages so 29 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. that the garage owners began to ensure that those spaces were not occupied by non-credentialed people. So it actually increased parking opportunities for people with disabilities.

Do you happen to know what the percentage of the folks who are using garages with handicapped plates might be?

I really don't have that information.

Because I don't see too many of those spaces being used. Without being sarcastic or insensitive, we all know that most of what was happening was abuse. I mean, my personal observations from walking down the streets was, we had people who were using handicapped placards on the rear-view mirror, but they had expired plates from two, three years old, but no 24 one bothered to look at the plate. When they saw the placard, they would just 30 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. walk by, the enforcement officers, and not ticket. And they were people from all over the region who were just using those as an excuse. Again, I just want to make sure for the folks who may not be familiar with what we did three years ago, that there was really no harm done, in my opinion, and I think your statistics support that as well.

I think not only was there no harm done, there was substantial benefit for people who were truly disabled who now have the opportunity to find a parking space that they never were able to find before.

They don't have to go looking and driving around the block for a space. Thank you. Councilman, do you have any questions or anything?

No. 24

Mr. Wang, would you proceed with your testimony? 31 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

Yes. My name is Larry Wang, Philadelphia Scooters. Philadelphia Scooters and the scootering community are in favor of designated scooter parking. Motor scooters are a highly efficient means of transportation in and around Philadelphia. Scooters are smaller vehicles that take up less space on our City streets, occupy less parking space, reduce traffic congestion and can help alleviate the shortage of car parking spaces in Center City. DOT approved street-legal scooters can get upwards of 65 to 75 miles per gallon, with some models boasting over 100 miles per gallon. Modern technology such as fuel injection, catalytic converters and four-stroke engines make scooters quieter, cleaner burning and more fuel efficient. Motor scooters are gaining popularity, with a to 50 percent 25 increase in riders every year since 1999, 32 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. according to the Motorcycle Industry Council. More and more, Philadelphia Scooters are discovering the convenience and fun of riding motor scooters and exploring many other parts of our City. One of the major problems that Philadelphia Scooters now face is a lack of designated scooter parking spaces. It is not efficient for scooters to take up an entire car parking space where three or four or five can park in the same space designated for scooters. Scooters have also been knocked down in car sparking spaces and even moved to the sidewalk by frustrated car drivers looking for parking. Philadelphia has an opportunity to lead municipalities across America in encouraging scooters as a responsible and efficient means of transportation in the City. With designated scooter parking, Philadelphia will be among leading international cities, such as London, Rome and Toronto, who encourage use of 33 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. scooters to help conserve gas, reduce traffic gridlock and make our City more user-friendly for both residents and tourists alike. Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you. There is no other city in the country that provides for scooter parking?

I think the latest one is in Canada, has been Toronto.

Well, that's not United States.

No, but close. Philadelphia would definitely be in the forefront.

You and I have had some conversations about this issue. I purchased a scooter from you a couple of years ago. I no longer own that scooter, and I'll explain that in a minute why I no longer own it, and one of the reasons is because I really had a 34 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. difficult time finding a place to park. I actually used to take it to City Hall. In those days, I had a City vehicle, issued vehicle, which I no longer have, but I got ticketed because I parked on the apron of City Hall and, using the chain or the lock system, chained it alongside bicycles on a bicycle rack. The height of my scooter was lower than the bicycles. A little bit thicker maybe, but lower. I got a ticket because it is a motor vehicle. So I was getting discouraged because I just couldn't find a place to park, and I didn't want to park it on just any sidewalk and attach it to a light post, because that would have made front page, I'm sure, that the Councilman is parking a motor vehicle on a sidewalk. So that's one of the reasons why I gave up my scooter. So I don't want anyone to think that I'm doing this legislation to provide parking for me, because it was written up a time ago that 35 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. I owned the scooter. I no longer own a scooter. And we also talked about, I think, Seattle and New York City where there's been a dramatic increase in the number of scooters that are being used in those cities, but they don't provide any parking spaces, on-street parking, that you know of?

There are petitions going around in all the major cities, just because the number of people that use motor scooters in cities in particular are just growing and growing every year. So I think there is legislation in the works as well in many cities. As far as I know, I'm not sure if anybody has actually enacted it, but it's definitely a trend that we will see happening going forward.

Thank you. One more question for Mr. Dickson. Mr. Dunn asked me a 36 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. question earlier about removing that percentage or number of meters that are now dedicated for handicapped parking. Are you confident, based on your statistics and your surveys, that should this bill be enacted, that there will be enough on-street handicapped metered spaces to accommodate the current need for those spaces?

Yes. Based on current occupancy rates at those spaces, we feel that we could eliminate a substantial number of those dedicated spaces without any negative impact on people with disabilities and their ability to access the stores and businesses of the City.

Just a point of information again, because the reporters were asking me some of these questions and I want to make sure I was accurate. Take South Street as an example where you have parking on both sides, the south side and the north side. 37 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. So 1000 block -- and it's all the hundred blocks, but we'll just use 1000 block. There are currently two handicapped metered spaces on that block. There's one on the north side, one on the south side. What happens to those meters, if anything, if this bill is enacted?

Well, the ordinance says that up to every other block could be taken out, but it doesn't require that every other block be taken out. We would begin to do a survey of those areas where there seems to be the greatest demand for parking for people with disabilities based on occupancy rates and the types of institutions that are around there, such as hospitals, doctors' offices, rehabilitation centers, and then work with the Mayor's Commission for People With Disabilities to designate those areas that have low occupancy and have the least demand for those spaces and begin by removing those and then converting those to reserved spaces for 38 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. motorcycles or scooters.

But it would be safe to say under that scenario that projections are that about 40 percent or so of those meters, am I accurate, would be eliminated?

That would be -- from the surveys that we have conducted, 40 percent is a safe number.

Thank you. Any questions, Councilman?

No. 14

Is there anyone else here to testify who is not on the witness list? I know from looking out in the crowd there are a number of folks here who are scooter owners, users, and I see the thumbs are going up. Would any of you like to testify or have anything to add to what has already been said? My son is not allowed to testify. He's recusing himself. Yes, sir.

Good afternoon. 39 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.

My name is Pedro Rodriguez. I'm the Executive Director of the Action Alliance of Senior Citizens of Greater Philadelphia. I apologize. I have the tail end of the flu, so my voice comes in and out.

Well, stay where you are and everything will be fine.

I will keep my distance. The Action Alliance has a lot of concerns about this bill, and the more I listen to the rationale by the Parking Authority to go ahead with this proposal, the more flags it begins to raise. I would suggest that the Committee consider postponing any action on this bill until the Parking Authority comes back or has more detail, idea of where do they see 40 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. elimination of the parking meters for handicapped individuals is going to happen across the City, particularly because I'm concerned that there might be some undue pressure on eliminating such meters responding to the concerns of certain business people in some locations rather than doing a more rational allocation of those spaces at this point. The other issue that I would like to raise is that this should not be one mode of transportation against another competing for parking spaces in the City. We believe that there should be accommodation for both and would support the notion that we should encourage that as a City policy the use of other forms of transportation rather than motor vehicles, than cars and automobiles and so on. So I want to make that clear, put that on the table. But, again, I'd just like to express our concern that we're really worried that there might be a rush to 41 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. eliminate some so-called premier spaces responding more to the concerns of specific businesses rather than the overall general welfare of the individuals who have physical disabilities and who need those spaces to go in and out from those locations that they frequent.

Thank you. I believe that Mr. Dickson answered some of your questions. They may not be as specific as you would like, and I think Mr. Dickson will be more than willing to take some of the time to talk to you. They're very sensitive about areas where institutions, hospitals and medical facilities, obviously those are places I think would be the last place we'd look to eliminate the handicapped metered parking. There are other places, South Street is an example, which is pretty much an entertainment venue, and from personal observation -- it's my district, I'm down there often doing things -- it's 42 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. rare that I ever see those spaces being used. So from a practical matter, I think that those are places you would see some elimination or reduction in the number of spaces. What I would do is -- and I appreciate the fact that you're saying you're willing to at least go through this because you understand that it's an opportunity maybe to accommodate both sides, and that's what we intended to do three years ago, and I think that proved to be successful. I would ask that we at least vote the bill out of committee, and it will give you guys two or three weeks before we recess before any final action on the bill were to take place to see if you can resolve some issues and get at least some answers to your questions, and hopefully you're satisfied with those answers, but I'd rather not just hold it up. We recess on the 15th. It will 43 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. be sometime in January before we get back, and I think, for all intents and purposes, we would like to get this thing done in the early part of next year when the weather starts changing again and you'll see more activity from scooters as you will over the December, January and maybe February. But I'm not in a rush to do this. And, by the way, I don't have any problem taking responsibility for things. This was initiated at my request. It wasn't the Parking Authority's idea. They agreed with me as soon as I brought it up, but I was the one who initiated it based on personal observation, not so much from the business community complaining to me. The Parking Authority probably hears that because they're out there all day. It was generated in my mind because I saw so many of these spaces being unused for long periods of time, and I was wondering if it really made sense to keep that many number of 44 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. spaces. So I'll take full responsibility for the initiation of this legislation, as I did for the existing bill that we're in today.

Thank you for that. I just want to add another point, that we're not just concerned that the spaces be reserved around hospitals. I know that institutions -- because we have a vibrant city in which people with disabilities participate in all aspects of social life.

Sure. They're shoppers. They go to entertainment venues like everyone else. I understand that.

Absolutely. From personal observations, just around this part of Center City, I see the spaces occupied during the evening. I mean, people go in and out of some restaurants and bars and so on. So I would not like to see the situation 45 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. evolving into which only spaces around institutions are the ones that get to be reserved and not any others.

Not to interrupt you --

I was a little bit concerned from Mr. Dickson's testimony that the Parking Authority was looking more in that direction.

I didn't get that from his testimony. What I got is that those are the more obvious places where we may not want to eliminate or reduce them, and there are also other places as well where they would look to based on their current information and surveys as to where they think it would be least harmful to folks. Because if there are places that are being used, no 21 one wants to see those go away. If there are places where they're either not being used at all or very limited and eliminating one of the two spaces on a unit block would still accommodate the 46 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. need, then I think that all reasonable people could agree that it's okay. So it's not every block, every unit block, every hundred block in the City of Philadelphia is going to see a reduction. And Mr. Dickson is the expert on that based on his information, and that's why I'm going to ask that the bill 10 come out of committee, and it will give you folks some time to talk about those areas, and if there's a concern, then you need to bring it to us.

