COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, October 29, 1997 10:23 a.m. - - - BILL 970270 - (Deed conveying fee simple title to N.E. corner 7th St. & Pattison Ave., 39th Ward) BILL 970350 - (Deed conveying fee simple title to 4700, 4702, 4704, 4706 Market St.) BILL 970361 - (To purchase fee simple title to 907 Hamilton Ave., 5th Ward) BILL 970545 - (To enter into sublease for portion of building at 3001 Market St.) PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN AUGUSTA A. CLARK, Chairlady COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 2 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS P R O C E E D I N G S
Good morning. The Committee on Public Property and Public Works is now in session. I assert that there is a quorum present. At the table today are Council Members Rizzo, Kenney, Clark, Miller and Nutter. Would the clerk please read the first bill before us.
Bill No. 970270. An ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property to execute and deliver to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development, without consideration, a deed conveying fee simple title to a certain tract of City-owned land with the buildings and improvements thereon erected, situated on the northeast corner of Seventh Street and Pattison Avenue in the Thirty-Ninth Ward of the City of Philadelphia, under and subject to terms and conditions of the Philadelphia Industrial and Commercial Development Agreement between the City, the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development, and the Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation.
Thank you. 3 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS Are there persons present to be heard on this bill, 970270? Good morning.
Good morning. Paul Deegan, PIDC and Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development. I'm here to testify in support of the bill. This bill authorizes the Commissioner of Public Property to convey an 11-acre property on the northeast corner of Seventh Street and Pattison Avenue to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development. The property is currently used by the City's Streets Department for vehicle maintenance and for Sanitation Division operation. Also, it's the location of the City Incinerator, which is no 18 longer in operation. The site will be conveyed to P.A.I.D. to provide expansion space for Food Distribution Center Companies interested in the site. There are two companies that have expressed interest to us. Cisco Foods is the largest food distribution country in the country, and they have 4 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS a several-thousand square foot warehouse immediately to the north of the incinerator property. And they have expressed an interest in expanding southwards. Right now they've developing the rest of their site between Sixth and Seventh Streets. When that initial phase of expansion is done on the site they own now, they will be looking to expand to the south. The other company is Hopkins Seafood. They're an existing and longtime tenant of the seafood market, and they're in the seafood business. The mike, is it working?
But I need the practice. Hopkins Seafood is an existing seafood company now located in the seafood market, and they're the second company. And they're interested in the Pattison Avenue frontage, which would be where the incinerator building is. If both of these companies are able to expand in the food distribution center, it could 5 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS add approximately 500 jobs to the total work force in the food distribution center. Prior to utilizing the site, we'll have to demolish the incinerator building and relocate the Streets Department operations now located on the north end of the site. We have met with representatives of the Streets Department and the City's Capital Program Unit to develop a schedule and a plan for the relocation activities. Parenthetically, we'll also be asking for money in the capital budget, which is now being developed, for the demolition of the incinerator. And we also hope to access some State business infrastructure development grant funds for that demolition. The passage of this authorization will be an important signal to both of the companies that the City is seriously committed to developing new locations for their activities within the food distribution center. All of these companies are hearing from the New Jersey Burlington County food distribution effort. They're always trying to attract the 6 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS companies over their with promises of free land and build the building and lease it to the company for basically nothing. But most of these companies would like to stay in South Philadelphia. They've been there since they were relocated from the Society Hill area in the fifties. And it's a great location, both transportation-wise and with the synergy of having a lot of food companies in one area. I ask that the Committee consider this bill favorably and report it out at the next regularly scheduled meeting of City Council. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. And I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you, Mr. Deegan. In your testimony, you say, "We have met with representatives of the Streets Department." And did you get an agreement from them?
Did you have an agreement? Did they -- 7 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS
Yes. But we -- in fact, we looked at several sites where they could be relocated. We went out with the commissioner with the Capital Programs Unit, and we haven't made a final decision on the site. They are looking at the far eastern end of the Navy Base, which is kind of an industrial area right off 26th Street and at some property right across 26th Street, which is part of the old Penn Central Greenwich Point Grain Elevator property. And I think both sites were acceptable to the Streets Department. The reason we haven't moved forward is because Cisco Foods, who are, I guess, the prime movers in this project, they're still a year or two away from finalizing their plans for expanding off the site. They are renovating and doing new construction on the property they now own. But we're going to get back together with Commissioner Lloyd and with Emily Biddenbender, the head of the Capital Programs Unit. They have a chart and they have a schedule. They know exactly when we say we want to start moving on this, you know, they have given 8 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS us schedule for how long it would take them to move all their facilities.
