I'm going to do13 the majority of the testimony, and both14 Mr. Lombardo and Mr. Sklaroff are here15 assuming you're going to have some16 questions.17
Okay.18 Fine.19 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: So you get20 nine minutes?21
If I could have22 nine minutes, that would be great. That23 would be great.24 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:25 235 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Please identify yourself, Craig, for the2 record.3
7 I appear before you today in my capacity8 as Executive Director of the Development9 Workshop, along with Richard Lombardo,10 long-time zoning expert and former11 Executive Director of the City Planning12 Commission, and Neil Sklaroff, noted13 zoning attorney in Philadelphia. 19 And so in the audience previously and20 some still are people from Ballard Spahr,21 Brandywine Realty Trust, Jerry Sweeney22 from whom you heard earlier, Tony Rimikis23 of his staff is still here, Econsult24 Corporation, the James J. Anderson25 236 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 24 Given the added complexity of25 237 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 the proposed zoning process, the length2 and total rewrite of the current Code3 comes at a time of enormous uncertainty4 in the economy in general and the real5 estate and investment industries in6 particular. With small exceptions, as7 Mr. Gattuso and Mr. Sweeney indicated8 today, we are aware of our city's lack of9 competitiveness in the marketplace due to10 high costs and low rents. We are also11 aware of the neighborhood concerns12 expressed by Councilman Green and O'Neill13 which led to the adoption of the Minority14 Report by the Zoning Code Commission. We15 share their view that certain16 well-intentioned additions to the17 allowable uses in the residential18 districts and the commercial strips that19 abut them in fact create fear, legitimate20 concerns and uncertainty in these mature21 neighborhoods. And from direct22 experience, I know how long the remapping23 of neighborhoods will take beyond any24 City Council action on this proposed Code25 238 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 2 We wish to commend Councilman3 Green on his ten-point amendment4 proposal. 10 How to make the new Code work11 for Philadelphia: The members of the12 Development Workshop have worked through13 various drafts and modules, met with14 representatives of the Zoning Code15 Commission and consulted with Workshop16 members to understand how the new17 provisions would impact development in18 the City. We have tried to identify19 major issues that need to be resolved in20 the draft. A favorable resolution of21 these issues would not adversely impact22 any of the goals in the draft. Once23 these issues are resolved, the Workshop24 will be in a position to support the25 239 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 2 One, assuring an as-of-right3 code: Land owners, investors, tenants4 need to know up front what can be built5 without exorbitant costs. A, the design6 standards in Section 703 and subsequent7 are requirements that impose inordinate8 investment in design that burden the9 developers seeking an as-of-right permit10 and invite unnecessary trips to the11 Zoning Board for relief from what are12 essentially aesthetic values. I give you13 two examples here in that two properties14 that Liberty Property developed, both the15 Comcast Tower and their new SmithKline16 building at the Navy Yard. In both those17 instances, if this code had been adopted,18 those projects would not have been a19 matter of right. 23 The costs associated with the24 basic application for the initial permit25 240 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 are prohibitive, a show-stopper, with the2 Section 700 requirements and sky plane3 computations. The advantage of the4 current as-of-right code is that land5 owners, investors, lenders and tenants6 know what can be built. 10 Changes in design resolving11 from the Civic Design Review or the12 normal process of development could13 trigger a need for zoning relief from14 Section 700, placing them before the15 Zoning Board again for essentially16 aesthetic concerns. 23 This was done at the last minute without24 any dialogue, which leaves the25 241 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 development community at a loss to the2 thinking behind this change. As a3 solution, we have stated many times4 before that design standards are5 something that we support, but those6 should be placed in a manual that informs7 the civic design process.
10 Two, accepted plans: An11 accepted plan is not an amendment to the12 comprehensive plan. The new Code should13 not authorize the Planning Commission or14 any other agency to give weight to plans15 not adopted by the Commission, nor should16 such a plan be a policy guidance17 document. 22 Third, clarity: In order to23 preserve the clarity of one of the24 initial drafts, we recommended that25 242 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 dimensions should follow substantive2 provisions in the use charts, and3 definitions and use categories should be4 contained in the same sections. 24 Four, Delaware River25 243 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Conservation Overlay District: The2 Delaware River Conservation Overlay3 District, the North Delaware from4 Allegheny Avenue to the County Line has5 been revised from the existing zoning6 code to remove City Council from the use7 approval process. Taking Council out of8 the process will no longer assure owners9 and operators of existing industrial10 facilities along this portion of the11 riverfront a thorough and comprehensive12 review of their proposal. 14 Five, the Central Delaware15 Waterfront Overlay District: Without the16 completion of the master plan currently17 underway by the Delaware River Waterfront18 Corporation, the DRWC, and no draft of a19 proposed new zoning ordinance, land20 owners have no clear idea of what to21 expect, nor do land owners and the public22 have a clear idea of the level of public23 infrastructure that will be provided to24 support investment. The current zoning25 244 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 8 And the reason that this is critical here9 is, this is, as we see it, a major10 initiative on the part of the City to11 move forward pushing water development to12 the Central Delaware waterfront, an13 anticipated $771 million project. 20 What you have in this proposed21 Code is a one-line overlay, with no22 description whatsoever, and that if in23 fact this is going to become the priority24 with the Mayor and with City Council, for25 245 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 7 Center City Overlay: The 1258 foot height limitation in portions of9 Center City West of necessity drives10 otherwise compliant projects to City11 Council for special legislative relief or12 the Zoning Board for dimensional relief,13 which is a barrier to outside investment14 in the City. 19 And an example here, we support20 the notion of what the Commission has21 done in terms of suggesting higher22 density near transit nodes. However,23 within one block of the Market Street24 East Station, there are limits which25 246 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 exclude the Girard Estate properties from2 benefiting in this extra density. 13 Sky plane: The proposed sky14 plane regulations are difficult to15 administer, appear arbitrary and16 confusing and would have precluded some17 of the best mid and high rise towers18 built in Center City over the last 4019 years. I would include here the Comcast20 Tower, which would have required a21 variance, the Bell Atlantic building,22 which would have required a variance, the23 entire 1600 block of Walnut Street, which24 would have required a variance. And we25 247 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 13 Point 8, Historical Commission:14 The Historical Commission is the15 authoritative, legislative and16 administrative agency to enforce the17 Historic Preservation Ordinance, which is18 part of the Zoning Code. We have long19 advocated making the Commission an agency20 of record, with sworn testimony, a21 transcript of the proceedings and formal22 decisions. Appeals would go to the Court23 of Common Pleas rather than the Board of24 License and Inspection Review, but we25 248 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 15
Thank16 you.17 Are there any questions?18 The Chair recognizes Councilman19 Green.20
Thank you.21 Mr. Sklaroff, just very22 quickly, did you hear my question to23 Mr. Primavera about special exceptions24 and Bray? Have you read my suggestion,25 249 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 and do you think that the way we2 described the changes that need to be3 made to the way special exception is4 described in the new Code is appropriate5 or not?6
As I understand7 your suggestion is that the Code should8 reflect the law that follows Bray as to9 what the relative burdens in proving or10 disproving the need for a special11 exception, and I would support that. I12 was pleased to be part of the Bar13 Association committee that met in14 dialogue with the Zoning Code Commission15 and the Law Department, and in the three16 meetings we had, at each time we brought17 up the revisions that were made to not18 only the special exception criteria, but19 also the variance criteria and attempted20 to have it revised to reflect Bray.21 Obviously each revision did not22 accomplish what we had hoped and we23 brought it up again. We think the24 current iteration of what they believe25 250 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 the standard to be to still be off mark,2 and rather than putting all of the cited3 burdens that had been previously in our4 Code upon the protestants or objectors,5 that it should be shared as it was6 articulated by the appellate courts in7 Bray.8
Thank you.9 Could one of you please10 describe the sort of problem with the11 existing Central Delaware overlay? The12 Code -- the new Code is intended to13 promote development and certainty, and it14 seems to me you have identified two15 overlays that create a problem for16 certainty or knowing how to develop17 dollars or getting investment into the18 City of Philadelphia, and it doesn't19 appear that there's a clear timeline to20 end that uncertainty.21 So would your recommendation be22 then to have automatic conversion apply23 in those areas also and then whatever is24 of right is of right until there's a25 251 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 remapping that has a thoughtful planning2 process associated with it?3
Yes, we would.4 That we think would be the best solution,5 but we're also in the process of giving6 detailed comments to the Delaware River7 Waterfront Corporation in terms of,8 again, a way that we can incorporate some9 of the planning goals that they have, but10 to try and make them more realistic and11 practical as opposed to aspirational.12 And they have stated in their plan13 that -- which, again, we have supported,14 that they want to put focused15 infrastructure improvements, $65 million16 I believe is the figure, as soon as17 possible to prime the pump to have18 development take place in certain places.19 We've asked them, can you tell us what20 those projects are so that adjacent land21 owners can see what the focus is going to22 be and then to assess how realistic it is23 that those funds in fact will be24 recommended by the Planning Commission in25 252 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 their capital budget and program,2 supported by City Council in their budget3 actions, so you can assess what is4 realistic versus what is unrealistic.5 There are portions of that plan6 that talk about an area to be developed7 25 years hence and zoning mechanisms that8 will deal with an area when it gets9 developed 25 years hence. If you're a10 land owner, you don't want to know what11 you can do 25 years from now. You want12 to know what you can do now, and that's13 what we don't know right now.14 The response that we have15 gotten from them is that they're16 interested in opening a dialogue with at17 least one land owner and the --18
But that's a19 negotiated, behind-the-scenes,20 who-you-know process that we're trying to21 avoid, isn't it?22
This is in23 response to the master plan which their24 Board is going to consider approving I25 253 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 believe on the 28th of October, and we're2 trying to simply get them input so that3 they know what a large stakeholder's4 opinion would be.5
And does6 that master plan create a zoning map or7 zoning designations?8
No. It has not9 yet, and that's what we're saying. They10 have said we're making general comments11 about zoning, but that zoning has not yet12 happened yet.13
So it's all14 in theory and none of it will be applied15 in the ground and they don't want to16 apply it on the ground until there's 6517 million approved by City Council in the18 capital planning process, which means19 that money won't be spent for at least20 three or four years. And so you're21 talking about restricting development and22 land owners' use of their property for23 three or four years. Do we have a24 regulatory taking problem here?25 254 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591
Yes. What we2 don't know right now -- and this3 corporation can approve whatever plan4 they want to approve, but what will5 happen is that the plan will then be sent6 to the City Planning Commission for7 adoption, and when that plan goes for8 adoption, it becomes part of the9 comprehensive plan and --10
That's correct,13 but it provides an underlying basis on14 which to then do the zoning. And if you15 look in the draft Zoning Code that you16 have before you, it's one line. It just17 says Central Delaware District Overlay.18 That's it. That's it today.19
Thank22 you.23 Do we have any other questions24 from members of the Committee?25 255 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 (No response.)2 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:3 Gentlemen, thank you very much.4 (Thank you.)5 MR. McPHERSON: Our next6 committee is James White, Gina Snyder,7 Shanta Schacter and John Chin.8 (Witnesses approached witness9 table.)10
