Committee Hearing, June 15, 1998

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Monday, June 15, 1998 2:08 p.m. - - - Resolution No. 980287 - Calling on the City Council Committee on Transportation and Public Utilities to conduct hearings concerning the proposed Chestnut Street Intermodal Improvement Project. PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN HAPPY FERNANDEZ, Chairwoman COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 2 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 I N D E X DENISE GOREN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Deputy Mayor for Transportation JOSEPH SYRNICK, Chief Engineer. . . . . . . . 17 and Surveyor, Streets Department BERNARD COHEN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Assistant General Manager, SEPTA ANN DIXON, Chestnut Street Coalition. . . . . 60 SUE MCNAMARA, Bicycle Coalition . . . . . . . 67 DENNIS WINTERS, Clean Air Council . . . . . . 71 NANCY LAVIN, PhillyWalks. . . . . . . . . . . 79 BERNARD SPAIN, Owner. . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Spain's Cards and Gifts NANA GOLDERG, I Goldberg. . . . . . . . . . . 86 PAUL LEVY, Executive Director . . . . . . . . 93 Center City District KATHY RYAN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Thomas Jefferson University Hospital STEPHEN GLEASON, Amerimar Enterprises . . . . 102 JOSEPH ZURITSKY, President. . . . . . . . . . 106 Parkway Corporation KEVIN SMITH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Regional Citizens Committee of the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission 3 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 (Index, cont'd.) JANE GLENN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Regional Citizens Committee of the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, SEPTA Citizens Advisory Committee ANN DIXON, Private Citizen. . . . . . . . . . 119 CLAUDIA CRANE, Private Citizen. . . . . . . . 122 CLAUDIA MESSINA, Private Citizen. . . . . . . 130 AJAY CHRESHKOFF, Retired College Professor. . 132 SCOTT MAITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 Philadelphia Trolley Coalition Chestnut Street Artway and Trolley Plan Advocate JOHN BOYLE, Private Citizen . . . . . . . . . 156 STEVEN ZWICK, Private Citizen . . . . . . . . 157 4 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 P R O C E E D I N G S

I'm Councilwoman Happy Fernandez. I'm Chair of the Transportation and Public Utilities Committee. And on my left is Councilman Frank DiCicco, also a member of this committee. We here today to hear testimony on Resolution 980287 regarding the Chestnut Street Transit Way. The origin of these hearings were really precipitated by citizen comments and testimony at our budget hearings in February and March, where many citizens felt they really wanted to chance to hear and have public testimony on the proposed Chestnut Street Transit Way and certainly wanted a chance to have their views be known. Since the Chestnut Street Transit Way is in the district of Council President Street and Councilman DiCicco, the three of us then drafted a resolution for hearings on this issue. I think the basic problem is, how do you accommodate all of the different types of interests and modes of transportation that people want or feel they need on Chestnut Street, from cars to bikes to transit vehicles to pedestrians 5 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 to the various kinds of businesses and other uses of Chestnut Street. So I'm eager to hear the testimony from all the parties, and we'll begin with a panel composed of: Denise Goren, Deputy Mayor for Transportation; Joe Syrnick, Chief Engineer and Surveyor of the Department of Streets; and also Bernard Cohen, Assistant General Manager of SEPTA. Is he here?

Yes.

Why don't you come you up to the table here too, okay?

So, Deputy Mayor for Transportation, Denise Goren, would you like to begin? Identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon, Madame Chairwoman and Councilman DiCicco. I am Denise Goren, and with me today is Joseph Syrnick, Chief Engineer and Surveyor for the Department of Streets. We are pleased today to present to you the Chestnut Street Intermodal Improvement Project. We appreciate your scheduling of this 6 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 hearing. It is a forum that we think will both raise questions and answer them and also provide an opportunity for us to show some of the work we've been doing over the past few months. This project is the culmination of five years of Center City major street improvements. Other projects included the 21-square-square-block area around the Convention Center, the improvement of East Market Street from City Hall to Front, the Avenue of the Arts improvement from South Broad to Washington Avenue. We understand the procedure here today is that following our testimony, we're going to briefly sojourn to the back of the room so that everyone in the room can look at what we have displayed, which is geographically correct -- it goes from east to west on Chestnut Street -- picture really of each of the blocks that we are proposing to affect under this program. Many of the questions, as we've been in the course of discussing this with many of the individuals in the room concerned specifically with, What happens on my block? And today, we're finally at a point where we can start answering 7 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 that question and move on. At that time, by the way, there will be representatives from the Streets Department and our consultants to answer questions on a more personal level, and they will be here throughout this hearing. In many ways, though, Chestnut Street's the most complex and difficult project in the Center City Streets Improvement Program to bring to fruition, and I'm going to do a very brief background and basically state that back in 1975, 5 we converted Sixth through 18th Street into the Chestnut Street Transit Way. It was a bicentennial project. We used federal Urban Mass Transit Administration dollars to both reduce the roadway width, widen the sidewalks, and restrict total the total roadway use to two-way transit. We also provided a new streetscape with trees, and it was the vision of the planners of the day that such improvements would make the street more accessible by and for public transportation, make it pedestrian-friendly, and most important, energize the historically vibrant commercial corridor. 8 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 In all candor, that vision has not been realized. And we realized that almost immediately upon opening of the Chestnut Street Transit Way. That street, for instance, was designed for two-way transit operation, with vehicles stopping mid-block. There were these monolithic structures "Transitrons," which, as we discovered, aside from our today's esthetic thinking, are really ugly. And they were supposed to stop vehicles. And in fact, instead of making transit move more swiftly, they stopped at the light, they stopped at mid-block, they stopped at the light of their end of the street. And almost immediately, they were rendered obsolete as we started to redesign the operation of the street. The mid-block crosswalks were cobblestones where people were tripping. As time went on, we started to do a series of reevaluations of the street. And perhaps more than any other street in the City of Philadelphia, we have surveyed people about what works and what doesn't. Over the past 20 years, each time we 9 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 surveyed, we got a different set of responses. But there was one thing that was consistent: This does not look the way we want a major Center City commercial street to look, this does not function the way we've envisioned it. Several times in the past years, 8 we've made significant changes to the street.

One 9 of those changes, of course, was removing those 10 Transitrons, just physically removing them. 11 Another was removing the cobblestones in the 12 middle of the block that were there that people 13 simply thought of as tripping hazards and were 14 really unsafe in that they invited pedestrians to 15 cross mid-block, and now buses were going to the 16 corners. 17 Then we made another decision, and that 18 decision was really predicated upon a reality of 19 the street. And that was that although we were 20 thinking that this street would be transit-only, as the years passed, more and more of the individual properties were converted into smaller and smaller commercial store frontages. And more and more of them did not have rear loading access. And so, in the early 1980s, 10 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 a program was begun which basically said with a special pass, you could load and unload on the street. That special pass, which was limited to those businesses without rear parking, started to create a whole new influx of problems. Though loading could occur on the street, the two-way transit started to play leapfrog around the stopped buses, creating, in all candor, not a safe situation. The next development followed, and that was limiting the street back to a one-way access street, accommodating loading on the north side of the street and keeping transit to eastbound service on the southern side of the street. Functionally, that has worked well from the vantage point of transit, but what we've seen over time is that more and more vehicles are using the street to load throughout Center City Philadelphia, and we've lost the identity and character of the street as a transit way, and we have lost the identity and character of the street as a place that you want to be. That has a lot to do with the condition 11 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 of the streetscape. It did not age as well as most of us in that room. The sidewalks were dealt with early on. And for the bicentennial, in a decision that was perhaps really bad, we decided not to deal with some issues on that street which, today, we have to grapple with. One is the fact that we had many vaults extending under the sidewalks, so we used thin break pavers. They cracked, they're hard to replace. All of these issues together made us realize that there were so many challenges that in 1993, the Mayor's Office of Transportation and the Department of Streets started to initiate a program to look at what was different about Chestnut Street, what were the deficiencies both physically and operational, and what could we do to make it more viable as a transportation corridor. As a special place, the transit way itself, with its 20-foot roadway and deteriorating environment, showed an expenditure of $12 million 20 years ago. And that has not withstood the test of time. 12 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 The Mayor has stated his full support for the revitalization of the street and directed the Department of Streets to proceed with force to implement an improvement program. The Streets Department retained then a team of professionals, including Pennoni Associates Consulting Engineers; and Kise, Straw and Kolodner, Architects- Planners. And this is the same team that developed the design plans for the Avenue of the Arts. This scheme that we are sharing with you today is one that dealt with and came out of a myriad of alternatives. We evaluated. We evaluated making it pedestrian-only, transit-only, transit-bike, transit-bike-car, transit-bike-car- pedestrian facilities, two ways and one ways. We looked at the issue of loading zones. We looked at the potential of taking all loading off the street and putting it on the cross-streets.

And, fortunately, that discussion and evaluation and studies progressively led us to the decision that we would like to present to you today, which we think balances all of the modes on 13 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 the street. Our proposal is to widen the existing 20-foot roadway from Sixth to 18th Street by 4 feet on. Within the widened roadway, we propose three lanes: an exclusive transit lane for buses and bicycles on the southerly side; a lane for general motor vehicular traffic in the middle; and a lane on the northerly side for general parking, with special zones for loading and unloading drop-off deliveries. In brief, Madame Chairwoman, the Administration proposes putting motor vehicles back on Chestnut Street, providing approximately 130 new parking spaces, special zones for loading and unloading, an exclusive lane for buses and bicycles. We've also expanded the scope of the project, which initially stopped at 18th Street, with certain improvements to be carried out from 18th through to 22nd Street so that we could weave these improvements into other parts of the neighborhood, which were rightly a part of the Chestnut Street experience. As we noted earlier, Chestnut Street is 14 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 unique. It has a number of diverse constituencies -- some on the street, some off the street -- with serious interest in the nature and form of this transportation and commercial environment as well as with the operation of the street. We recognize this and we recognize the reality that timely improvement is not only vital for the street, but it's vital for the overall economic success of all of Center City. We've sought out and listened to many interested parties. There have been a series of special Chestnut Street business groups that, over the years, we have relied on to share their concerns and their operations. We have spoken with City Planning, the Parking Authority and the Philadelphia Police Department about this project. And they have been involved in the design. We've met with representatives of the Trolley Coalition, the Clean Air Council, the Bicycle Coalition, and the Delaware Valley Regional Railroad Passengers, and we've met with property and business owners on the street. And, of course, we've met with Council President Street 15 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 and Councilman DiCicco and their staffs to brief them as we evolved in this iterate process of design. As to the funding: years ago, 12 6 million; 20 years later, more. Throughout the 7 alternative evaluation stages of this design, we 8 talked with State and federal officials of whether 9 or not we could find a single source of money for 10 Chestnut Street. It became clear that there was 11 no single source of money. 12 So we began, as we moved and defined 13 our intermodal concept, to realize that as an 14 intermodal project, intermodal dollars were 15 appropriate for those portions of the design which 16 are emphasizing individual modes. 6 million in construction dollars for Chestnut 20 Street. That's what makes this a real project, that's what makes it timely now for to us look at this as a package for construction and to look at this design. There's now a reality which, for the past several years, we could no pinpoint, but this 16 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 project can move forward. Our proposal is to move forward in two separate packages. To move first on the eastern end of the street, from City Hall east. The reason for that funding --

You mean from Broad Street?

From Broad Street, I'm sorry, east. Funding success, as I stated, came from the very complex solution that we're presenting to you today. It also came from the fact that the Mayor is very persistent that this street and project could not go away and that we had to do something to change both the look, the tenor, and the way we as Philadelphians feel about the street. And it also came about this Council supported and passed in the 1998 capital budget clear money to redo Chestnut Street; in fact, a significant $4 million appropriation. Together, it's taken almost four years for us to get to the point we are today, with the clear commitment for dollars, with a design that 17 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 we believe balances very, very difficult demands on a street with limited cart way and limited sidewalks. We have something for everyone and not everything that everyone wants. Funding is in place. It's time to move forward and do something for Chestnut Street. Joe Syrnick will describe in some detail the physical issues of the street, how it operates, and we'll be available to answer questions from the committee.

Could I just ask you, before you go to Joe, do you or Joe address the proposed timetable for this to happen?

Yes.

Go ahead, Mr. Syrnick.

Good afternoon. Before I start my testimony, I think I should mention that up from front there on the easels, we have some sketches or renderings which show in pictures what we're going to discuss today. Also, I would like to note the arrival of the Streets Commissioner, who is in the back 18 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 somewhere. And it's my pleasure to present this testimony on his behalf. The unique challenge of the design of Chestnut Street has been to develop a fundable, operational improvement, which is compatible with the current needs of the corridor, and one which will also create the best opportunity for revitalization of the street. It is our strong conviction that the intermodal improvement program we present today best meets this challenge. We will discuss the physical improvements, the construction schedule, and the operation of the new corridor when improvements are complete. The improvements are as follows: From Sixth Street to 18th Street, the roadway will be widened to 28 feet with bump-outs at intersections on the north side. Roadway paving milled and resurfaced. Work will also include new granite curbing; special architecturally-treated, cast-in-place concrete sidewalks; new drainage facilities, new street lights and traffic signals; new streetscape elements, such as trees, transit 19 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 shelters, signs, and bicycle racks. The 28-foot roadway width will provide an exclusive transit bicycle lane on the south side, a general vehicular traffic lane in the center, and a protected parking loading lane on the north side of Chestnut Street. Street lights will be the new pedestrian-scale fixtures recently developed by the Center City District and installed by the City as part of CCD's Walk! Philadelphia Program. Also, signing and other street elements, as provided in the CCD's streetscape program, will be incorporated into the Chestnut Street improvement. Traffic signalization on Chestnut Street will be coordinated with and connected into the Department of Streets Center City Traffic Signalization System. In the section between 18th Street and 20th Street, the work will be comparable to that east of 18th Street, except that the roadway widening will not take place. Traffic operations as they now are. Between 20th Street and 22nd Street, we 20 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 will only do minor landscaping and new lighting. No new curbs or sidewalk work will be performed, but the roadway will be resurfaced. Traffic operations in these two blocks will remain as they are now. As Denise mentioned, Chestnut Street will be improved in two distinct construction contracts: Sixth Street to Broad Street and Broad Street to 22nd Street. After thorough evaluation, it has been concluded that the most suitable initial construction package should be the easterly portion of the project; that is from Sixth Street to Broad Street. The reasons for this decision involve the existing street conditions, which is worse in that area, the extensive proposals and plannings for hotels and other development west of Broad Street, the uncertainty surrounding the timing of the Meridian Place demolition and its possible impact on the Chestnut Street project, and other traffic issues. Assuming that we stay on our proposed schedule, the first contract, Sixth Street to Broad Street, will be bid in late 1998. The 21 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 second, Broad Street to 22nd Street, will be bid in late 1999. During construction, the Department of Streets will utilize special construction techniques and disciplines to assure access to businesses and properties, coordinate vehicular deliveries, and provide for pedestrian movement along Chestnut Street. Certainly, utility work will be performed by the utility companies prior to our improvement contracts.

