COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING COMMITTEE ON RULES - - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, September 22, 2004 10:00 a.m. - - - - BILL 040611 - An ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land bounded by Lawrence Street, Green Street, 4th Street, Fairmount Avenue, Galloway Street, Green Street, Bodine Street, Fairmount Avenue, American Street, Brown Street, Hancock Street, Fairmount Avenue, Front Street and Spring Garden Street. PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA VERNA, Chair COUNCILMAN DARREL CLARKE, Vice Chair COUNCILMAN JAMES KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO - - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 I N D E X BILL 040611 THOMAS CHAPMAN, Planning Commission.. DEBRA KING, Northern Liberties Neighbors Association ............ 20 3 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611
Good morning, everyone. We would like to start the hearing. This is the public hearing of the Committee on Rules regarding Bill No. 040611. I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of the bill.
An ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land bounded by Lawrence Street, Green Street, 4th Street, Fairmount Avenue, Galloway Street, Green Street, Bodine Street, Fairmount Avenue, American Street, Brown Street, Hancock Street, Fairmount Avenue, Front Street and Spring Garden Street.
Thank you. The record will reflect we do have a quorum. To my extreme left is Councilman Kenney, Councilwoman Brown. To my extreme right is Councilwoman Miller, Councilman Clarke. Mr. Chapman, please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. 4 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611
Good morning, Madam President and Members of the Rules Committee. My name is Thomas Chapman.
Excuse me. Does everyone have a copy of Mr. Chapman's testimony? Was it circulated, Mr. Chapman?
I can't say that it was, Madam President. This bill was only considered by the Planning Commission yesterday afternoon so there may not have been time for to the testimony to have been circulated.
Well, in the future, we would like to have a copy of the testimony 48 hours prior to the hearing. Please proceed.
I am the Director of the Development Planning Division for the City Planning Commission, and I'm here today to testify on Bill No. 040611. Councilmember DiCicco introduced this bill on May 27, 2004. Bill No. 040611 wouold rezone a number of parcels in the area generally 5 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 bounded by Spring Garden Street, Front Street, Brown Street, and Lawrence Street. Currently these properties are zoned C-3 Commercial. This bill would change the zoning of those properties to C-2 Commercial. The primary reason for this change in zoning is that while the uses permitted under the C-3 and C-2 zoning classifications are similar, the permitted building height and density of development permitted under of the two classifications is significantly different. C-3 has no specific building height limitation. Height is controlled only by a floor area ratio requirement. On the other hand, C-2 has a height limitation of 35 feet which is much more consistent with the existing pattern of residential business development in the surrounding community. In 1979 in conjunction with the Northern Liberties Neighborhood Association and the District Council representative, the Planning Commission prepared a zoning re-mapping proposal for the Northern Liberties neighborhood. About 90 percent of the zoning 6 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 in this area prior to that re-mapping was G-2 General Industrial. Various residential, commercial, and industrial zoning classifications were mapped in this neighborhood as a result of that effort. At the time of the re-mapping, there was a thriving wholesale business district in the immediate vicinity of Second Street and Fairmount Avenue. Since C-3 Commercial permits wholesale sales, that classification was used in this area to recognize that fact even though most of the buildings met the requirements of C-2 in terms of density and height, using C-2 would have made all of the wholesale businesses non-conforming uses. Over the years, the wholesale businesses have left this area and have been replaced by retail commercial mixed use and residential uses. The Planning Commission considered this bill at its meeting yesterday afternoon and requested that the bill be held. Members of the commission thought that while C-2 is certainly appropriate for some parcels, there 7 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 may be instances where C-3 is still appropriate. And also the commission thought that -- the commission recommended that this area be considered as part of a zoning re-mapping study for the entire Northern Liberties community. That concludes my testimony. I'd be happy to answer any questions of the Committee.
Well, I think before Committee members start to ask any questions, Councilman DiCicco is the sponsor of the bill and I'd like to know what his position is.