Good afternoon and11 thank you for the opportunity to testify.12 My name is James White and I am the13 Policy Coordinator of the Philadelphia14 Association of Community Development15 Corporations. PACDC is a citywide16 association of more than 90 community17 development corporations and other18 organizations that have extensive19 experience developing property and20 improving the quality of life of their21 neighborhoods.22 PACDC appreciates the Zoning23 Code Commission developing a thoughtful24 plan to bring Philadelphia's current25 256 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Zoning Code into the 21st century. PACDC2 also applauds City Council's engagement3 in this process and the opportunity for4 dialogue around a variety of specific5 issues that have been identified.6 PACDC encourages City Council7 to work with the Zoning Code Commission8 to quickly resolve these issues so that a9 new Zoning Code can be approved this10 calendar year.11 Our members look forward to the12 opportunity to proactively help shape the13 future of their neighborhoods and future14 development through the related district15 planning process.16 In order for Philadelphia to17 succeed and healthy and vibrant18 neighborhoods to flourish, we need19 implementation of the new Zoning Code in20 the near future that will facilitate new21 restaurants and other small businesses to22 open on our neighborhood commercial23 corridors, homeowners fixing up their24 homes, developers building on vacant land25 257 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 and to attract new businesses to2 Philadelphia.3 PACDC looks forward to the4 opportunity to continuing to work with5 the City to advance the new Zoning Code6 that will address resident and community7 needs and result in stronger8 neighborhoods throughout Philadelphia.9
Hi. My name is12 Shanta Schacter. I'm the Deputy Director13 of the New Kensington CDC. Thank you for14 giving us the opportunity to testify.15 New Kensington CDC is a non-profit16 organization dedicated to revitalizing17 the Kensington, Fishtown and Port18 Richmond neighborhoods of Philadelphia.19 Our mission is to strengthen the20 physical, social and economic fabric of21 the community by being a catalyst for22 sustainable development and community23 building.24 Since our inception in 1985, we25 258 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 have been working with various members of2 the community on zoning-related issues.3 In areas where there's representation by4 civic organizations, we work side by side5 with them, including the Fishtown6 Neighbors Association, East Kensington7 Neighbors Association and the Old8 Richmond Civic Association. Our9 territory of concern is largely the 1912510 and 34 zip codes.11 I'll be brief, since I know12 that you would prefer that we be brief,13 but we've written more extensive14 testimony.15 We would also like to see this16 plan pass in this calendar year. We feel17 like there's been extensive community18 engagement and opportunity to provide19 input by members of our community.20 We've also developed a very21 strong relationship with the Planning22 Commission and have full confidence that23 we'll be able to work through any service24 gaps between the passing of this Code and25 259 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 any remapping that's needed.2 It's critical that we have this3 in place, because we have an antiquated4 zoning in the neighborhood, and this has5 prevented small businesses from opening6 up. It's put a lot of the burden of7 going through zoning on community members8 and, in particular, volunteer community9 members.10 One particular example is that11 Frankford Avenue, which is our primary12 commercial corridor, is zoned13 residential. We feel like this Zoning14 Code will start to alleviate some of15 those issues.16 Thank you.17
Thank18 you. And you said you have further19 testimony?20
If22 you give a copy of the testimony, we will23 give it to the stenographer.24
Madam President, I25 260 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 believe we gave it to the2 Sergeant-At-Arms.3 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:4 Great. So your testimony will be5 transcribed in full. Thank you.6
Good8 afternoon. Please identify yourself for9 the record.10
My name is Xin Ge and11 I'm giving the testimony of John Chin,12 who regretfully could not be here in13 person to testify.14 Dear Madam President and15 members of City Council, good afternoon16 and thank you for the opportunity to17 testify today. My name is John Chin and18 I am the Executive Director of the19 Philadelphia Chinatown Development20 Corporation, PCDC. PCDC is a21 community-based organization which22 represents Chinatown in matters of zoning23 and planning. In addition, we provide24 much support to the residents and small25 261 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 businesses through our development of2 affordable and market-rate housing,3 retail development and commercial4 corridor services.5 We look forward to the passing6 of the new Zoning Code and the subsequent7 remapping of our neighborhood, Chinatown.8 Philadelphia needs a new Zoning9 Code. Presently one can find instances10 in which regulated uses are outdated and11 not relevant. The Code can be daunting12 for the businessperson or homeowner. The13 lack of clear rules deters small14 businesses from opening on our15 neighborhood commercial corridors and16 homeowners from fixing up their houses.17 The lack of clarity also increases costs.18 These are the problems that we see when19 people seek help.20 The new Code tells every21 developer or homeowner making an22 improvement to his or her property23 exactly what is allowed and what is24 prohibited. Having clear rules,25 262 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 developed ahead of time with community2 input, is a far more effective way of3 ensuring good development than efforts to4 stop or change development after it has5 been approved.6 The new Code defines a formal7 role for community in the development8 process. For the first time, there is a9 mandate that developers must notify and10 meet with community groups about large11 development projects planned in or12 adjacent to residential areas and13 projects that do not comply with the14 Zoning Code.15 For these reasons, we support16 the passing of the Zoning Code.17 Thank you.18
Thank19 you very much.20 Are there any questions from21 members of the Committee?22 (No response.)23 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:24 Seeing none, again I thank you.25 263 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Our next panel.2 MR. McPHERSON: Penelope Giles,3 Christine Knapp and Joe Schiavo.4 (Witness approached witness5 table.)6 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:7 You've been very patient and I thank you.8
Thank you.9 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:10 Please identify yourself for the record11 and proceed with your testimony.12
My name is Joe13 Shiavo and I'm here on behalf of the Old14 City Civic Association. Thank you for15 the opportunity.16 I understand that Christine17 Knapp, who is to be part of this panel,18 is running a little bit late and maybe19 she'll arrive before I finish. But I20 will make it brief.21 My first point is a small,22 fine-grained point, and OCCA has sent a23 letter to members of Council, and I have24 a copy of that letter here for25 264 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 distribution. And in our letter we're2 requesting that use table included in the3 proposed new Code, Use Table 14-502(2) be4 left intact. Supporting OCCA's expressed5 position, several Old City residents and6 businessowners have also written Council7 making the same request.8 Use Table 14-502(2) as it9 appears in the new Code includes certain10 provisions of the existing Old City11 overlay and it continues those particular12 provisions that we think remain vitally13 important to appropriate and positive14 development in Old City. So we ask that15 you, the Council, leave that particular16 use table as it applies to the Old City17 residential districts unchanged.18 Second, on behalf of the Old19 City Civic Association, I wish to express20 our support of Councilman Green's21 memorandum of September 7th wherein22 Councilman Green outlines and details his23 ten-point proposal of recommendations and24 amendments to the preliminary draft Code.25 265 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 We acknowledge that each point of2 Councilman Green's memo is offered as3 subject to improvement by additional4 input from Council, the Administration,5 the ZCC and hopefully the public, and we6 support the principles and points of7 Councilman Green's proposal.8 And my last point is regarding9 special exceptions. Special exception10 uses in the new Code, replacing the11 certificate use category of the current12 Code, is a lower regulatory standard when13 compared with variance uses, and it14 presents unintended consequences by15 unlimited concentration of uses, normally16 innocuous uses made noxious by17 unrestricted concentration. Ideally, our18 new Code would include some form of19 citywide, across-the-board aggregation or20 distancing standards to control the21 concentration of any one or all of these22 such uses. All of these uses are assumed23 to carry some detrimental impact on the24 host community. Otherwise, they would be25 266 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 permitted by right. And most2 communities - residential, mixed-use3 residential and commercial - may find4 such uses perfectly acceptable, but would5 they find any one of these uses or all of6 these uses in concentrations of 10 or 207 acceptable or appropriate to the8 developmental direction of that9 particular community? I think not.10 There is no control of the11 concentration of these uses in a12 community. And, for instance, in the13 example of a residential community that14 is mixed use to the degree that allows15 any commercial uses by special exception,16 the community can change, one parcel17 after another. That residential18 community could become overly19 commercialized, because there are no20 aggregation controls.21 So I strongly recommend that22 Council accept the recommendations for23 distancing and aggregation that are24 included within the Crosstown Coalition's25 267 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 paper submitted to Council earlier today.2 Thank you.3
Thank4 you.5 Are there any questions from6 members of the Committee?7 (No response.)8
By your lead, Madam11 Chair, I just wanted to say that we had12 one of our members of our panel, Gina13 Snyder, had to leave because of other14 business, but she did submit written15 testimony just for the record. Thank16 you.17
Fine.18 Did the stenographer get a copy of that?19
I gave it to the20 Sergeant-At-Arms. I believe she did.21 Thank you.22
Thank23 you very much.24 MR. McPHERSON: Our next panel25 268 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 consists of Janet Milkman, Leanne2 Kruger-Braneky and Lauren Bornfriend.3 (No response.)4
Are5 they here?6 (No response.)7 MR. McPHERSON: Marion Brown,8 Leslie Benoliel, Christie Balka and Alan9 Rubin.10 (Witnesses approached witness11 table.)12
Good afternoon.15 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:16 Please identify yourself for the record17 and proceed with your testimony.18
Thank you. My name19 is Marion Brown. I speak on behalf of20 the child care community of the21 Neighborhood Interfaith Movement, a22 one-stop shop for child care licensing23 information in Philadelphia, and of the24 Southeast Pennsylvania Early Childhood25 269 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Coalition, also known as SEPECC. Thank2 you, Chairwoman Council Verna and other3 Councilmembers, for this opportunity to4 speak today.5 I speak in support of moving6 forward with the proposed new Zoning Code7 at this time. When the existing Code was8 written in the 1930s and again when it9 was revised in the 1960s, child care and10 many programs for young children as we11 know them today were not happening. We12 are pleased that the proposed new Zoning13 Code fully incorporates child day care14 and also distinguishes it from adult day15 care. We appreciate that the proposed16 new Code is aligned for consistency and17 definitions with the state regulations.18 It also clarifies child care as a matter19 of right in recreation centers, schools,20 houses of worship, and we appreciate this21 fact.22 We do have issues with the lack23 of uniformity on child care in schools,24 recreation centers, et cetera. Still, we25 270 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 urge you to move forward with the Code at2 this time. There are some additional3 areas of concern for the child care4 community which we encourage you to also5 address in the process of moving the Code6 forward.7 We support the amendment or the8 suggestions made by Councilwoman Brown9 that would change child care from an "N,"10 not prohibited use in many districts to11 an "S," special exception use. We12 support this variation which fully13 incorporates into the future Code14 neighborhood and councilmanic input into15 any request for variances for special16 exceptions in these districts.17 In the C-1 districts, child18 care is limited to 12 children. In the19 interest of cutting down on unnecessary20 ZBA appeals, we urge that this number21 limit be dropped, because state22 regulations already limit the number of23 children based on square footage. This24 provides a built-in protection for the25 271 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 community in the state regulations, which2 should be sufficient. The time of the3 ZBA is too valuable to require4 unnecessary appeals.5 We support uniformity in the6 Code and believe uniformity would7 simplify and improve the readability of8 the Code, as stated in the original goals9 of the Zoning Code Commission. I refer10 specifically to the four-to-six carve-out11 issue covered in Area Maps and 2, as12 noted on Pages 630 through 633. We13 believe the use of wards and portions of14 wards and divisions to determine how many15 children a person can care for in her own16 home is an administrative nightmare, a17 major headache for L&I and an18 impenetrable complication for providers.19 It fails to accomplish one of the initial20 ZCC, Zoning Code Commission, goals, to21 make the Code consistent and easy to22 understand. We hope you will work to23 create more uniformity within the Code24 and eliminate the need for Area Maps 125 272 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 and 2.2 All of this being noted, I3 continue to urge City Council to move4 forward with the Code at this time,5 preferably with these modifications being6 suggested.7 Thank you for your time.8