There will be undoubtedly many inconveniences during constructions, and perhaps some outright disruption, but we believe it will be manageable and we pledge to do our utmost to keep it to a minimum. There are extensive underground vaults along Chestnut Street. Our design team identified 106 such vaults between Sixth Street and Broad Street alone. They have had generally good cooperation from businesses on the street gaining access to and for evaluation of these vaults. The basic philosophy of the improvement is to avoid impact on vaults, if at all possible. 22 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Unfortunately it is not always possible. For those vaults which will be unavoidably affected, businesses will be contacted by the design team before construction starts and solutions discussed. And there is, of course, always the possibility of a vault being discovered during construction, of which no one was aware. These situations will be handled in a manner similar to the vaults we know about. For the intermodal improvement of Chestnut Street to function effectively, the three new operational elements on the street -- general traffic, parking and loading, and the exclusive bus-bike lane -- must interface and operate cooperatively in an environment of control. Center City has four east-west arteries for general traffic: Arch Street, John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Walnut Street, and most significantly, Market Street. Chestnut Street is not your typical vehicular artery. It is special and unique. The central concept of the intermodal improvement is that Chestnut Street is not a place to go through; 23 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 it is a place to go to. Accordingly, vehicular traffic will not function as it does on Arch street or Walnut Street but will interface with the other two operations on the street to serve the needs and best interests of Chestnut Street. Approximately 100 new metered on-street parking spaces, between Sixth Street and 18th Street, will be provided. Unmetered loading zones in each block will also be provided. The purpose of these on-street spaces will be to service the customer and delivery needs of Chestnut Street, not to function as on-street commuter parking, nor to function as on-street area-wide truck distribution centers. The new parking loading zones will be enforced. The Philadelphia Parking Authority has worked closely with the Department of Streets in the development of this program. As we evaluate alternatives for Chestnut Street, the retention of the transit lane has been an important consideration. It has been key to the future operation of the street and development of a funding package for the 24 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 improvement. Currently, the entire 20-foot roadway is dedicated to transit. The intermodal project will reduce it to an 11-foot exclusive bike lane. We have met over the past four years with SEPTA, and they have been most cooperative with the City in seeking some solution which would allow improvement to come to Chestnut Street. Today SEPTA, while not totally pleased with the shared bus-bike lane and the addition of general traffic to the street, has agreed to the principle and is supportive of the intermodal project, as presented. And, of course, Mr. Cohen is here to speak directly to that. The exclusive transit lane will be specially paved and strongly delineated and signed. It will probably not be separated from the general vehicular traffic by any overall barrier. However, intrusion into the lane by vehicular traffic will be prohibited by regulation and strongly enforced. Also, the treatment of the lane will in no way preclude conversion to a rail trolley facility at some time in the future if funding for 25 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 such a facility becomes available and if the studies show that this is a good thing to do. The exclusivity of the transit lane is essential.

We believe that a city committed to public transportation, as Philadelphia is, must do everything possible to keep transit on an equal playing field with private auto travel. Our intention is to retain the transit priority concept inherent in the existing Transit Way, even while returning general traffic to the street. To that end, general vehicular traffic will not be permitted to make right turns to southbound cross-streets at five locations. The reason for this necessary restriction is twofold: first, the traffic safety hazard of vehicular traffic crossing into and across bus and bicycle traffic in a signed, designated exclusive bus-bike lane; and, second, the intrusion and progressive usurpation of the exclusive transit lane by general vehicular traffic. As previously noted, Chestnut Street is different and is not intended to function like Arch Street or Walnut Street. At present, no 26 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 vehicular traffic at all is permitted on Chestnut Street. The intermodal improvement will significantly increase the general vehicular access to the street over that that is presented at present. The Department of Streets, the Philadelphia Police Department, and SEPTA strongly endorse this limited restriction to vehicular traffic on Chestnut Street as absolutely essential to the traffic safety operation of the new corridor and the viability of the exclusive transit lane. Finally, Madame Chairwoman, the Mayor's Office of Transportation and the Department of Streets have been working continuously for over four years to bring to fruition this much-needed improvement. There may be no perfect plan, nor is there unanimity of opinion among the diverse advocacy entities as to what the street should be. But we believe we're at a crossroad. With the leadership of the Mayor and Council's significant financial support, we've developed an intermodal improvement plan that has something for everyone; perhaps not everything that each 27 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 interest seeks. We have a controlled exclusive lane for transit and bicycles, a lane to put motor vehicles back on the street, and a protected lay-by for on-street parking, with provisions for loading and unloading. 6 million to bring this concept to reality now. We feel confident that we can put the first contract to bid this year, 1998, and the second in 1999. Thank you for your attention.

Could you just briefly say if the contract is bid, the first contract this year, what is the time line for completion of your proposed project.

We believe both sections can be completed in one construction season. So the one that is bid in the fall of 1999 would be completed during calendar -- I'm sorry, the fall of 1998 would be completed in calendar year 1999. And then the second section would be completed in calendar year 2000.

That's fast 28 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 work. Okay, Councilman DiCicco.

Thank you, Madame Chair. Good afternoon. Mr. Syrnick, you testified to a number of things, and I've got two or three questions. In relationship to the bike racks, bike racks, do you know the number of bike racks at this point that will be installed and how many bikes that they would accommodate? Just a general idea as to the location. Is it at the end of the block or middle of the block or what have you?

We intend to use, first of all, the bike rack that we've been using around the City of Philadelphia, which is the inverted U. Each of those can hold two bicycles and I would think there'd be about three of those in each block, some blocks more.

So a minimum of three per block?

That would three racks, that would be six bicycles.

And the number of 29 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 blocks we're talking about now is. . . ?

It's to 18. 4

Nine? 5

It's or 6 blocks, 9 blocks? 7

Mm-hmm. 8

So that's 54 9 bikes. Using 3, if you have had 2, racks that 10 hold 2 bikes on each block times -- that's per block times is 54, if my math is right correct.

That sounds right.

Do you think that will be sufficient? Given the fact that we are including a bike lane and will be encouraging the use of bicycles, do you think that that number of racks would be sufficient? And if, going forward, we find that the number is not sufficient, will we be able to adapt or include additional bike racks?

First of all, I would love for that number not to be sufficient. As you know, we've in the last two years had a big project to add a bunch of bike racks throughout the City. 30 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Initially, when they first went in, the biggest disappointment to us was that they were, for the most part, not being used. Since SEPTA has been on strike, of course, we've all seen a real increase in bicycle usage, and I've noticed a real increase in the use of these bicycle racks. So the answer is, certainly, we want them to be used. We're trying to bring bikes into the mainstream. The Bicycle Coalition is working with us on that, and we could add as many bike racks as would fit, not just on Chestnut Street but in other locations throughout the city.

On the feeder streets?

Yeah.

The numbered streets, okay.

Yeah.

You also testified to that -- there would be certain areas designated for deliveries. Will there be special hours for deliveries? Have we looked into that?

We were looking at limited time. I'm not exactly sure why you're 31 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 asking me this question, but we were trying to get -- first we looked at each individual block, and we tried to use a common-sense approach as to where the best place in a block would be to have these deliveries. Sometimes it's in center, sometimes it's closer to an end. And we were looking for those delivery zones to be used only for deliveries on that particular block. And in order for that to work, we need to turn these spaces over, so we're going to sign that to have the deliver duration be a very short duration. I'm not sure if it's going to be five minutes, ten minutes, or twenty minutes, but it's going to be one of those times. And that will hopefully guarantee that when a delivery vehicle comes there, there will be a spot for that driver.

I think you'll have a difficult time dictating the time that a delivery should occur. I mean, there are some places that may have a larger delivery than others, and five minutes or ten minutes may not be adequate. Really, where I was going to, and I know in some other cities, deliveries are 32 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 restricted during certain hours -- not before or after, say, o'clock a.m., just as an example, 4 and not during the hours between 8 a.m. and 5 5 p.m., as an example. some cities prohibit 6 deliveries on certain city arteries. And that's 7 so that traffic could continually move. 8 The best case scenario is that everyone would only park in the delivery zone area. That doesn't happen in Philadelphia, we all know that. That's not to say that it shouldn't be happening in Philadelphia, but that doesn't always happen. If you had three delivery trucks, and the area dedicated for deliveries could only accommodate two -- which leads me to another question on size, but I'll get to that in a minute -- the third truck is going to find a place to park. I noticed in New York a couple months ago that they have these special delivery zones. Their streets, quite frankly, for the most part, are wider, and the length from block to block is usually longer than ours, but they were really enforcing that. I didn't see trucks parking anywhere other than in those delivery zone areas. 33 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 That goes to enforcement, I understand and appreciate that. But I just was wondering, have we looked into the possibility of restricting -- what I'm looking to do is restrict as much of the commercial vehicles from Chestnut Street during certain hours of the day. We are talking about buses -- I would probably prefer trolleys, and I'm sure the Trolley Coalition people would like to have that also. But, for the moment, just assuming there won't be any trolleys and we're using buses, one of the problems on the Transit Way today is that it is, to me almost, an industrial highway because the only thing that is there are trucks and buses, and I think we want to get away from that. So if we haven't already looked into it, I would appreciate if we could look into some restrictions on the hours of deliveries. And also, is there a limit on the size of vehicles that will be permitted on the street, with the exception of the buses? And that's a question I'll have for SEPTA when they testify. 34 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287

Let me simply state that currently, there is a restriction on Chestnut Street in terms of the hours that deliveries are permitted, and they're not permitted to be there in the rush. We have looked at every permutation on what to do about deliveries on the street. This was one of our major issues. We've looked, in fact, at paid meters for deliveries, a special meter just for deliveries. We have looked at banning them completely on the street and going around the corner. We, in fact, have looked at every single block face and talked to the many of the property owners door to door, talking about what their delivery needs are. In addition, the CCD actually surveyed a lot of the businesses about their delivery needs. It is extremely difficult to limit specific times, but we do know an incredible amount of detail, and as we move forward with the final regulatory plan for the timing, you'll see how that detail plans out. We know, for instance, how frequently pianos get delivered to Jacobs 35 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Music on the 1600 block, and that is a very particular problem of delivery; as opposed to Rite Aid's, which uses tractor-trailers in specific locations. Our goal is yours; we really want to really limit deliveries on that street. But more than that, what we learned was that many of those trucks parked there today are not delivering to Chestnut Street. They are using that as an area-wide loading zone. We think this plan will put that and stop that in its tracks. It just won't be something you can do. And that's the partnership we've established with the Parking Authority and the police to make sure that occurs.

Okay. My other question was, is there any limitation on the size of the vehicle that will be permitted? For instance, do we want tractor-trailers rolling down Chestnut Street? I don't think so. At least during hours of -- I'm just using an arbitrary number -- 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., as an example.

I think you make a good point. Right now, there is no limit to the size 36 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 of the vehicle. In talking, as Denise said, with the various businesses along the street and some of the delivery companies, we did not get a lot of opposition to our limiting the delivery time to, say, early-morning or night hours when we were talking about a tractor-trailer because that -- first of all, everybody realizes a tractor-trailer is impactive and it takes a long time to load and unload a tractor-trailer. Where we did get opposition was from the smaller stores who receive a lot of their packages through delivery services like UPS, and those were the ones who basically said, We can't afford to have somebody come in here at 5 o'clock in the morning to receive a delivery. And even if we could, we can't get the delivery service to deliver it to us at that time. So while there is no -- there's nothing in this plan right now that would prohibit tractor-trailers from coming at any time if they could find a place to park, I think that that probably would not be too impactive to any of them, based on our discussions with them. 37 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Rite Aid, for example, is one that delivers with large tractor-trailers. They do it very early in the morning. Most of us in this room, I'm sure, have never seen that happen, and yet they're there almost every day because of the nature of their business.

But I think, Joe, I really think that we can find some common grounds on this. I know this from my experience with developers in the neighborhoods that I represent where we have -- where the community has supported the development of a state liquor store, which is a block away from me. We made certain provisos that the trucks would be limited to a certain size and certain hours for delivery. There's a small strip mall that's being built at Sixth and Washington Avenue. Washington Avenue is basically an industrial highway, but we've already made some provisions that the truck sizes would be limited so that the 16-wheelers, you have nothing longer than a 20-foot or a 22-foot truck, tractor-trailer, or whatever you want to call it. These aren't things that are unusual. 38 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 We are doing this through other parts of City. And if we want to create an environment in Center City which is much more pedestrian-friendly, and I'm certainly not doing anything -- at least I know, and I'm speaking for myself, I'm trying not to do anything that would impede business 'cause I think this will increase business people. I'm sure people will take exception to that, but I think this is going to help business. I don't think it helps us to have this environment and have a 16-wheeler driving down Chestnut Street or even coming in alongside the Rite Aid at 16th and Chestnut and unloading. That is really not pedestrian-friendly. And these corporations and companies have made these accommodations in other communities in Philadelphia. I've been a party to those negotiations. So I really think we need to look at that very closely. I mean, we've met and we've talked about this whole issue and about the right turns and all, and I think we're really moving forward. But I would hate for us to have to wind up back where we were with the traffic and the 39 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 congestion that's there. And if it's a tractor-trailer delivery for some of the more major corporations, they do have people that are on site basically hours a 6 day. They have security people. I don't think 7 it's going to increase their costs to have 8 somebody there at 5 or 6 o'clock in the morning. 9 For the smaller stores, maybe that 10 would be an inconvenience and it would be more 11 costly for them to provide someone there at 6 12 o'clock in the morning to get a delivery off of 13 the UPS truck. I'm talking about the bigger-size 14 trucks, the things that we're really are going to 15 do -- I mean be going backwards basically and not 16 really move forward with this project. 17 So I think we really need to look at 18 that. Thank you. 19

Thank you. 20

Thank you for 21 your testimony, and it's been suggested that we 22 take a five-minute, but I'm going to shorten to it 23 a three-minute look at any of the charts in the 24 back. Particularly if you want to look at anything in the front, why don't you do that 40 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 during this break for sure. And then if anyone -- this testimony might go on a while, we have 4 different witnesses. 5 Feel free during the hearings if you 6 want to go back and look further at the details of 7 particular blocks, but we'll take a three-minute 8 break for people to move around and see as much as 9 they can see. 10 (Short break taken.) 11 (Proceedings resume.) 12

Could we 13 resume the hearings, please. 14 Our next witness is Bernard Cohen, 15 Assistant General Manager of SEPTA. 16 (Bernard Cohen comes forward.) 17

And I would 18 like to request that each person testifying today 19 really try to keep your testimony focussed and to 20 the point. I think we got a good start with 21 Denise Goren and Joe Syrnick, and hopefully with 22 Mr. Cohen. But the important point is to get your main points out and -- because we have a lot of people who have interests and viewpoints that they 41 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 want to express. Mr. Cohen.