Thank you, Madam Chair, and good morning. This bill was introduced to Northern Liberties Neighborhood Association. It came as a result of concern that they were having about the development that's going on Northern Liberties. We are happy that there is development is occurring, but one of the problems we're having is because much of the land within the Northern Liberties boundaries 8 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 is zoned C-3, as Mr. Chapman's testimony spoke to, a developer can build a building with no 4 height limitation as a matter of right. And we were concerned and the community is concerned that because of the configuration of many of the streets within Northern Liberties, which are very narrow small streets, that high-rise buildings would be offensive to the rest of the community and would not really fit into the streetscape that we're accustomed to in Northern Liberties. My concern with the request of the Planning Commission to table this bill today is -- I have a concern because if we don't do this bill and report it out of Committee today, there's a potential that developers could rush -- there would be a rush, if you will, to take out building permits that will allow for additional high-rise buildings to be built within the Northern Liberties community in addition to the three that have already been permitted by use of a use permit or building permit. In fact, I think as of yesterday, the developer for the three sites 9 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 that raised this concern in the community -- and I only heard this this morning so I don't know if it's accurate -- renewed the building permits yesterday because he understood that this bill was coming out, hopefully out of Committee today. So in essence what we have is a 12-story, a 9-story and 7-story building that are legal to be built within Northern Liberties today and we want to keep that from occurring going forwarding. We're not suggesting that at some point in time or in some particular location within Northern Liberties that the community would not support a building above three stories. What we want is for the community to be part of that process. We don't want it to be as a matter of right. We want for developers have to come back to the community to show the community their plans. And if it's above three stories and it fits within the streetscape of what Northern Liberties accepts, then fine. There may be support for that. But just as a matter of right, we think will be detrimental to the configuration, the 10 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 appearance of Northern Liberties and what Northern Liberties has become. It's one of the hottest neighborhoods in the City of Philadelphia, and we're happy for that. As I said earlier, we're happy that development occurring, but we want to have a say in the process as to the size and scope of future projects. And for the record, I just want to point out, when I introduced this bill or asked the Planning Commission to look at the Northern Liberties community to draft the legislation, they were unaware that what I formerly represented in Northern Liberties I no longer represent in total. Councilmember Clarke has a portion of Northern Liberties. If you look at the existing map, you'll see that little block that runs from Fourth Street to Lawrence along Spring Garden, that technically is within the boundaries of Councilman Clarke's district. So I wanted that for the record. Councilmember Clarke and I had a little discussion earlier and he is okay with that. But the Planning Commission 11 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 didn't realize after the last reapportionment that I no longer went up to Fifth Street. My district at one time went up to Fifth Street but now only goes up to Fourth. If anybody has any questions for me, I'll be glad to answer them.
Thank you, Madam President. As Councilman DiCicco indicated earlier, there is a small portion in this particular proposal that is in my Councilmanic District and I fully support it. In fact, there's a likelihood that we may look at expanding it into other parts of the district that I represent and I'll be looking forward to meeting with the representation of Northern Liberties to discuss that, some form of change in the zoning venue. Councilman, I don't know if I should ask Mr. Chapman or you. With respect to pending legislation, when does that come into play that prohibits pulling of zoning permits or that affects the ability to pull a permit? 12 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611
If this bill is reported out of this Committee this morning, then L&I considers this bill as being law. Once it's reported out favorably by the Rules Committee, it's as if it was the law.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Has anyone notified or will notify L&I that that is in fact the case? One of the concerns I would have is that while policy would indicate that they consider this law, if the developer runs in there this afternoon and gets across the desk something as of right as we speak now, it's going to be a difficult thing to get that back and we'll at least have some litigation that we have to go through, I'm sure, to get it back. Who is the developer or proposed developer?
And those three 13 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 buildings are all the same developer?
I would just urge that someone on staff on Councilman DiCicco or Councilman Clarke's staff get ahold of L&I immediately as soon as we vote on this so somebody doesn't run in there cutesy and grab those papers.
I think my legislative assistant told me that he already talked to Dave Perry about it. But you're absolutely right. I remember in 1989 I came before this council when I was president of the civic association I formed. We were trying to stop a church from being demolished across from Pat's Steaks. And the developers literally ran across the street to pull a permit. And we had some litigation, but in the end we prevailed because it is as Mr. Chapman said, when it's reported out of Committee L&I perceives it to be the law even though we had not taken a final vote by the 14 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 whole council. Because if you didn't do it, dozens of people could be rushing in today pulling permits out.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
Has the City had any prior experience with this developer?
No, Councilman. This is not a problem or concern for the developer. It's a concern for the development of high-rise buildings within Northern Liberties. It has nothing to do with the developer. I know the developer. He's done a number of projects in my district. This is at the request of a neighborhood association. They don't think it's appropriate or feel it's appropriate for a 10, 12, 18, 20 story buildings to be built within Northern Liberties. It just doesn't fit in with the landscape. It's not aesthetically -- it may really set off balance what is there. But the main purpose, as I said 15 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 earlier, is by doing this, there may come a time where a particular project may exceed the height limitation that's in this legislation, but the community will at least be part of the process and they could go to the Zoning Board and maybe support a project that may exceed three stories. But if we don't do this legislation, by a matter of right developers will be able to come in and build buildings as high as they want without any input from the community.
The question I was raising was relevant just to this particular developer. Has the City had any experience with this developer at all? I didn't quite follow your answer to that question. That's the only question I'm raising.
