Well, the understanding that we were going to phase in the implementation strategy as related to funding, because last year I think the request was like 500,000.
We couldn't do it. I was told that we'd do two-fifty this fiscal year and subsequent years it would additional funding. And you're now telling me it's in the Operating Budget. I'm having difficulty getting a sense of where the commitment lies. This is a lease arrangement with the charter school, is my understanding, for a specific time as it relates to access.
The commitment I knew about, and there may have been discussions that I didn't know about was for the remediation study. That's what I knew about. If there were commitments to anything beyond that, I didn't know them. It doesn't mean it didn't happen, but I didn't know about them.
I did. I certainly knew 118 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 there were discussions. When it came up this year, I think the anticipation was that some fairly straightforward conversations between your office and the team in the same vein, and as I responded to Councilman Nutter's query earlier, that from time to time we do get back to Council to find out whether a project request can be modified in some way to better meet the objectives of the program. That conversation did not happen. That is our fault. To the extent that that can happen and these issues can be dealt with, the City Planning Commission does not have a problem revisiting the request.
Who's working on the issue with respect to the public access to the facility? In addition to which, who is working on the issue as it relates to the ownership of the facility? Because right now I understand it's owned by the Redevelopment Authority.
You're saying that as a result of that, we're not able to spend City Capital dollars on the facility?
Right. On that issue I would have to get back to you. I'm not sure, 119 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 frankly, whose working on that. As to the access issue, it probably should have been my staff working on it. So it's my fault. And we can have a conversation immediately following these hearings if you'd like.
I'm just concerned because I attended an announcement, an opening announcement around three weeks ago. You had a lot of very excited individuals there who were under the impression that this is moving forward. So the sooner get me a response, the better.
Well with your query, Councilman, it now is moving forward.
And thank you for being open and honest and taking the weight on this one. It's refreshing. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman O'Neill.
Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Dubow, could you just elaborate for the record -- a couple weeks back there was a large story in one of the local newspapers about the 120 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 stadium bonds and how it had grown from the original price. There was a piece of that, a very large piece, I think about million that was 5 attributable to the -- I think it was $22 million. 6 Could you explain why it was the Vet Stadium 7 repairs, why it went into the bond issue? And I'm 8 only assuming that it would have gone in the Capital 9 Budget otherwise. I just saw that as being a major 10 portion. You can explain the whole differential, 11 but the major part, I believe, was the Vet Stadium 12 repairs. I think it went from 3-something to 13 340-something. 14
From 304 to 340-something. 15 I can talk about that issue. I can't talk about the 16 larger issue of how it went from 304 to 340. I 17 would have to have someone else come to talk about 18 that. 19
Who would that be? 20 Just in case they happen to be around. 21
It would probably be someone 22 from PIDC, I would think. Back, I guess, about two Capital Budgets ago, we put $40 million into the Capital Budget for repairs to Veterans Stadium. We said at the time 121 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 that we anticipated that if there was a stadium deal completed that we would fund repairs through bond issue, and it was another way to actually conserve some of our debt incurring capacity. So when we went forward with the bond deal, that's the way we did it. So what's that done is actually allowed us to come back to you and ask you to reallocate the 40 million that had been put in the Capital Budget under the City's debt capacity for the Vet. And that's another one of the requests. So the impact of that is that we'll have more debt incurring capacity.
Thank you, Madam President. I was going to wait, but since -- oh, the Streets Commissioner left. I can wait until they come back. I can wait until they come on the individual thing. It's okay, Madam President.
Councilwoman, there's schedule for them to come back today unless you query them. So they're here awaiting your pleasure.
I would only 122 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 ask if they would provide me with an update. Jerry Clark always does with our bridges on 40th, 41st and 42nd Street. And I'm not sure if the project was pushed back from 2004 to 2006. Would you let me know that? I don't have to know this moment, but just an update on our bridges. They've been in the budget for some years. They're out there working, so we're grateful for that because we've been pushing for this for a very, very long time.
The Commissioner is indicating that there is a response for you now.