Thank you and good afternoon. My name is Bernard Cohen. I'm an Assistant General Manager at SEPTA, and I'm here today to represent John K. Leary, Jr., who is the General Manager. I'd like to thank you, Councilwoman Fernandez, for inviting us and as well as the other members of the committee to testify today before the committee. I'd like, on behalf of SEPTA, to state our goal for modernizing Chestnut Street to achieve our support for modernizing Chestnut Street, to achieve the goals that the City described earlier at this hearing. A stronger Chestnut Street will help all of us. The concept of a transit way that provides mobility through the heart of otherwise congested city streets has been successful in a number of other North American cities. In these cities, the existence of a transit way has contributed to increased business, enhanced 42 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 quality of the area around the transit way, and increased transit ridership. These cities cite the following three critical requirements for success: The area around the transit way must be attractive, pedestrian-friendly, and well maintained; local businesses and their organizations must actively support the effort; and traffic and parking laws must be enforced. SEPTA supports the redevelopment of a modern transportation corridor on Chestnut Street that incorporates the above criteria. Our main interest with respect to Chestnut, as it is everywhere we operate, is ensuring safe and efficient operations. Walnut Street, two blocks, away shows how automobile traffic can slow transit service and is the model we would like to avoid from a transit perspective. Two issue with Chestnut Street that will require careful attention are the presence of bicycles in the bus lane and the frequency of right-hand turns permitted by automobiles. We would prefer not to share the transit way. A well-enforced, exclusive bus lane with few -- very 43 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 few if any -- right-hand turns by automobiles would be ideal from a transit perspective. That being said, we recognize that many concerns need to be balanced as the planning for Chestnut Street goes forward. We are here to support the City's plan, and we will work closely with the Department of Streets to make the redevelopment of Chestnut Street a great success. Thank you again for this opportunity to present testimony today.

Could we just clarify for the record the numbers and where are the right-hand turns. I know at Broad Street -- are there any other right-hand turns permitted in the proposed plan?

Right now, there are no 18 right-hand turns permitted in this plan on the five streets where one could go southbound. The street, as it's designed, (unintelligible) has only left turns so that you have to do a circuitous pattern to get -- a circular pattern of lefts; no different than any of our other streets in downtown Philadelphia where certain turning movements are prohibited, such as on East Market 44 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Street.

Okay. Well, perhaps we've heard the first of the users of Chestnut Street who are agreeing, but it's not perfect as far as you're concerned; is that right Mr. Cohen?

That's correct. And, as I said, we'll -- we will work -- continue to work closing with the Department of Streets to try to accommodate both the efficient operation of our buses as well as the other mobility needs that will be addressed on Chestnut Street.

Okay. Councilman DiCicco.

Thank you, Madame Chair. Good afternoon, Mr. Cohen.

Good afternoon, sir.

Could you tell me the type of vehicles that SEPTA is planning to use on Chestnut Street?

Well, today we operate 40-foot buses on Chestnut Street, and I would expect that we would continue to operate 40-foot 45 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 buses on Chestnut Street.

Well, the 40-footers, are they the double bus? Is that what the --

No, that's the 60-foot, articulated bus.

I just wanted to know.

We are purchasing -- in fact, at the SEPTA Board meeting this month, we are purchasing 155 new articulated buses. We're asking the Board to approve that purchase.

Those big long ones, you mean?

Those are the big long ones. And we will be deploying those on our busiest routes. I can't tell you today exactly which routes will be getting them, but we will be deploying them on the routes where we have city routes, where we have the most demand that we are not able to meet today with the 40-foot buses. So we'll be looking at specifically where to deploy those longer buses as they come in. 46 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287

So you understand, I'm not looking for longer buses on Chestnut Street; I'm looking to smaller buses. Has there been any consideration to using a smaller than the 40-foot bus on Chestnut Street, something that is more pedestrian-, transit-friendly?

Well, at the moment, we have not considered using small buses on Chestnut Street because one of the things we do with our buses is we go through -- we put them through what's called "a cross-routing system" where a bus might operate on one route in the morning and a second route in the afternoon. And we do that because it's a more efficient way to deploy our buses throughout the city. So the fleet plan that we have developed does not foresee using small buses on routes where we would typically be cross-routing those buses with other routes. So at the moment, there are no plans to operate the small buses. To the extent that there is a plan developed for a better circulation -- a new route that would provide better circulation to key 47 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 business and cultural and historic locations in the city, that is an area where we are looking at, but those would be dedicated to that service.

I mean because we've been looking for, I guess -- for about a year, Denise? -- to talk about how we move people around more effectively in the Center City area; in particular, the area east of Broad, to take people down to the historical district -- hopefully, the future site of the Simon DeBartolo Entertainment Center. We're looking for a smaller vehicle that will move people around, with less inconvenience to other vehicular traffic, less pollution, things of that nature.

I'm aware of that interest, and we are actively looking in a different way of serving that market using small buses. And as I said, those would be dedicated to that service.

And I guess it's something of a more personal nature to me, and I know it will change somewhat when the transit way is removed and we get back to a more common type of thoroughfare on Chestnut Street. But it is, for me extremely -- and I 48 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 like walking, and do I a lot of walking when I can, when have the time along Chestnut Street to do my shopping, and it is most offensive when those 60-footers come rolling down Chestnut Street. And the fumes, the diesel fumes, what have you, the dust that they kick up, it's just not a pleasant experience. And if we are going to make it a pleasant experience, I think the size of the public vehicles should be conducive to making that -- should be all a part of that whole experience. And I know from a question -- I would assume, from a question of economics, that from SEPTA's standpoint, that the larger the bus, the more people you put in it, you generate more fares with only one driver as opposed to two smaller buses is a considerable amount of additional for SEPTA to be encumbered with. But I think if we're going to set this tone and make this a really great experience, we may be able to encourage more people to use the public transportation, and more people would be getting on the smaller buses, and it may actually 49 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 pay for itself in the end.

We carry about 32,500 people a day on the 4 routes that cross Chestnut Street, so we would have to look at what the number of buses would be that would be required in order to serve that.

Four routes?

We have the Route 9, the 21, the 38, and the 42.

All going up and down Chestnut Street?

That's correct. And we have about a total daily ridership of about 32,000. One of the things we're trying to do with the fleet plan work that we're doing now is to do a better job of matching the size of the vehicle to the ridership demand, so I'd be happy to take another look at this issue of the size of the issue on Chestnut Street. I'm just saying that where we have high-volume routes, it's obviously an economic issue from an operations point of view and from a capital point of view to deal with a smaller 50 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 vehicle.

Is that 32,000 going both ways? So if it's one way --

That's total daily ridership.

Going east.

Correct, that's correct.

And there's a lot of times -- I mean there are certain times it's higher. I mean, where I live, on Federal Street -- Mr. Leary was in a few months ago and we talked about this a little bit. Off-peak hours, even during peak hours, I have never seen a full bus. I mean, that line for me would be appropriate to have a Phlash kind of bus or something maybe a little bit larger. It just doesn't -- there's no need for it. And you have this humongous bus rolling down, and we have a lot of other problems, which I'm not going to burden this record with but --

It sounds like you're making the argument for trolleys.

Well, I'm getting there, I'm getting there. That was one of my -- 51 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 My last question is: Has any consideration been made to trolleys? And if it has been and you've decided against trolleys, could you explain to us why not?

At the present time, there are no current plans to develop a trolley operation on Chestnut Street. The issue for us is, again, as I said before, is the efficient and safe operations. And a street running for a trolley system continues to be a challenge. It's, in our view, it is a -- it is a mode that was developed in a different era, worked well in a different era. But to try to make it work effectively today, to intermix trolley and street operations, which you would inevitably have -- I mean, you would really have to have an absolutely dedicated right-of-way in order to make effective use of the investment that it would take to put a trolley system there. As I heard the City representatives speak, I don't believe there's anything in this plan that precludes it. But the kind of investment for us that would be required to 52 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 develop a trolley system on Chestnut Street is not something that we think we have the resources to do at this point.

But you're not sure.

I'm sorry?

You're not certain of that, though.

Well --

I heard you say you haven't really looked at that closely. Didn't I hear you say that?

We haven't done a study of a trolley service on Chestnut Street, no. 16 But I'm saying that the inevitable incursion of traffic into that bus lane, if right-hand turns are going to be made, the cross traffic, the cross streets, to the extent that there is traffic blocking so that the trolley can't get across at intersections, all of that in a congested area, it makes it a difficult decision to make that kind of investment.

I'm sorry, not to be confrontational, but we've known about this 53 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 plan for a long time. I can't understand why SEPTA would not have even looked at the notion of possibly doing trolleys.

Well --

The Trolley Coalition people, the Bicycle Coalition, everybody's been on this, this has been talked about for a long time. And I think that's why -- how we get ourselves in trouble sometimes because we're not listening. Although we may not be able to give the answers that everybody would like for us to give them, we're not listening sometimes.

Well, I think our -- the way we've addressed this issue with respect to other routes is to say that we have a project to restore trolley service -- to restore light rail service onto Girard Avenue.

In the line? 21

The 15. 22

And the 23 line? 23

Well, we have funding in the --

The Councilman 54 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 lives on--

And the line? 4

Yes, we have funding 5 identified in the out-years of the capital program 6 for the 23. 7 But I'm saying that I believe the way 8 the General Manager's answered this question in 9 the past is to say we are focussed restoring 10 service on the Route 15, that we're getting ready 11 to award a contract, in fact, to get the design 12 finalized on that. 13 And we're focussed right now on doing 14 the best we can to make the Route 15 Light Rail 15 Restoration Project a success, and we will look 16 beyond that at how we succeed with the Route 15. 17

My colleague's 18 saying I could trade you Chestnut for the 23. 19 (Laughter.) 20

I'm sorry? 21

But I think my 22 colleague and I, we both are into this whole thing 23 about traffic calming and making the street experience a lot more pleasurable for people who live here and visit here. 55 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 And I would really appreciate it if you, I mean, gave it some real serious thought. Not just to say, Councilman, we looked at it, it doesn't work, but really look at it. If we're going to create this whole environment in Center City, which we've done a pretty good job to date with, other cities are buying our trolleys. I mean, you've heard about this before and read about it. And they're putting in trolley systems. And it's all part of the experience of downtown, wherever it is, whether it's San Francisco or Chicago, whatever it is they're doing. Why not us? We're kind of going in reverse order here. And people want to be on trolleys. It always amazes me when I see people who come from other areas and never saw a trolley but get on the buses that look like trolleys because they want to get on a trolley -- and they're really not on a trolley, but they don't know it, I guess. But that always amazed me how people want to try that experience and get on that stuff. And I know -- and I'll end with this -- 56 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 that people in my community who I'm constantly arguing with in South Philadelphia about shopping in Center City and it's really a much nicer place than it was 10, years ago, and you don't have 6 to use your car. Almost to a person, they tell 7 me, for whatever reason, they don't like buses. 8 But when the trolley comes through -- 9 and Mr. Spivak's back there and plays Santa Claus 10 on the trolley once in a while. When the trolley 11 comes through, especially for the people in my age 12 group, the 50-or-older's, they want to get their 13 kids on it, they want to talk to them about it, 14 it's an experience. And people are not as 15 intimidated with a trolley as they are with buses but. . . I have no other questions, but I really would appreciate it if you would get back to us quickly on it. And I'd like some really meaningful discussion on the trolley service on Chestnut Street. Joe wants to jump in because he's going to tell us, probably from a structural position, it despite make sense or whatever?

I can't help myself, 57 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Councilman, sorry.

I know. If you work for the Streets Department, it's inherent.

I think sometimes we get a little confused as to what we're talking about here, though, on Chestnut Street. We're talking about four bus routes that come from a long way away, and they just use Chestnut Street as a very short part of their route. The Route 9 bus, for example, is from upper Roxborough and it comes down to Center City and then travels back by Walnut Street. I mean --

Well, do they have to use Chestnut and Walnut? Could we not move them maybe to Market? I don't know.

Well --

If you said they only use Chestnut Street to get from point A to point B, maybe we've got to find another street that they can use where it's not as intrusive.

And maybe they even could use a Chestnut Street that had rail traffic also, trolley traffic also.

A combination. 58 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287

It's just -- we don't want to get into a situation where we think that we're replacing the four routes that run on Chestnut Street with trolleys, because I don't think that --

I'm not suggesting that.

-- necessarily works.

And your point is well taken. That's not -- my suggestion is maybe there is a combination, I don't know. I'm going to SEPTA. They are the people-movers, and I think they should be able to come back with something that maybe accommodates all of our needs. And I think that some of people who are in this room today are here to testify in favor of trolleys and bikes. Maybe we could find some common ground and accommodate everybody's needs and still move people efficiently. But I don't see how it would be appropriate for us to put a restriction, as an example, on the size of the delivery truck that may be 60-foot long but allow a bus that is 60-foot long to use the same street that we don't 59 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 want tractor-trailers on. To me, the bus is a tractor-trailer. I look at it as a tractor-trailer. One moves products and materials and merchandise; the other moves people.

Let me say for the record that I would hope you would decide not to do those extra-long ones on Chestnut Street. I mean, talk about something that's ugly and intimidating. Even if you're in a car, they're intimidating, so as a pedestrian, I find them. . . So I just think that would be a terrible mistake on a street where we're really doing all we can to have it be more attractive and customer- and pedestrian-friendly.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you. Let's move on to our next panel. Our next panel is: Ann Dixon, of the Chestnut Street Coalition; Sue McNamara, the Bicycle Coalition; Dennis Winters the Clean Air Council; Nancy Lavin, PhillyWalks; and Joel Spivak, of the Philadelphia Trolley Coalition. 60 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 The panels coming after that are folks from Society Hill Furniture, from I Goldberg, and Spain's Cards and Gifts. And then there's a panel of Center City District, Thomas Jefferson University, Amerimar Enterprises, The Preservation Alliance of Greater Philadelphia, and the Parkway Corporation. And then a series of citizens who have asked to testify -- other types of citizens -- or citizens with -- citizens who have asked to testify. So would you identify yourself and proceed with your testimony.

My name is Ann Dixon. I'm a member of the Chestnut Street Coalition, as are the following groups: The Bicycle Coalition, The Clean Air Council, The Delaware Valley Association of Railroad Passengers, PhillyWalks, and The Trolley Coalition. We want the City to make a new plan for Chestnut Street. The Streets Department plan has problems. Widening the streets will kill 20-year-old trees, reduce sidewalk -- thus pedestrian space, and does not allow for the 61 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 possibility of warm-weather cafes. It does not do anything to attract pedestrians, residents, or tourists. It brings increased traffic pollution and noise to the area. The shared bus-bike lane is unpleasant and unsafe for bicyclists. The plan relies heavily on law enforcement. There are already many unenforceable laws in the city; we don't need more. The right-turn restrictions are not strong enough, and we fear they can easily be overturned with somewhat minimal political pressure. Lastly and most importantly, this multimillion-dollar plan has not, until now, provided any opportunities for public involvement. The Chestnut Street Coalition has done canvassing of Chestnut Street businesses and found that many store managers were unaware of the City's plan. Everyone agrees that the street could be improved; we just don't think that the City's plan will do that. Pedestrians bring businesses to stores. According to the Center City District's own pedestrian counts, there are more pedestrians on Chestnut Street than Walnut during weekday lunch 62 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 times; yet Walnut has full-time auto traffic. Parking meters in front of stores are most often used for people who work in the stores rather than customers. Therefore, the City's plan of adding a parking lane won't improve business. There is auto parking in nearby Liberty Place. Individual and groups within the Coalition have different specific concerns and ideas for the street. You will now hear from them.