Has the developer had developments? Has he paid his taxes? Is he in good standing? That kind of thing.
My experience 16 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 with this developer is that he will buy land, come up with a project design and then eventually sell that to another developer. He kind of basically goes in, gets the land, does a development scheme, a plan for it, and the term is they flip it. He would flip it out to someone who will actually come along and build it. I don't know him and he may have but in my experience I don't know of him actually doing the actual project, but for designing and putting the deal together, if you will, and then flipping it.
Whatever dealings he's had with the City, what is his record of performance?
I don't know of any problems. As far as I know his record is fine, to the best of my knowledge.
Is there any way of finding out beyond your knowledge? Is there anyway of checking with the City?
If anybody, I guess L&I would be the department probably. But again, he's done a few projects in my 17 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 district where he flipped those projects out. And there's one at Second and Christian. The houses are selling for about $850,000 now and the community is very happy with that project. But he didn't do the actual construction. He bought the land, came up with the design, got all the pieces together under zoning and everything else and then sold the development plan to a builder.
Nothing I said indicates anything that I have that is harmful to the developer. All I'm trying to do is to save the City Council and the developer some embarrassment. If there is a problem in taxes or anything else with the City, it ought to be cleared up. If there is no problem, that's fine and everything you report about them otherwise is excellent. All I'm suggesting is that Council ought to have a procedure in which it goes beyond the testimony of the developer or the knowledge of a Councilmember but we ought to just make sure that the person is not a tax delinquent or has other problems that's not compliant with the laws of the 18 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 City. I have no reason to believe that this developer doesn't meet that test. I'm saying that I think that's a good process for the Council to follow.
Thank you. Councilman DiCicco, you answered my questions I had regarding awareness of the neighborhood association. Shall we assume then they have seen, reviewed and approved the new proposed zoning map?
Yes. To the best of my knowledge, I believe they met with the Planning Commission. Mr. Chapman, I don't know if you were out there, but someone from the Planning Commission.
Yes. Councilwoman, I've discussed this re-mapping or rezoning request with a number of members of the 19 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 community association. In fact, there is a community representative here with us today.
And there is a member of the Northern Liberties Neighborhood Association who is here, and she wishes to testify.
Are there any other questions of Mr. Chapman? (No response.)
Thank you, Mr. Chapman. The record reflect that Councilman O'Neill is also present. I believe we have another witness. I'm sorry I don't know your name. Would you like to come up to testify, please. Good morning. Welcome. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name Debra King, K-I-N-G. I'm the board member of the Northern Liberties Neighbors Association and recording secretary of the Zoning Committee for the neighborhood. Our President, Matt Reuben 20 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 could not be here, but he did write a letter fully supporting this. And Larry Friedman, the head of the Zoning Committee would have loved to have been here to support this. I can assure you that this has the full support of the neighborhood association. And I plead with you, please, to approve this. And I'm delighted that Mr. Chapman said he hopes that this will continue and that there will be a full reevaluation of the zoning situation in Northern Liberties because we desperately need it. I just hope that you support us in that future effort as well because what's happening in our fragile neighborhood which has a lot of young families and people who are really trying to make it a better community, there has been so much development. It's been incredibly disruptive and we need to have just a little control to keep it incorporated into the neighborhood in a reasonable way. We welcome development, but responsible development. And some of the these proposals have been just overwhelming and daunting. So please, my hope is I'll be able to testify in 21 9/22/04 - RULES - BILL 040611 the future for future rezoning efforts.
Thank you very much for your interest in your community and certainly for coming in to testify. And if would give the letter to the Sergeant-at-Arms, we will give it to the stenographer to make it part of the record. Are there any questions of this witness? (No response.)
Thank you again for coming in. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, this will conclude our public hearing. - - - - 22 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC MEETING COMMITTEE ON RULES - - - - Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - - - - Public meeting conducted by the Committee on Rules, held in Room 400, City Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on the above date, to consider action on the following: BILL 040611. PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA VERNA, Chair COUNCILMAN DARREL CLARKE, Vice Chair COUNCILMAN JAMES KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO 23 9/22/04 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING
We will now go into our public meeting. And the Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I move that Bill No. 8 040611 be reported out of Committee with favorable recommendation, and request for suspension of the Rules as to allow reading at the next section. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 15 040611 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, also a recommendation that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Council session. All in favor will indicate by saying aye. (Aye.)
Those oppose? (No response.) 24 9/22/04 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING
The ayes have it, and the motion carries. That concludes our public hearing and meeting. Thank you all very much. (Council adjourned at 10:30.) - - - - 25 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Wednesday, September 22, 2004, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. RE: COMMITTEE ON RULES _________________________ Lisa C. Bradley, RPR