And I'd also just like to add that other organizations need to be consulted, including Adapt, Liberty Resources and some of the other legal institutions. So if a resolution 19 of this could be worked out, you avoid the future problems.

We're willing to look at it. At some point we'll have to make the decision, obviously, and do something that may not be as popular, but as long as it's fair, 47 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. I would be comfortable in moving legislation, if it's in the current form or some adjustment based on discussions that you have with Mr. Dickson.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against this bill? (No response.)

Thank you all for coming. I'll ask the Clerk to read the title of the next bill.

Bill No. 050862, an ordinance amending Title 9 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Regulation of Businesses, Trades and Professions," by adding provisions regulating the operation of tour buses and amphibious tour vehicles, all under certain terms and conditions.

The first, 48 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Mr. McDonald and Pat Waterman from the Big Bus Company and Mr. Kravitz from Super Ducks. Maybe you can come up to the witness table, and as everyone is coming forward, I just would like to make a brief statement on my behalf, and I believe it would be the sentiment of my colleagues in City Council, not only of this Committee, is that we welcome the tourism industry and the vehicles that are part of the experience of visiting Philadelphia, be it buses, be it amphibious vehicles, be it horse carriages, what-have-you. I, for one, believe that it's important. It's important to give folks who visit the City of Philadelphia an experience that they may not be able to get in other cities or places that they come from. It's all part of the whole packaging, I believe, of making Philadelphia a much more attractive place to visit. People who live here may use it from time to time. I'm sure they do, but 49 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. it's primarily the businesses that we're talking about today are geared for tourism, and none of us want to see you go away. There may be some constituents that I represent in and around the area where you operate that would like to see everything that you guys do and ladies do go away, but that's not my intention, nor is it the intention of this legislative body. We recognize the importance of having you here. We have been dealing with this issue for a long time. I see Mr. Slocum in the back. We have had the issue and discussion and the debate and arguments from time to time over the horse-carriage industry and some of the regulations that we have implemented. We were being told from time to time that this was the doom's day theory, that these regulations are going to regulate us out of business. I'm sure there may have been some negative impact, and I don't mean this, again, to be sarcastic or 50 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. insensitive, but I still see horse carriages out there and I think, for the most part, they must be still somewhat profitable. If not, they would not be in business, because you're business people and you don't stay in business to lose money, you're in business to make money. And I remember saying this a very long time ago, even before we got into the horse-carriage issue. With our promotion of the City of Philadelphia as a great tourist destination, in particular the area in and around the Historical District, that we need to figure out a way in which we can make traffic flow better, pedestrian flow better. We need to figure out a way in which we can move all this stuff around, and with the limited amount of space, with our very narrow streets that were never built for anything maybe but horse carriages and the competition for that space. And to move traffic as quickly as we can in and around the quadrant of the 51 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Historical District should have been paramount in everyone's mind, public transportation, SEPTA, City of Philadelphia, traffic engineering. Everybody is a stakeholder. Since that time, we've seen a number of other entertainment and/or tourist destinations evolve. We have the Constitution Center. We have a number of other facilities, whose names escape me at the moment, that have contributed to the tourist experience, if you will, and that's a good thing, as I said earlier. We need to figure a way out, and we have been working on this for a long time, and I want to thank my Legislative Assistant, Brian Abernathy, and all the folks who have been involved in this process for a long time now. And I understand that some of the testimony I'm going to hear is not going to be positive, that people still believe that they're not being treated fairly. The Board, the Committee, whoever is here and 52 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. whoever is listening, will have to make a decision on this legislation.

As I said to the horse-carriage industry folks a few years ago, that there comes a time when this legislative body needs to make a decision and we have to act, because in a perfect world, things would be perfect. But not everybody gets a hundred percent. It's just the nature of the way things go. So while this legislation before us may not be the perfect solution to all of the issues and may not be the perfect solution to your particular business or businesses, I believe at least it's a foundation and a good start. And going forward, if we don't make any adjustments between now and the time this bill is voted on, we can always make adjustments going forward. And I think we have some time on our hands over the next few months when the cold weather is coming and a lot of what you're doing as a business now 53 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. will either not be happening or be significantly reduced because of weather conditions. We're not enacting this at the height of the season. It gives everyone some time to adjust. But what we want to do is, while we're protecting your interests as best we can, and there may be a disagreement on that, is protect the citizens of this City, the taxpayers who pay for the paving of streets and the policing of our streets and all those other things that are important and necessary and are our responsibility, but in addition to that, to protect and encourage the tourism business so that the experience of coming to Philadelphia and using these venues and these products that are out there today, that people walk away with a pleasant experience, that people don't feel as though they were somehow hustled, mishandled because of the competitive nature of the competing interest that is out there 54 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. today. That is not helpful or beneficial to any of us. It's not beneficial to the growing tourism industry and all the money that's being spent to advertise our great City, nor is it, in my opinion, beneficial to your industry to have people walk away with an experience that they may feel was not to the best of their expectation. I'm not suggesting that that is happening to any large degree, but I think it happens, and I think that unless we get our arms around this issue, we will see a more negative response as opposed to a positive response about the Philadelphia experience. So it's not just your industry. It's all of those things that we have worked very hard at, whether it's on this side of the table or your side of the table, whether it's the Constitution Center, whether it's Lights of Liberty, what-have-you. It's all part of that 55 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. wonderful experience, and we got to figure out a way in which we can make that a more pleasurable experience for the people who are using that. So I want to just make that perfectly clear at the onset. Although we may disagree, and I'm sure we're going to disagree, this is not an attack on the industry, because we do not want you to go away. We want to see you thrive. We want to see you prosper, because when you do better, we do better as a City. So thank you, and please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. I'm Patrick Waterman, President of the Big Bus Company of Pennsylvania and Business Development Director of the Big Bus Company, which is a UK corporation. I've been involved in this type of an operation for some 20 years, primarily operating in Central 56 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. London. As an aside from what I was going to say, I would like to thank you for your positive comments on the tourism industry in Philadelphia. We believe that it has a great future and that we've seen substantial growth in that industry over the last three years that we've been operating in Philadelphia. As I say, we've been operating in Philly for about three years, and when we made the initial approach to the City, we were welcomed with open arms and felt we'd be able to contribute to the continuing regeneration of Philadelphia's tourism industry. To date, we've invested in excess of $2 million in our Philadelphia operation. I fully understand the position of the City regarding the lack of licensing, permits and controls, and that this, together with competitive pressures, has led to there being too many vehicles pushed into too small an 57 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. area. Couple this with operators competing for the same turf creates a bad impression for the City, the local workforce and ultimately the tourists, and we accept and support the fact that legislation is required to provide some controls. We, as a business, have two main areas of concern as to what is being proposed. One is focused on the customer; the other is the commercial aspects. For the customer, when considering this plan, it's difficult not to fail, despite the assurances that the various authorities have forgotten what it is that does make the City work for us all and the income they bring, the tourists. What is being proposed makes access to the tour more difficult, makes it more difficult to promote and differentiate between products, particularly given that in our line of the business, the vehicle is the key 58 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. marketing tool available. The proposal to make all customers go to the Visitors Center to purchase tickets has a number of problems. People will come to the vehicle, which is the main means of attracting a customer, only to find that in order to purchase the tickets, they then have to go to the Visitors Center to do so. We believe that in a significant number of cases the customer will just walk away rather than purchase a ticket. These products are generally spontaneous purchases, and due to the nature, sidewalk obstruction is kept to a minimum as passengers can board the vehicle and the sales transaction take place on the bus. With departures every ten minutes in the summer, there are not issues with excessive numbers of people waiting for the next vehicle to arrive. The inability to sell tickets on the vehicle is a major issue for us. 59 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Commercial aspects: These proposals have a huge impact on the profit performance of our business. The additional cost to Big Bus we estimate to be in the range of $150,000, the majority of which is as a result of rent and commission payable to the Visitors Center. The Visitors Center already sells Big Bus tickets and earned commission of $36,000 in the last year. Under the proposed ordinance, this will be near $150,000, plus the additional cost of having to man the sales booth. Once we are prepared to support the Visitors Center, the restriction on our ability to sell our own tickets on our own vehicles is enough to make the business unviable. I also have to question whether this situation is going to apply to all the City's attractions or have we been singled out as a self-target. We didn't come to Philadelphia assuming that the streets were paved with 60 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. gold.

However, neither do we expect to have the kind of prescriptive legislation that is being proposed brought upon us, making the value of continuing operations questionable, and would ask the Committee to address these concerns prior to adopting the legislation. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Mr. Waterman, in the UK, people purchase their tickets on the bus?

They do.

I was actually in the UK about three years ago. I was on one of the double-decker buses. Are there any other places where they can purchase tickets?

It's a very similar situation to here. In London we have about 65 stops, most of which we would have a pavement salesperson -- we call them customer services representative -- on the pavement. They can sell tickets. They also provide 61 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. other services. They tell people where the nearest restroom is, how to get to the restaurant, how to get to the underground. We also sell tickets through -- we have a sort of similar Visitor Center arrangement where everybody pays the same commission and they equally sell the products. We sell through the hotels. We sell through agents, but roughly in the UK, 75 percent of our business is turn-up on the day. What generally happens, it's a sunny day, you're walking past with your kids and little Johnny says, Can we go on top of the bus, Mommy, and that starts the transaction process. And we have a real concern that if we find ourselves in a situation where we then have to say, You have to walk around the block, go to the Visitors Center, cue up, get your ticket and come back, the spontaneity of the sales will just disappear and we will lose the business. 62 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

The on-sidewalk sale, a certain intersection, I'll just say 3rd and Pine as an example, in England when you reach that intersection, is there one salesperson for each -- how many operators or how many tour bus operations are there?

When I started in '86, there were seven operators. That's now consolidated down to two operators.

So there's two tour bus companies?

Yes.

Do they each have a salesperson at that location?

Generally. We wouldn't necessarily -- you might say there are 30 locations that both companies would have, and maybe we would value some stops more than other people.

That's a business decision based on where you believe you have most sales and volume? 63 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

Yes.

And in addition to hotels and other places that offer that as an amenity, if you will, for their clients in hotels, you did say there was a civic center or a convention center?

Yes. We don't have quite --

Similar to what we're proposing with the Constitution Center?