Thank you. My name is Joel Spivak. I'm the Chairperson for Philadelphia Trolley Coalition. I would like to remind everybody that actually SEPTA had proposed a light-rail plan for Chestnut Street about a year ago at a -- we all paid about $25 to go and see the proposal that Mr. Heinley (ph.) presented a while back about having a loop down Chestnut Street. So I can get you additional copies of that if you'd like. When we talk about the Chestnut Street Transit Way, it actually wasn't completed as it was designed and, therefore, it was doomed to fail before it was finished. There was no effort to 63 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 maintain the street, there were no like additional promotions or anything from the City of Philadelphia to bring people back to Chestnut Street after it had been closed for a very long time. And because of this, it failed. And it was one of those kind of things in Philadelphia where we build something halfway, and then we say, Well, we told you so, it wouldn't work. Also what they created when they opened the street, is they created additional stringent regulations for businesses concerning signs and roll-gates. It made it very difficult to have a business on Chestnut Street. A number of stores were broken into constantly because they were denied to have roll-gates. And it wasn't until one of the chain stores actually sued the City of Philadelphia, or threatened to sue the City of Philadelphia, that they were allowed to put roll-gates on. The City seemed to have abandoned the street, and it became kind of a free-for-all or a hangout for homeless people. Actually, if you walk down Chestnut 64 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Street today and look at the sidewalk, the condition of the sidewalk and the condition of the benches, if this were in front of your house, you'd be fined by the City of Philadelphia for maintaining such a sloppy environment.

While you're on that, I had met earlier. I'd like to ask the Streets Department to be -- are they still here, the Commissioner? Or Joe Syrnick, is he still here? Okay. While Denise Goren was talking, I was remembering a friend last week, a woman in her 70's, tripped on the loose bricks on Chestnut Street by the vacant building there right from Broad Street. She fell and broke her kneecap. And for people that age to get that kind of injury is very serious. I would like to request the Streets Department to be sure to work with L&I to make sure that the sidewalks along Chestnut Street are kept in good repair while we're waiting these next two years for this construction 'cause I don't think the City can afford a lot of lawsuits. Or I guess it's the businesses along there that are the 65 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 responsible parties. Excuse me, go ahead.

Over the last couple months, I've been reading various editorials talking about the past glories of Chestnut Street. One particular issue comes to mind where they quote the Kennedys came here and they stood on the corridor of 15th and Chestnut Street. Today, if the Kennedys would come here, they couldn't actually stand on the corner of 15th and Chestnut. The sidewalk there has been closed for about seven years due to the Meridian fire. Almost instantly, when the sidewalk was closed, it forced the very successful bookstore out of business, and any business surrounding the bookstore that was doing very well also was put out of business. These issues are blamed on the Transit Way, but they're actually the fault of a closed sidewalk. Transit ways -- we say transit ways can't work in Philadelphia, yet they've managed to work all over the world. There are over 20 very successful transit ways in the United States, all 66 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 with light-rail vehicles because they are much more pedestrian-friendly. In fact, a couple weeks ago, I was in Boston, and in The Boston Globe travel section, the headline reads, "Baltimore With Ease." The second sentence says, "The secret's out. Light rail is the way to tour our historic city." Within Philadelphia, we have always resisted progress. On the north apron of City Hall, there's a statute of John Bullet (ph.), and I'm not exactly sure who he was, but he was the major opponent to modern public transit. He resisted the electrification of the street railway system for a couple of years and finally lost the battle, and we got the public transit. Throughout our history, we have always resisted new and unique things to Philadelphia. We were one of the later cities to have the telephone. Even smaller cities surrounding us had airports before we did. I guess you could say we are being true to our history. What we really should be looking at for Chestnut Street is to making it a very, very unique place where people would want to come from 67 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 all over the world to be on it. I think the City Council and our Planning Commission need to have the courage and commitment to create a role model for Chestnut Street and for cities for the 21st century. Thank you.

Hi. My name is Sue McNamara. I'm the Executive Director of the Bicycle Coalition. We are a 2,000-member group in the Delaware Valley. We are a member of the Chestnut Street Coalition, which Ann spoke up, and agree with all of those principles that she spoke of. When I look at the plan for Chestnut Street, it's upsetting that the City couldn't come up with something somewhat more imaginative. And some of the things that we've been told is, Well, we want to create Walnut Street, look how thriving and successful Walnut Street is. But I look at the 1100 block of Walnut Street, and that's not very thriving and successful. My office is on 11th Street, and there are a lot of empty buildings. I think when we talk about Walnut Street, we tend to look at 68 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 the model of around Rittenhouse Square and Borders and where you have an anchor store. So sometimes we look at things like adding traffic as the solution when we're not really looking at what is there on the street. You look at many places on Chestnut Street, and you have dead space. You have dead space around like Ninth, where there's that big parking lot. You have dead space by the University. You have a lot of areas that really have dead space that are not pedestrian-friendly spaces, that pedestrians would have to transverse a big space to get from one pedestrian area to another pedestrian area. And that's a problem. Adding traffic isn't going to solve that. That being said, with the existing plan, I think that the most important thing that the Bicycle Coalition can do is to support the right-turn restrictions. If we lose the right-turn restrictions and just have a regular street -- and I do applaud the Mayor's Office of Transportation and the Streets Department for the idea of the right-turn restrictions 'cause it's a good idea. If we lose that, then it's even more 69 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 dangerous than it is now. I don't like the bike-bus thing, as SEPTA said. As a cyclist, I don't want to ride behind a bus, I don't want to ride in front of a bus. I think you're going to create problems with that. To make the street even wider and add a bike lane is probably taking away too much from the pedestrians. And I do understand that everybody has to give in a little bit in this situation, so we're willing to give that and do the shared bike-bus lane. However, if it becomes an area where cars are staging themselves to make right turns, then not only will you have a bus on you as a cyclist, you have the cars staging themselves to make the right turns and going around the bus. You have an incredibly dangerous situation. And as Ann said in her testimony, I don't see how that doesn't get turned over politically next year or the year after. You know, somebody says, Oh, these right turns are a silly idea, and they get the Mayor's ear or they get the right person's ear, and they're gone. 70 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 To me, that just -- I would like to see some sort of physical impediment -- I don't know what, I've thought about this for a while -- to keep those right-turn restrictions in there. The red road that they have is good, but I still don't see it as being totally. And also, as Ann said, this plan relies a huge amount on enforcement. And the right-turn restriction relies a huge amount on enforcement. You see how many cars drive down Chestnut Street now when it's clearly they're not supposed to be driving down there except for during the SEPTA strike. And, you know, the cars are already there; you're just preventing them from crossing over to a lane? You know -- I don't know, that's just -- that just doesn't seem to be very wise, and that seems to be a dangerous situation.

And, unfortunately, it will probably come to the cyclist gets hurt by a bus or gets hurt by somebody making a right turn lane, and then we go back and we reexamine the whole situation, which is how these things always work. And that's really unfortunate. You know, I don't 71 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 want to sacrifice any of my cyclists for us to look at this. So I would encourage City Council to examine how they can better enforce and better maintain that right-turn restriction. Thank you.

If I could just add there. I think it's important for citizens to know, it would really be the District Councilperson on the east side of Broad, which is currently Councilman DiCicco.

So if you want to make sure the right-hand turns never happen, you have to make sure I get reelected. (Laughter.)

He added that, but they would really have the key to yes or no on whether that happens, and also could really help with enforcement. So those two Councilpeople will be, you know, very key in protecting that.

Thank you. My name is Dennis Winters, and I'm a policy analyst with the Clean Air Council, the oldest membership-based local environmental public interest group in the 72 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Philadelphia area. I want to thank the City Council for holding this hearing on the City's plan for the Chestnut Street Transit Way. The (Clean Air) Council is disturbed by the fact that the present design for Chestnut Street between 18th and Seventh Street has progressed to an advanced stage with almost no 9 regard for the public. There have been no public meetings or hearings on the project, even though special-interest stakeholders have been intimately involved from the very beginning. While the Center City District and the Ritz Carlton Hotel, for instance, have legitimate interest in the future of Chestnut Street, no one has asked the folks who use Chestnut Street today what they would like to see the street become. The smaller shops and businesses on and near Chestnut Street have not been drawn into the planning process. It is difficult to imagine how the merits of the planned project could have won Federal Transit Administration financial support. Scarce transit funds are going to be spent to put automobiles back on what once was a transit way. 73 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 While the usefulness of the proposed renovation is questionable, even if the present design endures, it is likely that precipitous political action at some point will remove the right-turn-on-southbound-streets prohibition and make the combined lane virtually useless for buses and bicycles when automobiles are turning right in front of them. While the project is presently moving forward, partly because of a Congressional earmark of almost a million dollars in FTA money, whoever it was in the Delaware Valley Congressional Delegation that asked for the set-aside for the Chestnut Street project probably did not have any particular design in mind when they agreed to promote it in the Congressional appropriations process. The Clean Air Council questions whether they would find the current plan an expenditure of rare transit funds. The return of automobiles to Chestnut Street is certain to increase the levels of air pollution in Center City. While it may be hoped that the opening of Chestnut Street might relieve congestion on surrounding streets, planners 74 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 understand that convergence will simply attract additional traffic to the downtown area, if there is even a temporary perception of reduced congestion. Air quality is likely to grow worse as carbon monoxide and nitrous oxides inevitably increase at a time when ambient air quality standards are about to be tightened. A lane to be shared by bicycles and buses is doomed to failure. Bicyclists will not feel safe with buses bearing down on them, and bus operators will abhor bicyclists in their path. To insist that both use the same lane is to invite disaster, and we're not talking about a dead bus here. The most likely result will be for bicyclists to move over to the left side of the travel lane next to the narrow parking lane. Then motorists and delivery vehicle operators will be screaming at cyclists to, quote, get in their own lane, unquote. Add a dash of road rage and this situation begs frequent injuries and fatalities. The inevitable result will be for the consequences to again fall on those with the least 75 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 political clout, and a return of the ban on bicycles on Chestnut Street. While the existing condition of the sidewalks is deplorable, the inevitable result of spending money for capital improvements, with little interest in maintenance, completely changing the character of the street, seems both an unnecessary overreaction and a wasteful use of scarce tax dollars.

Replacing maturing trees with typical trees used in the Center City streetscapes also seems like overkill. With an apparent determination to not spend necessary funds for upkeep of the Chestnut Street Transit Way, the Clean Air Council suspects that the City will be revisiting a capital project on Chestnut Street every years or so. 19 But the worse part of the present 20 project is its disappointing lack of vision and imagination. The existing transit mall on Chestnut Street was doomed to failure in 1976 when the design was badly compromised to begin with. Now new players in the city are preparing to duplicate that bad history with another short- 76 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 sighted doomed-to-early-failure project that simply provides a sink for taxpayers' dollars. What is supposed to be a multimodal facility has clearly been designed by people who obviously do not have to rely on transit or a bicycle to get across Center City. Rebuilding Chestnut Street offers a marvelous opportunity to enhance tourism downtown. Chestnut Street is a natural conduit for tourists traveling between two of the City's most attractive destinations -- that is Independence National Park and the Avenue of the Arts. Keeping Chestnut Street, at least between Broad and Independence Park, as an auto-free pedestrian way, with two-way historic trolley service down the middle would provide an imaginative solution to the continuing Chestnut Street saga. It is our belief that such a project easily surpass the financial goals now set for the revitalization of Chestnut Street. It is difficult to believe any other likely development of Chestnut Street in that area would be as successful. So the plan you have before you is not 77 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 the least imaginative project possible. Converting Chestnut Street to just another Walnut Street would take that prize. The City's current plan is even worse than that because it won't matter how you get around in Center City today. Whether by car, by bicycle, by transit, or on foot, all users of Chestnut Street will lose if the City's current man becomes a reality. In summary, the Clean Air Council urges City Council to reject the City's current plan because it will exacerbate poor air quality in Center City, it is an inappropriate use of hard-to-come-by transit funding. The only favorable treatment given bicycles and transit, the combined-use exclusive lane, is too vulnerable to political whim. Economic success for Chestnut Street lies in making it special and attracting tourist dollars to it rather than making it look just like any other street in Center City. The combined bicycle-bus lane jeopardizes the safety of cyclists and impedes the efficient flow of buses. 78 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 And the 20-year capital improvement cycle is a waste of taxpayers' money. Thank you.

I would like to suggest if this goes through, your issue about road rage between the SEPTA drivers and the bicycles, that might lend itself to some sensitivity training or something.

Well, I think that would only be an aspect of it, Councilwoman. I think the road rage between the motorists on Chestnut Street and the bicyclists would be even worse. 'Cause they're going to perceive us to be in their lane. And I think that's --

No, no. If you're in the bike-transit lane, you won't -- bikes would not be in their lane.

But I, having -- the only other place we can draw a parallel here is on Market Street, and I don't see many bicyclist contending with the buses in that shared lane. Most bicyclists -- or using Market Street. So I think they're going to be moving over next to the parked lane on Chestnut Street. 79 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 That's where I'm going to bicycle rather than compete with a bus that's 40-feet long.

Well, we'll maybe need to deal with that if and when this happens. Our next witness is Nancy Lavin, from PhillyWalks.

Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Nancy Lavin. I'm representing PhillyWalks. This is an organization that --

Pull the mike right way up so that -- there's some old-fashioned mikes here.

Tilt it down a little bit more, I think. Try that.