And what you're now deciding is where they will relocate to.
But they're not insisting on retaining the site that they presently have.
No. I think the Streets Department and the City Capital Programs Unit and the Office of Productivity realize that a vacant incinerator and some maintenance buildings are not going to be the highest and best use of a property that's in the middle of the food distribution center and also a block away from the new arena and Veterans Stadium.
Yeah, well, we really ought to move the incinerator no matter what. I mean, we ought to move that.
Right. It does nobody any good. It's a question of money and having a real 9 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS good reason to budget the money.
Well, we haven't discussed the purchase price with the companies yes, but we are generally talking in the food center of around 70,000 per acre.
The total site is 11 acres, and we would probably divide it up. If Hopkins were to go into frontage, they probably need about a five- or six-acre site. And then Cisco would take the remainder of the site to the north, which abuts their property. But we haven't struck the final deal with -- we're meeting with Hopkins, I think, next week to start --
When fully implemented, though, this 11-acre site will be used by the two food distribution franchisers.
And we don't really much care whether one gets 80 percent and 10 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS the other gets 20 percent.
That's correct. It will all be -- it will be 11 acres sold to food companies. The average value down there now is 70 to 75,000 per acre for vacant vacate industrial land, and both companies are interested.
Just one comment relative to Cisco. About a year ago, I had made a contact with an individual in Florida who had relations with the company's president. I think the company's based in Texas somewhere.
In Dallas. We got the Mayor and the Deputy Mayor for Labor involved in the labor negotiation contract with the Teamsters. There's over 500 jobs, high-paying jobs, at that location. They were very close to leaving. One of the things that's important to 11 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS know is that it's the only union plant that they have in the country and that's why it's seeming always on the bubble as to whether or not they're going to move and get out of here. This kind of expansion, I think, if it comes to fruition, helps ensure that they have deeper roots in this area than they do even now. So one of the things I'd like to do is make sure that once we move, if Council decides to do this, deeding this land over to P.A.I.D. that we move quickly to try to get Cisco to remain here. It's one of those kinds of companies that employ people at a very decent wage. And with more than 500 jobs, it's a critical situation.
It is, Councilman, I agree. And I recall last year when they were negotiating their contract with the Teamsters. That was one of the things that held up the progress of the project. But since then, I think, thanks to Jerry Murphy from the Mayor's Office and the Councilmen --
I think the Mayor had some real direct contact with them. 12 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS
And the Mayor had some direct contact also. I think that they have made a commitment to stay. And, in fact, last month they went to the Zoning Board and got zoning approval for the expansion of the refrigerated space within their existing building.
And for building a parking lot on the corner of Sixth and Pattison to handle the added employees that are going to be there. But they are a strong union, do have a strong union there, and we'd like to keep the activity here.
Thank you. The site is presently being used by the Streets Department for a maintenance facility for heavy equipment for compactors and other large equipment.
Yes, Councilman. The northern -- it's really the northern end of the site behind the incinerator property.
I'm familiar with 13 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS the site. My concern is that these sites, especially where auto repair facilities have operated in the past, and also the incinerator, the remediation of the site, the environmental impact. Have you estimated what it's going to cost the City for a cleanup of that environment?
Yes. We've estimated -- we've had an environmental study done. And there are, when you include the incinerator property, there are approximately underground storage 14 tanks on the site. We estimate around $2 million for the demolition and cleanup of the site so that it's a marketable property.
So what you're saying is that the site will have to be cleaned, the underground storage tanks and also the surface contamination.
Because what they do there is they have hydraulic fluids leaking when there's lines ruptured, so the place is a real 14 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS mess. So we're going to spend $2 million before we even start to talk.
That's right. That includes taking down the incinerator, which is a pretty massive structure with underground pits and utility tunnels which run throughout the site. It looks like grass in front of the incinerator. It looks like a vacant sodded area. But underneath, there are tunnels, utility -- there's a sewer pumping system underneath there, there's underground storage tanks. You can walk underneath the --
Two million sounds like a conservative number from my experience with those kinds of cleanups. Has there been a site survey with all of the monies required to clean the site up other than just the removal of the tanks? Do we really know what we're dealing with there at this time?