No. It's exactly as it is now, where the Tourist Information Centers, they're run by a main body and they can sell tickets. They generally sell everybody's ticket, and they sell at a standard commission, so that there's not seen to be any unfairness. I think in London we pay 15 percent commission to the tourist --

How much?

15 percent commission on each ticket sale. 64 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

So percent commission goes to the entity that sells the ticket?

Yes. 6

And it's 7 Tourist Information Center? 8

Yes. 9

Here we're 10 proposing the Constitution Center -- 11

Yes. 12

-- as the 13 location? All right. 14

Yeah. The 15 problem that we have is, the nature of our business is -- in London, it's 75 percent. Here it's probably even higher. It's near 80 percent, is turn-up on the day and pay dollars on the day, and that's just how these businesses work.

Do you find -- and I'm sure you're going to be honest with me, so I don't want to insult you, but do you find any problems with the on-sidewalk sale as a result of the 65 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. competition between the two companies? I mean, what happens out there? I mean, I know that vendors in general, you know, I got a better deal than you do, and people kind of get like hustled, grabbing somebody's arm, Our bus will give you a 30-minute ride, theirs only gives you 9 minutes, or something like that. 10 Do you have those kinds of 11 problems out there? 12

Yeah. 13

If you do, 14 how do you address that? 15

It would be 16 ridiculous for me to sit here and try to 17 pretend that that doesn't happen. And 18 you -- obviously I'm trying to promote my 19 product against you trying to promote 20 your product. And you have to be very, very careful to try and keep the staff at a level where customer satisfaction is being given, but you're not actually causing the customer to walk away. I've said to my colleagues in 66 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. the industry -- we went through this process in London in 1995. Westminster City Council carried out a very similar exercise. The net result was, they proposed an amendment to the equivalent of an ordinance and the operators belatedly got together and eventually put together a set of proposals that generally took away the impact of the competition. And I think a lot of what is being proposed in this ordinance will achieve exactly what you're looking to achieve. I am very concerned about this proposal of having to not be able to sell on the vehicle around the 5th and 6th Street, around Independence Mall area, and this notion of being pushed into the Visitors Center and us each having a booth, because I'm not even really sure how we make the selling prospect other than this five-booth within the building, Big Bus, Ride the Ducks, et cetera, on them. 67 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. But the separation of the operators is probably the key to resolving the on-street issues, the on-street conflicts that you describe and which, yes, absolutely take place.

I'm a little confused. What makes the process of going into the Constitution Center -- and I'll just use the term it's an information center, because it's a place that you go to. What is the difference between our proposal and what happens at the Information Center in England? I mean, people go into a place and they buy a ticket.

That's exactly the situation that we have in Philadelphia at the moment. If you go into the Visitors Center here, you can buy a ticket for any of the products, amphibious or the land tour products. The difference is that we could also sell you a ticket on the street at the moment.

So that 68 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. one segment of this is pretty much identical to what you have in England?

Yes.

But we're not permitting you to sell it on the bus?

Yes.

And I'm not going to try to rewrite this legislation right now, but if there were an accommodation that would allow for the sale, in your case with the bus, to be on the bus but at a location further away from the Constitution Center, maybe midway, as an example, through the tour of your route or several places along the route but not at the corner at the intersection of the Constitution Center or half a block away, does that address some of your problems? Would that address some of your problems, your concerns?

I mean, potentially I think it would. It's just the difficulty of managing that process. 69 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. I personally, speaking for Big Bus, would be very happy if we were allowed to transact a sale on the vehicle but strictly on the vehicle, not on the sidewalk, and I think that's one of the key differences. There's also the reality that as the proposals are set, none of the operators are actually going to be head to head with each other.

So the sale on the bus, on the vehicle, would be acceptable. Would you also be looking to have sales representatives at intersections or just sale -- the bus goes down 5th Street, turns left on Pine. We would have to create other staging area, would we not --

We have --

-- in order for that transaction to take place? If I'm going to get onto the vehicle, I need a place to get on.

Yes. At the 70 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. moment, what happens, if you get on the vehicle at any of the stops, other 4 than the two main stops, which is 12th 5 and Filbert or 5th, then you would get 6 taken to one of those two main stops and 7 the ticket transaction would be done 8 there. 9 We man very few of the stops 10 that we use. During the summer, we may 11 have somebody on Broad Street by a stop 12 there, but generally we found in 13 Philadelphia that the focus seems to be 14 to use -- are you familiar with the hop 15 on/hop off concept where you buy your 16 ticket? Generally our passenger surveys 17 would say that the passenger does a 18 complete circuit and then carries on and 19 starts hopping off at the various 20 transactions. And we've noticed compared to London where we have lots of people getting on at different stops, in Philly generally what happens is, people get on at our main stops, do the tour and then stop. 71 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

And then they don't --

Right. They like the comfort of coming to the main point knowing that the bus is going to be there, knowing what time it's going to depart. I think it's just a comfort factor thing.

And, again, if memory serves me correct, the route that is taken in London compared to the route that it takes in Philadelphia, am I correct, is it safe to say that in London the route doesn't go through as many residential neighborhoods as it does in Philadelphia? Am I accurate in that? Because I remember Big Ben. I mean, we passed the Prime Minister's street, but you just kind of fly by that.

Yes. As I said before, this situation is very, very similar to the situation we found in London with the Council. The Council were petitioned by what is a relatively 72 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. small number of residents, but very influential residents within places like Eaton Square and Barkley Square, which are multi-million dollar homes with --

Not unlike Society Hill.

Exactly. Very similar. And we had to find some resolution to the problem. And I don't think -- again, I'm only speaking for Big Bus, but I don't think any of the operators are shying away from the fact there needs to be legislation, and in some ways, legislation is good for the industry. That's certainly my personal belief. I just feel there are one or two issues contained within that ordinance.

Because I'm just trying to think of when you go south on 6th Street, once you cross Walnut, you're pretty much in the thick of a residential community, and even if I wanted to try to help you figure out 73 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. where you can have a staging, I don't know where it would ever be acceptable to have a vehicle have a staging area within Society Hill within the core of the residential community. And that's why I was asking about in London, I don't remember that thick concentration.

No. It's not quite the same. And there isn't the same level that -- the sort of stops that we have in London tend to be focused around the key areas. We would tend to focus on hotels.

All right. This is helpful to me. It is difficult. I mean, there are some challenges here, and I understand that.

I think if I just make one final comment, the reason that I think it makes sense for this activity to take place around the tourist attractions is that that's what they are and they expect people to be there and we all want people to be there. So to my 74 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. mind, it kind of makes sense that your key staging areas, given that we have to find a way of doing it in a way that's good for the community.

Thank you. Sorry to monopolize. Councilman Ramos, do you have any questions?

No. 11

I just wanted to hear you because you're an outsider, if you will, coming in, and you have an operation in another city, and I just needed to get some of those facts, and I appreciate your testimony. Mr. Kravitz, please identify yourself for the record. Pull that microphone a little bit closer.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. My name is Alfred Kravitz, President of Super Ducks. I'm the newest and the smallest operator, so I don't really have experience, but I agree with 75 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Mr. Waterman. There is reason to have legislation and ordinances to regulate the tour business. In my case, my vehicles are a little bit unique to -- whether or not unique to the American market, but the doors, you enter from the right side, and the proposal, from what I understand, to locate us on the east side of 6th Street I think would put a safety issue in the fact that when we pick up people, if we convert our vehicle to pick up people from the left side, when we pick up people from hotels or schools, we'd be laying people off in the middle of the street. The other issues that we have are also ticket sales on the vehicle. To us, that's very important. The uniqueness of the vehicle, people seem to come to the vehicle, they want to ride on it because it is unique, and if they had to be told to go to the Visitors Center or another location and buy their ticket 76 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. and wait in line, a lot of the people who come to Philadelphia are only here for a couple hours and I don't know if they'd want to waste their time standing in line to buy a ticket for an event. They're on a schedule. It's not the type of City-related people that are staying here for a day or two days or three days. It's not a resort area.

That's the motive to our madness. It's going to take them so long to find a place to buy a ticket, they're going to have to stay overnight.

That's a good idea.

Just joking.

A lot of our customers are locals also. I'd say about a third of them are locals. So a lot of them really don't have a reason really to go into the Visitors Center. That's another reason why it would be very 77 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. counterproductive, I think, to sell tickets only in the Visitors Center. But the safety factor of loading on the one side, the vehicle is built for the American market basically, and to have to load on the opposite side and then when we go to a hotel or we go to a school to pick up people, we'd be letting them off in the middle of the street. So that's an issue that I don't know how we're going to deal with. If there was a loading area that was conducive that would work that we could load on the right side, that would be fine. But, like I said, I'm new in the business, and I'm agreeable to legislation, but those are major issues that I have right now.

We've tried to figure out a way in which we can make the loading and unloading of passengers more safe. We engaged with the Streets Department to see if they can 78 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. do a lay-by, which would move the vehicles further in off the street. For a whole bunch of reasons, that doesn't happen. Before I go any further, my Legislative Assistant, Bill Moore -- I apologize. I kept saying Constitution Center. I meant to say the Independence Visitors Center. I stand corrected. Have you looked into relocating the door from the right side to the left side?

We have a door on the opposite side, but we only have one ladder. So if we move the ladder to the opposite side, then we wouldn't comply with the regulation that we wouldn't have an exit door. We couldn't have two ladders. So the ladder can either be on the left side or the right side, but if we move it to the left side, then when we pick up passengers at a hotel or a school, we wouldn't be able to load them.

How many 79 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. ladders do you have now?

One. We have a choice, we can have the ladder either on the left side or the right side.

Couldn't you just reverse that and still --

We could reverse it. If we reverse it, then we'd be able to pick up people at the Visitors Center, but then when we go to a school or a hotel to pick up people, they'd be getting off in the middle of the street.

Doesn't that same thing happen now? I mean, is every school and hotel you go to on the right side?

No. It's built as an American vehicle. All vehicles pick up from the right side, the curb side. Buses, every SEPTA bus picks up only on the right side.

If you go to the Omni, I'm not saying you do, but if you went to the Omni to pick people up 80 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. and you parallel parked on the north side of Chestnut Street --

In that case, it would work. In that case, it would work.

But presently you would be loading and unloading on the right side?

Well, what we do, we park on the opposite side of the street when we have --

You're parking illegal now?

Yeah, but if we pick up people at the Loews Hotel on 12th Street, then we have the door -- it's on the right side of the street.