Okay. PhillyWalks is an organization dedicated to improving the walkability of Philadelphia. The PhillyWalks organization believes that the City needs meaningful input that we and other concerned citizens can provide. Because PhillyWalks sees that the revisions the Chestnut Street project are absolutely necessary, our 80 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 members strongly urge the City to provide detailed responses to our concerns before actual work is begun. Pedestrians have neither been made aware, nor consulted in the design of this project. Therefore, we have to consider it an incomplete presentation as it stands today. The present proposal is in dire need of revision. Despite our reservations, we're aware that the basic infrastructure of Chestnut Street must be repaired. We are impressed that the City will be making positive, pedestrian-friendly changes by placing bump-outs at certain curb intersections, by building new sidewalks, and by repairing the underground areas. PhillyWalks also believes that certain elements must be unincorporated into a workable plan. Street furniture, such as benches, should be a part of the scheme. Bench designs are available that easily accommodate single sitters as well as -- instead of sleepers. We ask you to avoid reducing amenities in your zeal to discourage the behavior of some since the result would be to cause discomfort to everybody else. 81 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Other considerations must be the installation of proper drainage systems at ramp and curb cuts and the strengthening and rigorous enforcement of right-turn restrictions already in place. What is needed stricter enforcement of regulations already on the books. In order to reach any goals, planners must work to create positive activity to invigorate the environment of Chestnut Street. Residents and visitors to the neighborhood have the right to walk in an atmosphere that they perceive is safe and inviting. Street widening is an irrelevant and inappropriate means towards achieving this desirable end. As we all know, from Philadelphia's history of street use, bicycles and buses were never meant to share the same lane. As you also know, from bicycle organization testimony, Chestnut Street is now the safest Center City street for bicycles, and consequently, is heavily used by cyclists. With bicycles in the street, the sidewalks are safer for pedestrians, unlike many other Center City sidewalk. Therefore, 82 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 PhillyWalks opposes any plan to widen the street since that would result in the same lanes being designated for bicycles and buses. Future plans for Chestnut Street cannot be realistically addressed without examining the repeat past. Specifically, what caused the downturn of Chestnut Street after the changes of the 1970s? Chestnut Street has not functioned as originally intended because of larger economic forces at work. High-end specialty shops moved to suburban mauls, and shoppers quickly followed them. , but we need to create other successes of retail and business areas rather than just widening a street and hoping that something will just happen as a result. There has to be a more proactive economic approach to this. What we have not heard in any material fashion is an encompassing vision of the form and function of the proposed new Chestnut Street. Do we want it to be a quaint replica of Main Street, USA? Do we want a grand boulevard of gracious 83 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 shops, another upscale restaurants row? Or perhaps a haven for more dollar-stores. We have to decide what our vision is. Philadelphia has so many talented and concerned individuals, as you can see from this room, all of whom are eager to help you create a more vibrant Center City. As the plans for Chestnut Street currently stand, they offer little by the way of that kind of improvement.

We implore you to utilize the talent that's available to you in framing your decisions about improving the city we all love. And it will love you back.

Thank you very much for your testimony.

Thank you.

And I'd like to move on to our next panel with Stan Schaeffer, Society Hill Furniture; Nana Goldberg of I Goldberg's; and Bernie Spain of Spain's Cards and Gifts. And I'd also like to note the presence of Council David Cohen, who's just joined us. Good afternoon.

I'm Bernard Spain of 84 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Spain's Cards and Gifts. I also have another store on Chestnut Street called "Marathon Grill." And I have two stores on Chestnut Street, which are wonderfully taxpaying events, called "Dollar Express." I own two buildings on Chestnut Street in addition to the seven stores that I run there. I'm on Seventh Street and I'm on 15th Street. I've had a presence on the street since 1966. I was against the original transit way project. I believed that the plan was flawed from the start for many of the reasons that were given to you today. Large buses, no cars, bad and ugly lighting, something called "Transitrons," which were a horrendous idea that have since been removed. And then there were the false-brick sidewalks, which crumbled almost immediately and caused many fall-and-slip cases. Personally, without asking anyone's permission, I took up the bricks in front of all my buildings, went back to concrete sidewalks, I've never ahead a peep from anybody in the City. I also have not had any slip-and-fall cases since then. 85 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 But most importantly, the thing that I think a lot of people here have alluded to, and what bothered me the most then and still bothers me now, is that there's no architectural continuity to draw tourists from the historical area uptown or from the uptown hotels down to the historical sites. The pedestrian walkways in the middle of the block never worked because of the fear engendered by the large buses. The buses are larger today, and from what we hear, may be even larger. They're a definite detriment to any use of the street. Chestnut Street, at the time of 1973, when all this started, was a premiere business street in Center City, Philadelphia. Walnut Street was the street that was in need of repair. I know; I owned property on Walnut Street as well. When the automobiles and the attendant convenience were barred from Chestnut Street, the street began a long decline to where we are today -- empty stores on every block, and still no draw for tourists or residents, no real reason to come to the street. 86 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 I recommended then, and I still recommend, that we draw upon the character of Independence Hall and change the street lights to gas lamps or some other colonial-type lighting. And encourage the businesses on Chestnut Street to put brick or colonial fronts on the street levels of their buildings. Put the furniture on the street in a colonial manner. We have so many tourists coming to the City, and all they see is the Independence Hall area, wonderful as it is. And then the next block up on Chestnut Street is a disaster. There's absolutely no reason for a tourist looking up that street to know there's more to Philadelphia than that historical square. I am this favor of trolleys. I am in favor of unrestricted use of cars on Chestnut Street. I would like to change the traffic back to allowing automobile to park on one side, with designated drop-off zones. I'd like to vitality back to Chestnut Street. And I believe if you do that, the economic health will follow. Thank you. 87 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287

Good afternoon. I'm Nana Goldberg, from the original I Goldberg. Chestnut Street should be reopened to as many types of transportation as possible and without further delay. We've operated our third-generation family business from 902 Chestnut Street since 1967. The transit way never achieved its goal, and we've seen the street go through a steady deadline, particularly over the past ten years. The brick sidewalks and their never-ending maintenance were a disaster. We, too, have changed our sidewalk to concrete and haven't had a problem since. The street furniture encouraged loitering and three-card monte games during the day, and beds for the homeless at night. Many merchants left the street or went out of business altogether. The retail and business representatives and spirit on the street was in such decline that the Chestnut Street Association folded. Businesses took another downtown turn when two-way SEPTA traffic was changed to 88 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 eastbound only, and the number of people able to reach our doors easily was reduced again. The 90s brought exodus of offices to the suburbs, and others relocated to the west side of Broad and on Market Street. We are currently the only operating building on the 900 block sandwiched by two parking lots serving the hospital community. We are located in the heart of Center City, just four blocks west of Independence Hall and five blocks from the beautiful new Convention Center. Yet people avoid Chestnut Street, and we find that most of our business is by destination shoppers only. People don't choose to walk on Chestnut Street. We need to encourage people to come to Center City and not antagonize them as they try to maneuver around the City. Our customers travel by foot, roller blade, skateboard, wheelchair, bicycle, motorcycle, train, bus, and trolley. Please, let them find their way to an attractive, functional and vibrant Chestnut Street once more, and soon.

Thank you. 89 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Mr. Spain, I'm wondering. Your idea's rather intriguing of trying to have an architecturally-unified design of Chestnut Street. Some of the things you mentioned, like the brick facades and maybe requesting gas lamps instead of the Center City District model lamps. Is there any discussion among some of the businesses along Chestnut Street? And maybe that's where you or some others could take a lead with the Center City District. Because a lot of that would be in the private sector to take that initiative.

Absolutely. We would be pleased to discuss it with the Center City District. And one of the things that's wrong with Chestnut Street today, with all due respect, there's too much governmental meddling. Business streets are best left to businesses. Walnut Street had its renaissance, not with the help of the City. It had a renaissance because people had ideas, invested money, took chances, and created an atmosphere that ultimately led to the Rittenhouse Row restaurant renaissance. 90 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Similar thing happened on Delaware Avenue. The same kind of thing could happen on Chestnut Street. The one thing that we don't need is a lot of governmental regulations with everybody trying to cover everybody's ills. Let the marketplace work for itself. Chestnut Street is a market street, and we can bring it back to its brilliance.

I have a question for the both of you, and you choose how you'd like to answer. You heard some of my comments concerning the limitations on the size of the vehicles and hours of deliveries. As a business person, has anything I suggested, do you think, would interfere with your business? Do you find that it's something that you could live with?

Well, actually, what you suggested is what was originally suggested in the Transit Way plan. It was supposed to be small, people-friendly vehicles going both ways on ways on Chestnut Street. And from the first day of the plan -- 91 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 actually before the plan, SEPTA never intended to follow that part of the plan. And it was sold to the street as though we would have small, people-friendly vehicles similar to the trolleys that run now on four wheels rather than on electric. And that was how the people would move up and down the street, and that's why the street would be people-friendly. But it never happened because those big buses scared everybody off the street, including the people.

I agree. But when it comes to deliveries and the trucks that would be used --

We deliver --

Would that in any way restrict you? Do you have any problems with that?

I don't. We deliver early in the morning and late in the evening anyway. And we --

Okay. And even if it wasn't for the hours -- I mean, that's something we're going to work on, but the size of 92 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 the vehicles that would be permitted, do you find that to be something that would be inconvenient or cause a problem for you as a business person?

It would not be an inconvenience to me. We don't use our tractor-trailers in Center City.

Okay.

And as far as I know, UPS, Fedex, and all the other delivery vehicles are small trucks as well.

We're lucky to have a receiving entrance on Sansom Street, so this doesn't affect us. Just customers being able to stop in front of the store would be an improvement for us.

I know you do. Thanks for your testimony. And I think some of the suggestions on the streetscape improvement -- I don't know where we are, but Paul Levy is in the audience, and maybe he has something to add to that when he comes up on the next panel. Thank you.

Okay. Let me 93 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 call the next panel: Paul Levy, Center City District; Kathy Ryan, Thomas Jefferson University; Stephen Gleason, Amerimar Enterprises; Don Meginley, The Preservation Alliance of Greater Philadelphia; and Joe Zuritsky, Parkway Corporation. After that, I have -- if there's anyone else who wanted to testify who is not on this list, could you let Nicole, my last staff member, know. But the last panel will be Kevin Smith, Jane Glenn, Ann Dixon, Claudia Crane, Darlene Messina, Ajay Creshkoff, Scott Maits, and Steven Zwick. So if there's anyone else who wanted to testify and wants to get on the list, do let Nicole know. Okay, Paul Levy.

Thank you very much. My name is Paul Levy, I'm the Executive Director of the Center City District. And I'm here, first of all, to thank City Council for holding these hearings so that we can discuss this important issue. And secondly, to support the reopening of Chestnut Street to automobiles 24 hours a day. 94 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 For more than years, a large group of 3 more than 25 Chestnut Street property owners, business openers, retailers, and hotel and general managers, large retailers and small, have been meeting with representatives of the Streets Department and the Mayor's Office of Transportation to discuss plans for revitalizing Chestnut Street. While I am not in complete agreement with all the traffic operations plans proposed for the street, I view these as details that can be worked out later. My basic message is simple. Construction documents are virtually complete. Put the project out to bid as it is currently designed, and get construction underway before the end of 1998. I was very pleased to hear Joe Syrnick's schedule. We have been talking about this street for at least five to seven years, if not longer. We all know what's wrong. Chestnut Street and Walnut Street are the same width building to building. Yet Walnut Street is the most active and vibrant street in Center City, while Chestnut Street is the most 95 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 deteriorated. Chestnut Street has 330 street-level retail shops, percent of which are vacant. And 5 I should say, the vacancies are higher east of 6 Broad, away from the Meridian fire than they are 7 west of Broad. So the Meridian fire, while a 8 serious impact, is not the primary cause of 9 vacancy. 10 Walnut Street's vacancy rate is almost 11 half of that, at 9 percent. Forty to 50 percent 12 of the office space on the upper floors of 13 Chestnut Street is vacant. Walnut Street thrives 14 with restaurants in the evening hours. , 15 Chestnut Street rolls down its security gates, and 16 not a single restaurant is open for business. 17 What's the difference? The failed Chestnut Street Transit Way. This is not a matter, as some of our previous panelists would lead you to think, of a matter of choosing between buses, bicycles, and cars. Cities thrive when they're supported by multiple sources of transportation -- cars, taxis, buses, bicycles, and pedestrians. Cut off a primary means of transportation and you cut off 96 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 one of the life-support systems for the street. Philadelphia can give priority to transit without giving it exclusivity. This is not even a matter of choosing between different constituents. This is not bicyclists verse pedestrians versus pedestrians versus people in vehicles. All of us use different modes of transportation throughout the week. At times, we are motorists or cab passengers. At times, we are bicyclists or transit riders. And nearly all of our trips end with us being pedestrians. So this is not an issue of one faction versus another. If you prohibit one mode of use, you limit people's choices. Reopening Chestnut Street to all modes of transportation, including transit, is key to stimulating new private investment in retail, restaurants, and in the conversion of vacant office buildings to residential use. Chicago recently learned this when they reopened the State Street Transit Way to automobiles. They've experiencing new waves of private investment in what had been a fading 97 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 commercial corridor. But you don't have to go to Chicago to learn this lesson. One block away, we have a model that works. " Let's give Chestnut Street the same opportunity to keep up with its next door neighbor and become an eastbound Walnut Street. I frankly don't see congestion on a street as a major problem. It slows us down, but congestion means that people want to be there. The goal of cities is density.

Large numbers of people work here, live here, and shop. The fact that things move slowly sometimes on Walnut Street, while frustrating, is a sign of success, not a sign of failure. We can have buses going 40 miles an hour down Chestnut Street 'cause no one's there. That is not a definition of success. I do have operational concerns about the street. One, I think the prohibition of cars in the right lane and prohibiting taxis from dropping passengers off in front of buildings is a deterrent. I think the prohibition from right 98 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 turns off of the street will prohibit people from coming on to the Avenue of the Arts. It will prohibit people from finding all the support parking garages on Sansom Street. Instead, motorists will be circulating in other areas of the city, and it will increase congestion. But as I said before, these are operational concerns, not concerns about the basic plan for reconstruction. I think there's some hints here of how we can work things together. The four routes that Bernard Cohen said run down Chestnut Street are all running eastbound. Their peak is the morning rush hour. That is when they are fullest. We might have one set of conditions at morning rush hour. Those buses are not full at lunchtime, they're not full in the afternoon, and no one is on them in the evening. So there's certainly ground for operational compromise. But basic point is you've got a plan for construction, it's ready go out to bid. I urge City Council and the Rendell Administration to issue the construction documents as soon as 99 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 possible, start construction. As you heard, this is a two-year project. We have plenty of time to work out the operational details, but I don't think any business or anyone who own business or operates a hospital on Chestnut Street can afford to wait much longer much. Thank you very much.

Thank you for your testimony. Kathy Ryan, of Thomas Jefferson University.

Good afternoon. Thomas Jefferson University and Thomas Jefferson University Hospital are pleased to have the opportunity to publicly support the opening of Chestnut Street to vehicular traffic. This plan will obviously provide a financial stimulus for merchants along the entire Chestnut Street strip, and the expected outcome should be beneficial to all citizens as well as to the City of Philadelphia. In addition to the positive financial impact this change should bring about for the 100 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 City, we at Jefferson are particularly interested in this regulatory change because it will allow cars to make a right-hand turn onto Chestnut Street from 11th, the main entrance to Jefferson Hospital. As is widely known, 11th Street is one of the busiest and most congested streets in Center City, particularly between Walnut and Arch Streets. Traffic gridlock occurs daily as a result of buses traveling this route, truck traffic exiting from Ludlow Street onto 11th, cars exiting from the Clover Street Garage onto 11th Street, and pedestrian traffic that crosses Market, which thus limits vehicular traffic in making a right-hand turn from 11t5h onto Market. Added to this is the movement of approximately 85,000 cars per year that are moved through the Jefferson valet operation on 11th Street just below Chestnut Street. On any weekday, at almost any time of the day, 11th Street virtually becomes a parking lot. Allowing cars to turn onto Chestnut from 11th will substantially reduce the traffic that currently must travel now up to Market before 101 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 going east or south. Besides increasing traffic flow and decreasing congestion on 11th, another issue that must also be given serious consideration is the safety of the citizens and visitors to Philadelphia. These citizens include the patients and their families of Jefferson Hospital. The current traffic on 11th Street often poses hazards to the health and safety of pedestrians and Jefferson patients, with patients frequently being dropped off at the hospital entrance in the street, in the middle of the block because cars are unable to move into the valet parking area at 11th and Sansom Streets. As a representative of Jefferson Hospital, I'm also requesting that serious consideration be given to eliminating the proposal to restrict the right lane on Chestnut Street to buses and bicycles only, and that cars be permitted to make a right-hand turn on southbound streets from Chestnut. If this proposed restriction were to be implemented, it would have a particularly negative impact on patients who are seeking access to 102 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Jefferson's emergency department whose entrance is on Tenth Street between Sansom and Walnut. So people will literally be able to see the hospital and not be able access it. Even if Chestnut Street is open to vehicular traffic, it serves no purpose if our valet-driven cars are restricted by traffic law from turning onto 10th Street to the location of our valet parking lot on Tenth Street, south of Chestnut. Conversely, lifting or eliminating the restriction on right-hand turns would result not only in further decreasing traffic on 11th, but have a likely effect of citizen and patient satisfaction and convenience. Thank you for the opportunity to present to City Council interpret.