Yes. I think we're going to do more. We'll do more studies as we go on, but we had a very thorough environmental study performed about three months ago, and we'd be happy to share that with anybody in Council who 15 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS would like to take a look at it.
I would say that it's -- it's -- I hate to say it's not going to be more; it always ends up being more. But I'd say $2 million is what we think is a reasonable figure based on -- we've identified all the tanks, so we know what's there. We feel there aren't any unknowns there. And the Streets Department has been very helpful in, you know, telling us what their activities are and where the tanks are and where they store certain materials. And they have taken us all through the incinerator. So I think we have a very good feel for what's there.
(Inaudible, off mike.) . . . as far as economic development etc. for this company and its 500 jobs to stay. What's your assessment of how that's going to work out?
I think we'll make money. First of all, with the number of jobs that are 16 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS going to be created, we'll be eligible for about a $1 million business infrastructure development grant from the State so that half of the $2 million, we should be able to get from the State of Pennsylvania.
After we spend that, I would say there will be various economic incentives, of course, for both companies. But I think, with the level of jobs that you're talking about and high-paying jobs, that overall, it's going to be economic plus for the City because of the tax revenue, wage tax and the real estate tax. You get no real estate taxes from the site now. It's tax-exempt. Thirdly, at some point, the City's going to have to deal with that incinerator. It just can't stay there forever unused and deteriorating. So I would say even if we were to sell the ground for less than market value, which, you know, honestly may end up being part of the deal when we finally get the deal with Cisco and Hopkins put into financing and what we can offer 17 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS them and what the problems are, it could be for less than fair market value. But I think Hopkins is talking about a whole new food-processing activity there. And it's going to be, you know, I think the 500 jobs is conservative when you look at the size of Cisco and the number of operations they have around the country. And I think it will be a great plus for the City because the City gets no money at all from the site now. It's basically a liability, particularly the incinerator property.
Are we approving it in advance and blank, not knowing -- there are a lot of X's and Y's to be filled in this equation.
That's correct. We prepared the ordinance because we want Cisco and Hopkins to know that there is a path laid out for this thing to take place. They would like to know that the City and PIDC are on board with the idea that this site will be for economic development. So we do have the ordinance. We can't do anything until we relocate the Streets Department. And we can't -- this is 18 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS an authorization, and we still -- I mean, the Commissioner of Property, Mr. Sipos's boss, still has to sign the deed to us, and that won't happen until we have everything cleaned up.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just would like to add to the last comment that was made by Mr. Deegan. I have some personal knowledge about Hopkins Seafood because one of the owners is a friend of mine. And just this past summer, we were sitting down and having something to eat one night, we were talking about his business, and he indicated to me he was considering moving out of the City. And I asked why, and he said because he just needed to be able to expand. And, presently, the way the market is set up, the food 19 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS distribution center, there really was no room for him unless something can be done with the Cisco company expanding into the present site of the incinerator. I understand that some of the questions about what the environmental cost may be. But I can tell you that although Mr. Marmer (ph.), who's from Hopkins, would rather stay in the City, he may be faced with the situation where he has no 11 alternative but to leave. And New Jersey has offered him to build him a new facility, to pay for relocation, and some other incentives, just to get his business. In fact, he would be located near a highway -- I don't know if it's the turnpike or whatever it would be, the New Jersey Turnpike. And they would actually build a ramp to get the trucks in, off the highway to his facility. But he said to me personally that he would much rather stay in the City. He would rather not make the 50-minute commute from Philadelphia out to New Jersey on a daily basis because his business would require him to be there. 20 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS So I think what we really need to take into consideration is, one, the potential for 500 jobs --
Additional jobs. But, more importantly, the job loss if we at least don't send a signal that we're willing to see what we can do to accommodate them. By the way, this is actually Ann Verna's district, Councilwoman Verna's district, and she's very aware of this. They've also been looking at some sites at the Navy Yard, but the most suitable site is in the food distribution center. And he's just committed to Philadelphia. He's a Philadelphia resident and would much rather than stay here so I think that's the kind of thing that we really need to --
Yes, I do. I look good for 80, don't I? See what seafood does. (Laughter.)