Councilwoman, hello. I'm Joe Syrnick again. Those three bridges that you talk about, 40th Street, 41st Street, 42nd Street, are all three bridges in a row over the same rail line, as you know. We are not able to work on all three of them at the same time because they would then all be shut down at the same time. Our schedule is to do 42nd Street. That's just about ready to be bid and that work should be starting sometime this year. 41st Street is in the Capital Program request for engineering money. We have selected a consultant, who just finished up the Strawberry Mansion Bridge for us and did a 123 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 spectacular job. If that money is approved, they would start work on the design. And in the 40th Street Bridge is programmed for construction money in Fiscal '04, that would be next year. So if all those three bridges come in they would go in one, two, three in row. Probably 42nd Street construction this year, 40th Street construction next, and then in the meantime 41st Street which would be worked on and designed would come third.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr.Syrnick. Do you know about the crossing signal for Mitchell School, 55th and Kingsessing? They've been really pressuring us because they claim they had eight accidents.
Thank you, very much. Thank you, Madam President.
You're 124 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 welcome. Councilman Nutter, it's my understanding that someone from the Law Department is here regarding your inquiry.
Good afternoon. I'm Cheryl Kritz. I'm the Chief Deputy of Commercial Law in the Law Department. And I understand there was discussion earlier about the eligible of using Capital funds.
The Councilman will ask his question, if you don't mind.
Good afternoon, Ms. Kritz. I'm sorry that you drew the short straw on this particular item. That will teach you to be hanging out near the Solicitor's Office. There was discussion earlier and this particular item has been in the Capital Budget in the past. It has to do with using Capital dollars as a part of any matching requirements specifically related to Hope 6 developments which are Public Housing Authority developments funded by the Federal 125 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 Government. There has been an ongoing debate and discussion, at least for all of my time here, and there's a significant document that was produced actually back when Stephanie Franklin-Suber, I believe, was Corporate Chair and I believe Joe Duretski (ph) was the City Solicitor often referred to as "The Tome" and the definitive document on curb, sidewalks, and street trees. Generally, the policy has been -- and we've also been told that it is I think there's something called Capital Program guidelines which are approved by, I believe, the Mayor, the Controller, and I'm not sure who the third party is, maybe the Managing Director or City solicitor. Which basically says -- I mean, the bottom line has been since about 1991 and after the City's fiscal crisis through the early '90s that curb and sidewalk restoration or replacement were not Capital eligible. And then somewhere else in the document there was a bit of a caveat that talked about unless the Controller deemed that the project was a part of a larger community revitalization plan or effort or something like that. Naturally and unfortunately, none of those terms are defined. This discussion came up today because Capital 126 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 dollars are designated to go to either two or three, or three or four PHA Hope development specifically 4 for curb and sidewalk restoration. It's both listed 5 in the Capital Budget and also in the commentary in 6 the front of the book. The question arises, why are those dollars eligible for those types of developments, curb and sidewalk, and still seemingly are not eligible for non-PHA developments in whatever anyone would consider residential neighborhoods throughout the City? Which creates a bit of, from my perspective, an unfairness to the rest of the citizens of the City, especially since all of them will have the opportunity to vote on the authorization of this Capital Budget. And we're trying to understand why one type can get it and others can't.
Outside of a larger publicly funded development, you're saying, why it is that isolated blocks or areas are not eligible.
Right. And I make the premise that if you're doing a neighborhood revitalization program, streetscape could be in the words of "The Tome" or the Controller, could be a 127 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 comprehensive revitalization plan. That is the program in some neighborhoods, as opposed to complete new house reconstruction and a wide variety of other activities. Again, in an undefined term of comprehensive neighborhood revitalization, I don't really know what that means, but I think I have some examples.
Councilman, I have with me the 1992 Finance Department guidelines for Capital eligibility. I'm not seeing a provision of that nature in here.
That would support expenditure of capital funds as part of a larger project. Do you know what the source of that is?
The permission to use Capital funds for curbs and sidewalks as part of or incident to a larger development project. You're asking us to distinguish why that's an eligible use and isolated blocks is not.
Well, first, I'm telling you that it's in this Capital Budget book 128 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 right now, so somebody think that it's eligible.
I'm not trying deny the funds. What I'm saying is if it's good for one it should be good for the other. A distinction has been made that in a regular residential block, people cannot have this work done and paid for by the City. Whereas, in these public housing developments sites -- again, I don't have anything against people getting what they're trying to get. So I'm not trying to take something from one and give to other. I'm saying if it's good for the one, then it should be good for the other. It's always been denied because they didn't have a comprehensive revitalization plan. Streetscape work is the plan.
I appreciate that. And, again, I would certainly encourage you to take a look at the document that was produced a couple years ago.