Thank you for your testimony. Our next witness. I'm not sure whether you're Steven or Don.

Thank you. I'm Steven Gleason, representing Amerimar Enterprises, as the owner of the properties at 1015 Chestnut, 1622 103 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Chestnut Street, and the Wanamaker Building between Juniper and 13th Streets. These three properties total over 1.8 million square feet, and our interest in seeing a revitalized Chestnut Street brings me here today. And plan for the revitalization of Chestnut Street should be one that will foster 24-hour vitality and a combination of various means of transportation -- buses, automobiles, bicycles, and pedestrians. The successes of Walnut Street are well-documented. National retailers are literally having bidding wars for space on Walnut Street between Broad and Rittenhouse Square. Rents are in excess of $30 per square foot, as compared to the teens on Chestnut Street. The rental rates are, therefore, encouraging landlords to revitalize buildings, as we have done at 1623 Walnut Street, where the Le Colonial Restaurant opened in December. That restaurant would not have taken place if Rick Walstead (ph.) was not able to find a location on Walnut Street. His locations in New York and Chicago forced him to look for the 104 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 premiere street in Philadelphia, and that lead him to Walnut Street. We suggested the acquisition of buildings on Chestnut Street, and he wouldn't hear of it. The investment by landlords improves not only the streetscape of the city, but also, obviously, the tax base. By being able to put national retailers as well as local retailers scattered along the street, we are increasing the livability of downtown Philadelphia. I would like to say that Chestnut Street revitalization should be a priority and that something should be done now. The current plan not perfect, but we can move forward through the operational phase, implement the plan, and work out the details later. New York has Madison Avenue and Fifth Avenue paralleling each other, and it's time for Philadelphia to have Chestnut and Walnut as strong locations for business and for residents of Philadelphia. Thank you very much for the opportunity.

Thank you for 105 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 your testimony. I have one other question. Paul Levy, you all did that report on having apartments on the second floors of Chestnut Street or the upper floors of businesses.

Right.

What's the status of that? Have you had any --

Yeah. I mean it was (unintelligible) that this City Council and Councilman DiCicco and the Mayor supported a ten-year tax abatement, and that is beginning to bear fruit with properties beginning to be converted. And what's very interesting, there are two properties being converted on Chestnut Street at this moment -- 16th and Chestnut and the Avenue of the Arts. And both of those developers are saying they want to be there because they believe cars will be able to come down that street. So I think clearly we're beginning to see movement on that, but clearly, the two developers who picked two properties on that street envision cars being able to come to their 106 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 buildings, and that's what heard was coming, and that's why they're investing there.

No, I was thinking more of the, you know, two- three-story buildings, not the big huge ones.

Yeah. Actually, I think one of the later people who will testify but who had to leave right now but will be back is Don Meginley, from The Preservation Alliance, who is spearheading a lot of efforts to deal with those smaller properties. And I think he can address your concerns.

Okay.

And if I may add, I think Mr. Greenfield (ph.), who's developing the property at 15th and Chestnut, is also looking to the north side of Chestnut Street -- there are several buildings there which are not as high, they're lower-rise buildings -- to do some similar conversions.

Mr. Zuritsky.

Good afternoon. I'm Joe Zuritsky, President of Parkway Corporation. First, I applaud the City's effort to 107 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 finally address Chestnut Street's plight. It's obvious to everyone that the current configuration of the street has been a failure in terms of commercial viability mainly because of the exclusion of auto traffic. The City's current plan to grossly limit the exit options for automobiles is not sufficient to enhance Chestnut Street as a commercial retail district. It seems to me the City originally made the design mistake of excluding cars years ago 13 in an effort to put federal money to work in 14 Philadelphia. And it now seems we're about to 15 continue our mistake for the very same reason. 16 On a related issue, our current loading 17 zones are woefully inadequate, thereby forcing 18 trucks onto Chestnut Street to unload. The 19 current plan, which limits loading to an average 20 of only 3 loading spaces per block or 3 loading spaces per 800 feet of retail frontage, plus millions of square foot of adjacent office space, is not adequate. Either the loading zones should be expanded on the numbered streets or expanded on Chestnut Street; one or the other. 108 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 There have been studies by traffic engineers over the years which cited the inadequacy of our current loading zones. However, no one in the City has paid attention to those studies. I think they were made by -- I forget the name, but I can provide that if you'd like. If we wish to improve the movement of traffic and encourage retail trade, we must remedy this problem. Lastly, placing buses and bicycles in one lane seems to be a recipe for disaster. I would, however, be very much in favor of a trolley service, which would be tourist-friendly, slow-moving, and an easier mix with both bicycles and automobiles.

Thank you very much for your testimony. Why don't we come to our last panel. Kevin Smith, Jane Glenn, Ann Dixon, Claudia Crane, and Darlene Messina. And then we will hear from Ajay Creshkoff, Scott Maits, Steven Zwick, and John Boyle. Probably only four people or five people fit up at once, but the others can be in 109 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 the chairs if you'd like. Again, I'd like to thank everyone for a very clear and concise presentation of your concerns. You can see here the variety of interests and the variety of opinions around what should be done around Chestnut Street. Kevin Smith.

My name is --

Pull way up to the mike, if you could.

Okay. Hello. My name is Kevin Smith. I'm a member of The Regional Citizens Committee of the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, but I'm speaking to you as a resident of Philadelphia. By now, everyone is familiar with the City's plan for Chestnut Street. The City's plan fails on so many levels, it's difficult to put it all together. The beginning of the end of our car mania is at hand. " 110 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 The article predicts that world oil production will peak within years. This 4 represents the point at which half the oil ever 5 expected to be recovered will have been recovered, 6 after which our only real option is to reduce 7 consumption in step with the declining 8 production. 9 This turning point will fall within the 10 tenure of many of those currently on the City 11 Council, and perhaps our next Mayor. 12 Reduced reliance on the personal auto and increased reliance on local and regional transit systems is the inevitable result as we adjust to the falling supply of oil and the higher cost of the remaining oil and the higher costs and limited supplies of alternative fuels and energy sources. Adding vehicle capacity worsens air quality while doing nothing to relieve congestion. From the Department of Energy's Center of Excellence for Sustainable Development web page, many communities have reached a crossroads if they build a new highway, traffic will stop backing up -- at least that's the initial 111 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 rationale. Citizens will stop calling to complain, everyone presumably will be satisfied for a while. This, quote/unquote, solution, how you are is short-lived. When pavement is laid, more vehicles come. With more vehicles comes more smog. Autos are a major contributor to global warming. Their pollution also causes severe health problems for many. Traffic congestion, already costing us an estimated $168 billion annually in lost productivity, is expected to triple in coming years, wasting more productivity and fuel and worsening our air quality. Some communities have found a promising new course for handling growth and their transportation problems. Planners refer to these ideas as "liveable" or "sustainable" communities. By whatever name, these plans focus on people, rather than on cars. Auto traffic is not the answer. Chestnut Street is a thriving retail district during the day. In the evening, when cars currently are allowed on, the sidewalks are empty. Whatever the problem is, it's clear that 112 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 cars are not the solution. There have been several stories in the media detailing how retail is struggling during the strike, despite increased auto traffic. Misuse of Federal Transit Administration funds. The City's plan is a major step backwards for transit. It will change the smooth flow of transit vehicles across town into an intricate and dangerous dance between buses, bicycles, and cars. About the only thing worse for transit would be to ban buses altogether. Why bring back cars? The City has published no studies to show that bringing auto traffic back to Chestnut will benefit the City or the street and no studies that show the conversion to a transit way played a part in the street's decline. The City's plan destroys the unique nature of the street and uses federal transit funding to bring back cars at the expense of transit. What is the City's real purpose? The only thing in the City that needs cars is a parking lot. The answer probably lies in the 113 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 rumors confirmed in these hearings of backroom deals and development contingent upon auto traffic on Chestnut. Studies show that pedestrian traffic is the life blood of any retail district.

But instead of embracing a solution for the future, the City is turning to the one solution that has already been tried on every other street in our country and the solution that has created the congestion and pollution that are now part of our daily lives. Why not envision tourists and visitors using a friendly simple trolley loop to carry past the virtual wall of Sixth Street and into the rest of our beautiful city. Or stepping out of their hotels onto cool, tree-lined street for lunch at a sidewalk cafe and a quick ride down to the historic district or Penn's Landing. By beautifying the street, improving sidewalks, facades and lighting, opening the upper floors to residents, and encouraging sidewalk cafes and theaters, the quiet, cozy atmosphere could be the seed of a truly cosmopolitan neighborhood. 114 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. " Thank you.

Thank you very much. Our next witness is Jane Glenn.

Hi. I'm Jane Glenn, a resident of Philadelphia. Over the past few years, I have become increasingly involved in transit issues. I am on the SEPTA Citizens Advisory Committee and a member of the Regional Citizens Committee of the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. It was through the DVRPC's Regional Citizens Committee that I learned the City's plan for Chestnut Street was not a done deal but was progressing through the process, as though it were. I feel the current plan is devastating to transit. The overall project construction costs is estimated to be $15 million. This money should be used for improving our dedicated transit way and thus promoting transit in the region. Yet 115 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 the Transit Way is being blamed for the death of the street. The Meridian Building fire and the rundown Victory Building are culprits. Well, fire at the Meridian Building was beyond anyone's control. The Victory Building was a valuable asset that should have been protected. No amount of automobile traffic could have prevented its neglect, nor will automobiles restore the building to its former architectural stature. The less-inhabited areas of the street can be directly related to their geography. Large parking lots are not pedestrian-friendly. And office buildings do not support a busy night life. The upper floors of many buildings are vacant because the owners have removed stairs or elevators to gain more street-level space, thus removing residents, a key ingredient to successful street life. Trends have changed and businesses have located in other areas of the city, such as Old City, South Street, and Manyunk. These areas had little business 20 years ago, but are thriving today. The Gallery and Liberty Place have also 116 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 drawn business away from Chestnut Street. It is important to note that Chestnut Street not be confused with pedestrian malls that have failed. Chestnut Street Transit Way was intended to be a street dedicated to transit and pedestrians, and it has been successful in this role. Center City District statistics, from midday June 1997, showed 1,157 more pedestrians on Chestnut Street than on Walnut Street. Many of these people are transit riders, and the bus routes on Chestnut Street are very busy. The current transit strike has granted the City the opportunity to open Chestnut Street to traffic. The Do-Not-Enter signs were removed before most people knew the strike was definite. However, business in Center City is not thriving during the strike. This proves that automobile traffic is not the answer. Prior to the strike, delivery trucks were parked on the street all day, and the automobile restrictions were poorly enforced. Neglected buildings have been tolerated, and the street has not been promoted. To blame the 117 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 problems with Chestnut Street on its lack of automobile traffic is shortsighted and auto-centric. While some think adding lanes of traffic will relieve congestion on surrounding streets, it has been proven that additional roads attract additional traffic. Bringing cars back to Chestnut Street will not enhance the city or bring business to the street. It will add pollution, stress, and an inhospitable atmosphere. Air quality will deteriorate in our region, which is already an ozone-non-attainment area. Completely changing the character of the street is an unnecessary overreaction. Rebuilding Chestnut Street does not require annihilating the Transit Way. Renovations and repairs need to be made to the sidewalks and buildings. The plan should play to the street's existing strength by allowing and encouraging sidewalk cafes, outdoor shopping, and other activities that make use of the wide, tree-lined, pedestrian-friendly sidewalks. 118 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO.

980287 Support should be given to upgrading the transit route with bi-directional trolleys. A practical, historic cross-town trolley line could be installed, or the existing subway surface trolleys could be rerouted to the Chestnut Street and extended to Penn's Landing. Deals should not be made to sell property on Chestnut Street based on opening the street to traffic. We cannot let our government officials allow buildings such as the Victory Building fall to neglect, and then sell our transit rights to make a buck. Promoting the transit way will bring revenue, jobs, and prestige to the region. Transit should be the lifeblood of the City. Forcing bikes and buses together in one lane, while giving automobiles their own lane and a parking lane, puts autos first and transit last. Transit users and advocates should be outraged. Philadelphia should be presenting itself as a pedestrian-friendly, transit-oriented city. It is already known as a city to drive in, around, and out of in two hours. We'll get what we promote, and a drive-by city should not be on 119 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 the agenda. Thank you.

Thank you for your testimony. Ann Dixon. (Ann Dixon comes forward.)

You already testified? Is this in addition?

Right. I was testifying earlier as member of the Chestnut Street Coalition, and now I'm testifying as an individual. Okay? I'm happy that Councilperson Fernandez's office organized these hearings for Chestnut Street. It's my hope that the testimony heard today will be incorporated by city planners into a new plan. Chestnut Street has some wonderful assets. It is a straight, tree-lined thoroughfare, with much potential. It has the liability of empty storefronts also. The reason for these empty places are complicated. Philadelphia, like other cities, has been losing population to ever-growing 120 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 suburban sprawl. The late Sam Rappaport let his properties on Chestnut sink into decline. Many properties have no second-floor access. When the street was originally closed to cars year ago, the plan to put in electric 8 street cars was never realize. Instead, study 9 noisy diesel buses were used. 10 Some people think that the reason for 11 the empty stores must be because auto access on 12 Chestnut is restricted. This is faulty 13 reasoning. No one would claim that the reason 14 that there are so many empty factories in North 15 Philly is because North Philly streets have cars. 16 Yes, if only we would eliminate cars 17 from Hunting Park Avenue, everything would be 18 okay. It's ridiculous, of course. 19 The Meridian Building fire did not 20 occur because Chestnut is closed to car. Woolworth's did not go out of business nationwide because Chestnut is closed to cars. Suburban shopping malls and residential flight to the suburbs did not occur because Chestnut is closed to cars. 121 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 The largest trees on Chestnut are years old. This is a small miracle because most street trees die within the first seven users of their life. Killing those trees and replacing them with young ones greatly increases the probability that Chestnut will never again have shade. Even though the proposed new tree pits will be improved, increased traffic and less sidewalk space ensures that there will be more chances for trees to be hit by cars, a common cause of death and decline. Fifty million dollars is an insane amount of money to spend on a project which will likely turn Chestnut into a congested, noisy polluted, shadeless place, with just as many empty buildings as there are now. We need to make the street into a desirable destination. Pedestrians are key to making areas viable. Some people drive into the city but, of course, park and walk around during the day. Pedestrians can easily stop in the stores, but those in cars cannot because the street parking is usually used by those who work in the stores. Chestnut could be open to autos during 122 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 rush hours but closed during the day after people have already arrived downtown. When I canvassed Chestnut Street, business people mentioned that they wished that there were more places to eat. Banning motor vehicles during the day would create a nice place to put cafe tables. Chestnut is already a lunchtime shopping destination. It would become the eating destination as well.