Good afternoon. 15 As you know, for more than a16 quarter century, PCCY has been worked to17 improved the lives and life chances of18 Philadelphia's youngest residents, and19 before I begin my formal remarks, I just20 want to thank you for fitting this topic21 in to your busy fall agenda. 24 PCCY takes a strong interest in25 273 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 the proposed Zoning Code, because2 children need safe, well-designed places3 to play and learn before, during and4 after school. 8 They need playgrounds and recreation9 centers, after-school programs and other10 safe places to go while their parents are11 at work. 15 The Zoning Code ensures that we16 have an adequate supply of these and also17 that they're located in areas that are18 accessible to the families that need19 them. Moreover, compliance with the20 Zoning Code is a first step that21 child-serving organizations need to take22 in order to begin to meet basic health23 and safety requirements. Without zoning24 approval, these organizations can't begin25 274 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 2 Unlicensed child care is a big3 problem in Philadelphia. Thousands of4 kids spend their day in places that are5 never inspected to make sure they don't6 have exposed wires, leaky pipes and7 leaking roofs. 11 Some unlicensed child care programs don't12 have working fire extinguishers or smoke13 alarms. 23 Through research on reasons for24 this city's unlicensed child care, PCCY25 275 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 learned a number of years ago that2 Philadelphia's Zoning Code is difficult3 and confusing for child care providers to4 understand and is often interpreted in5 arbitrary fashion. Being turned down by6 the Zoning Board doesn't discourage them7 from opening. 9 The proposed revisions are a10 major step in the right direction. They11 respond to the needs of today's families12 and the reality that three-quarters of13 Philadelphia's children now have what the14 census terms "all parents" in the15 workforce. The revisions recognize that16 different families have different child17 care needs and preferences. They also18 recognize that the School District relies19 on partnerships with over 9020 community-based organizations to provide21 pre-K and after-school programs to22 thousands of children each day. Far from23 making it easier to open a child care24 program, as Councilwoman Tasco worried25 276 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 4 The proposed revisions will5 serve Philadelphia well as we enter a6 period of transition caused by the School7 District selling 50 schools and the need8 to relocate the child care programs that9 are in them. 16 Having said this, the Code17 contains exceptions to the definition of18 family child care in Council Districts 619 and 10. 23 The proposed carve-outs perpetuate the24 shortage and harm children. PCCY urges25 277 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 4 Young families revitalize5 cities. Parents decide where to live6 based on opportunities for their7 children, and employers decide where to8 locate based on their ability to attract9 and retain employees. 19 Change is never easy, but we believe20 we've had plenty of time as a city to21 consider this and it's time to take the22 next step. PCCY urges you to resist the23 temptation to create special carve-outs24 for any district and to approve the25 278 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 3
My name is Alan11 Rubin and I am Chairman of the Zoning12 Committee of the Spring Garden Civic13 Association, a position I've held for 4414 years. I'm also President this year once15 again.16 I'm here to speak of one thing.17 We are a historic district and have been18 for some time, and we've developed areas19 from 24th Street down just about to Broad20 Street, and Broad Street is now being21 developed from Spring Garden to22 Fairmount. Within that area, there are23 approximately 20 vacant in-fill lots that24 have been empty for some time. The25 279 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 zoning proposal incorporates the existing2 Historic Preservation Ordinance.3 Unfortunately, the present ordinance --4 if a lot has been in existence for a5 period of time preceding the historic6 designation, which was about 15 years7 ago, the Historic Commission really has8 no say in what the building looks like9 that goes in there. And these are all10 house fronts. PHA owns lots they've11 owned for many years. They're apparently12 going to sell those. We have no idea13 without controls what will go in there.14 There are blocks that are 42 feet high,15 the buildings are 42 feet high. There's16 no regulation presently that would17 provide mandatory building of a building18 so the roof lines would be level19 throughout the block. So if there's a20 vacant lot in that block, someone can21 build a two-story building. They could22 build a three-story building. They could23 have the windows in different proportions24 to what's there. Just imagine a25 280 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 hypothetical, the 1800 block of Delancey2 Street, it had a vacant lot for 50 years.3 Someone could go in there and build a4 two-story building. It would destroy the5 looks of that block. And we have 15 or6 so empty lots in historic blocks. And I7 believe that the Historic Commission8 should have control over what goes in9 there in terms of its appearance, in10 terms of its contextual nature and it11 should look like it belongs there.12 Under the present ordinance,13 they only have basically advice, but they14 have no control. There's basically a15 30-day delay and they will get the permit16 to build a two-story house or to build a17 PermaStone front or to build anything18 they choose. And right now we're19 getting -- we're under a lot of pressure20 from developers and there are some lots21 that are owned by speculators, and this22 is an imminent danger to us.23 Thank you very much for your24 attention. I appreciate it. Thank you.25 281 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591
Good afternoon,4 Council President Verna and members of5 City Council. My name was added to the6 list late. My name is Rasheedah Phillips7 and I'm an attorney at Community Legal8 Services in the Community Economic9 Development Unit working on the Child10 Care Law Project. 21 My colleagues and I have attended nearly22 all of the ZCC meetings, have provided23 input at community meetings and have made24 extensive recommendations to the ZCC that25 282 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 6 Throughout the reformation process, the7 ZCC has recognized the use of fair land8 use regulations to the establishment of9 quality child care programs, has heard10 our concerns and has taken the vital step11 of including child care into the Code in12 a meaningful way. The new Code inclusion13 of child care makes sense at a time of14 decreased funding for education and15 economic development. 19 The draft Code, in its present20 form, includes clear definitions of child21 care that are more consistent with state22 regulations; recognition of child care23 programs as public, civic and24 institutional uses that provide unique25 283 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 services that are of benefit to the2 community as a whole; and clarifies the3 use of recreation centers, schools,4 religious institutions and other5 facilities for child care use. Many of6 the barriers that once stood in the way7 of creating child care programs bound by8 zoning regulations have largely been9 eliminated, and the Code is now much more10 accessible and user friendly for11 providers who rely on zoning to increase12 the economic resources in their13 neighborhoods and provide child care to14 families. 16 However, despite the17 significant progress that the Code has18 made with child care issues, there19 remains some inconsistencies in lingering20 areas of concern. 22 We urge you to make group and23 center day care a special exception use24 in all zoning districts, similar to the25 284 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 special exception use status granted to2 religious institutions, schools and3 libraries. Just to be clear, we are not4 asking for expanded uses, and day cares5 do not typically threaten health, safety6 or welfare of communities. 9 We are asking that you10 eliminate the up to 12 children11 limitation for C-1 properties. Many12 properties in Philadelphia are large13 enough to accommodate child care for 1314 or more children. 24 Often families living in apartment25 285 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 3 Restricting child care as a use within4 multi-family dwellings deny these5 families the opportunity to use local,6 familiar, community-based child care. 23 All of these suggestions would24 help to cut back on unnecessary appeals25 286 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 25 287 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591
Thank2 you.3 Are there any questions of4 these witnesses?5 (No response.)6 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:7 Seeing none, I thank you very much.8 Thank you.9 Before our next witness is10 called, before I forget, I know that we11 have a letter here from the Committee of12 Seventy, which will be made part of the13 record.14 Our next panel.15 MR. McPHERSON: Christine16 Knapp, Janet Milkman, Leanne17 Kruger-Braneky or Lauren Bornfriend.18 (Witnesses approached witness19 table.)20
Good21 afternoon. Please identify yourself for22 the record.23
24 I'm Christine Knapp. I'm the President25 288 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 of the Board of Passyunk Square Civic2 Association. Passyunk Square serves the3 area from Washington Avenue to Tasker4 Street between 6th and Broad Streets in5 South Philadelphia. 12 PSC has many active committees13 and projects. Among them are14 Beautification, Communications, Town15 Watch, Planning, Fundraising, Education16 and Zoning. Of those committees, the17 Zoning Committee carries out one of the18 most important functions of our civic19 association in helping us to meet our20 mission. The Zoning Committee holds21 monthly meetings to review, monitor and22 effect positive change to proposed zoning23 applications made in our stated24 boundaries. The Zoning Committee25 289 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 4 In 2005, we signed on as a5 supporter of the Next Great City agenda,6 which included a recommendation that the7 City's Zoning Code be modernized and8 updated. 16 After following the work of the17 Zoning Code Commission over the past few18 years, we would like to commend and thank19 the hard-working members of the ZCC, as20 well as others who have helped advance21 this important effort. 25 290 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 First, the proposed Code2 formalizes the role that community groups3 like ours should play in reviewing and4 approving development in our5 neighborhood. The new Code requires6 developers to notify registered community7 groups about the project and to meet with8 them. Until now, the onus was on our9 group to seek out development projects in10 our neighborhood. This process should11 help our Zoning Committee and ensure good12 communications with developers. 19 The updated draft provides clear rules on20 building height and setback and also21 establishes a Civic Design Review22 Committee to ensure that major projects23 are developed in a way that enhances24 rather than harms quality of life in the25 291 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 neighborhood. Passyunk Square has seen2 several such projects proposed in our3 neighborhood where a clear process to4 engage the developers, community members5 and design professionals would have been6 helpful. 12 Next, we support the updates13 that have been included to help modernize14 and simplify the Code so that it is a15 more useful, understandable and relevant16 tool for us to use. The new Code defines17 new types of uses, such as community18 gardens, that didn't exist in the 1950s19 so that they may be appropriately20 recognized and regulated. With two21 community gardens in our boundaries and22 plans to bring on more in the future,23 this is one clear example of how this new24 Code can help make things easier for our25 292 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 2 The new Code is also simpler3 and easier to read so that members of our4 Zoning Committee, our Board and any other5 concerned citizen would be able to read6 and understand it and apply it to our7 community. 10 Lastly, we are glad to see that11 the updated Code supports additional but12 appropriate growth. While our13 neighborhood has seen a tremendous14 rebirth over the past few decades with15 two booming commercial corridors,16 affordable and steady home sales and a17 diversity of residents, there are still18 many abandoned homes and empty lots in19 our community. In the majority of cases,20 the best use for these lots is for them21 to be developed. 24 The new Code provides clear rules and25 293 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 4 In addition, there are a few5 additional suggestions we would like to6 make. While an updated Code will go a7 long way, changes should also be made to8 the Zoning Board of Adjustment's process9 and procedures to make it more10 transparent and easier for community11 groups to engage. 16 These meetings are also held during17 regular work hours, putting a burden on18 community members who want to attend and19 preventing many others from20 participating.