I understand, but the way I understand, we generally unload and load on the right side, but every situation doesn't accommodate that anyway. So why couldn't you just --

Normally it does. That's why all SEPTA buses -- 81 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

But not all the time.

No, but most of the time. But with a SEPTA bus, they have only a door on the right side. It's the same exact situation.

But SEPTA buses go down streets and they have staging areas that are on the right side. In your case, you're moving all over the City in different venues, different locations, and there are times it's going to be the right side and there are times it's going to be the left side.

You're probably right, but 95 percent of the time it is on the right side.

I feel like I'm in one of those Abbott and Costello things, like who's on first here right now. So have you looked into that, though?

The door could be 82 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. reversed. It would just create another problem. Right now there's never been a problem. We've always picked up people on the right side of the street.

Even if it's not in a --

Well, occasionally we may have to park, we'll call it, illegally on the opposite side.

I just want to make sure I'm accurate on that one. I'm not going to get you a ticket, by the way. You have to talk to Mr. Dickson about that. Where do you stage right now? Currently where is your staging area?

Right now we're at Ranstead Street, on the north side of Ranstead right at 5th, and also on 5th Street between Ranstead and Chestnut.

And how do you deal with the staging area and your competitor? It's who gets there first?

Well, our 83 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. competitor is on 6th Street. We're on 5th Street.

What is the problem in putting all of the vendors in one location? Do you not think that would -- using the analogy that whether it's -- the Independence Visitors Center I think probably gets a lot of activity, because when you go to a new city for the first time, that's generally where you go for information.

It seems that there's no --

From a business perspective, and I appreciate Mr. Waterman's comments, but don't you think that would help?

Well, on the east side of 6th Street, there really isn't any tourist traffic at all. There's no 22 traffic really there at all. If you had to walk into the Visitors Center and walk to the back -- I've seen lines of people there 4th of July where people are lined 84 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. up outside to use the bathrooms. So they surely couldn't be able to go in during the peak time and buy a ticket. You can't even get in the door. There were lines out there. Tour buses drop off whole groups to go in, use the facilities.

Which is not a bad thing.

No. 12

It's a good thing.

No, but how would they know? They'd have to go through the crowd. It's almost a half a block walk to go through the crowd to go to the back of the Visitors Center to your ticket booth.

You're talking about vehicles that are quite obvious parked on the street. If I was walking down the street, I'd say to the operator, How do I buy a ticket, how could I get on this thing? They're going 85 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. to direct me to the sales booth.

You may not see them if you're going in the front of the Visitors Center. They're on the side.

You guys are very visible. They're big, big, big -- I mean, those things are eye-catching, which isn't a bad thing, but you're not parking a Volkswagen on 6th Street, that's for sure.

Right. If there was a way of selling tickets in the front of the Visitors Center, that would be agreeable, I think, to everybody, to all the operators.

My concern about that is, and I don't know if that was the concern at the time the folks were talking about this, we don't want to set up -- and I don't mean this to be disrespectful -- any kind of like a carnival appearance to this where people are hawking in the middle of the street their product. That's the purpose of 86 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. trying to set some regulations that it makes it more -- not formal but a much more attractive way of doing business.

It is. If you go to New York, they have a separate area. If you want to go to a ball game or a play, they have a separate area that you go and you buy tickets.

Right on Times Square where you go at a certain time of the day and you get tickets at half price for shows. I hear lines and lines of people are -- and everybody knows to go there.

Right, but you don't have to go into a building to do that.

Well, they're standing outside. Look, it's New York, but my point is, people know that that is a place to go to, which is far away from the theatre that they may be purchasing a ticket for, and they take the opportunity and the time to walk down 87 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. there and buy their ticket.

I think --

The suggestion is that people aren't going to buy tickets anymore if they have to go to the Visitors Center, or less people will buy because they don't want to walk the extra block.

Even if they walk a half block, if it was a separate building to buy the ticket at, to me that would work, but to have to go into the Visitors Center, walk all the way through the back, to me that will never work.

Well, if the industry wants to build a new building, you guys want to front the cost of a new building. My Legislative Assistant has reminded me about Boston. Similar situation, isn't it, in Boston? The guys from Ride the Ducks can probably -- he's shaking his head. When you get up, are you going to be testifying? No one? 88 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Someone from Ride the Ducks will answer that question. Tell me about the Boston experience when you get up, if I forget to ask you, please. Yes, Mr. Waterman.

Just to make the point, in New York they also -- the open top operation in New York is fairly exclusively sold off street. I think they have about 80 street vendors, and it's a very, very easy product to buy from the street.

Thank you. And it is New York and it is unique, there's no question about it, and I'm not suggesting we need to mirror New York. I don't think we want to do that in most cases. Councilman, do you have any questions?

No. 23

Thank you, gentlemen. There will be more witnesses and we'll continue with the dialogue. 89 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Slocum, Mr. Kates, Mr. Grimes from Philadelphia Trolley Works.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Michael Kates. I'm the Director of Operations with the Philadelphia Trolley Works. With me is Michael Slocum, President and owner of the Philadelphia Trolley Works, and Joshua Grimes, our attorney. Philadelphia Trolley Works is the City's largest private transportation provider. We are currently investing several million dollars in our community in the Grays Ferry section in the process of developing a multi-million-dollar facility in the Grays Ferry section of the City on the Schuylkill River. The Trolley Works employs over 150 people, most of them City residents. 90 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Aside from our trolley vehicles and horse-drawn carriages, we operate London-style double-decker buses and the Land Shark amphibious vehicle in the Independence Mall area. We also operate the Phlash Downtown Loop, several fixed route shuttles and a full-service charter bus business. The Trolley Works has served Philadelphia's residents and visitors from its staging areas on Independence Mall for 30 years. In both good times and bad, we operated when tourism was down in the late '70s and early '80s. We operated in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. And when other tour operators such as Old Town Trolley shut down and left the City, we continued to provide a quality product. In short, we have been a part of Independence Mall's evolution from its beginning to its present position as a major tourism draw for the Philadelphia region. The current staging system on 91 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. the Mall is a product of the City's success in the visitor industry. As more people are drawn to the region, more transportation providers follow. We understand that some officials feel that greater regulation is needed to create a more orderly Mall. While we disagree, we have concluded that some additional rules are inevitable. However, we have two requests. For any additional legislation, that the rules provide all companies an opportunity to compete on an equal footing and that they allow everyone a reasonable opportunity to succeed. The key to our success is visibility and accessibility. Our major issue is with the staging locations mandated by the legislation and a related requirement that vehicles load passengers only from the left side. Our entire trolley fleet loads from the right side, and this is also true of all American-made vehicles, 92 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. including SEPTA buses, Paratransit vehicles and all other trolleys made in the United States. What this legislation would do is require us to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on adapting our fleet for left side access. The process would take several years and reduce the capacity of our vehicles. The process also compromises the structural integrity of the vehicles. It's a very difficult process and something that we are, quite frankly, not prepared to do. Alternatively, we will be relegated to a staging area across 5th Street that would put the Trolley Works at an extreme competitive disadvantage from a marketing standpoint. This legislation initially created six locations that would not provide for proper vehicle loading. As a result of our opposition, the legislation added a location that would require the touring 93 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. public to walk past every other tour provider to choose our product. We have made several suggestions that would not result in such a disadvantage, but those suggestions have been ignored. What is the City's rationale for the left side loading requirement? We're told that it's necessary for public safety, but the facts just don't back that up. Philadelphia Trolley Works vehicles have safely loaded passengers from the right side of its vehicles around Independence Hall and elsewhere for many years. In that respect, we are no different from any passenger car in the United States, which, of course, opens on all sides.

However, neither the federal government nor any state seeks to prevent loading and unloading in the right-of-way, similar to the point that you made with the Super Ducks. There are many occasions when you'll pull up to a hotel downtown where you have to load from the improper side 94 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. of the vehicle. We do that. We do it safely. We man somebody on the pavement. We are not here to recommend loading from the improper side of the vehicle, but if it's one of the only options we have, we would like to use it. We believe we can safely load from everywhere, although not a preference, something we'd like to have the opportunity to do. Are there differences between trolleys and passenger cars? Sure there are. One big one is that our drivers monitor traffic conditions and take proactive steps to avoid dangers to our riders posed by other vehicles. We would, of course, continue to do this under the proposed legislation. However, the City's preference is to ban our vehicles or relegate them to substandard staging locations across 5th Street from our competitors. Other tour companies use foreign-made vehicles or amphibious 95 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. vehicles, which are loaded from the rear or the left side. However, our attempts to achieve a reasonable resolution on this issue have not resulted in favorable changes. Another issue relates to the unprecedented amount of authority this bill would delegate to the Independence Visitors Center. Under this legislation, all tour ticket selling would be prohibited in the Mall area except through booths set up at the IVC. The IVC is seeking a commission on every ticket sold for services rendered. The fee was initially 12 percent of gross sales. This past Monday it was revised to five percent of sales and a $50,000 per year fee. Few industries other than gaming are so heavily taxed. For example, under the IVC's current requirement, our annual cost to operate trolleys on the Mall would rise to at least $56,000. That includes a $50,000 payment to the IVC and around 96 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. $5,500 to the City. That's before we sell a single ticket. On top of that, the IVC will require each company to spend over $20,000 building a ticket booth and the plans to mark up the cost of utilities by percent. The total additional cost to 9 operate per provider would be in excess 10 of $150,000 per year. 11 The result is that a company 12 like Trolley Works would have to sell 13 about 10,000 tickets just for the right 14 to operate in the first year. This is 15 equal to about 310 trolley tours at full 16 capacity. And that figure does not 17 allocate one time to pay our employees or 18 any operating costs. 19 If a company operates both 20 trolley tours and amphibious vehicles like we do, these costs would double. In addition to the increased cost to operate, the IVC will continue to sell tour products for competing entities such as walking tours and segues from their 97 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. information desk. So not only are we required to pay exorbitant fees to operate from the IVC, but they will continue to compete against us. Also, under an agreement submitted by the IVC for tour operators to sign as a condition of selling tickets in that building, the IVC is also seeking unprecedented enforcement powers against tour operators. The IVC wants the absolute discretion to eject from the building and, therefore, terminate the right to sell tickets to Mall visitors any operator that the IVC no longer wishes to have in its building, for any reason or for no reason. There would be no limits on this power. This delegation of power is unprecedented. The IVC is a private corporation, not a governmental agency, but this legislation allows the IVC to be the tax collector, judge, jury and executioner of the tour industry. We all know that the IVC and 98 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