Are there other 21 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS questions by the Committee with respect to Bill 3 No. 970270? (No questions from the Committee at this time.)
Are there other persons present who wish to speak for or against this bill? Good morning, sir.
Good morning, Madam Chairman and Members of the Committee. My name is Ken Sipos. I'm a real estate specialist with the Department of Public Property. The Commissioner of Public Property supports passage of Bill 970270. The Northeast corner of Seventh and Pattison will be transferred to PIDC who, in turn, will sell it to Cisco Foods for an expansion, together with Hopkins after the Streets Department repair facility is relocated.
Thank you. Are there other persons present who wish to be heard? (No persons come forward at this time.)
Seeing none, the floor is open for a vote, a motion. The next bill before us, the clerk will 22 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS please read Bill No. 970350.
Bill No. 970350, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property to execute and deliver to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development, without consideration, a deed conveying fee simple title to a certain tract of City-owned land with the buildings and improvements thereon situated at 4700, 4702, 4704 and 4706 Market Street, under and subject to the terms and conditions of the Philadelphia Industrial and the Commercial Development Agreement between the City, the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development and the Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation.
Thank you. Does anyone wish to be heard with respect to Bill No. 19 970350?
Yes. That you, Madam Chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Paul Deegan. And I'm representing the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development and the Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation. 23 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS This bill authorizes the City to convey a parcel of vacant land at 4700 to 4706 Market Street to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development. After conveyance to P.A.I.D., the property will be sold to Community Care and Development Corporation, a developer of health care facilities. C.C.D.C. also owns the adjacent vacant lot, which it purchased from the City on May 13, 1991. The sales price would be based on two independent real estate appraisals obtained by P.D.I.C., and the net proceeds will be deposited in the City's general fund. I would also like to offer an amendment to the legal description that's contained in the ordinance now. The legal description now in the ordinance includes the bed of 47th Street and -- I apologize, my testimony is wrong; it says Ludlow Street. But what we want to do is exclude 47th Street from the legal description because the street has not yet been stricken from the City plan. So I have an amended legal description 24 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS prepared here. Back in the late eighties, the developer -- the developer purchased the City lot at 4628 Market Street, which would be the property on the other side of 47th Street. At that time, I understand, he thought he was buying the whole property since, when you go out there, it just looks like one big vacant lot. And he discovered later on that he had only purchased half of the property. And so this would complete the assemblage of land he would need for a new health care facility development. Because 47th Street is still in the City planning, however, it still would have to come back to City Council for an ordinance to strike the existing street, if he wishes to combine the two lots.
Good morning, Councilman. 25 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS
This proposed site is not in my district; it's a couple blocks away. But I drive past this site every day because I happen to come down Market Street. And I saw what looked to be a recent demolition at this site, and I see people out there, doing working every day. What is the nature of this proposal? Who are these people? And what if any contact, I guess, has there been with my colleagues, who I share border with out in West Philadelphia about this particular project? What is this?
This is a -- I have to say I haven't seen the plans for what they intend to build either. They own the adjacent -- I think there's an adjacent nursing home that was once owned by Gerimed, which has several nursing homes throughout West Philadelphia. And they purchased the property from Gerimed.
Who's the "they," Mr. Deegan? Who are we talking about?
The person who owned COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS Gerimed and who, I think, still owns 4628 Market Street is Daniel Valoric.
Okay, but who owns 4700, 4702, 4704 and 4706 right now?
They were acquired -- I'm not sure of the exact date. It used to be a City facility; I think it was the Department of Public Property communications repair shop until the early 1980s, when it was closed.
Isn't this right next to what used to be Penn Electric or something?
This person who you were talking about, what was the name?
The name of the person who 27 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS bought the parcel next door, his name is Daniel Valoric. And he owned the Gerimed Corporation.
And Community Care and Development Corporation has purchased the assets of the --
Okay. And so now, this same entity wants to get these properties?
Yes, Councilman. They own the abutting property at 4628 Market Street, which is also a vacant lot. And then there's the bed of 47th Street, which -- there's no street there so it just looks like one large vacant lot.
And then there's further vacate land between 47th Street and the next privately owned property.