After decisions are made,21 there's no easy and clear method by which22 the decisions are communicated back to23 the community so that they can easily24 track these results. In this day and25 294 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 5 The Civic Association Zoning6 Committee has experienced several7 problems where our letters stating either8 our opposition or non-opposition have not9 shown up at the ZBA hearing. We send our10 letters to the ZBA, to the attorney of11 the developer, to the Planning12 Commission, to our District Councilman13 and others, and we confirm receipt. 25 295 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591
Thank2 you.3 Good afternoon. Please4 identify yourself for the record.5
Good6 afternoon. Leanne Kruger-Braneky,7 Executive Director of the Sustainable8 Business Network of Greater Philadelphia.9 I'm pleased to submit this10 testimony in support of the Zoning Code11 Commission preliminary report to City12 Council presented in May 2011. I speak13 on behalf of the Sustainable Business14 Network of Greater Philadelphia, a15 500-member non-profit business16 organization that brings together local17 businessowners who want to grow18 successful companies that are socially19 and environmentally responsible. I urge20 City Council to adopt the recommendations21 of the Zoning Code Commission as22 presented originally in May. The Zoning23 Code Commission is to be applauded for24 its intensive three-year process to draft25 296 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 an updated, sensible and fair Zoning2 Code, which pays special attention to the3 places where the current 50-year-old4 Zoning Code is having a negative effect5 on our businesses and residents.6 At the Sustainable Business7 Network, there are two main reasons why8 we support the recommendations in the9 preliminary report. First, they will10 make it easier for the City to realize11 its goal of becoming the greenest city in12 the country. The revised Code makes it13 easier for neighborhoods, residents and14 businesses to put sustainable practices15 in place. For example, in Kensington and16 Mount Airy, Germantown and West17 Philadelphia, urban farms have become18 true treasures in their neighborhoods.19 These farms are creating new jobs,20 educating youth and providing healthy,21 affordable food for their communities.22 Under the current Zoning Code, however,23 there's no zoning for urban agriculture.24 Without being zoned as farms, these25 297 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 properties are vulnerable.2 In another example,3 Philadelphia has recognized the value of4 alternative energy as a way to create new5 jobs, protect the environment and to save6 money. But the current Zoning Code7 limits energy production to industrial8 districts alone, making it harder to9 place solar panels and wind turbines in10 other areas of the City.11 The second reason why the12 Sustainable Business Network supports the13 Zoning Code is that it will make it14 easier for small businesses to do15 business in the City of Philadelphia.16 Through recent interviews and surveys17 with over 100 small businessowners, we've18 discovered that they are overwhelmed and19 often derailed by the difficulty of doing20 business in the City. The current Code21 contributes to this challenge. The22 existence of 36 different zoning overlays23 makes it virtually impossible for a24 business to know where it can locate.25 298 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Businesses often need to spend the money2 to hire a lawyer to interpret conflicting3 and confusing provisions, and4 Philadelphia's sign requirements are so5 complex and inconsistent that it often6 takes weeks and hundreds of dollars in7 fees just for a business to get approval8 to hang a sign.9 Furthermore, 52 percent of10 small businesses in Philadelphia are11 currently home based, yet under the12 current Code these businesses are13 technically illegal, but they are14 providing essential income to a large15 portion of our population.16 It's essential that City17 Council pass this new Code to improve the18 viability of small businesses by creating19 a more predictable business environment.20 Small businesses may seem small, but they21 actually contribute over half of all new22 jobs in Philadelphia. If we want to see23 more jobs, a healthy environment and more24 economic opportunity for all25 299 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Philadelphians, we need to do everything2 possible to help these businesses3 succeed. Authorizing a reformed zoning4 code that provides clear, universal5 guidelines for doing business in the City6 of Philadelphia is an important first7 step and one that Council must take soon.8 Thank you.9
Thank10 you.11 Are there any questions from12 members of the Committee?13 (No response.)14 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:15 Seeing none, I thank you. Thank you very16 much. You were very patient.17 MR. McPHERSON: Our next panel18 is Tiffany Green, Marjorie Greenfield,19 Barnaby Wittles, Yvonne Haskins and20 Tracey Gordon.21 (Witnesses approached witness22 table.)23 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:24 Again, I'm going to ask if you could be25 300 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 as brief as possible, please. We're2 losing an awful lot of our witnesses3 because of the time. Thank you.4 Please identify yourself for5 the record.6
My name is7 Marjorie Greenfield. I am First8 Vice-President of East Falls Community9 Council. I chair its Zoning and Land Use10 Committee, and I appreciate the time to11 testify before you again today. 21 We do endorse the22 recommendations of the various members of23 the Crosstown Coalition, who have24 previously testified, and I also want to25 301 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 give special notice to the memorandum2 from Councilman Green. 4 East Falls Community Council is5 a 501(c)(3) organization. It's resident6 based, transparent. Our members come to7 Zoning Committee meetings at which they8 express their opinions. They come to9 monthly community meetings at which they10 voice their opinions. 12 We have some significant13 concerns, some of which were expressed in14 detail in the piece on special15 institutional districts, which you've16 already received from the Crosstown17 Coalition. 20 We are concerned about the21 improved but not yet adequate22 participation by community organizations23 with respect -- especially with respect24 to institutional development districts,25 302 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 3 I reiterate what I've said4 before. This city is a city of5 neighborhoods. They each have a slightly6 different character, and one size does7 not fit all. 18 These districts or the19 potential for these districts exist in20 every single councilmanic district,21 because they may include schools,22 hospitals, governmental facilities and,23 most importantly, commercially related24 facilities which might support those25 303 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 other institutions. "3 It needs to be defined. 20 The best way I can bring the21 problems home to you is to tell you a22 little about what we're doing in East23 Falls. Supported by our Planning24 Commission District Plan, we're working25 304 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 with Philadelphia University, Drexel2 University Medical School and the William3 Penn Charter School to develop long-range4 land use plans for each school. 7 They share many of our goals for8 preservation of neighborhood character,9 including open green space. 17 At our last meeting, after18 discussion and an attempt to summarize19 where we have been up to that point in20 the series of meetings we've held about21 what buildings will go where on a part of22 the campus and what should remain open23 space and what kind of buffers we need,24 he said, I'm very reluctant to make any25 305 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 5 Money speaks. 12 The Multi-Community Alliance13 has sought for years to have a commitment14 from the City and the State to have that15 site cleared so it be ripe for16 development, and we can't get it because17 of money. But in the case of the18 institution which said, Well, we agree19 with you on this and we agree with you on20 that and we agree with you on the other21 thing, but we can't make a commitment22 because someone might want to give us23 some money and not want to do what we all24 want to do, the problem is we don't have25 306 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 7 This is why, most importantly, we need a8 strong built-in process for community9 participation in the creation of10 institutional plans. 24 Our detailed proposals are25 307 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 attached to my testimony. 6 However, there's no excuse for omitting7 altogether the items we have listed. We8 do not want to be dependent on the9 goodwill of either the entity planning10 the use or, with all due respect, the11 Planning Commission. 15 Lastly, I'd like to address16 Councilman Green's memo very briefly. He17 mentioned a couple of items, including18 industrial-zoned districts, and there was19 some discussion this morning. Well,20 we're talking a lot of the ones that21 people seem to be concerned about are22 zoned G whatever. We have a number of23 industrial-zoned districts, some along24 Ridge Avenue in the heart of our25 308 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES.
1104591 commercial district and across from the2 brand new Dobson Mills Apartment Complex3 which is zoned L, and as it now stands4 and under the new Code, they would be5 subject to halfway houses and other kinds6 of uses, which are totally inappropriate7 in that context. We have another one on8 Indian Queen Lane, which was the subject9 of -- which is right across the street10 from a playground and residential homes,11 single-family homes, which was recently12 the subject of an attempt to put the SVU13 unit there. 17 And, finally, we share --18
Thank19 you. I would really appreciate it if you20 could summarize.21
One more.22 We would appreciate his23 suggestion with regard to methadone24 centers being extended to include25 309 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 outpatient treatment centers for any kind2 of abuse. They all carry the same3 problems for residential areas.4 We appreciate your time, and we5 welcome questions.6
Thank7 you so much.8 Good afternoon. Please9 identify yourself for the record and10 proceed with your testimony.11
Good12 afternoon. My name is Lauren Bornfriend13 and I'm the Executive Director of the14 Philadelphia Parks Alliance. I was15 originally scheduled to be on Panel 8.16
Thank you for18 the opportunity to testify here today.19 The Philadelphia Parks Alliance20 mission is to champion the public's21 interest in outstanding parks, recreation22 and open space, which we feel are key to23 making Philadelphia a healthy, vibrant24 and sustainable city for all25 310 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Philadelphians.2 In 2007, 80 percent of3 Philadelphia's voters cast their ballots4 in favor of zoning reform by establishing5 the Zoning Code Commission. Now almost6 four years later, the Philadelphia Parks7 Alliance asks City Council to pass the8 draft Zoning Code into law during the9 next three months.10 A new Zoning Code will impact11 the quality of life for Philadelphians12 and our parks in several ways. It will13 explicitly offer a parks and open space14 zoning classification, which can be15 applied to publicly owned parkland or16 privately owned land with the owner's17 consent. This will allow developers to18 dedicate green space for parks to be open19 to the public on their privately held20 land.21 Parks always benefit from22 thriving, active neighborhoods. Clear23 rules for development will help to24 revitalize blighted vacant land and will25 311 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 attract residents and businesses to2 support and enjoy our city's parks.3 The new Zoning Code will4 promote the greening of Philadelphia's5 public areas.6 Finally, I would like to thank7 City Council for passing the Parkland8 Protection Ordinance in April 2011 after9 a comprehensive, open and public process.10 Through this law, we have achieved a11 positive balance between parks and12 ancillary uses. That work is done and13 the Zoning Code does not need to revisit14 these issues.15 Thank you very much for your16 time.17
Good afternoon,20 President Verna, Councilmembers. My name21 is Barnaby Wittles. 25 312 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 I first want to applaud, as I2 think many others have, the hard work and3 extensive research that's gone into this4 Zoning Code. 11 The problem with that -- and it's a12 problem of longstanding -- is that13 Philadelphia is a city of neighborhoods,14 each one of which is unique, each one of15 which is precious. This tension really16 goes back before zoning was created to17 the City-County Consolidation Act of 185218 when the outlying entities and townships19 and boroughs all wanted to preserve their20 own nature. 24 I want to talk next25 313 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 specifically about East Falls. 4 First, I'll hand up when I'm done a5 letter from Sharon B. 8 One of the problems given the9 way that East Falls is constructed is10 that when restaurants vent, the odors go11 into close proximity to where there are12 residences. East Falls Community Council13 did not vote to have scrubbers as a14 requirement. We felt that it might be15 financially onerous. But Ms. 19 At a minimum, we believe that20 venting should be through the roof. It's21 only fair to the adjacent neighbors, who22 don't need to smell all what they think23 are not wonderful smells and some other24 people may think are. Maybe there will25 314 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 5, which omits6 taking into it the ordinance passed in7 1999 for the Philadelphia East Falls8 Special District Controls. I won't9 enumerate them because they're in the10 statute. And we strongly feel that these11 should be ported into any Zoning Code12 that's adopted. 15 They help to preserve the unique16 character of that neighborhood, which the17 Zoning Code doesn't do. 21 One other remark by way of22 illustration of although there's been a23 great deal of progress with this Zoning24 Code, it needs further work, is in CMX-3,25 315 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 for example. Wireless service facilities2 are permitted as a building or3 tower-mounted antenna. Well, I can't4 tell you how outraged people get when5 anybody even tries to put that. 11 The second thing that's12 permitted, for example, is a multi-level13 structure such as a garage. 23 MR. McPHERSON: The next panel24 consists of Stephanie Kindt, David25 316 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 6
Good afternoon,7 Councilman DiCicco.8 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: John,9 excuse me. Ladies first.10
Good afternoon,12 esteemed members of City Council. My13 name is Stephanie Kindt. I'm the staff14 attorney for SCRUB, the Public Voice for15 Public Space. I'm also on the Board of16 Overbrook Farms Club. I'm here today17 testifying on behalf of SCRUB. I'll be18 very brief. Thank you so much for19 hearing my testimony.20 With regards to the preliminary21 draft report, it's completely understood22 that the signage section is being put off23 and work is occurring now in finalizing24 those chapters. However, there are some25 317 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 subtle changes that have been made from2 the prior Code that could have dramatic3 and drastic impact on certain sections of4 the City. It's to those points that I5 speak today.6 The first is the Food7 Distribution Center -- the former Food8 Distribution Center, which has not been9 reclassified or redesignated. There are10 current plans in the works, but it's not11 been designated for any future12 development. The new preliminary draft13 report allows signage, billboards, as a14 matter of right in that district. We15 would like to, as part of the working16 group proposed by Councilman Green,17 discuss that specific area and put a18 moratorium on any changes to signage19 regulation in that area.20 With regards to -- there's also21 some issues with distancing requirements22 in commercial districts that would abut23 residential districts. There are some24 subtle changes from 500 -- it's currently25 318 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 1,000, and in the preliminary draft2 report it goes to 500 feet.3 So there are just a few subtle4 changes that we really would like to5 highlight and have those addressed in any6 further working groups that would7 continue on the Code.8 That concludes my testimony.9 Thank you so much.10 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you.11 Thank you for your testimony and thank12 you for being brief.13 John, you're on.14