its leaders are upstanding members of the hospitality community. We respect their abilities and are often in line with their views, but this is too much power to go unchecked. We can think of no similar situation where so much authority that rightfully belongs to the City is transferred to a private party to exercise as it wishes. If a City agency takes action against tour operators, there are clear avenues for appeal. No such appeal rights exist with this IVC legislation. There are no Councilmembers or other City officials to hold accountable, yet there has been no clear reason stated why this transfer of power from the City to the IVC is necessary. About 15 years ago, Council faced a similar situation when issues arose with sidewalk food vendors. The solution was to specify permissible vending locations and limit the number of 99 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. licenses. There was no dramatic increase in vendors' costs, and enforcement powers remain with the City. We think a similar solution is possible here. There are other issues that concern the Trolley Works, many, but we will defer them to a later time. We prefer instead to ask members of this Committee to work with us to resolve these issues. If our goals are really to organize the transportation companies at the Mall and maintain our harmonious environment, we ought to be able to find a solution that won't increase the fees on each company by nearly $150,000 in one year and, additionally, to force the Trolley Works to accept a bad staging location or spend hundreds of thousands more on modifying its American-made vehicles. You are going to hear that the tour operators have had sufficient time to work towards a solution, but it failed to do so. That is completely untrue. 100 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. When we were presented with the City's plan to restructure staging on the Mall, which was November of last year, we provided detailed objections and various solutions. Some objections were addressed; the solutions were ignored. As the media has reported, all the affected transportation companies are united in their opposition to this legislation. We urge Council and City agencies to work with us to craft workable solutions that will make Independence Mall better, without unduly hurting local businesses. There are certainly many ways to do this. With the winter season rapidly approaching, there is no reason to rush this bill into law. Gentlemen, I implore you to take our concerns seriously. This legislation will result in the death of motorized tour business. Councilman, you had initially opened the discussion with the carriage industry and the threats of the carriage 101 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. industry going away. I won't elaborate, but I'll tell you, this is the last year that Philadelphia Trolley Works will operate carriages. It is not profitable. We will operate carriages in 2006 and then we will cease the operation of carriages. It's an unfortunate circumstance. Where being able to have a substantial barn management program to care for the animals and to run the business profitably, we're no longer able to do that. This year there were losses in the horse industry. Next year there will be further losses in our horse industry. So we have decided as a business, and not necessarily public information, but since you mentioned it, I figured I will let you know that 2006 will be the last year for 76 Carriage Company, and that's very unfortunate. It will be the last year for 76 Carriage Company, but not the last year for the horse and carriage industry. What will 102 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. remain, none of us will be proud of. Philadelphia Trolley Works respectfully requests to postpone this process based on the obvious significant unresolved issues in this bill. There are numerous issues with regard to the IVC that are both irresponsible to implement and would really result in harming our tour industry.

One positive note, the tour industry as it has existed in the last couple of years in the City has been quite confrontational. Those days are over. As a result of this process and Brian forcing us to work together, I think there is one positive outcome and, that is, that we will continue to work together. The days of harassing folks on the street are over and have been probably for the better part of four to six weeks or so. We have realized the consequences to those actions, and, quite frankly, it's over. And I would challenge any one of you to go to the 103 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. street and check that out. So I guess in closing, I do respect the time that you've given us, but just for now, the timing is not right. If we could have a week or two, the landscape of the tour industry is changing significantly, and if this legislation is enacted, the trolleys will go the way of the horses.

I'm glad to see you resolved your differences a month before the hearing. That's very helpful. Talk about timing.

Well, that's coincidental, actually.

I'm sure it is. I'm sure it is. You had great testimony, and I tried to follow it as best I could. You don't have, other than your copy -- there were some comments about the percentage going from 12 percent to five percent and the annual fee, and your last comment about Philadelphia Carriage will not be 104 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. in business after '06. Did you not say in the beginning you're relocating your facility to Grays Ferry?

We are relocating our facility to Grays Ferry.

Will there be stables there?

There's being restrictions that prevent that.

I was wondering why you would be building a new facility when you won't have horses. What makes -- and I don't want to turn this into the horse-carriage industry, but I'm the person who brought some of that up, obviously. What makes it more difficult for you to continue operating but the so-called undesirable or companies that we won't be proud of, why will they continue to operate? I thought we said, Michael -- and I think you know this -- that you guys are the state-of-the-art as far as Philadelphia is concerned in the way you 105 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. operate the carriage industry.

And that is a true statement, and we appreciate that recognition. However, I think that I have indicated to you on several occasions that the overregulation of the carriage industry has essentially crippled us financially. We cannot operate a facility, a carriage operation, to the level that we feel is necessary and be profitable. I did meet with you several times after the legislation was enacted and asked for your consideration in relaxing certain issues, and all of those were denied. The net result is, it is not a profitable end of our operation anymore. It's not conducive for us to stay in that industry and continue to just swap dollars or essentially lose dollars.

Is there any reason to think that maybe the addition of -- the increase in other 106 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. types of vehicular attractions may have caused a decrease in the carriage industry as well, more buses, more amphibious? I mean, there's a lot more stuff out there, which gives people more choices. When carriages was the only game in town, if you will -- and I recognize your concern, and you have expressed those in the past -- there really was no other place for people to go, but now you have at least two other types of tourist transportation opportunities.

That may be true to some degree. However, the net result is less revenue, and I think that's coupled not only with that, but the fact that we can't operate during peak hours and we lose a lot of days on the street. We have the weather conditions, the lowering the temperature. I mean, it just cuts into our peak season and our operating. 107 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. And if you couple that with the increases in expenses to operate this type of business -- I mean, unbeknowing this was going to happen today, I was just in an argument yesterday with our saw dust supplier. To deliver a load of saw dust for us right now is approaching $500 a load. A few years ago it was $200.

I don't mean this again to be disrespectful. That's the price of doing business, which we don't control. You don't want it to be there, but it's there. It's like police cars, taxi cabs are paying a lot more for fuel today than they did six months ago. So obviously it's cutting into their profit margin as well. Notwithstanding your concerns about peak hours and the like, but when you talk about weather, again, when it was really just carriages, people didn't have the option on a day that was a little bit chilly to do any other thing 108 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. but the carriage. I don't like cold weather. If I have my choice between -- and there were some carriages out, I think it was, Friday or Saturday. It was a very cold day, going down 6th Street, and there were some people in carriages. You'd never get me in a carriage on a 35-degree-weather day. If I had my choice, I'd be in one of the buses or the amphibious vehicles with the plastic down and the heater on. Again, I'm not trying to get off the hook in saying that we don't take some responsibility. Maybe overregulating. I'm not agreeing to that or admitting to that, but maybe there is some truth to that. There are other factors, I think, that are driving your profit margins down, and I don't think it's just peak hours. Mr. Grimes, the attorney, just can't wait to jump in, I know, and I'll give you a minute. 109 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Again, I don't want to create this environment where there is just carriages, but it's part of this whole discussion about regulations regarding the tourism and vehicular industry, tour bus ridership clientele and what they prefer versus the opportunities that they have. Mr. Grimes.

No. I'll --

And we agree. Our ridership hasn't necessarily suffered. We can only do so many 20-minute rides in a five-hour or four-hour period in the course of a day. So obviously we don't have the potential to generate the type of revenue that we need to survive. But, again, our intent was not to disclose that information here today. It was a result of you bringing up the carriage industry. I think the correlation that we can draw here is that if you expect our operations -- and I think this is 110 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. collectively among all the operators -- to try to absorb a $200,000 a year expense --

That's an issue we're going to talk about.

-- we're going to go down the same path.

I can appreciate and respect that. I just get concerned when you tell me you're going out of business and it's basically overregulation, is the issue.

And I can also assure you that if we can work to relax those regs and you can give us some consideration, we may be able to divert that, but our intent right now is that we will disband that operation in '06, because it is not profitable.

Two questions. Assuming you guys are still in business in '06 and -- you're going to be in business in '06 but not after '06; is that correct? 111 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

That's correct.

What makes it profitable for your competitors in the carriage industry to continue to operate and not --

They don't use saw dust. I mean, we've been through this before with the humane issues. I mean, they can cut their operating expenses. They don't have a layered staff like we do. They don't have supervisory staff. They don't have a management staff. They don't have people on site hours a day. 15 They don't have the size of the facility 16 we have. They don't have all of the 17 equipment behind our facility. They 18 don't have the costs. They do it at a 19 much lower level, so they can essentially 20 survive on much less revenue and cut 21 their operating costs, something that we 22 can't do. 23

Without 24 trying to get you into trouble with your competitors -- I'm sure you're already in 112 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. trouble with them at certain times anyway -- are you suggesting that some of the things that they're doing are not complying with the regulations?

I will be the first one to tell you, as I have behind closed doors and publicly, that these guys do not do this business properly.

Based on what the Code requires them to do. So we're back where we were a couple years ago with the condition of the care of the horses?

That's right. In other words, we're back to square one where I was. We need to address --

We're going to get on that first thing tomorrow, I assure you that.

But, Frank, one thing is, it's not the current regs. What I had said from day one is, we had a comprehensive stable management program that addresses the welfare and well-being 113 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. of the animal 24/7, not what happens on the street as a result of that. So if you fail to provide the animal with adequate shelter and care --

Cold weather is approaching. We're going to address that. That, I assure you. And I don't know if that changes your business plan going forward or not --

That, in itself, does not.

-- but that's what brought us to that whole debate in the first place.

And it didn't work. I mean, this is the point that we're trying to make. It overregulated the operators who want to do it right, who have that high level of cost factor to operate at that level. It did not achieve that for the lower levels.

You have made your point, and I respect that and I appreciate that, and I've said and I'll 114 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. repeat again, that you did run the best operation that far exceeded everybody else, but if they're not at least reaching the criteria of the Code, then that's something that is out of your hands and it's in our hands and the City's hands to address, and we will certainly address that. Mr. Grimes.

Councilman, I defer. I could talk to Mr. Abernathy or yourself later on, if you don't mind. I don't want to take the Committee's time --

I appreciate that, and let me say this to you: There was some suggestion about giving you guys a couple weeks. What I might request of the Committee is that we vote this out of Committee, but maybe give us some time to go over some of those other issues, and hopefully we can come to some sort of resolution between now and the 15th of December, which gives 115 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. you two weeks.

That's all we need.

