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