My name is John15 Gallery. I'm the Executive Director of16 the Preservation Alliance. I've handed17 in a copy of my full testimony and I18 won't read it. 20 The testimony addresses two21 issues. One is the issue of the22 institutional development districts and23 the size and the controls in them, which24 has been addressed in detail by the25 319 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Crosstown Coalition, so I'm not going to2 speak to that, except to say that we3 support the changes which the Crosstown4 Coalition is recommending. 6 However, the primary change7 that we would like Council to recommend8 to the Zoning Code Commission has to do9 with the issue that Alan Rubin spoke to10 earlier about Spring Garden Street, and,11 that is, the lack of full review by the12 Historical Commission over new13 construction in historic districts in14 certain instances. The last page of my15 testimony includes an illustration, which16 you probably are familiar with,17 Councilman DiCicco, which was a high rise18 tower proposed in the Old City District19 exceeding the height of the Christ's20 Church steeple, but this proposal, even21 though it had a dramatic impact on Old22 City District, did not come under the23 jurisdiction of the Historical Commission24 to review because it was built on a25 320 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 11 This would require simply12 changing Section 14-1005, Section 4 and13 deleting that section. 17 There would be no additional burden on18 the Commission since they already have to19 review these items. And it would apply20 in a limited number of cases. It really21 would only apply to historic districts,22 of which there are 12, and even within23 those 12, it really is only relevant for24 those that are in or near Center City,25 321 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 which are experiencing these larger type2 development projects. However, in those3 neighborhoods, it would have a tremendous4 benefit and ensure the issues that5 Mr. 9 That is the end of my10 testimony. I would like to just add a11 note, however. Councilman Green asked me12 earlier what my view was on the Developer13 Workshop's recommendation that the14 Historical Commission make a complete15 stenographic record similar to the Zoning16 Board of Adjustment. 20 Right now all appeals go to the21 Board of L&I, and the only reason they go22 to the Board of L&I is to create a23 written record since the Historical24 Commission does not create a written25 322 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 6 But on the other hand, you would7 considerably lengthen the time period8 necessary for the Historical Commission9 action. Right now if the Historical10 Commission doesn't act within a 45- to11 60-day time period, the application is12 considered approved. That time13 constraint makes certain that decisions14 happen quickly. If you had to do a15 stenographic record, cross-examination by16 attorneys, the procedure would be much17 lengthier. 23 There are relatively few cases24 that go to the L&I Review Board for25 323 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 2 So I'd have to say on balance, I don't3 think the additional time that would be4 enforced on everybody -- the Historical5 Commission would probably have to meet6 more than once a month to be able to do7 this -- would be longer for all8 applicants. I'm not sure there are9 benefits to that. 13
Good afternoon.14 My name is David O'Neill. I'm from15 Roxborough, and I'm representing the16 Friends of Manatawna Farm.17 We were here less than a year18 ago when City Council unanimously19 supported the enactment of the Roxborough20 Environmental Control District, and the21 new Zoning Code would -- we sort of fall22 through the cracks with that. We have23 not been -- the overlay was not moved24 along into the proposed Zoning Code, and25 324 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 we request that Chapter 14-500 of the new2 Zoning Code include a section entitled3 Open Space Conservation, that4 environmental control districts be5 included in this section and that the6 Roxborough Environmental Control District7 be listed under this category and the Fox8 Chase Farm, which received similar9 consideration and support from you, could10 also be put in there.11 We certainly are not going to12 revisit the testimony that we gave to13 you, and I hope that you remember, but we14 would like to just touch on a few points,15 and I'd like to introduce Emilio Garcia,16 a recent graduate -- he just graduated17 from the Saul High School. He was the18 President of the Student Council of Saul19 and he was also the President of the20 consolidated Student Councils for all of21 the School District of Philadelphia.22
25 325 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Again, as he said, my name is Emilio2 Garcia. 20 As you may or may not know,21 Saul High School of Agricultural Sciences22 is the largest agricultural high school23 in the nation, and while at that school,24 the school provides over 15 fields of25 326 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 agriculture for the students to major in,2 especially in terms of the large animal3 science production, wildlife and4 environmental sciences. These particular5 courses have direct connections with the6 Manatawna Farm. 11 The land works hand in hand12 with the high school's Farm to Table13 program with Manatawna Farm, and further,14 the productivity of the land is15 absolutely remarkable and is bringing16 added attention even by the State17 Secretary of Agriculture. An example of18 this is one farmer who lives on the land19 who has worked diligently over the course20 of 12 years in completely reforming the21 farm that's there. He's improved the22 soil quality, the hay quality and has23 even made it a goal to set at a certain24 part of the year migratory birds that25 327 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 come through the City. It just happens2 that that particular land spot is exactly3 where they land and where they nest. B. Saul High14 School's Even Greener campaign, in15 particular with respect to Manatawna16 Farm. As per their many conversations,17 we are undertaking the following and18 effective immediately: Consistent with19 the best practices for restoring20 grassland habitats, we will delay mowing21 until after the primary nesting season22 for migratory grassland birds. Mowing23 will not commence until fledged birds24 have been observed by our students with25 328 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 21 Again, I'd like to thank the22 Councilman and Councilman Jones, who23 unfortunately isn't here at this time,24 and a deep thanks to all Councilmembers25 329 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 6
Thank7 you.8 Good afternoon. Please9 identify yourself for the record.10
Good afternoon,11 members of City Council. Thank you for12 allowing me to speak this afternoon. My13 name is Paul Boni. I'm a Philadelphia14 resident, practicing land use attorney15 and a member of the group Stop Predatory16 Gambling, which is a national advocacy17 group whose mission is, among other18 things, to get government out of the19 predatory gambling business. I'm here to20 testify today about the SP-ENT section of21 the draft Zoning Code, which is what we22 used to call or currently call the23 Commercial Entertainment District, the24 CED; in other words, the part of the25 330 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. I submitted my written comments3 for the record. Some background. In my6 opinion, these convenience casinos are7 predatory, and their business model8 relies on addiction. 12 I don't raise this as a13 religious or moral issue. I raise it as14 a purely economic issue. 17 Three facts and three quotes18 from executives of area casinos. Last19 year, the President of Parx Casino stated20 that a majority of the people in his21 database visit Parx Casino 200 times a22 year. 23 Earlier this year, Wendy24 Hamilton of SugarHouse Casino, the25 331 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 6 times a week. 6 times a week. 15 So to me, these numbers are16 astonishing. 23 So let's cut to the chase about24 the Zoning Code. Right now Foxwoods does25 332 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 not have its license. 3 We don't know if they're going to get it4 back. If they don't get it back, whether5 it's going to be reissued to some other6 company. 13 I would say that a good place14 to start is Councilman DiCicco's bill15 from a couple years ago now that imposed16 a few different requirements on the17 ability to comply with zoning. 24 And, like I said, now is the time to do25 333 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 6 I would note that Mayor7 Nutter's Administration spoke very8 favorably of that bill a few years ago,9 and I would also note that, in my10 opinion, the Supreme Court rulings are of11 limited applicability to the current12 situation. 25 334 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591
Thank2 you.3 Are there any questions from4 members of the Committee?5 (No response.)6
Thank7 you.8 MR. McPHERSON: Our next panel9 is Cheryl Gaston, Joseph Beller, Steve10 Pollock.11 (Witnesses approached witness12 table.)13
Good14 afternoon. Please identify yourself for15 the record.16
My name is Cheryl17 Gaston. I am Chair of the Real Property18 Section of the Philadelphia Bar19 Association. 23 Good afternoon. I served as24 counsel to the Zoning Board of Adjustment25 335 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 for 17 years and was a member of the Law2 Department of the City for 19 years3 specializing in zoning. 9 The Real Property Section of10 the Philadelphia Bar Association shares11 with the Zoning Code Commission the12 desire to provide all Philadelphians with13 a simple, transparent and effective14 Zoning Code with which to guide15 development. In that spirit, the Real16 Property Section appointed a liaison to17 the ZCC charged with attending their18 meetings and reporting ongoing19 developments at the Real Property20 Section's monthly meetings. Key members21 of the Section's Zoning, Land Use and22 Code Enforcement Subcommittee volunteer23 to review and provide written comments24 with respect to the respective ZCC Zoning25 336 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 2 The Real Property Section3 members evaluating this preliminary draft4 are a diverse group representing5 community groups, developers and6 municipalities. They work in solo, small7 and large firms and are, without8 question, among the best zoning lawyers9 in the City. 15 As you might expect with such a16 diverse group, there are many divergent17 opinions and views. We certainly did not18 agree on every issue, but we decided to19 focus our review and efforts on Chapters20 14-100 and 14-300 for the most part and21 improving Zoning Code processes and22 procedures by minimizing uncertainty and23 eliminating ambiguity in the proposed24 Code, an area where we all could agree25 337 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 21 To that end, we spent countless22 hours intensively reviewing the Zoning23 Code Commission Modules 1, 2 and 3, the24 Consolidated Draft and Redline, Blueline25 338 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 and Greenline Drafts of the proposed2 Code, a task that became daunting as the3 Commission produced successive drafts and4 embarked upon a continual Code revision5 process, which we understand may be6 ongoing even now. We commend the ZCC and7 its staffers' impressive work producing8 this draft. 14 While we spent hundreds of15 hours reviewing each draft and preparing16 and submitting extensive written17 comments, we met numerous times with18 representatives of the ZCC to review our19 written comments and attended ZCC20 sessions with others, including21 representatives of community groups in22 what were deemed to be productive23 meetings in an effort to improve the24 drafts. The process of review and25 339 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 comment has resulted in a better2 document. 6 The preliminary draft before7 you does not yet achieve the intended8 result, a shorter, clearer and easy to9 use Code. 17 Number one, the proposed Code18 is deficient in the method of defining19 terms and the absent -- and is absent20 many defined terms. The proposed Code21 uses terms without definition, a practice22 that creates confusion and ambiguity. A23 glaring example, the term "variance" is24 not defined in this draft. It is defined25 340 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 2 The definition section is3 inadequate. Many terms are redundant or4 repetitive, and in far too many5 instances, users are directed to other6 Code sections, which defeats the purpose7 of a definition section. For example,8 the terms "abut" and "adjacent" are9 virtually identical. The Planning10 Commission is defined in three different11 sections of the definition section. 22 The proposed Code attempts to23 paraphrase legal standards and/or24 annotate or change longstanding settled25 341 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 9 This is a move that will create10 uncertainty and confusion. 23 There is no procedure in this24 draft to apply for a zoning or use25 342 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 registration permit. Users are directed2 to a city website to find out what3 application materials are required.
This4 is not the transparent process promised5 by this Code. 8 For example, the powers of the Zoning9 Board are enumerated in Section 14-180110 of the current Code. In the proposed11 draft, to find the same information users12 must consult three other sections of the13 Code. And Mr. Pollock will speak a14 little bit more on that. 21 The process for appealing to22 the courts omits procedures for filing of23 the appeal, transmission of the documents24 necessary to prosecute the appeal, which25 343 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 12 The proposed Code allows L&I to13 make code interpretations and, in effect,14 amend the Zoning Code to conform to their15 interpretation. 17 The proposed Code gives the18 Zoning Board the power to conduct19 investigations and seek agency opinions,20 an empowerment not within the scope of21 the Home Rule Charter or allowed, for the22 most part, by caselaw by quasi-judicial23 agencies such as the ZBA. 25 344 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 6 We offer our input to City7 Council in the hope that we can make a8 substantial contribution to City9 Council's response to the preliminary10 draft. 19
Thank you for the22 opportunity to testify.23 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:24 Mr. Pollock.25 345 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591
Council President2 Verna, Member DiCicco, Member Bill Green,3 and I guess Councilmember Kenney has sort4 of left the room, I take it. My name is5 Steve Pollock. 7 I guess what we're trying to8 say is that the task that the voters gave9 everybody was like the old Daily News10 commercial, make it easy to hold and fun11 to read, and the task was to try and make12 it so it could be understood. And there13 was a time when we couldn't get a zoning14 code published and Peter Kelsen and I,15 along with Tom Chapman when he was with16 the City Planning Commission, were able17 to produce something called the Blue18 Book, which was sort of like the19 unofficial guide to -- was our Zoning20 Code, but we didn't get it published21 through the public. And it became very22 clear that other people, not just the23 people that have been here testifying24 today who live the process, who are all25 346 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 9 So what Cheryl said is just the10 very simple thing of what are the cases11 that can be heard by the Zoning Board,12 what are their powers. You have to go to13 about for different sections right now,14 whereas today I could go to 14-1801 and I15 know what kinds of cases they hear16 appeals from. 21 303(4)(a) and (4)(b) which talks about22 final -- the Zoning Board has final23 action over appeals for variances,24 special exceptions, but it doesn't really25 347 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 say that they have -- it refers to2 another section when it gets to a3 neighborhood taking an appeal against the4 determination by L&I that they're not5 happy with. 23 So the question isn't so24 much -- we're not saying -- we're saying25 348 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 9 I'm not still part of that school that10 will type in a key word and let the11 computer sort of look for me. 22 Now, from, I guess, some of the23 legal inside -- we'll call it inside24 baseball kind of talk, one of the things25 349 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 that concerns us is, there's this2 innocuous little paragraph at 14-303(4)3 that says consultations. And what it4 says is, we're okay with L&I and the5 Planning Commission, but it says the6 Zoning Board may consult with any other7 department or agency of the City, State8 or federal government to seek advice on9 any aspect of an application that is10 under jurisdiction of that department or11 agency of the City, State or federal12 government. And then it goes on in13 another section to say that the Zoning14 Board, as part of the variance criteria,15 can look at reports of other City16 agencies made as a result of an inquiry17 by the Zoning Board, may be considered by18 the Zoning Board. 22 But, finally, in Section 14(k)23 of 14-303, it gives us the current way24 it's framed in the Zoning Code, which we25 350 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 10 This is a quasi-judicial hearing. 21 So all we're asking for is that22 we think those -- as a specific23 recommendation, those provisions other24 than 14(k) should be stricken so that --25 351 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 or in the alternative, allow that if2 there is that inquiry, that it's going to3 be -- you'll have to give notice to both4 sides, to all sides, all interested5 parties, and give them an opportunity to6 have that witness brought in for7 cross-examination. 17 Also with what I know has18 become sort of like a four-letter word in19 this discussion, the Bray test, there is20 a case that came subsequent to the Bray21 test, and I'll leave it either with the22 Chairman or Council President or if23 Councilman Green wants it. It was a24 later case, the Reformed Seventh Day25 352 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Aventist Church versus the Philadelphia2 Zoning Board, where the applicant was a3 church that wanted to have a rooming4 house, and back then they had the very5 powerful Charles Bowser representing6 them, but they still lost on a7 certificate case because they didn't meet8 the standards.