I'm very familiar with that one. 129 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029
Councilman Nutter, do you have any other questions?
I have plenty of question, Council President. I'm still in Fairmount Park and I have some questions about specifically about a park and recreation facility Poppa Playground. It's been an on going discussion about that the quality and integrity of the facility at Poppa Playground which is a recreation-type facility, it's a part of the Fairmount Park System. There was actually a meeting relatively recently between the parks, citizens, representatives from my office, a significant number of probably Operating Budget maintenance issues as well as a significant amount of Capital Budget maintenance needs at this particular facility. And it's only distinguished in that the needs are so great. But it, again, raises the larger issue of what is our schedule of getting around to all of our 130 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 facilities? How do we know in advance what our facilities needs are? On what kind of regularity are they assessed? What system or program is in place that we have an up-to-date understanding of the following of the facilities within the jurisdiction of these various agencies and specifically Fairmount Park.
Good afternoon. Stephanie Craighead again from Fairmount Park Commission. We've been in the process of collecting information on our facilities and trying to prioritize the needs. We have 460 buildings in Fairmount Park, and it's a pretty substantial understanding to develop the comprehensive assessment that's needed there. But we use our facilities management staff and district managers to bring to us issues that arise at the sites of recreation leaders and have been attempting to address the most critical needs on a case-by-case basis.
Is there a process or procedure by which each facility of the park system is evaluated based on condition and any needs for current maintenance or longer-term Capital 131 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 needs?
There's an informal process through the use of facilities management staff.
As the staff visiting the site, they bring back reports to the Capital staff and other maintenance staff about conditions at the buildings, and we try to prioritize the needs through the Operating Budget and the Capital Budget.
Is there any specific requirement or policy or procedure wherein every building in your jurisdiction is checked and evaluated top to bottom on an annual basis?
Is that a people-power problem? Do you not have enough people to do that? And how do we know which buildings are being evaluated when or how do we know what the condition of the entire system is at any point in time.
We recently did visit all of the buildings in a process to develop a 132 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 computerized system of evaluating our buildings. So we have been at the buildings, at most of them in the last two years. In terms of annual inspections, I think that that is a pretty substantial undertaking, but we have been trying to work with the Capital Program Office and our staff to attempt to address the needs of all the buildings.
What would it take to have that kind of system in place? I mean, this is not any attack or criticism, but I don't understand how the Fairmount Park system can have 400-some-odd buildings or facilities and that at a minimum every one of them is not checked on an annual basis for condition, safety, maintenance issues, needs, and overall function and presentation, if you will, presentation to the citizenry who may need to use or access any of those facilities. I don't understand how we can have a system where every building is not checked at least once a year. And what would it take to have such a system?
Well, I'd have to discuss that with other staff in order o answer that 133 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 question. I'd like to get back to you on that.
All right. of the program book, the Kelly Drive reviewing stands. It's my understand that the Capital funds were already allocated for design work for the reviewing stands, but the project work is not listed in the program book until the next fiscal year, '04; why is that?
It was our expectation that developing the design documents for this project would take some time and so we postponed the request for construction, figuring that we wouldn't be ready until that time.
When do you anticipate being ready? You don't think that anywhere in the course of Fiscal Year '03 this project is going to be ready to go?
Because it's a rather complicated project with a number of issues and we've been in discussion with the users trying to develop the appropriate design document for that 134 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 project. And there are a number of issues that have to be resolved.
When is the anticipated completion of this? Or before we get to completion, when is the anticipated start of the project?
Thomas Kline, the projects director for the Capital Program Office for Fairmount Park. The schedule is to go out for bids approximately June of next year. That would be '03. In anticipation, the funding would be made available in the '04 budget as is currently scheduled.
As Stephanie Craig had mentioned to you, we just started the design process. And it will take approximately one year for design.
Now, you know I have one ounce of architectural background. I'm still drawing stick people. I use that as a qualifier. But why does it take so long to design a project?
Well, there's a lot of 135 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 jurisdictions.
These are reviewing stands. One of the entities we're dealing with is the user, the Schuylkill Navy.
These are for the regattas observing, both for the spectators and the judges.