I hope that's all we need, but I'm going to ask that we vote it out of Committee, because I don't want to delay it any further than it's been delayed, go through the recess period, come back sometime in January and then before you know it, we're into February and then it's going to grind. Because we have put it on hold on a number of occasions already. We've delayed it, delayed it, delayed it. And, again, at the end of the day, what we do here may not be satisfactory to everyone. We don't do everything and call all the shots correctly all the time, but we do have a responsibility to get something done, and we're going to try to keep working towards that, and it will give everyone another two weeks to try to figure this all out and get hopefully some concessions on everybody's part to make 116 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. it work.

We appreciate that, and we do believe that the concessions are there and by working together, we can get them there.

Good. Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Dutcher, Herschend and Mr. Gaier. He's going to do them all? There you go. Councilman Ramos will be leaving the Chambers. He will be in his office. He will have his speaker on listening to this. He does have some other business. He will come down in time for a vote, but thank you. Mr. Dutcher.

Herschend, Councilman DiCicco.

Herschend. I'm sorry. I should know. We've met a number of times. I apologize.

It's good to 117 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. see you again.

You're going to be speaking on behalf of Mr. Dutcher, Ride the Ducks. Fire away.

Good afternoon. I appreciate Councilman DiCicco and all the members of the Committee allowing us to testify today. My name is Chris Herschend. I'm the President of Ride the Ducks International. With me, as you mentioned, is Steve Dutcher, who is our General Manager here in Philadelphia. We're here today to express our support for Bill No. 050862. We want to thank Councilman DiCicco and his staff for their efforts to find common ground among all of the interests involved. We also want to thank the Managing Director's office and the entire working group that's been addressing the various Independence Park issues over the last couple of years. Briefly, allow me to introduce my company to you. Ride the Ducks came 118 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. to Philadelphia in early 2003 with the wonderful idea of helping visitors discover this great City, both on land and water, in a fun and professional way. If you look around the room and count the imitators, you can see that we've been fairly successful. Since 2003, we have doubled the number of vehicles we operate here from six to 12. We're now open from March 1st through December 15th, seven days a week. We employ 150 Philadelphians each season, and in our three years, we've hosted nearly 400,000 passengers, more than half from outside the region. Our professional guides function as ambassadors for this great City and point out the sites and destinations within the Historic District, Old City, Society Hill, South Street and Penn's Landing, which directly increases the visits to these attractions, as well as increasing shopping and dining for those from out of 119 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. town. Ride the Ducks Philadelphia is owned by Herschend Family Entertainment. Herschend Family Entertainment owns, operates or partners in properties in 7 eight states, hosting over 8 million 8 guests per year. Our properties include 9 the Dollywood Theme Park in Tennessee; 10 Stone Mountain Park in Atlanta, Georgia; 11 Hawaiian Falls Water Park in Dallas, 12 Texas; and the flagship Silver Dollar 13 City Theme Park in Branson, Missouri. We 14 also, of course, operate Ride the Ducks, 15 which has wholly owned operations here, 16 as well as Baltimore; Memphis, Tennessee; 17 and Branson, Missouri. We also supply 18 equipment and license to partners in 19 Boston, Massachusetts and Seattle, 20 Washington. Since we arrived here in Philadelphia three years ago, we've actively supported many local non-profit organizations and worthy causes. We have provided tours or transportation to the 120 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. following local groups: The Police Athletic League, Ronald McDonald House, Pennsylvania School for the Deaf, Philadelphia Charter School for the Performing Arts, City Year, Philadelphia READS, Philadelphia Zoo, Pennsylvania Ballet, Philabundance, Franklin Institute, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, St. Christopher's Hospital for Children and, most recently, Hurricane Katrina victims who relocated to Philadelphia, as well as contributing our equipment and men to the actual recovery and rescue effort in New Orleans itself immediately after the storms. We want to continue to be a great corporate citizen here in Philadelphia, so we agreed to collaborate with this working group to address the various issues that have been raised. However, we do want the Councilmembers to be aware that this legislation singles out Ride the Ducks unfairly and puts us at a tremendous competitive disadvantage. 121 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. These changes come at a significant cost to our company and we believe will also hurt the City by decreasing the amount of visitors referred by us to attractions, shops and restaurants in the City. Let me explain that a bit. Currently we sell tickets to Ride the Ducks from a kiosk we purchased and have licensed in front of our immediate loading area.

This legislation will not allow us to continue to sell tickets where we load our vehicles. Thus, our customers will go elsewhere to buy tickets, while customers of the land tours can board a bus or a trolley and pay later, as they stop at other points in the City to load passengers and sell tickets. Not being able to buy the ticket and board the vehicle immediately will certainly decrease our ticket sales and, importantly, I believe will artificially restrict the growth of this industry. The net result is a phrase 122 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. we've heard often in this process, which is a true leveling of the playing field. Significantly, it also lowers the playing field to the lowest common denominator. We believe it's in the City's best interest to have operators that can sell tickets on site and board passengers quickly, thus moving more people through the process faster. This legislation in fact does the opposite. With that being said, we do support Bill No. 050862. This has been a long and sometimes painful process, but we recognize that the Councilman and the working group believe this legislation is necessary. Ride the Ducks looks forward to continuing this partnership and working with Councilman DiCicco and the City government for many years to come. We thank you for your consideration, and we invite you to come Ride the Ducks. Thank you.

I've been invited and dismissed the opportunity 123 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. until all legislation is complete, because I don't want to think that I've been influenced by a free ride on Ride the Ducks. Actually, I want to pay, so that will eliminate that. That will be a front page story or blog tomorrow. Let me ask you a question. Second page of your testimony, third paragraph, "Currently we sell tickets to Ride the Ducks from a kiosk," which my office was instrumental in setting up for you fellows a while back. Would it help, would it benefit if you were able to sell tickets similar to the way the trolley and/or bus do at other points along the way?

There are no 19 other points along the way on our product.

Well, if there were. If there were. If we created other venues for that.

Let me make sure I understand the question. Our 124 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. product now loads and unloads from a single location.

Right.

If we modified the product to load and unload at multiple locations; is that the premise of your question?

Let me see if I understand you correctly. "This legislation does not allow us to continue to serve tickets where we load our vehicles," meaning you would be relocating your sales to the Visitors Center?

Presumably.

Presumably. "Thus, our customers must go elsewhere to buy tickets, while customers of land tours can board a bus or trolley and pay later, as they stop at other points in the City to load passengers and sell tickets. Not being able to buy the ticket and board the vehicle immediately will definitely decrease our ticket 125 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. sales." Let me ask you it this way: What would be your solution to that? What would be a recommendation?

Regarding our business?

Yes, sir.

Well, I think the ideal solution is what we have done unique to all the other tour operators in this City, which, as you point out, you helped us in late 2002 to set up for spring 2003, which is continue to have a distinct point of sale, which eliminates our participation in any of the sidewalk fracas -- what's the word -- that's been referred to several times. That works extremely well for our product, and it provides us a point of differentiation, as well as safety for our employees on the sidewalk. That would be my preference in an ideal world.

But if you were allowed to buy a ticket or tickets 126 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. and board the vehicle immediately, would that satisfy some of your concerns? I'm using your --

Yes, having the point --

I'm reading from your testimony and I'm giving you the other side and opportunity to respond to that.

Having the point of sale immediately adjacent to the loading point, as many other operators have pointed out, is very desirable, yes.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Oh, Boston. Somebody was supposed to remind me about Boston. We talked about the inefficient way or the more undesirable manner in which we are suggesting that ticket sales be at the Independence Visitors Center.

Every city is 127 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. different. The legislation in Boston is different.

What happens in Boston? Isn't there one designated place to buy?

No, sir. Boston Duck Tours, with whom we are affiliated, although I should stress it is an independent company owned by a separate set of investors and managed independently, my familiarity with that is as anybody else's here having seen it several times. They're blessed with a high traffic desirable tourist location that is private land, the mall.

Is what?

Private. It's on the mall, Prudential Center. It's owned by a private developer.

And you said it's highly?

Desirable by tourists, high traffic, similar to Independence Mall here. Within that 128 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. mall, they have leased space in a straight-forward land lease. So they're not required by the city to sell or not sell from any location, I believe. Frankly, I haven't...

You don't know?

I'm not a hundred percent sure. There are numerous trolley businesses, land tour traditional trolley businesses in Boston. I believe four companies operate in there, and I'm sure the working group looked into that at some point.

That's what I'm trying to understand. If there is a desirable attractive location -- I have to assume our Visitors Center is a desirable and attractive location. A lot of people go through there. Why wouldn't it be as successful here as it is in Boston?

As I understand it, the Independence Visitors Center 129 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. issue is outside the scope of the legislation. It's not directly included in any of the reads I've made of it. So speaking theoretically, I guess, the IVC is certainly a desirable piece of real estate, and we look forward to being there, and we are there today, as others have pointed out, and we've had great conversations with that team. So our issue with the IVC is really one of timing and whether or not we're forced to be there versus choosing to be there.

Thank you.

Yes, sir.

Thank you. Angela Dowd-Burton from Rohm and Haas. Cynthia Philo is not here. Is anyone from Old City other than the written testimony -- do we have that written testimony? We have written testimony from Rich Horrow, from the Old City Civic Association, which will be given to the stenographer and put on the record. 130 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Ann Meredith. You might want to come up, Ann, as well. Are you testifying, Ann? You can come up. Good afternoon, ladies, and thank you for your patience. Ms. Dowd-Burton, Angela Dowd-Burton. Ms. Burton, would you proceed with your testimony. Please identify yourself for the record.