But this case lays out9 what Councilman Green has said in his10 memorandum, that we've probably perverted11 or twisted the burdens under Bray for a12 special exception. 22 So we would suggest that you23 look at the languages in this Seventh Day24 Aventist, because in Seventh Day Aventist25 353 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 they say, Well, here's what we said in2 Bray. 5 So I just -- I don't want to6 talk about that, other than to say that7 one of the criteria that has been added8 into Bray into the special exception9 section as it stands right now is also10 another technical thing, but this is a11 recommendation that we'll bring to the12 Council. As I said, we wanted to be sort13 of more technical and hard-nosed as14 opposed to giving you some policy15 discussions, is that -- it also says16 about injuring permanently confirming and17 adjacent properties. 22 So the decision as to whether23 it has already injured has been taken out24 of the equation, and that's why it was25 354 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 3 Also, we have -- and we are4 grateful that the Zoning Code Commission5 has gone to something that maybe you're6 also tired of hearing. You've heard7 about the four-letter word Bray, but8 you've also heard about the three-letter9 acronym, the MPC. With MPC, we now have10 basically the five-pronged test that the11 rest of the state so when a court will12 look at it, they won't try and say we're13 going to impose what we do in the rest of14 the state on Philadelphia. We've at15 least -- with the variance standards,16 we've caught up, but for one criteria,17 which tries to address the dimensional18 requirements, which I have a hard time --19 I know I've scratched my head. Joe20 Beller, who can't be here right now, has21 scratched their head, and it's regarding22 that a viable economic -- it's (d) in23 14-303(8)(1)(d) -- that a viable economic24 use of the property cannot be permitted25 355 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 by granting a variance from dimensional2 standards or conditions. 8 And we know we've raised this with Peter9 Kelsen and Eva, and they're going to10 check into it, and we want to check into11 it a little bit more. We're not sure,12 but right now since the quorum has been13 changed to only needing three, however14 the Zoning Code now says that -- and also15 in this Code, it says that you need to16 have all three members concur before you17 can have a vote. 20 We are mindful that if the21 referendum passed by the public said that22 that was what was to be, that will be23 what will have to happen, because that's24 a public thing, but when I checked 3/9/1125 356 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 6 So we would ask that we would7 catch up and reinstate what used to be8 the law and is the law of Pennsylvania,9 unless the Legislature goes otherwise,10 that if there were three members -- if we11 had to go to a hearing with three12 members, we would hope that a13 three-nothing vote would not be what14 would be required, that we could at least15 have a two-to-one vote. And that could16 work both ways. If you're a community17 group and you've appealed against a18 determination and one member decides to19 go the other way, then you have not been20 able to reach your burden. So it plays21 both ways. 23 So with those kinds of things,24 I wish I could end with a joke like Joe25 357 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 4
Madam President,7 Neil Sklaroff. I'm a practicing attorney8 in Philadelphia. My practice is mostly9 land use. Knowing that I could never be10 as entertaining as Joe, I will be very11 brief.12 In what we think was a very13 good-faith attempt to try to rewrite14 standard, understood concepts that have15 been well settled in the law, we think16 there has been some confusion added to17 the Section 300 series of provisions in18 the proposed Code. We believe there is19 time left for us to continue our dialogue20 with the Zoning Code Commissioners and21 the Law Department to try to revisit some22 of these issues in order to avoid23 unnecessary litigation in the future.24 We have had settle principles25 358 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 that nobody was contesting as to what2 made a variance, what made a special3 exception, formerly a certificate, who4 was a party or what the Zoning Board5 could or could not do. And we urge the6 Commission to engage us again in the7 dialogue and that we think we can cure8 these and, in fact, advance the Code to9 one which we can fully embrace.10 Thank you.11
Thank12 you. Thank you very much.13 Any questions?14 (No response.)15 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:16 Seeing none, thank you very much.17
Does anybody want18 a copy of that Seventh Day Aventist case?19 (Copy of case given to Stacy20 Graham.)21
Our22 next panel is Lorna Katz, Roseanne23 Loesch, Anthony Jones.24 (Witnesses approached witness25 359 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 table.)2
Good3 afternoon. Please identify yourself for4 the record and proceed with your5 testimony.6
I am Lorna7 Katz-Lawson from Society Hill Civic8 Association. I'm the Zoning and9 Preservation Committee Chair.10 Society Hill Civic Society has11 been an active member of the 13-member12 civic association group called Crosstown13 Coalition. We participated in the14 preparation of the comments that Stephen15 Huntington made to you today, as well as16 helping prepare some of the supporting17 white papers. So my additional comments18 right now purely have to do with our19 identity and issues that have to do with20 being a historic district.21 The most important of these is22 how new development is handled in23 historic districts, and John Gallery24 preempted me in this point, but we would25 360 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 also, going along with his idea, that it2 would help our community tremendously if3 the Historic Commission review was moved4 from advisory to statutory. And as he5 pointed out, the work involved for the6 applicant is no different, and the work7 for them would be not very much different8 either.9 The other issue that is very10 important for us has to do with uses in11 residential districts. The proposed Code12 places an additional burden on historic13 districts. The wildly expanded use of14 residential properties as sites for15 commercial activities is excessive and16 will promote overuse of the buildings17 themselves. The increased rate of wear18 and tear on the structures is19 counterproductive to preservation of20 original fabric. The commensurate higher21 maintenance costs also might act as a22 deterrent to properly maintaining these23 properties in the future. The proposed24 Code is blind to the particular physical25 361 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 realities of antique structures.2 So we support Councilman3 Green's suggestion to separate home4 office from home business, because we5 feel that it would help protect the6 structures in our community.7 The other point I would like to8 make today is, we feel that some of the9 Civic Design Review triggers may be too10 high for a close-knit row house community11 and that it should possibly be considered12 to be -- the threshold should be lowered13 before Civic Design Review kicks in in14 communities such as ours and other15 historic districts.16
Good afternoon,22 Madam President and members of Council.23 My name is Dr. Anthony Jones. I am a24 member of the Oak Lane Community25 362 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Association Board, as well as the2 Chairman of Zoning and Crime and Safety,3 and today I would like to just read a4 little statement here about the zoning5 laws and things that go on within6 communities.7 The current zoning laws are not8 finite in working with community and9 businesses. To state specifically the10 zoning for commercial building, the way11 the current zoning laws are written,12 investors, businesses can bring a six13 million plus dollar project into a14 neighborhood that is unwanted, even15 against the community wishes, which has16 been expressed over time. If the17 community does not have any say in how18 some of the zoning laws should be19 established, viewed and implemented, then20 we are always at the mercy of business21 and politics.22 Here's an example: A23 residential facility that will house24 chronic substance abusers and disorders25 363 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 is labeled as low-income housing. The2 community is then placed in a position of3 opposing low-income housing when the4 opposition is actually to the facility's5 specification of occupants and their6 impact on the neighborhood that is7 already saturated with rehab facilities8 and halfway housing.9 There is a need for the zoning10 laws to be specific on housing usage11 sensitive to the community concerning12 change in neighborhoods and its negative13 impact.14 Thank you.15
Hi. Good19 afternoon. My name is Leslie Benoliel.20 I was supposed to be in a previous panel21 and I arrived late. So I apologize.22
I'm the25 364 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Executive Director of Entrepreneur Works,2 which is a Philadelphia-based non-profit3 that provides capital in the form of4 micro loans and business support services5 to entrepreneurs and small businessowners6 to help them start up, stabilize and7 expand their businesses. 11 First, I want to commend the12 Zoning Code Commission for their hard13 work and efforts to craft a new Zoning14 Code. 25 365 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 3 Those are businesses with five or fewer4 employees, and many of them start up or5 are based out of the homes. 19 The proposed Code promotes20 economic growth in our city and will21 benefit residents and businesses alike,22 especially the home-based businesses. By23 eliminating much of the zoning overlays24 that have accumulated over time,25 366 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 7 Compared with the current Code,8 the proposed Code provides more clarity,9 predictability, flexibility, particularly10 for individuals who are looking to start11 up businesses out of their homes. 25 367 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 And data shows that more than2 half the businesses are home based, and3 this number can only be expected to4 increase in today's economy. In fact,5 most businesses get their start in the6 home, in a spare bedroom, in the kitchen7 or in the basement. 19 I respectfully ask you, members20 of City Council, to give the proposed21 Zoning Code your full and careful22 consideration. Be mindful, please, be23 mindful to preserve its simplicity as you24 consider revisions to it and, at the same25 368 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 time, push to see that it is adopted in a2 timely manner. We want to make sure this3 new Code, once finalized, is robust4 enough to withstand the next 50 years or5 more. 13
Thank14 you. Thank you.15 Are you going to testify?16
Yes, I'd like to17 testify.18 Good afternoon, Council19 President Verna.20
My name is George23 Gould. I am the Managing Director for24 Housing and Energy at Community Legal25 369 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Services here in Philadelphia. My2 testimony will be very brief. I would3 just like to point out one of the4 sections of the proposed Zoning Code.5 Back in 2007, City Council6 passed and the Mayor signed a bill that7 would require inclusionary housing in the8 City, and basically what that bill said9 was that in any development of more than10 20 units of new or rehabilitated housing11 in the City, the developer would be12 required to put 10 percent affordable13 housing into that development or14 contribute to the Housing Trust Fund.15 There was a provision that said that the16 bill would not be implemented until17 incentives were passed by City Council18 which were given to developers which19 would help that process. Unfortunately,20 those incentives have not yet been21 created.22 We have a problem with one23 particular provision in the proposed24 Zoning Code, and, that is, 14-702(7),25 370 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 which creates a voluntary inclusionary2 housing program. It's somewhat similar3 to what City Council has passed, but it's4 totally voluntary. And what this would5 do, you would have two sections of the6 Code, one with a mandatory program and7 one with a voluntary program. I think8 that would be inconsistent, it would be9 confusing and, quite frankly, the10 organizations which we are involved with,11 the Campaign for Housing Justice, wants a12 mandatory program, which is what City13 Council has already passed. We have14 found that in other jurisdictions,15 voluntary programs do not work.16 Developers do not do it, and you do not17 end up with the affordable housing that18 is needed. Where there has been a19 mandatory program, it works. And what we20 strongly suggest is that you make the21 provisions in this Code consistent with22 what's already in the existing law or you23 simply strike it and make it a mandatory24 program.25 371 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Thank you.2
My name is6 Michael Churchill. I'm an attorney at7 the Public Interest Law Center of8 Philadelphia, and I thank you for the9 opportunity to speak.10 The Public Interest Law Center11 of Philadelphia submits its opposition to12 any amendment to the zoning proposal that13 would prohibit or impose additional14 burdens on facilities which serve persons15 with disabilities from neighborhoods16 where similar facilities would otherwise17 be allowed. Any provision which singles18 out for discrimination facilities serving19 people with disabilities, such as group20 homes, which serve our most vulnerable21 citizens, some of whom have autism,22 cerebral palsy, Down's syndrome, et23 cetera, and that makes it harder for them24 to find places to reside equally in this25 372 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 city or to receive the medical treatment2 necessary for some of them, violates3 federal law.4 In particular, the Law Center5 notes that banning group homes which6 allow persons with disabilities to live7 in the community, frequently near family8 and friends instead of being confined in9 institutions, is directly contrary to10 federal and state law. In the Claiborne11 case, the United States Supreme Court12 held municipalities violate the13 Constitution if they subject residents or14 persons with disabilities to different15 zoning standards than for other persons.16 And many courts have repeatedly17 recognized that under the Fair Housing18 Act, small group homes, albeit for19 unrelated persons, are equivalent to20 family residents for persons with21 disabilities and may not be excluded from22 residential neighborhoods.23 Labeling those homes as noxious24 is particularly offensive to many25 373 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 individuals who pose no threat to their2 neighbors and whose homes cannot even be3 identified by anybody walking by unless4 told beforehand.5 Additionally, attempts by6 Pennsylvania communities to exclude7 methadone clinics, which medically treat8 persons recovering from addiction,9 differently than other medical facilities10 have been struck down by the courts.11 Just three years ago, the federal courts12 overturned the efforts of both the13 Pennsylvania General Assembly and the14 City of Reading to require methadone15 clinics to go through more burdensome16 procedures for approval than other17 methadone clinics in a case called New18 Direction Treatment Services versus the19 City of Reading.20 Philadelphia is facing certain21 suit and unnecessary expense if it22 proceeds with the provision banning23 methadone clinics where it permits other24 medical facilities merely because of the25 374 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 population who uses that clinic.2 I will be glad to submit this3 testimony and any back-up materials that4 would be helpful to Council in their5 considerations.6 Thank you.7