Thank you for your testimony. Claudia Crane.

Hi. My name is Claudia Crane. First of all, I want to say that I really appreciate this opportunity to speak today, and I really appreciate the incisive questions that you have both asked today of the various presenters. I am affiliated with just about all the groups that have been mentioned that have serious concerns about the City's plan, but today I speak for myself. And I've been paying attention to this 123 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 issue for well over a year now. And after listening to all the different ideas that I've heard from various people, I think the best plan for Chestnut Street is the one I heard presented in Philadelphia, in March 1997, by a Dr. ), who's a senior lecturer on urban and traffic planning at Delph University of Technology, in the Netherlands. And this was -- his plan was later engagingly written about by journalist and Philly booster, Michael McGettigan. And so the ideas I'm about to express on what I think would be good for Chestnut Street are largely borrowed from Dr. Bach and from Michael McGettigan. I think that just about everyone agrees that Chestnut Street, as it is now, is less than ideal. Behemoth, diesely buses lumber down, UPS and Fedex trucks are allowed to sit there all day, and the sidewalk brick work is crumbling. And it's virtually deserted at night. Yet, despite the problems, Center City District counts show more people -- this has been mentioned before -- show more people on Chestnut during the day than on Walnut. I personally would 124 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 rather walk down Chestnut Street in the daytime than Walnut Street. The sidewalks are wider, there are more trees, and the only traffic is buses and bicycles -- the SEPTA strike notwithstanding. , the sidewalks fixed, crosswalks defined at corners, and if there were more trees and benches -- that is, the kinds of benches that you cannot stretch out for a snooze on. Once that all happens, sidewalk cafes and outdoor sales would naturally spring up. Extend the daytime bus- and auto-free zone to Fifth Street, just past Independence Hall, and tourists would come. Do all of the above, and you would have a daytime commercial street that is truly a magnet. People would want to stroll, relax, meet friends, eat lunch away from the unpleasantness of bus fumes and traffic. Chestnut Street should be special and 125 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 different, different from Walnut. Walnut Street, while doing fairly well, does have some empty store fronts. That begs this question: Can the City support a Walnut clone? Since Chestnut is virtually deserted at night, it may make sense to bring back late- afternoon and evening traffic in short-term -- say two-hour metered -- parking. Once the daytime crowd is gone, people say they feel safer in the evening if they see people coming and going, if only to and from their cars. Having more people around at other times other than midday might also be an impetus to converting the upstairs of many buildings to apartments. I hasten to add that bringing back traffic and parking and eating does not necessitate a wider street. Buses, if they do not continue to (unintelligible) Market in the evening, can share a lane with cars. And with the delivery trucks not there, that second lane becomes a parking lane. What about bicycles? I'm a bicyclist. During the day, with no motorized traffic, there 126 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 would be plenty of room for bikes, but there should be frequent prominent signs that say "Bicycles Yield to Peds," which would warn bicyclists and pedestrians alike. In the late afternoon and evening, when the buses and cars are in the first lane, there would be room enough for a de facto passing bike lane between the south-side traffic lane and the parking lane along the northern curb. And it's important to note that the Congressional -- I think this has been said before.

The Congressional earmark for this project with the City match is not legally wedded to the City plan as it exists now. This money can be used to fund an alternative plan, one that results from a truly public process that is beginning here in this room today. In the meantime, the beauty part about the scenario I favor is that it can be tried now with little construction. SEPTA daytime buses could be rerouted now, delivery trucks could be assigned to morning hours, the daytime auto-free zone could be extended to Fifth Street, evening parking could be instituted, and appropriate signs 127 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 for all of the above could be put in place. We should try it for six months. If we like it, then we could really do it right -- fix the sidewalks, define the crosswalks, get new lighting, get more trees, get benches, and put in parking meters for the evening traffic. Chestnut Street is a tarnished jewel. Let's polish it, not re-cut it.

Excuse me. Miss Crane, you mentioned -- you're about the third or fourth witness today who mentioned the statistics bear that there are more -- there's more pedestrian traffic on Chestnut Street than there is on Walnut Street.

During the middle of the day.

During the day.

In the middle of the day.

Where do you get those statistics? (Unidentified person responds off mike.)

I can't hear her.

It's in the 128 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Center City District.

It's in the Center City News --

-- District Newsletter. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Mine was from June 1997.

And do we know whether that's -- I mean, is that from 25th Street to Front, or is it -- is it the full length? I mean, I'm just curious. For me -- no 12 disrespect -- I consider 18th Street to Eighth Street on Chestnut as the dead zone, primarily on the east side. Once you pass Sixth Street, get past Sixth Street and go east on Chestnut, it's lively morning, noon, and night. I don't -- I don't see all that activity on Chestnut Street. And Denise Goren is approaching the table. I think she has some information for us.

Believe it or not, the statistics support that on very specific intersections, Councilman, that is true.

That's what I was asking.

One of the busiest 129 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 intersections for pedestrians counts -- and this has been historically true, by the way, not only from the CCD's study, but from an early City Planning Center City study -- 15th and 16th and Chestnut are the two intersections with the highest pedestrian volumes than other streets. It is markedly different at different times of day and on different intersections, but those two intersections, 15th and Chestnut and 16th and Chestnut, midday, the ped volumes go through the roof.

I thought so. Because my experience on both Chestnut and Walnut during the day and in the evening, overall, I would think that Walnut Street had a higher pedestrian use because of the theaters and everything that takes place from the eastern end all the way through to Rittenhouse Square.

Maybe mostly during the day. We're in here at hearings, so maybe you don't see all of that.

No. On the days that I'm out there, I actually do, especially on weekends. 130 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 I mean, yeah, you know, we have Independence Park and all the activity east of Sixth Street. It really -- I mean, it's a busy area. So I don't know if that is scientific enough for me.

I can send you a copy of that portion of the newsletter.

Thank you.

Okay. Our next witness is Darlene Messina.

Yes. Thank you for allowing me to testify today. I have been employed in Center City for the past 13 years and have been a resident of Philadelphia for the past 17, and I've chosen Philadelphia as my community. I use the shops and walk the sidewalks in Center City. I'm opposed to the widening and reopening of Chestnut Street to traffic. The year is near 2,000, and I'm hoping that our city can design and plan using modern concepts and strategies to bring the vitality back to Chestnut Street. If the goal is to promote Chestnut Street and bring business back, then I 131 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 suggest a more comprehensive study, looking at successful pedestrian business plazas and centers. The present -- I doubt the present ill health of Chestnut Street is due to the lack of traffic and parked cars. It is not a pleasant shopping and dining experience to be in the constant exhaust and noise of traffic and parked cars. May I suggest that the types and mix of businesses is what attracts people to shop and stroll the streets of Philadelphia. Parked and moving cars inhibits casual, relaxed shop and dining. There are lovely and successful urban centers all over the world and in this country which are designated pedestrian. Traffic happens to be one of the reasons why people avoid Center City. I would also like to point out that probably between the hours of 11:30 and o'clock in Center City, many people can be found putting on their sneakers and walking outside their offices in search of pedestrian-friendly streets. And with those sneakers on, they probably are more 132 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 accessible to walking in and out of the shops in a traffic-free environment. It takes careful and well-thought-out planning for this to happen. Part of the process is to educate developers and property owners to the economic benefits of pedestrian commerce centers. Philadelphia is a beautiful, world-class city, and I hope that it is the goal of our Planning Commission, Streets Department, and City government to make our city more friendly to people who live and work here and liveable by limiting traffic and cars in Center. I urge members of City Council to rethink the opening of Chestnut Street to cars and expand the vision of the proposed plan. Thank you.

Thank you for your testimony. Next is Ajay Creshkoff, to be followed by Scott Maits, Steven Zwick, and John Boyle.

Good afternoon, Madame Chairman and friends. I'm appalled at what's been going in 133 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 with regard to this project. I am a retired professor of project planning, project management, regional planning, and economic and social development. And when I discovered that a project was being looked at in isolation, independent of its relationship to whatever is being planned for Center City and the city as a whole and its part in the region, to me, this violates all of the principles that I ever taught in the field. And when I looked for a handle to make a presentation today, I fortunately recalled that the Center City Residents Association, a few years ago, had a long-range planning committee which studied what the area bounded between Market Street and South and Broad Street and the Schuylkill River might look like if present trends continued and if no efforts were made to have some long-term goals. I seized upon this report, which I have in my hand. I'm sure there's a copy available in City Hall somewhere, certainly in the City planning Commission. And I looked at the approach that was 134 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 taken by these long-range planners who served the CCRA. And what they did was to say, What are the main issues that relate to our environment in terms of the area where residents live, what are these issues? How did these issues develop? What's the context of all of this. And I ask about this project, what is the context besides a little historical presentation we were given? How does it relate to everything else? How coherent is it in relation to the goals of the City. And besides asking the question of what is, you know, what are the issues, the question then became, Well, if we can set goals that are acceptable to the community, then what strategy should we follow to achieve these goals? I don't have time to present what is in this paper that I've made available to the --

Could you leave copies with the Chair, and we'll make sure all member of the committee get it.

Right. But in just the minute or two that I still have, I simply want to point out that one has to look at this Chestnut 135 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Street revitalization project in terms of what will be its impacts on neighborhoods that adjoin Chestnut Street, and not simply look at it from the point of view of what will it do for business development or what will it do for tourist development. These are important questions to ask, but one has to look at the whole area as a small region and think of what vision should one have for this area. So I submit -- and this is spelled out -- that we have to ask the right questions from the point of view of how we plan our development. Thank you.

Thank you very much. I need to leave these hearings at this point. I'd like to turn the chair over to the Vice Chair, Councilman DiCicco. I think there are three other witnesses. I do, before I leave, say that I really want to thank all who came to testify and shared their points of view. And I notice that Denise Goren and Syrnick did stay around to make sure 136 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 they heard all of the views and opinions from the members of the community. Councilman DiCicco.

Thank you. The next witness is Scott Maits? Am I pronouncing that correctly?

Yes.

Pull the microphone closer to you, please.

Before I read my written testimony, I'd like to answer your question on Chestnut Street volumes of pedestrians, because I've been looking at this for many, many years.

I have a copy of it.

Well, the reason you don't see as many people on Chestnut, or it appears that way, is because the sidewalks are much, much, larger. And it doesn't form a crowd as easily. And also the cars crowding the streets do make an appearance of vitality, even though they may not contribute as much as we usually tend to think to the vitality of the stores themselves.

Isn't this done by 137 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 a head count?

Yeah. I'm not disputing any numbers; I'm just saying the appearance of it is --

Oh, the experience of it.

You were asking --

I'm looking at numbers really. I'm not concerned with the appearance.

I've seen more people on Chestnut than Walnut during business hours.

Okay, thank you.

I'd like to thank Council Transportation Chairman Fernandez in her absence and her staff, as well as Councilman Street for granting this and yourself, and for arranging this hearing and forum. Today we are here talking about Chestnut Street and trying to make it the best it can be. Many of us have different ideas and most of us are here in good faith. I'm here with a message that is a product of nearly 30 years of study and one that 138 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 few understand but, nevertheless, is critical at this point in Philadelphia's continued redevelopment. My own plan for Chestnut Street, if you would consider it, is ultimately one that allows for and utilizes all the different modes of transport and doesn't exclude or truly limit each one's proper role. First let me say that Center City, in order to expand its renaissance to the next level and job and residential growth -- tourism, shopping, and commercial growth -- needs a downtown distribution trolley loop. Downtown trolley loops and lines are in operation and are being built or seriously considered by much lesser cities around the world, across the country, and in our region now too. Further, every one of the other of the dozens of new light-rail lines around the country crosses the length of its central business district. In this region, Camden and Trenton will soon have downtown distribution functions built into their New Jersey Transit Light Rail Line being built between these two Delaware Valley 139 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 cities. Baltimore's trolley connects one end of downtown to the other, passing shopping, transportation, entertainment, educational, and residential areas. Wilmington, Delaware is about to embark with business community leaderships, City Council support, and (unintelligible) endorsement on building a downtown line for shoppers, tourists, workers, and residents alike, using old-fashioned- stop real trolleys as a starter line for the New Castle County trolley system. New Jersey's subway surface trolleys are being expanded on street tracks through its downtown. The North Jersey Hudson waterfront is currently building such a line, and it is expected to be the busiest in America. Norfolk, Virginia is planning a line through its CBC, nearly 20 miles to Virginia Beach. Yet Philadelphia, which has so much more to offer than do all of its neighboring smaller cities combined and whose downtown is by far the leading regional concentration of jobs, 140 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 riders, tourists, you name it, has no serious commitment to build a true downtown trolley line. Because of politics and lack of good design vision, we instead are working on a modern, record-breaking 60-mile trolley to the suburbs that will virtually ignore Center City, making only one stop in the central business district. Ladies and gentlemen, the time for such a trolley in Center City is due, and Chestnut Street is the place. The Trolley Coalition, many other interests and stakeholders and businesses we've had time to reach, some political representatives and myself, all believe that the Chestnut Street, as well as Center City, needs a light-rail line as soon as possible. Any plan that does not take into consideration the millions of people yearly that transit delivers to Chestnut Street and improve upon that misses this point completely. Of course, the City's current plan for Chestnut can allow for light rail someday. This is good and this is necessary. SEPTA, though it only made a serious Chestnut proposal several years ago, seems to have currently forgotten this 141 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 critical improvement. Here's the study -- that I will send a copy to your office and to anybody else that's interested -- that SEPTA made in 1996 about putting trolleys on Chestnut Street and a downtown loop.