Yes. Good afternoon, Chairman DiCicco and members of the Committee on Streets and Services. I am Angela Dowd-Burton, Government Relations Manager for Rohm and Haas Company. On behalf of Rohm and Haas Company, I am here to testify in support of Bill No. 050862, which amends provisions that regulate the operation of tour buses and amphibious tour vehicles. Our headquarter office is located at 100 Independence Mall West, better known as the west side of 6th and Market Streets. We recognize the 131 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. importance of tourism to Philadelphia and the critical role tour passenger carriers play in helping tourists enjoy their stay in Philadelphia. We believe Bill No. 6 050862 is a step forward for tourism as well as the employees who work in this vicinity of the Independence Mall area. Forty years ago, F. Otto Haas, son of the founder of Rohm and Haas Company, committed to locate its world headquarters in one of the most vibrant parts of the City, across from the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall. This initiative was a partnership with the City at the time when City leaders were embarking on the revitalization of the historic Mall area and anxious to have high-quality commercial establishments along the perimeter of the Historic District. Relocating to 6th Street was an easy decision for us to make at the time. As a Philadelphia company founded in 1908, we recognized the unique history of 132 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. the City and the special relationships that it provides to the citizens and businesses that call this City home. The decision to locate our headquarters on Independence Mall West was the right one 40 years ago and today. While the company has expanded into a global enterprise, we are still proud to call Independence Mall West our home office. On a daily basis, we welcome employees from other parts of the world, as well as business leaders, dignitaries and other special guests to this wonderful location. During the past 40 years, we have enjoyed a true partnership with the City, the National Park Service and other businesses along the Mall. We work together to co-exist in this vibrant commercial and tourist section of Philadelphia. Over the last 18 months or so, however, we have noticed the proliferation of vehicles, buses, ducks, 133 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. super ducks and trolleys, as well as their enthusiastic patrons. We now have a high concentration of vehicles, tourists and employees in a relatively small area along 6th Street between Market Street and Ranstead Street. The excess of tourist vehicles causes undue foot and automobile traffic congestion. Sometimes five or more vehicles are standing outside of our building. The space for taxis and the drop-off and pick-up of our business associates in front of our building is often inaccessible, many times requiring double parking. We recognize the growth in attractions is a reflection of the vibrant tourism economy that has developed in this City. We value the opportunity for visitors to share in this unique experience when they come to Philadelphia. Nevertheless, we find the density of tourist attractions that have recently sprung up to be a new phenomenon 134 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. that may jeopardize the balance of historic preservation, echo tourism and the commercial establishments along Independence Mall. Specifically, our interest is in helping to reduce the concentration of tourist attractions on 6th Street in front of the headquarters of Rohm and Haas Company. We believe Bill No. 050862 provides a balanced opportunity to remedy the present situation. In closing, Rohm and Haas prides itself on its quiet but substantial corporate citizenship. We are one of the oldest, world-scale companies that has maintained its presence in the City.

Today we have more than 1,000 employees located at 6th and Market and still maintain a major manufacturing facility in the Bridesburg section of Philadelphia. We are just three years shy of celebrating 100 years of continued operations in Philadelphia, a milestone we intend to celebrate with 135 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. the very community that has been so supportive of us during the past century. Throughout our history, Rohm and Haas has worked with City leaders and other community and civic organizations to help build the vibrant, world-class City that Philadelphia has become. We appreciate your consideration and support of Bill No. 11 050862. This important legislation will enable the tourist carriers to find a more reasonable passenger zone within the Independence Mall area, while maintaining a balance between historic preservation, tourism and commerce. We appreciate the opportunity to once again participate in helping to maintain a reverence for the Independence Mall area. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Burton. As you know, I had the opportunity and pleasure of speaking to a 136 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. number of your employees at Rohm and Haas, I don't know, a couple months ago. I lose track of time.

Yes.

And I believe -- his name escapes me at the moment, your CEO.

Raj Gupta is the CEO and Robert Lonergan is the Chief Counsel.

Mr. Lonergan. Chief Counsel, you're right. We had some discussion about the future of Rohm and Haas in the City of Philadelphia, and I won't divulge all of the discussion, but decisions are being undertaken as to whether or not it makes business sense to continue to keep its corporate headquarters in Philadelphia. The building needs some significant repairs and reinvestment.

Yes.

So it's a business decision, and we certainly don't 137 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. want to see you leave, but one of the issues that came up was what you testified to today. Do you happen to know what the value of the wage taxes that Rohm and Haas -- if you don't, that's okay. I should have asked you this before you testified. Any numbers on what Rohm and Haas's contribution to the Philadelphia tax base is?

I'm sorry, Councilman. I have no idea of that number.

But it is significant, I know. I know it's significant. I thought I heard that number that day, and I don't recall it. And it is a state-of-the-art building. It's one of the most attractive buildings that I can recall. And I think I mentioned that day, as a young man coming down 6th Street, I always admired the chandelier, for lack of a better description. It's just a magnificent 138 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. building and it's an icon to my eyes, and we certainly want to do what we can to accommodate your existence in the City of Philadelphia. And I'm not suggesting that if we don't relocate the staging areas, that that will be the primary reason for why you may not stay, "you" meaning Rohm and Haas, but it certainly will, as I got it, I understand it from that discussion that day, it's certainly one of the factors that is being looked at rather carefully. And I do appreciate the fact that you understand that tourism is important and it's something that you welcome, and you're not being nimbies, Not in my backyard. We understand that as well.

Absolutely.

But thank you again for your testimony. Ann. Ms. Meredith. Excuse me.

Good afternoon, Councilman DiCicco. 139 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

Good afternoon.

I'm here on behalf of the Independence Mall Business and Residents Coalition, also known as IMBARC. We represent businesses, residents and public institutions in the Greater Independence Mall area. Our mission is to improve the beauty, vitality and accessibility for the benefit of our visitors, residences, businesses and their employees. We're thrilled with our City's success in attracting so many visitors and so many great new operators to give great experiences on the Mall. However, IMBARC has been long concerned about the need for a more effective management plan for tour passenger carriers in the Mall area. On 6th Street in particular we've observed traffic and pedestrian crowding and overuse of public space for operations, including, but not limited 140 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. to, the forming of nearly impassable crowding on sidewalks, the use of trees for locking up strollers and wheelchairs and the use of public sidewalks for storing supplies. Intrusive noise has also been a particular concern of our members, along with the demeanor of some front-line employees who serve as ambassadors to our City for our visitors. Over the past year, IMBARC has convened a public meeting where the need for a long-term solution was addressed at length. We've also had numerous communications on behalf of our members with the City's Managing Director's office, the Park Service and other stakeholders. We're very grateful for the hard work of the City, for you and your office, the Park Service, the tour passenger carriers and other stakeholders in addressing this complex issue, because we think there's a real, real need. In keeping with our mission and 141 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. the aforementioned concerns of our members, IMBARC wholeheartedly endorses the ordinance's designation of the east side of 6th Street between Market and Arch Streets for passenger loading zones, the east side of 5th Street between Market and Arch and the west side of 5th Street between Market and Arch for passenger loading zones. We feel these designations adequately address our current concerns and, with a more effective operational management plan, should reduce vehicular and pedestrian congestion. In addition, IMBARC endorses the ordinance's prohibition of inappropriate and unsafe conduct on the part of the operators' front-line employees. We enthusiastically endorse the requirement that tour passenger carriers are responsible for maintaining the sidewalk within 15 feet of the tour passenger loading zones. We hope that the operators and their employees would 142 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. be proactive in reporting work that needs to be done to the sidewalks, as heavy usage has and will continue to create safety hazards. We suggest that language be added regarding trash disposal, as the trash cans near the current staging areas are often overflowing. We would additionally ask that the sidewalks not be used for storing supplies and that trees not be used for locking up strollers, wheelchairs and the like. Finally, we believe the ordinance should address the noise issue in light of the large volume of complaints relating to blaring music and the encouragement of rowdy guests' behavior on residential streets and in front of sacred historic sites. I know that the ordinance does state that everything needs to be in accordance with The Philadelphia Code, so I'm assuming that that's included in The Philadelphia Code, relates to that. 143 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. That's why that's there, among other reasons. But it seems because it's such a big issue, that it should be stated explicitly. IMBARC understands that this ordinance does not meet the needs of all of the tour passenger carriers.

Since our mission is to improve the vitality of the Mall area and believe the Mall should be run like a first-class visitor destination, we urge continued cooperation between the City, Park Service and the operators in developing a plan that achieves maximum operational efficiency and outstanding guest service, while balancing the needs of the business and residential community. Further, and with all due respect, the ordinance appears incomplete since it addresses where tour passenger carriers are not permitted to sell tickets, but it does not address how and where they are permitted to conduct ticket sales. We're aware that this is a 144 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. controversial issue, but believe this resolution should be part of the ordinance.

Thank you. And since there are no members of the Committee, I have no questions at this moment, but thank you, Ms. Meredith, and thank you, Ms. Burton, as well.

Thank you.

The next panel, Mr. Castellano from the National Constitution Center, Mr. Moore from the Independence Visitors Center, and Mr. Eidmann from the National Park Service. And I'll leave it up to you gentlemen who wants to go first.

Good afternoon, Councilman. My name is William W. Moore and I'm the CEO and President of the Independence Visitors Center. We're located at 6th and Market Streets. I've been asked to share my testimony with you today regarding Bill 25 No. 050862, and I'd like to thank the 145 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Streets and Service Committee for hearing my testimony. I'd particularly like to thank your staff member, Brian Abernathy, for working so diligently on this process with us and also you, Councilman DiCicco, for affording this opportunity and, more importantly, for bringing attention to the issues concerning the City's tour operations and proposing this legislation. As you're all aware, Independence Mall's physical restorations began in 2001, and since then, we've included more than $300 million of capital improvements, many funded by the City of Philadelphia, that resulted in renewed interest in and increased visibility for the nation's most historic square mile regionally, nationally and internationally. In fact, the enhancements combined with the City and regional marketing efforts have led to a tourism boom not experienced since the Bicentennial celebration in this City. 146 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. The addition of our multi-purpose Visitors Center, which opened in 2001, was a cornerstone for this development on the Mall and has been a focal point for residents and visitors alike. We now attract more than 2 million visitors annually, but, honestly, that's about five seasons worth of Eagles, not counting we don't do any booing in the Visitors Center. These developments and the subsequent surge in tourism have undoubtedly benefitted existing businesses, while also attracting new businesses and new players to the area. The increase in our tour operators is a clear example. Evidence indicates that the increasingly popular tour operators, just like the City as a whole, were primed for even more growth, but in recent months, evidence also indicates this newly thriving industry lacks adequate controls and adequate structure. Increasing 147 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. concerns over service, safety, congestion, building business operations and quality of life are just some of the reasons that we're here today to talk about. In a word, the current situation is problematic. For just over two years now, City stakeholders have been meeting with historic area tour operators to discuss a remedy. Unfortunately, no conclusions have been reached. While some differences obviously exist, all parties, City of Philadelphia's Managing Director's office, the stakeholders and operators themselves, I believe are committed to finding the appropriate means of governing this industry. Based on ample input from all sides, legislation was proposed to accomplish a series of goals, including, but not limited to, the following: Oversight and regulations for this fast-growing multi-million-dollar industry, regulation of tour departure and pick-up points, 148 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. establishment of safety reporting methods and, finally, from the point of view of our visitors who are not here today to testify, this legislation creates an environment conducive to ticket sales outside of the public right-of-way for visitor convenience. While the convenience, safety and the satisfaction of City visitors is certainly at stake, if we don't reach sound decision regarding governance and regulations, we'd be naive to think that the problems end here. We cannot ignore increasingly loud complaints stemming from local businesses whose operations are disrupted and that residents who find themselves inconvenienced, nor can we ignore the impact the tour operations have on the historic area. Foot traffic, street traffic and sidewalk congestion, alterations, jockeying between operators, unannounced route and fare changes, safety issues and haphazard operations all exist.