Thank8 you very much. Thank you.9 MR. McPHERSON: The next panel10 is Lucy Strackhouse, Jeff Hornstein, Mary11 McCrea.12 (Witness approached witness13 table.)14 MR. McPHERSON: Gregory Moses.15 MS. McCREA: I'd just like to16 say I have testimony for the record.17
Ms.18 McCrea, would you take the witness chair19 and identify yourself and proceed with20 your testimony.21 MS. McCREA: My name is22 Mrs. Mary McCrea. I'm a resident of the23 Yorktown community, and I came to really24 listen and to have some input. I wanted25 375 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 to ask the Planning Commission mostly2 concerning we, the Yorktown, have a3 legislation in place, and I wanted to4 know the new zoning, will it overlap --5 have any interference with this6 legislation that we have in place?7
We'll8 have someone speak to you.9 MS. McCREA: Pardon me?10
We'll11 have someone speak to you.12 MS. McCREA: Okay.13
Do14 you have another comment or statement to15 make?16 MS. McCREA: That was about it.17 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:18 Pardon me?19 MS. McCREA: That was about it.20 Would she be able to speak to21 me?22
Point of25 376 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 information.2
Thank you,5 Madam Chair.6 Ma'am, generally speaking,7 throughout the City, everywhere there's8 an overlay or specific control in a9 neighborhood, it is being eliminated.10 And if you have that in your11 neighborhood, that may well be the case.12 And so Ms. Gladstein, who is behind you,13 can provide you specific information14 about that issue.15 MS. McCREA: Okay. I live in16 Councilman Clarke's district.17
Yes, ma'am.18 And I don't know about Yorktown or what19 the specific controls are there, but20 generally speaking, they're eliminated21 across the City, unless specifically22 included in the new Code. And yours are23 included in the new Code.24 MS. McCREA: Okay. Thank you.25 377 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591
Ms.2 McCrea, is this your testimony?3 MS. McCREA: No. That's4 Mrs. Pendleton-Smith's. She wasn't able5 to come.6
Very7 well. We'll give a copy of this to the8 stenographer.9 MS. McCREA: Yes.10
It11 will be transcribed in full.12 MS. McCREA: Okay.13
Thank14 you.15 Our next -- Greg, I didn't see16 you there. Please come up. Have you17 been hiding?18 (Witness approached witness19 table.)20
Pretty good.24 Pretty good.25 378 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:2 Please identify yourself for the record.3
Thank you.11 My name is Gregory Moses. I am12 the Executive Director of Southwest13 Association for Involvement in14 Development, as well as the Chairman of15 Ward 40-B in Southwest Philadelphia,16 Democratic Chairman.17 I'm here today in opposition in18 talking to -- referring to, rather, the19 idea of reentry programs. We have a20 parcel of land at 5312 Grays Avenue that21 City Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell and22 some others have been trying to turn into23 something else.24 If I may, I'd like to read what25 379 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 I have first.2 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:3 Please.4
My name is Gregory5 Moses. 10 At present, regulated uses are11 prohibited within 500 feet of a12 residential neighborhood. A prison is a13 regulated use. 22 For years, my neighbors and I23 in Southwest Philadelphia have been24 successfully fighting the development of25 380 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 a private prison, halfway house and a2 400-inmate prison at 53rd and Grays3 Avenue. 4 It hasn't really been for years. It's5 been a couple years. It's been going on6 and exceptions have been going on for7 about four years. The last two years8 we've been aware of it. 17 We have collected a petition18 of -- we have collected a petition of19 over 3,000 -- actually 3,500 --20 individuals who are against this21 particular project, opposed to this22 private prison. The applicant went to23 the Zoning Board of Adjustment and24 obtained a use variance. That was after25 381 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. The applicant -- excuse me. What occurred was, Southwest7 AID, they appeared at the hearing on that8 particular date, which I believe it was9 February the 27th of last year, and the10 developers, the Watts family, Dr. 13 Last night I learned that the14 new draft Code does not -- last night I15 learned that the new draft Code does end16 around on this issue. A new use category17 is created called reentry facilities. In18 other words, what they're trying to do is19 trying to put this under another title,20 which would not be subject to the 50021 foot rule buffer. These reentry22 facilities would be allowed by special23 exception in the districts formerly known24 as L-1, L-2, L-3, L-4, L-5 and Port25 382 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 2 We all realize that the value3 and importance of figuring out ways to4 reintegrate offenders back into our5 society, but for all times, these sorts6 of private prisons were prohibited from7 being 500 feet of a residential or school8 neighborhood. 25 383 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Just as a way of explanation2 with that, this is a situation whereas3 the major person who is the chair of this4 is Deputy Mayor Everett Gillison. He met5 in my home last fall, him and Tumar6 Alexander. Mr. 11 Mr. Gillison and I went back12 and forth. I allowed him to present what13 he thought would change my case or change14 our position. I wanted to hear what he15 had to say. And, most importantly, he16 wanted me to hear what he had to say,17 because he called me, not the other way18 around. 20 We as a community of over 35 --21 like I said, over 3,500 people -- that's22 3,500. 23 That does not include those who written24 letters, voiced their opinions or spoke25 384 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 3 There are many other locations4 where this kind of situation can be5 built. What we're majorly concerned6 about is the closeness of such a thing7 such as this. 11
Greg,12 I don't mean to interrupt you. However,13 when this case went before the Zoning14 Board, how long did it take them before15 they rendered a decision?16
They did not render17 a decision. Well, they did -- I take18 that back. They did render a decision.19 What occurred is at the hearing the20 Southwest Association for Involvement in21 Development, we were the only ones who22 were there, because we learned about it23 the evening before by happenstance24 through the CDC, the Southwest Center25 385 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 for, you know, the neighborhoods. The2 young lady there called me, asked me did3 I know about it. I said no. And, of4 course, I got on the phone and started5 making phone calls.6 So ultimately speaking, they7 answered, I believe it was, the fall of8 last year. Now, this is from a hearing9 that was dated January, I believe, of10 2009.11
And12 it took almost a year, did it not, for13 the Zoning Board?14
Exactly. Right.15 It took almost a year for that to be16 answered. That despite, like I said, the17 many hearings that we had, two major18 ones -- well, there was one official one,19 which was held on the first of -- I'm20 sorry. I don't have it here in front of21 me. I do apologize. But there were two22 major hearings that were held, one that23 was headed by Councilwoman Jannie24 Blackwell, the other by myself. The25 386 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 official one, the official community one2 as directed by the Zoning Board of3 Adjustment, was held by myself on the4 second, because that's who I was directed5 to follow through on.6
The status right9 now is waiting for a hearing to be set10 allegedly sometime possibly in October.11
In terms of14 petitions, you see here well over 3,00015 petitions.16
Well over 3,50019 petitions. And, like I said, this only20 includes just the petitions, not the21 letters that were written individually.22 And these are petitions against this type23 of facility.24
Thank25 387 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 you.2
Okay. Other than3 that, at this particular point that's all4 I would have. There are a number of5 things I could say, but I don't want to6 waste the court's time.7
Thank8 you. I'm sorry you were kept waiting so9 long. I did not see you in the audience.10
The12 Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.13
Thank14 you, Madam President. I regret that I15 missed the beginning of this testimony.16 The proposed reentry center17 that was in my district, not in the18 President's district, we talked about19 that, and this is an issue that we talked20 about for years. Unfortunately, the21 gentleman speaking did not have the22 official meeting. That's not true. He23 knows it isn't true. He knows he's being24 dishonest. He had a meeting called for25 388 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 by his Senator. That was not the2 official meeting. We met for about two3 years on it.4 And so I regret that -- I won't5 go through all of that. Suffice it to6 say to the Committee that what he's7 saying is absolutely not truthful. He'll8 have his day. Whatever happens, happens.9 He'll have his day to appeal, which he's10 done, but he's just not being truthful.11 They haven't been for a long time, but12 he's being led unfortunately by one of my13 State Senators who created this hoopla in14 the first place in order to fight my15 reelection. But, you know, thank God,16 I've been here a long time, I'm still17 here.18 So I won't bother the Committee19 with that, but I did want to set the20 record straight that what he's saying is21 absolutely unequivocally not true.22
And we25 389 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 don't have to have debate back and forth.2 It's been a long day. He had his say and3 I've had mine.4
Okay. Thank you.8 Let me be very clear. The9 first time I heard about this situation10 was the day before the hearing. The11 hearing was, like I said, I believe it12 was January 27th.13
And I heard about16 it the evening before at exactly 5:45.17 That's when I first heard of anything18 about this whatsoever, which is why we19 started to hurry and scurry around, which20 is why the other group members, group21 leaders were not at the hearing, because22 we only had enough time to reach out and23 gather the people from Southwest AID.24
Anything else? So2 at this point, this is my first -- I3 excuse myself. This is my first hearing4 such as this. I've been to many, many5 hearings, but this is my first one such6 as this. So I don't know to open the7 board to yourselves or --8
Thank19 you.20 MR. McPHERSON: Our next21 witness is Tracey Gordon.22 (No response.)23 MR. McPHERSON: Tracy Green.24 I'm sorry.25 391 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591
Tiffany2 Green.3 MR. McPHERSON: Tiffany Green.4 I'm sorry. I apologize.5 (Witness approached witness6 table.)7
I want to hand12 these pictures in. I want the13 Councilmembers to take a look at that. 15 I'm here to oppose the new16 Zoning Code. The reason why I'm showing17 the pictures, because -- I'm here to18 oppose the new Zoning Code, because I19 don't feel that community participation20 has been 100 percent or has been a part21 of this. The reason why I think that22 this -- and many people in our community,23 people we've met with over the last24 couple weeks, we tried to explain the new25 392 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Zoning Code to them, and many of them do2 not want what the new Zoning Code is3 about. They really don't. 6 When we went up there, meetings7 were held at 8 o'clock in the morning,8 and as I stated publicly before, people9 have jobs, people have kids. 13 When we finally got a chance to14 get up there to the new Zoning Code,15 there were a lot of lawyers, zoning16 lawyers, planners, architects, and they17 all had a vested interest in this new18 Zoning Code. 23 With that, we feel that this24 document gives power to the developers25 393 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 and taking away control from the2 community. And you say, well, why do we3 say that? Well, look at the building4 heights. In the new Zoning Code, they5 propose building heights that go from 356 feet to 38 feet. Now, the average7 two-story townhouse or house in8 Philadelphia is about 22 feet. And9 you're allowing these developers to build10 up to 35 feet, and now they have attached11 on 38 feet. 15 Here is a zoning agenda from16 last month. We had four developers who17 want to -- or investors who want to build18 in our community. They want to add an19 attachment, three-story, deck in this20 two-story blocks. These are in South21 Philadelphia. Okay? 24 Majority of the blocks in South25 394 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Philadelphia are two-story houses. So2 everyone moving in is saying to us, Oh,3 well, it's zoned for a three-story. 8 We've done a lot of research on9 conformity. 11 When you look at those pictures that I12 gave you, when the developers are13 building, a lot of them are new, they're14 new investors. I call them Donald Trump15 wannabes. They're coming into the16 community, and when they build, they're17 not building exactly to the houses. They18 put up wooden frames. 25 395 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 When they build two-story --2 the community is not opposed to new3 development, let's make that clear, when4 we asked for our moratorium in March5 23rd. The people are not against new6 development. 8 I move on to say that when you9 remove the variances, if you allow this10 new Zoning Code to go through, the four11 developers that came to this meeting12 would no longer have to come to this13 meeting. 17 Now, this is not just happening18 in South Philadelphia, in Point Breeze,19 because the word on the street is -- we20 were wondering why development has slowed21 down. They're waiting for this day,22 September 14th. So once the new Zoning23 Code goes through, then you will start24 seeing them in West Philadelphia, you'll25 396 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 see them in North Philadelphia, you'll2 see them down in Kensington. 11 This is a headache. This is12 constant every month, four, five, six,13 seven, eight developers coming through14 saying they want to do three-story15 attachments and decks. 16 And then the houses, they're not really17 affordable. 19 And it also inspires other20 developers, other landlords to raise21 their rents. Their rents are going from22 $700 to $1,800. What do they do? 25 397 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 I'm just telling you what's2 really happening out on the street. I3 know we can go in a sophisticated level4 and go into the languages, and that's5 great, but let's talk about what's really6 happening. 23 And the thing about it is that the24 developers are able to go through the25 398 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES.