All right. So the entity that is buying the assets of the former Gerimed --
-- is seeking to 28 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS get this property that we own?
They have not given me the definite plans. They're going to use it for parking in the interim until they develop plans for a community health care facility. But they are willing to pay fair-market value for the land at this point.
Well, we haven't got the appraisals yet. I would say, based on the former sale, that the fair-market value for about 30,000 square feet would be about $80,000.
Well, we're not clear about who they are and what they're going to do with it. We are not even clear of when they have to have it.
Well, I think the reason that they asked for the bill to be prepared is 29 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS that they seem to have thought that they bought the parcel back in the eighties.
I know, but a simple title search would have settled that.
How could they think that they bought something that we own? I mean, that would be like me saying, you know, "I thought when I bought my house, I got the one next door." I mean, we own the property.
That's true, right. They made a mistake. There's a City-owned property that was advertised for sale back in '86.
This is a terrible piece of business negotiation. You cannot think you bought something when you buy land by leaps and bounds.
So I need you know to give me a reason why we should report this out 30 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS with a favorable recommendation. We don't even know who we're reporting it out to. And when they get it, we don't even know what they going to do with it.
We do business with you all the time. This is not your shining hour, Mr. Deegan.
Mr. Deegan, why don't you hold this one until you know at least 31 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS the reasonable answers to reasonable questions. I'm not saying no to this.
Just put it back until you can answer the questions that we just asked. How about that?
I don't see that there's any urgency. Oh, the sponsor of the bill, Councilwoman Black.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I remember, I don't know, two years ago -- maybe it was a little less -- when I talked to Dan Valoric about the other property you mentioned on Market Street that was in question that they thought had been conveyed to Gerimed.
And I think back then, we got that straight so that that would be part of this whole package and that there would be plans to do something with it in the future. 32 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS But I don't know who these people are. I mean, I live at 45th and Spruce Streets. This is 47th and Market Street, you know.
Mrs. Blackwell, this is your bill? Do you object to our amending it and holding it until the reasonable questions are answered?
Well, I will get more information from the developer, and we'll also get the appraisals completed. And we'll have something much better than what I had today, I hope --
Madam Chair, may I also say, we have worked with the Valorics for a long, long time. And certainly we support them, but I don't know who this new entity is either. 33 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS And certainly in my neighborhood and certainly for us to support legislation, we're doing a lot in that area. And I pass it every day as well. But I've been waiting for somebody to contact me and give us some kind of presentation, so I appreciate the Chair's leadership in this matter. And thank you also to my colleague Councilman Nutter.
And I'll make sure that the developer does contact you and makes a presentation, Councilwoman.
You have just dodged a bullet. Don't bring us sloppy stuff like this. It damages our relationship with you.
Well, I thought they were -- there really isn't any excuse for this.
I thought it was a much -- because the lot's vacant and the City has no other need for it, but there are a lot of unanswered 34 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS questions. And I hate to admit that when the original mistakes occurred in 1986, I was Deputy Commissioner of Public Property so I was responsible for the beginning of the mess, and I'm here at the end of the mess -- or the middle of the mess. And I guess I'll be here at the end of it. (Laughter.)
Are there other persons who wish to be heard on this bill? (No response.)
Then it is our intent to amend the bill to correct the --
-- legal description of the property. And then we will hold it and report it out after additional information has been given so as to give us a record that it's defensible.
Okay. The next bill before us, the clerk will read the next bill 25 before us. 35 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS
Bill No. 970361. An ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to purchase fee simple title to a parcel of real estate with any improvements situated thereon located at 907 Hamilton (a/k/a 444-464 Percy Street) in the Fifth Ward, under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you. Are you present to speak in favor of this bill, sir?
Please introduce for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Madam Chairman and Members of the Committee, my name is Kenneth Sipos. I am a real estate specialist with the Department of Public Property. The Commissioner of Public Property supports passage of Bill 970361. 907 Hamilton Street it is presently being leased for use by the O.E.S.S. public property. The acquisition will enable the City to continue to operate the successful multi-service 36 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS center and to use capital funds to provide the renovations required to bring the building into code compliance and improve the overall condition and environment of the facility.
Good morning, Mr. Shaeffer. Please introduce yourself for the record and spell your name for the benefit of the stenographer, and proceed with your testimony.