There is such a study, it is at SEPTA, and we'd love to see them really look at it seriously and use it. It is only because of Mayor Rendell's SEPTA veto threat that we are getting any city-oriented light-rail improvements, and the Center City loop proposal project hangs on the fringes of SEPTA's official planning processing with other decades-long stalled capital improvements and less closely examine the City's current plan for Chestnut. The hope is, of course, that it will revitalize the street. Its primary means to do this is by renewing the streetscape even as it shrinks pedestrian space and by introducing automobiles full-time to where they are now restricted during the day. First the streetscape, walks, lighting, and signage can be made over in anybody's plan. 142 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Why it has been allowed to deteriorate so badly for so long is a facetious and obvious question to ask. The second and main means the City plan relies on is full-time autos. This, exclusive of the transit lane, would make Chestnut just like all the other city streets, not generally a bad concept at first, considering Center City's general, if uneven, prosperity. But look closer. Much of Chestnut Street downtown is open to full-time and often heavy traffic already. At night, the whole street is car-accessible. But this hasn't necessarily produced good results. Nighttime on Chestnut is generally when most people feel the street is its biggest failure. The car doesn't help there. The daytime car sections show a higher vacancy rate than the supposedly bus-only sections, if we don't count the fire-damaged block. I should know, as I have managed a business on the car-open section of Chestnut Street several years ago, when I finalized my Chestnut Street Artway and Trolley Plan. 143 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 The business got far less than 1 percent of its trade from people that drove past, parked, and walked in. Other businesses may get slightly higher car results, but in no way can one space for a typical store front -- and it's actually going to be a lot less getting the figures here today -- bring any serious amount of business to the street. Visibility is a similar issue. While many trucks and official and semi-official vehicles may roll by, relatively few shoppers can be expected or can physically fit in cars down the street. Actual new auto-shoppers will be small. Existing bus service, however, can be expected to deteriorate and, hence, lose riders as autos, trucks, bikes, and government-associated vehicles -- and I mean police, firemen, inspectors, and all sorts of other people that park and use it already on official or semi-official or shopping business -- can be expected to heavily and usually illegally use and park on this type of transit lane. While well-designed transit lanes can 144 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 work, the current configuration using a level colored bus lane style will not work without two policemen in every block at this location. Such a condition would be a disaster for any trolley line. Cross-street, already at capacity on some numbered street at different times, will get worse, driving away those we seek to attract. The many opportunities I have identified and can share with planners at improving north-south traffic in the vicinity of Chestnut could not be done if Chestnut is also jammed, allowing little traffic, light flexibility, and other improvements. Further, we, even in Philadelphia by now, should have grown weary of parking and auto-industry claims that more parking and more roads will lessen traffic problems. It's not so much the new Vine Street Expressway that has kept traffic moving downtown as it is Center City's decline in total number of jobs and total users, even as residential numbers and tourists increase and enliven the sidewalks. Parking industry claims that more 145 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO.

980287 garages equal less traffic are, of course, ridiculous. The line at the parking gate may be smaller as the entrances are better-designed, but the line down the street grows. New auto capacity only reduces transit usage downtown as it demands further space be removed from more productive use. Eventually, if we continue this, each building and each high-rise will require a second building or a high-rise that is for parking only. Could you imagine such a city? Parking high-rises are expansive, large parking garages that are blocks long would be the norm and not the exception here. The very reason most people come downtown will be destroyed even as we have new mega centers. Some day these too can be pulled up and leave as the uniqueness of Center City is destroyed and the completely-contained centers can be more easily and cheaply go to any good highway location in the region. Such a car-dominated future has already been envisioned by the City with its recent shift towards suburban-style parking lots built in front 146 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 of new developments all over the city, even as planners around the world now preach the benefits of urban- and village-style pedestrian models, which we are just getting around to abandoning here. What does this mean for 95 percent of the urban core that is already such a model in Philadelphia? More abandonment than the cars already largely induced throughout the city. Such a future in Center City glimpsed in the City Administration's parking garages -- I'm sorry -- in the City Administration's parking report that says that we really need to build at least five large-scale multilevel parking garages around Rittenhouse Square. That's in this study that the City has commissioned. What does this have to do with Chestnut? A Center City trolley-loop pedestrian mall, such as only Chestnut Street and not even Walnut could currently support or accommodate, will reinforce our urban density. Chestnut can again become the center of the City rather than just another street with lower-class shops than Walnut. 147 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 No matter what Chestnut does, it will never be Philadelphia's answer to Rodeo Drive; just as it will never be the hippest street in the town, nor the Parkway, nor Penn's Landing. Rather than trying to forever be the poor copy of Walnut, it needs to be its own type of attraction. It needs to capitalize on its strengths and build them. Its higher daytime-volume pedestrians and the trolley opportunity are what should be worked towards. Such a design parameter can, if one-way trolley rather than two-way trolley is used, accommodate all other users very reasonably. Bikes, a fast-growing and also pollution-free transportation mode, can be easily fit in. This will further populate the street in the day when they, too, need traffic relief. With a one-way trolley and continued wide sidewalks at night when congestion isn't a big problem, autos and trucks can still be accommodated, and parking can be added. Evening traffic, evening parking, and a truly busy trolley, including modern and antique-style cars, would really stimulate Chestnut during its 148 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 traditional slack periods. Of course, apartment conversion, facade improvement, including upgrades of illegal type of blighting roll-down safety grates, along with new sidewalk surfaces, improved lighting all will help. Cafes, artwork installations river to river, the trolley, and bikes are the key to making this street its own attraction. Pedestrians coming and going from the frequent trolleys, as they connect from the train stations, outlying parking lots, subway lines, and other Center City attractions will flock from Walnut Street and the surrounding areas. It can be done. This must be done if Chestnut is again to become truly preeminent, and not just a poor relation or copy.

Businesses may not like this idea fully but say that it's impossible. How will we pay for it? Well, the Schuykill Valley Metro Trolley, from City Hall to King of Prussia and Reading, has just received its initial $70 million to start final design and initial construction preparation. SEPTA's preferred plan for this line 149 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 will cost three quarters of a billion dollars. However, the contemplated design currently misses the heaviest ridership-generating area -- Center City largely -- by being the only light rail plan in the country not to traverse its whole central business district. A change to this should be politically and financially accomplishable. The City's commitment to spend $15 million on Chestnut's make-over can also, if not spent on removing the best trees in the core of Center City as well as removing and moving Chestnut Street's perfectly good curbs and other parts that do work well, can go far to provide the local share of any less evasive street make-over. Actually, to put a trolley back on Chestnut in this instance will be less disruptive than the current plan, which will require all sidewalks as well as the street to be rebuilt at once. As an immediate improvement, the bike way could be operated with buses within a few weeks of a decision, with sidewalk upgrades following as soon as possible, and single-track trolley line being installed in the ensuing years, 150 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 rather than several years for the City plan to be constructed. Many will, of course, say, Where will the trucks go that load all day on Chestnut? Well, the heaviest can load at night on Chestnut, as is done in other cities and as was discussed today, and even Philadelphia already does sometimes. The rest can now use special daytime loading zones at each cross-street rather than what the case is now, where they use Chestnut to park as they deliver to these other streets. Every business, of course, has a back door. Many can easily use it with some minor modifications and a little effort. The true handful of businesses that can't be reasonably accommodated -- and I wonder if there really is any at all -- can be relocated to another spot on Chestnut with better access or another nearby auto-accessible street for the benefit of hundreds of other shops. On this subject, I can again testify from current personal experience, that even if you have a narrow walkway-type alley, most deliveries from businesses can be accommodated through the 151 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 back door. At my current work site, we don't use our back door, but we could if we weren't allowed the convenience of illegal parking on the sidewalk and double parking on the street, if you will.

Excuse me, Mr. Maits, if I can interrupt just for a minute. Meaning no disrespect, is there any way you can summarize or is it necessary to go through -- it looks like you have quite a few pages of testimony left.

I have one and a half left.

One and a half, okay. It looked a little bit thicker from here. Okay, thank you.

And I apologize.

That's all right.

I see I've chased everybody out already. There is one instance that, I agree, does need full-time, 24-hour car access, car and truck access. And these are the large apartment buildings that need this, that we want to convert the street to. 152 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Fortunately, almost all of the old office buildings that are supposed to be converted are at cross-streets with fronts or side door and delivery access. A couple of the proposed buildings have excellent rear access from Sansom. One or two buildings have an opportunity to create a new rear-street access when the Meridian Building comes down. All conversions will be tremendously more marketable, with a cafe-line, go-anywhere loop service, pedestrian- and bike-friendly Chestnut Street. As I have mentioned, we have talked with many shops, businesses, and politicians -- some politicians up and down the street and in the area. Many are very enthusiastic with my artway concept and trolley, which includes the trolley. This is no mean feat in an auto-dominated America, along a discredited transit mall against a popular mayor's endorsed plan. Several different surveyors from the different groups you've heard today, all using different approaches, returned with the same result -- namely, after a few minutes of fairly 153 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 laying out the City's plan, its benefit. Its limitations, we have found that there is not widespread support for the current plan. From something like 50 support when first asked -- when first asked and after the limitations and likely benefits are explained, the result turn out to be something more like percent of hard-core 9 support for the current plan. 10 In the instance of the Trolley Coalition surveyors, we have found that 9 out of 10 are very interested in the artway concept that I've passed around, to the point of saying that so many of them would endorse it in writing. Joel Spivak, our president, who testified earlier today, only found one business in the busy block that he surveyed that was dead set for a car-oriented street. Frankly, I was amazed at this initial level of acceptance. As time and prospects allow, we can formalize these results for you. And as I suspect, as my plan gets better known, as these alternatives get better known, support will grow for them. I challenge any opponents of this plan 154 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 to seriously consider it first. I would be more than happy to answer any questions and deal with any real concerns in greater detail than can be handled in this forum. The SEPTA and City Planners and knowledgeable individuals I have in conjunction with other groups worked out the details of how the Schuykill Valley Metro can be both operationally improved as well as modified to be able to operate on Chestnut and through Center City within current projected budgets. And this is my closing. I want to literally drive home the point here, as I close, that we will be actually increasing car usage and benefit to the street without surrendering to it. In an area where pedestrian counts are light and there's room because of block-wide parking lots to widen the street in order to continue private lanes for all loads, we will actually invite in full-time traffic. In no 22 blocks will autos be further banned in the central section of Chestnut. I have a concept to increase auto access to the major institutions along Chestnut. 155 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 Jefferson Hospital, for instance, as we have simultaneously improved the street frontage in that school's areas, cars can and are a very necessary addition at night to enliven the whole street. The artway concept just manages them better so that they do not crowd the rest of the users inappropriately but instead let these modes develop to their full potential, to the street's benefit.

Only on Chestnut in the CBD, central business district, could such a daytime car-free plan work well. Remember, Chestnut lost cars in the seventies because it was failing, starting in the late fifties, when automobiles were peaking and jamming the street. The bus way and Chestnut Street work reasonably well now with higher daytime volumes of pedestrians than Walnut. Unfortunately, I know of only one place in the world, which really doesn't apply here, where buses have sparked or confirmed development or redevelopment pressures. As Chestnut's original 1963 trolley plan envisioned and as trolleys have created examples of growth in various places, so they can 156 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 help to spur Chestnut's rebirth. We need to realize that if we can truly make a street pollution-free, with high-quality transit connected to the rest of the system and bringing cafes and other elements, we will have a Chestnut renaissance that can help and be a proud beacon for the entire city. Thank you very much. I have a lot of handouts and information for the few people that remain.

Thank you. Mr. John Boyle.

Thank you, Councilman. I believe one of the flaws of the City's plan for Chestnut Street is that the bike-bus lane is far too narrow to safely accommodate bicycles. The Northwestern University Traffic Institute Bicycle Planning and Facility Handbook recommends that a dedicated bike-bus lane should be 16 feet. The proposed Chestnut Street bike-bus lane will only be 11 feet. The conflicts caused by these narrow shared lanes will be further aggravated by the new Icarus (ph.) talking buses that SEPTA now uses. 157 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 These buses are nearly 10-feet wide. That would leave slightly over one foot of room left for the overtaken bicycle. Chestnut Street buses stop at every major block. During the height of the rush hour, Routes 9, 21, and 42 headways are less than 5 minutes apart for each route. The initial result will be that buses and bicycles will be leapfrogging one another within a narrow space and encroaching into the auto lane. After a few close calls, many bicyclists will decide that Chestnut Street, which is now a virtual bicycle boulevard, will become yet another street that will be abandoned for the sidewalk. Thank you.

Thank you. I think you're name is Zwick, right?

Right.

State your name for the record, please.

Yeah, it's Steven Zwick, Z-W-I-C-K. Thank you for this opportunity to 158 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 speak. What I find particularly ironic about this whole conversation is that the street that's the least accommodating is trying to accommodate everybody's particular interests and use. And one loses the sight that this is primarily a commercial street. You know, I'm going to offend a lot of the remaining people here, but I think this plan should proceed as quickly as possible. And the $15 million a small investment if it spurs the type of development that can occur. When you're -- I -- I -- I think many of these ideas, as they are expressed, are wonderful, but I also think they are idealistic and at times a bit quixotic. I mean, again, the street is primarily a -- it should be construed as primarily a commercial street. Retailers, in fact, don't like expansive sidewalks because that discourages people from walking in front of their store fronts. That's a small example. I will cite a situation that occurred two years ago. I was working with a development company. We tried to encourage them -- well, this 159 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 was at the Mayor's behest, to try to find a location for a Second City theater company. We had them very close to taking a location on Chestnut Street, which was the old Eric Theater in the 600 block. The higher-up's from -- even though Second City's known for Chicago, their higher-up's are actually based in Toronto. They were accosted on Chestnut Street. They said no way, we are not going to be the pioneers who go into Chestnut Street and try to reinvigorate it and make it a 24-hour street. Because most people don't know when they can go on Chestnut Street in terms of vehicular traffic. And if there's no place to stop, park a car, or have the potential to park a car, it will further discourage street vehicular -- well, it will discourage vehicular traffic because it's unclear when it is supposed to be there. It will discourage -- it will, in turn, make people feel less safe on that street because the cars function as a safety factor. If cars are there to witness activity, that increases not only the perception of security, but it increases 160 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 security. And that's what discouraged Second City from coming in and occupying that space, 'cause they didn't feel it was secure. If you want to make a place that's pedestrian-friendly, the first thing you do is make them feel secure. What also encourages pedestrian friendlyship (sic) is not just the articulation of the street, but it's the scale. And Chestnut Street, like Walnut Street, has that scale already. You have to fill in some of the gaps, as is true on Walnut and on many other streets. But you also have to look at these streets in the context of all the other streets where many of these activities can occur like a bicycle lane, a bicycle-only Sansom Street or bicycle lanes on Locust and Spruce Streets. Trolleys on Arch Street. Not everything has to be done on Chestnut. And I think the whole fallacy of what's occurring as this argument is that everybody thinks that Chestnut Street can accommodate all these other uses that couldn't occur on other streets. 161 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RES. NO. 980287 And with that, I'll -- I have many other comments, but for the -- trying to keep myself succinct for a change, I'll end there.

I thank you for that. Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify? (No response.)

This concludes the hearings on the Committee of Transportation. I thank everyone for being here today and look forward to seeing you as this project moves forward. Thank you. (Adjourned at 4:58 p.m.) - - - 162 C E R T I F I C A T E I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Monday, June 15, 1998, were reported and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of same. RE: COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES RESOLUTION NO. 980287 __________________________________, JOSEPHINE CARDILLO, Registered Professional Reporter