1104591 civic design and then they're going to2 have one person from the community that's3 supposed to rotate among the RCOs. 10 So you either have to -- why is11 civic design necessary? All this is12 about -- I've heard Alan Greenspan (sic)13 talk about reducing the workload for ZBA,14 saying we have as much workload as New15 York. Well, you know, variances help16 protect the community. It gives the17 community a say in what goes on as far as18 zoning is concerned. 22 The other thing I want to say23 is, when you remove the variances, you're24 putting the load back on L&I. L&I is a25 399 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 mess, and I'm not going to go into detail2 about that. 3 First of all, L&I takes 10 to 15 days to4 go out and look at a property. By the5 end, the developer is halfway through or6 halfway done. When he puts the building7 up, no one is going to tell him to take8 down the brick and take it down. So by9 the time L&I get out there, half of it or10 three-quarters of the house is done. And11 then you have representatives covering12 from our area down to the Naval Base13 home. 18
Not founded. Thank21 you, Ms. Verna. Not founded. We're22 getting a lot of not founded's. Well,23 something suspicious about "not founded."24 So I'm saying do not put all25 400 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 that load back on L&I. They're already2 overloaded. You need to keep -- the old3 document is not too bad, but it needs to4 go back some and have more community5 input, a more realistic type of approach6 that will control the people.7 One more thing and I just want8 to go in the point, because I'm going to9 submit and Ms. Shikomba, she gave in10 recommendations. But we're saying also a11 public advocate. It is very hard when12 you're appealing to the civil court to13 find a lawyer to take the case. Many14 times it's conflict of interest. They15 talk about future earnings. They don't16 want to take the case, because it may17 affect them, because more of their18 clients might be developers as opposed to19 the community. So maybe a public20 advocate could come in and help people21 who want to appeal the process go through22 that, help them with going through that23 process, because civic court is real24 court.25 401 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 The following I want to say is,2 I think that this document needs to go3 back in front of the community. It has4 had five or six drafts. It has red ink,5 blue ink, black ink, and we just found6 out that they did type up a document for7 City Council because they didn't want to8 go through all that.9 So the thing about it is, it10 should go back in front of the community.11 They have not been in front of the12 community since last year. You have five13 and six rewrite drafts, three since March14 23rd when we submitted our moratorium,15 and the community has not seen it. How16 can you submit in a document or pass a17 document and the community, your bosses18 who have voted you in and you are19 supposed to work on behalf of them, pass20 a document that they haven't seen? I'm21 asking Ms. Gladstein, let's take it to22 the community centers, recreation23 centers, and let's not do a power --24 let's do a PowerPoint presentation, not25 402 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 poster boards. Senior citizens cannot2 walk around looking at poster boards and3 reading them. They get tired. Let's do4 a PowerPoint presentation. Let the5 people look at what was happening before,6 what's now and give their comment. Let's7 do the right thing. Let's do the right8 thing with the people, because people9 right now feel that they're going to be10 pushed out. You talk to people, they11 say, Oh, we're going to be pushed out.12 They're pushing us out.13 Do we want our communities,14 Philadelphians, do we want Philadelphians15 to feel like they're being pushed out?16 No, we do not.17 Send this document back and let18 it go back in front of the community.19 Let them see it. Explain it to them so20 they know what you're proposing.21 Thank you.22
Our3 next witness.4 MR. McPHERSON: I don't have5 anyone.6
Do we7 have anyone else to testify?8 Please approach the witness9 table.10 (Witnesses approached witness11 table.)12
Good13 afternoon. Please identify yourself for14 the record.15
Good afternoon16 to you all. My name is Jeff Carpineta17 from -- I'm the President of the East18 Kensington Neighbors Association. Thank19 you to Council and staff and the20 Commissioners, all that are involved, the21 Planning Commission, for putting in this22 really long day and for giving us this23 final window to make some comments to24 you. Thank you also to Councilman25 404 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 3 Our area, East Kensington, is4 the neighborhood just west of Fishtown5 and just east of the Market-Frankford6 train. We have three train stations at7 the western edge of our neighborhood. We8 are the neighborhood that's been hinted9 to many times today. East Kensington is10 the neighborhood that's sort of a11 minefield of zoning issues, of land uses12 and land abuses. We are the one that13 needs the new Code. We're the14 neighborhood that has heavy industrial15 parcels interspersed with tiny row homes16 and medium and tall row houses. We have17 several commercial corridors. We have18 several -- we have kind of an array of19 illegal uses through the years because of20 a previous Code that didn't quite make21 sense and was ignored. We have a lot of22 reckless auto businesses. We have23 commercial corridors where different24 zoning remappings and spot zonings25 405 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 5 And we have home builders who are6 convinced that front-loading garages are7 the most terrific thing. 11 So we burn a lot of precious12 volunteer energy in the neighborhood13 dealing with aspects of lousy Code, and14 we really hope and we make a plea that by15 the end of 2011 we have a new Code to16 work with. It makes a big difference for17 neighborhood life. 20 We want everyone here to be21 aware that all the meetings at 1515 --22 this is a compliment to Alan and Eva's23 work, the entire Commission and all the24 people that helped with that. All the25 406 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 meetings at 1515, the public outreach,2 the facilitated dialogues, the birth of3 the Citizen Planning Institute were all4 highly valuable and well worth it. They5 signal a new energy in Philadelphia. We6 built new leadership on the ground. 17 Some successes within the Code18 that I want to note that will make a19 difference in our neighborhood is that20 the civics are recognized and mapped. I21 think it's the first time in 30 years22 that there's actually a -- Planning23 Commission has a map detailing all the24 neighborhood boundaries and all civics25 407 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 that are involved to help make things2 easier in the neighborhood so that3 there's not as much agita and hashing out4 to do at the ZBA. That's part of the5 work that gets done in the neighborhood,6 and we feel like that's being recognized7 by finding a place within the Code, the8 role of the civics and the whole kind of9 protocols for civic engagement. 14 Something else that we're15 benefiting from the Code that sits before16 you is that urban gardens and urban farms17 have their place now. They're not18 existing in the shadows, as are the whole19 concept of live/work space and artist20 spaces within various types of buildings21 that seems like it may not any longer22 have to exist with sort of a "don't ask,23 don't tell" type policy of artists kind24 of hiding out in buildings and people25 408 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 having art studio practices within their2 homes. 10 So those are some successes for11 sure. We do hope that the final12 administrative procedure section of the13 Code articulates mechanisms for a few14 things. Number one, that ZBA review can15 run more efficiently. We want to be16 involved. We want the ZBA to know that17 we're here, that we're a partner in the18 process, as we talked about. But it is19 difficult.
We want to attend every20 meeting, our Zoning Chair or myself or21 Amy Miller here to my right, the22 Secretary of the Zoning Committee, but23 it's difficult when the meeting is like24 11 o'clock and we're not sure, we may25 409 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 wind up being down there until 3:00,2 3:30, 4:00 or 5 o'clock. 5 We would like to see some6 mechanisms outlined so that the ZBA and7 the members of the ZBA are able to share8 what their thinking is on the decisions9 that they make. 11 Because right now we do get the notice,12 which is great, of what the decision was,13 but we're not sure exactly why. And that14 doesn't mean that we're trying to be15 hard-headed or combative. 18 President Obama said once, he19 said, the things that come to my desk are20 the things that nobody else could really21 figure out. It's the toughest stuff to22 grapple with. 23 So the things that are winding24 up at ZBA should be, and we hope now with25 410 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 the new Code will be, the things that are2 more complex and difficult and need3 thoughtful analysis and consideration and4 evaluation. So what we need to be able5 to do is to learn from each one of those6 situations as live case studies what was7 the thinking there. The ZBA holds8 expertise. That's why they're there, to9 make those decisions. 10 We want to understand what are the11 perspectives, what's the reasoning, so we12 can grow. It's not always so that we can13 kind of come back for a second boxing14 match. And your better community leaders15 and your zoning committees and all the16 people now that are coming through the17 Citizen Planning Institute, they get18 that. They want to learn more. 20 We also hope that there will be21 clearly prescribed criteria for the22 granting of variances. 24 That's one of -- that's some of the most25 411 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 5 So just, again, thank you for6 the opportunity. 18
Thanks. Like Jeff19 said, my name is Amy Miller. I'm the20 Secretary of the Zoning Committee for the21 East Kensington Neighbors Association, or22 EKNA. Our seven-member committee23 submitted two formal letters to the24 Zoning Code Commission in the course of25 412 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 this process, and members of EKNA have2 attended numerous outreach sessions held3 by the ZCC. 9 The first letter that the EKNA10 Zoning Committee wrote to the ZCC was in11 response to the September 2010 draft12 consolidated code and focused on the13 proposed Transit-Oriented Development14 District, or TOD district. There are15 three stations of the Market-Frankford El16 that border East Kensington - Berks,17 York-Dauphin and Huntingdon. 20 We made some specific -- or we21 raised some specific concerns, and we22 feel that they have been addressed23 adequately, and we think that the current24 proposed Code on the TOD district is a25 413 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 6 We also wrote on the inadequacy7 of the tree standards. The landscaping8 and trees standard in the September 20109 version required street trees for10 residential subdivisions creating five or11 more lots. In the current proposed Code,12 this has changed to three lots, which is13 a significant improvement. 17 The required vehicle parking18 standards are also a great improvement on19 the current -- to the current as well as20 previous versions of the Code. In the21 current proposed Code, off-street parking22 is no longer required for traditional row23 home blocks. Attached residential24 buildings and lots less than 20 feet wide25 414 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 now would require a special exception2 approval. 5 Another great improvement in6 the definitions -- is in the definitions7 of home occupations. In the current8 proposed Code, artist studios are now an9 allowable home occupation. 16 The last comment I have is on17 requirements for bike parking. The18 bicycle parking standards are19 unfortunately unchanged from the previous20 Code. Philadelphia is one of the most21 bikeable cities in the world, except when22 you want to lock your bike. Stop signs,23 handrails and trees become ad hoc bike24 racks in the absence of adequate25 415 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 facilities. This is dangerous, unsightly2 and causes great damage to trees. The3 requirements for bike racks in the4 proposed Code are simply inadequate for a5 sustainable city. 9 For example, the current10 proposed Code states that for multi-unit11 residential of less than 12 units, zero12 bike racks are required. 22 In the process, Philadelphians have had a23 chance to reevaluate their city, their24 neighborhoods and their future. After25 416 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 this engaging process of rewriting the2 Code, we are now faced with the enormous3 challenge of remapping our land. 9
Thank10 you.11 Any questions or comments from12 members of the Committee?13 (No response.)14 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:15 Seeing none, thank you very much. We16 appreciate your patience.17
No20 agita.21 Do we have anyone else that22 would like to testify?23 (No response.)24 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:25 417 9/14/11 - WHOLE - RES. 1104591 Seeing no one, this Committee will stand2 in recess until September 27th at 10:003 a.m.4 Thank you all very much.5 (Committee of the Whole6 adjourned at 5:10 p.m.)7 - - -8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 418 1 CERTIFICATE2 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the3 proceedings, evidence and objections are4 contained fully and accurately in the5 stenographic notes taken by me upon the6 foregoing matter on September 14, 2011, and7 that this is a true and correct transcript of8 same.9 10 11 12 13 --------------------14 MICHELE L. MURPHY15 RPR-Notary Public16 17 18 19 (The foregoing certification of this20 transcript does not apply to any reproduction21 of the same by any means, unless under the22 direct control and/or supervision of the23 certifying reporter.)24 25