Good morning, ma'am. My name is Richard Shaeffer S-H-A-E-F-F-E-R. I'm an Administrative Services Director for the Office of Emergency Shelter and Services. Councilman, I don't have any prepared testimony. I've come here to answer any questions.
Please tell us what this property's intended use is. 37 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS
It's currently being used as an emergency shelter for 60 to 70 single men.
Single men, that's correct. It's a low-demand shelter. It's kind of like a first-step shelter for men on the street who had previously shown a resistance to coming into the shelter system. We tried to bring them into a shelter without placing any kind of demands or requirements on them and tried to work with them while their in shelter to accept long-term programming and long-term counseling. The center is also used to provide a variety of day programs: meals, showers, medical treatment. There's coordination with Thomas Jefferson Hospital for them to provide some on-site medical services. And we have other types of day programs services going on in addition to the emergency shelter.
Okay. Are there 38 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS any questions by Members of the Committee? (No questions from Committee Members at this time.)
Thank you. Are there any persons in the room who wish to be heard with respect to this bill? (No persons come forward at this time.)
Bill No. 970456. An ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property and the Director of Commerce, on behalf of the City, to amend a certain lease agreement dated April 17, 1990, between the City and the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia (herein after referred to as "R.D.A.") wherein the City lease to the R.D.A. for further sublease to Penn's Landing Corporation certain piers and riverbed areas adjacent to Penn's Landing, by adding to the leased premises approximately 1,956 square feet of land located between Piers 25 and 27 North. 39 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS
Good morning, Madam Chairman and Members of the Committee. My name is Ken Sipos. I'm a real estate specialist with the Department of Public Property. The Commissioner of Public Property supports the passage of Bill 970361. The 1956 square feet of land located between Piers and 11 27 North will be leased to the Redevelopment 12 Authority, who, in turn, will sublease it to 13 Penn's Landing Corporation. 14 It's my understanding that the present 15 property has weeds on it, and Penn's Landing 16 intends to clean it up and use it as part of their 17 facility down there. 18 And there is someone here from Penn's 19 Landing, Mr. Cuorato, who I would like to call up 20 at this time. 21
Thank you, Mr. 22 Cuorato. Please join us at the table. 23 (Mr. Cuorato joins others at the 24 table.) 25
Good morning. How 40 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS are you?
Please spell your name for the stenographer and proceed with your testimony.
My name is James Cuorato, C-U-O-R-A-T-O. I'm vice president of Penn's Landing Corporation. I'm just here this morning, Madam Chair and Members of Council, to express the support of Penn's Landing Corporation for Bill No. 970456. As Mr. Sipos testified, this is a small strip of land between Pier 27 North, which is the Parking Authority impoundment lot, which the Penn's Landing Corporation controls, and Pier 25, which some of you may know as "Katmandu," which is privately owned. This strip of land right now is entitled to the City. The purpose of this bill 22 would be to transfer it to Penn's Landing Corporation. We will clean up the site, remove the weeds and trash, fence it and secure it. And it 41 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS will improve the appearance of the waterfront. And, also, we may have the possibility to produce another dozen or so parking spots for that area.
Thank you. I was going to ask you about parking, which is such a great parking there on Penn's Landing. And a dozen more spaces would be helpful while getting rid of an eye sore. Are there any questions by other members of the panel? (No questions from the panel at this time.)
All right. Are there any persons present who wish to be heard on this bill? (No persons come forward at this time.)
There being none, thank you very much. Is this our last bill? There's one more? Read it. Don't read it if we're not 42 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS going to -- Bill No. 970519 has been withdrawn. Are there any other bills?
Bill No. 970545. An ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to enter into a sublease between the City of Philadelphia, as sublessee, and the Philadelphia Parking Authority as sublessor, for a portion of the building located at 3001 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, under certain terms and conditions.
Madam Chairman and Members of the Committee, my name is Ken Sipos. I'm a real estate specialist with the Department of Public Property. The Commissioner of Public Property supports passage of Bill 970545. Portions of 3001 Market Street will be subleased from the Philadelphia Parking Authority who leases from Academic Properties Incorporated for archival records storage. Also available for testimony on this 43 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS are Mr. Al Phelan of the City's Law Department, and Deputy Commissioner David Weinberg from the Records Archives.