Each one 149 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. by itself is a sufficient argument for regulatory measures and for this legislation. Bundle these concerns together, however, and you have a far more significant problem. The current environment surrounding tour operators threatens the value and the long-term sustainability of their own industry and has a potential to tarnish the image of this historic area, which is Philadelphia to many outsiders. The reputation we in the historic area have established as invested and interested parties in recent years has helped us move forward. We can't afford to slide backwards. This legislation will ensure that we don't. I appreciate your attention.

Thank you, Mr. Moore. Mr. Castellano, please.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. My name is Phil Castellano. I am the Chief Operating 150 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Officer at the National Constitution Center. Tourism is booming on Independence Mall, and the financial commitment that has been made by the public and private sectors is raising this region's profile exponentially. Residents and visitors to Philadelphia are now exposed to art, culture and entertainment at the level that has never been seen before, and tourism is vastly growing as an economic stimulus to our City. Tour vehicles and their operations are now a big part of the visitor experience to Philadelphia, and regulating the activity of the vehicles will only enhance the visitor experience and thus lead to even more participation by tourists and residents. The National Constitution Center supports the regulating of tour vehicle operations and looks forward to all of us as tourism partners in generating even more positive 151 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. exposure and economic development for the City of Philadelphia. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Castelanno. Mr. Eidmann, please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Yes. Good afternoon. My name is Frank Eidmann. I am the Special Events Coordinator for Independence National Historical Park here representing Dennis Reidenbach, our Park Superintendent. I would like to thank the Streets Committee and you, Councilman DiCicco, for giving me this opportunity to share with you the National Park Service's position on the proposed legislation. Independence Mall is the single most historically and culturally significant urban landscape in the City of Philadelphia and perhaps, for that matter, the entire country. As its 152 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. caretakers, the National Park Service, along with our partners, the Independence Visitors Center Corporation, the National Constitution Center and the City of Philadelphia, have an obligation to maintain an atmosphere and business climate that is both respectful to the monuments of our country's founding and, at the same time, responsive to the interest and needs of the visitors, residents, property owners, business owners and other stakeholders in and around Independence Mall. As a result of the concerted and successful efforts of the City's tourism agencies in promoting Philadelphia and the improvements to the Mall, including a new Visitors Center, National Constitution Center and Liberty Bell Center, Independence National Historic Park has experienced tremendous growth in visitation. We serve more than 2 million visitors a year, and this year we expect to have more than 2 million 153 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. visitors to the Liberty Bell Center alone, more than any year since the Bicentennial. Business in and around Independence Mall, particularly the local tour operators covered by this proposed legislation, have been beneficiaries to this growth in tourism. Because local tour operators conduct business on public right-of-ways, the impact of their growth on the landscape is significant. And if their expansion of operations is controlled by nothing more than market forces, serious negative impacts to the Mall may result. Negative impacts of this unchecked and unregulated growth, such as conflicts with neighboring residents, visitors, business and property owners, is what prompted the City of Philadelphia to call together stakeholders and tour operators to formulate a remedy for this situation. Over the course of the past couple of years, meetings were conducted 154 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. and all affected parties, including the tour operators themselves, were invited to voice their concerns and offer solutions. The legislation proposed and presented today to the Streets Committee is the culmination of many hours of deliberation, taking into account the business interest of the tour operators and the concerns of the many Mall stakeholders affected by their business operations, including Independence National Historical Park. The National Park Service supports this legislation, as it will contribute to the improving of our visitors' experience. The National Park Service is adding its voice to its partners in support of a managed visitor experience. Our hope is that we can sustain the public's interest by continuing to provide a quality experience at Independence National Historical Park. Thank you. 155 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

Thank you, Mr. Eidmann. Will there be anyone else testifying for or against these bills? Because I want to conclude this public hearing, and I will ask my colleagues who are members -- Councilman Nutter is here -- my colleagues who sit on the Streets and Services Committee to please return to the Chambers for the purpose of voting out the bills in this committee. Before we conclude with the public hearing, I want to thank everyone again for your participation. I'd just ask Brian -- and it's two years this legislation is in the making, and as I said at the onset of this hearing, that no one gets a hundred percent of anything and there are some issues, and I did also pledge that we will not call this bill up for final approval before the 15th of this month. I will ask the committee to vote this out favorably today with a 156 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. suspension of rules, which will allow us to have the first hearing. For those of you not familiar with the process, you have to have two readings of the bill 6 before it's called up for final passage. So in the interest of time, since there's only three session days left, including tomorrow, I will ask that the bill be reported out in its current form with a suspension of rules. I will further ask -- and Brian will contact a number of folks, Big Bus operators, Mr. Waterman, Mr. Slocum, either you or Mr. Kates, Mr. Kravitz from Super Ducks, and Ride the Ducks and Mr. Dutcher, and Mr. Moore, and I think that's it, maybe four or five people in the course of the next week prior to the 8th of December to convene a meeting and to talk about some of the issues and recommendations that came out of this testimony today. I think there may be a need to do some adjustments to the current 157 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. legislation, which is not unusual, and all the hard work that's been in it. When you get to the public hearing, things kind of get put on the table that you really need to take a harder look at. There may be some concessions we may ask, but I think we can come up with some piece of legislation in addition to what's here, amend this to accommodate most of the issues that have been raised as a result of this public hearing. And, again, as I said at the onset, it's a beginning. Whatever that final bill looks like, we will know in a six-month period of time. If there's adjustments that need to be made and should be made, we can always come back and do that, but we have to start somewhere, and I appreciate all the hard work that has gone into this. Mr. Engelke I see is here from Senator Fumo's office. I want to thank you, Carl, and the Senator for your participation as well. 158 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. We need one more individual member of this Committee to get into the public meeting. We have two points of information. Bill 051072 and Bill No. 7 051073 are being held at the request of the sponsor. And there will be an amendment to this bill and there may be subsequent amendments as a result of the meeting that will take place hopefully within the next several days as well. This concludes the public hearing. We will wait a few minutes to get the fourth member to establish a quorum, and we will then go into the public meeting. So you can all take a breather. Thank you. (Pause.)

Thank you. We're now back in session. This begins the public meeting on the Committee of Streets and Services. Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller is also in attendance. We do have a quorum for the purpose of voting 159 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. these bills out. The Chair recognizes Councilman Ramos for the purpose of voting bills out of Committee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill 9 No. 050861 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)

It has been properly moved and seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 050861 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)

Aren't we amending the --

I'm sorry; that the amendment be adopted. Thank you, Councilman Nutter. That the amendment be adopted. All those in favor? 160 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The Chair recognizes Councilman Ramos.

I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill No. 050859 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)

That's wrong.

I move that Bill No. 050861 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.)

It's been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 24 050861 as amended be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation 161 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. and a further recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)

The bill 8 is approved. Councilman Ramos.

I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill No. 050859 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)

It has been properly moved and seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 050859 be approved. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The amendment is approved. Councilman Ramos. 162 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

I move that Bill No. 050859 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.)

It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 050859 as amended 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.)

The bill 24 is approved. Councilman Ramos. 163 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill No. 050857 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)

It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 050857 be approved and a further recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The bill 18 is approved. Councilman Ramos.

I move that Bill 050857 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. 164 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. (Duly seconded.)

It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 050949 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.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The bill 16 is approved. Councilman Ramos.

I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill No. 050949 be reported out of Committee with a favorable --

Was that 52?

49.

Oh, I made 165 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. the mistake. I made the mistake. I apologize. I jumped to 949.

We were on 857.

No. We're at 949.

Do 949, then we'll have to go back and do the other one. I apologize. Is there an amendment to 949?

No, there's not.

That's what confused me. I didn't see that. All right. So we'll report it out on 949.

I move that Bill No. 050949 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.) 166 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

It's been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 4 050949 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.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The bill 14 is approved. Councilman Ramos.

I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill No. 050952 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)

It's been recommended and seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 050952 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation.

No, no, no. 167 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

I did it again. I've been doing this pretty good up until this year. It's like the tenth year I'm losing it. I move that the amendment to Bill No. 050952 be reported out of Committee favorably. All those in favor?

Be adopted.

Be adopted. (Duly seconded.)

All those in favor? (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The amendment is approved. Councilman Ramos.

I move that Bill No. 050952 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable 168 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.)

It's been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 9 050952 as amended be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The bill 20 is approved. Councilman Ramos.

I move that Bill No. 050860 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of 169 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.)

It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill 050860 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The bill 19 is approved. Councilman Ramos.

I move that Bill NO. 051098 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first 170 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.)

It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 051098 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The bill 18 is approved. Councilman Ramos.

I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill No. 050863 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)

It's been reported and seconded that Bill No. 171 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. 050863 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The bill 12 is approved. Councilman Ramos.

I move that Bill No. 050863 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.)

Did you do the amendment? Did you offer the amendment?

Yes. I just 172 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. did the amendment.

He did it. You put on the "reported out of Committee" piece at the end. Do you want to do it again?

Yes. Let me just go over that again. Bill No. 050863 as amended is being reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

Bill No. 19 050863 is reported favorably out of Committee as amended. Councilman Ramos.

I move that Bill No. 050863 as amended be --

4. We did 3. 173 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.

Okay.

Cohen is not here. That's why we're all messed up.

I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill No. 050864 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)

It's been properly moved and seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 050864 be approved. All in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

Councilman Ramos.

I move that Bill No. 050864 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit 174 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.)

It's been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 7 050864 as amended be reported out of this 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.)

The bill 18 as amended is approved. Councilman Ramos.

I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill No. 050862 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)

It has been properly moved and seconded that the 175 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. amendment to Bill No. 050862 be approved. All in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The amendment is approved. Councilman Ramos.

I move that Bill No. 050862 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.)