Please join us. (Mr. Phelan and Mr. Weinberg come forward.)
Good morning, Madam Chairman. I am Albert F. Phelan, P-H-E-L-A-N, Deputy City Solicitor. And we have reviewed the papers, and the City Solicitor's Department approves the sublease, subject to your approval here, Madam Chairman.
And your testimony with respect to this bill would be for or against?
Good morning, Madam Chairwoman. My name is a David Weinberg. I am the Deputy Commissioner for the Department of Records. My name is spelled W-E-I-N-B-E-R-G. 44 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS
Could we characterize your testimony as being in favor or against the bill?
Thank you. Are there any other persons present who wish to be heard? Mr. Rizzo, would you like to be heard?
Just a quick question. I'm a little confused on exactly what this transaction is. Could you just explain this, what this (inaudible/off mike).
The Philadelphia Parking Authority leases 3001 Market Street from Academic Properties, for a term of approximately -- I believe it's 15 years. And that commenced from the time that they took occupancy, which was within the last three to four months. All their improvements have been completed. 45 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS The improvements that are necessary for the Records Department will be completed by May 1, 1998, and the term of the lease will commence then and expire years from the date that the 6 Philadelphia Parking Authority took possession of 7 their premises. 8 So that the Philadelphia Parking 9 Authority is actually our landlord, but Academic 10 Properties is the owner of the premises, and they 11 will give us a non-disturbance agreement as long 12 as we're there. 13
Thank you. Any 14 further questions? Are there others in many room 15 who wish to be heard for or against this bill? (No further questions.)
Oh, wait a minute, wait a minute. Miss Blackwell has a comment.
Thank you. Certainly we had a meeting recently. We understand that this would consolidate all the 46 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS Parking Authority's space. And, in fact, they have been there already for several months, since the summertime. So certainly, Madam Chair, we're happy to support this bill.
Thank you, thank you very much. Are there other bills before this committee? (No more bills for presentation at this time.)
Then I declare this committee meeting. . . (Discussion among Committee off mike.) The public hearing is closed. We are right now conforming ourselves in the public meeting, and we will now address the bills before us. The committee will entertain motions with respect to Bill No. 970270, Mr. Rizzo. This is a bill introduced by Council Member Anna Verna.
I move to report it out with a favorable recommendation.
Did he ask for a 47 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS suspension of the rules?
Where is he? Do we need a suspension of the rules with respect to 970270?
All right. Then would you add suspension to your motion?
All in favor? Bill No. 970270 has been reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation, 48 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS and that the Rules of Council have been suspended as to permit first reading at the next Stated Session of Council. All those in favor, say aye. Opposes? - - -
Okay, Bill No. 9 970350. This bill is being amended so as to add the new legal description of the property. When the bill is amended, we will then not report it out because we're expecting additional information from the experts. I need a motion to amend.
All in favor? Opposes? Bill No. 970350 has been amended, and it is the rule of the Chair that we will hold and not report this bill out, subject to the receipt of additional information. - - - 49 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS
Madam Chair, I move that 970361 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and for suspension of the rules. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded. All in favor say, aye. Opposes? Bill No. 970361 has been reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendations. Did we suspend the rules?
And with the recommendation that the rules be suspended so as to permit first reading at the next Stated Session of Council. - - -
So moved, Madam Chair. 50 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS
All in favor, say aye. All opposed? Bill No. 970456 has been reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and with the recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at the next Stated Session of Council. - - -
Oh, this one has been withdrawn. 970519 was withdrawn and is not being considered by this committee at all today. - - -
Before us now is Bill No. 970545, 970545. I need a motion.
So moved, Madam Chair. We move that Bill 970545 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation. 51 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS Do we need a suspension, sir?
And with recommendation that the rules be suspended so as to permit first consideration at our next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It's been properly moved that Bill No. 970545 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of council be suspended so as to permit first reading at the next Stated Session of Council. All in favor say aye. Opposed, say no. 17
I'll entertain a motion that this committee meeting be adjourned.
Thank you very much for coming, I appreciate it. Thank you for coming. (Adjourned at 11:10 a.m.) - - - 52 C E R T I F I C A T E I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Wednesday, October 29, 1997 were reported and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of same. RE: COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS __________________________________, JOSEPHINE CARDILLO, RPR