The judges' stand was that rather tall skinny building, and it was built over years ago. So it is really, as we've done an 15 assessment, is really beyond its life span. The 16 substructure is fine. So what we really have to do 17 is replace the superstructure. That's just one 18 element that when we started it, we were hoping we 19 could just replace the windows, replace the siding, 20 replace the seats, replace the stairs. But when 21 we're dealing with the user, they're telling us the 22 standards that it was designed for 25 years ago are 23 now different. 24
So we're going to redesign 136 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 an entire new superstructure for that, and it can't be done in a couple months. Also, our funding is limited for the '03 Budget. So this is a lot of money, a half million dollars. So trying to be realistic and realizing to ask for the money in this year and then maybe not be able to get it out for bids until the end of next year or the end of next fiscal year, we'd be asked why did we ask for the money if we could get out the bids.
I understand that part. But my original question was, why does design take so long?
It normally -- I would say normally design would be a six to eight month process. This is a little longer because of the uniqueness. It's also in the floodway. We have to go through DEB. As I said, we're dealing with a user that's rather unique.
Reviewing stands next to a river I guess would be in the floodway. The two kind of go together. Does someone work on this every day? Or you do a little bit today and do some other things 137 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 and you come back to it next week?
Well, like every project, we're dealing with L & I. That's on every project. We're dealing with, of course, the Park Commission, and we're dealing with the Art Commission and the Historic Commission. Those are four givens to begin with. Those are four other agencies. And they all work well with us, but they all have their own interests and their own concerns. They're not always as budget oriented as we are.
I do have to admit that I have no idea what you're talking about. What do you mean they're not as budget oriented as you are?
Let me try to summarize that, Councilman Nutter. Because it is the type of facility it is and the kinds of clients or the people we're working with to develop a scope of work and the fact that, as Mr. Kline said, we have to work with the Federal Department, they all require a review process. And when we do a project like Manyunk Canal or any one of those projects, that process where we have to go and submit drawings for review to the Federal Government some other agency 138 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 can take a month or two months to get responses back. So that that hinders or delays the design of the project.
That kind of information is helpful. Again, having virtually no 7 background in this, if someone tells me that design takes a year, the naive person I am, I'm left to think that somebody's sitting around trying to draw something and figure out the mechanics for a year. Are you telling me that you pretty much come up with the design and then all the rest is approval process and moving paper around?
I think the approval process is a large part of the time it takes to get a project ready to go out for bid.
Because you didn't have any funding problems, right? I mean, the money was available for this in July, right?
Right. The money was available in '02, I believe, for the design. So you're correct, we do. But it's a matter --
No, it is not completed yet. It is not completed yet. 139 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029
So we haven't even gotten to sending plans different places and trying to get approvals. We don't have a document ready yet?
See, actually, the way it works, Councilman, is the approval process takes place during several phases of the design process. So we may go through a schematic or design process, then we have to send it for their review and approval. Then they send that information back to us with their comments or concerns which we have to then revise drawings, incorporate their concerns within the documents and move forward again with the next phase of the work. It's not like designing a library or designing a building that we have total control over and also don't have those extra review processes involved with it. I'd be more than happy to get back to you on this particular project with our best guess this time as to a time line on the whole project.
Okay. And I do appreciate that. I mean, you understand and I respect all the professionals and what they have to do and what 140 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 you have to go through. On the other hand, you understand that it is not just about reviewing stands, almost of these projects. You allocate the dollars, something kind of goes in between. You don't hear anything about it for a while. Then things start to heat up. Then ultimately construction happens. And it seems like it takes a very long time to get a project done.
I agree with you, Councilman. In the past, it has. The Capital Program Office is trying to shorten that process and trying to get our hand around some of the projects that have taken longer and find ways of shortening the process, as well as keep Councilpeople informed as to what's going on, on a regular basis on these projects.
That would be helpful. What's the current condition of the stands?
The current condition of the stand is it is usable. Some repairs have been made with the maintenance staff of Fairmount Park, so it is still usable at this time. 141 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029
Let's talk about parking lots on . Design dollars were allocated again in '02, funding in '04. Now, you're not going to tell me that it takes the same amount of time to design a parking lot as it takes to design reviewing stands, are you?
Councilman, this is somewhat similar in that the project really, as far as the construction funding for this project, which currently, if you see, it's been budgeted or scheduled in '04 and '05, this is actually two parking lots.
One is an existing lot. It's at Black Road and West River Drive. It's an existing parking area, cinders, that's been cinders as long as I've been in the park. That's one lot to be reconstructed with proper drainage curving, et cetera.
Cement, asphalt? 142 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029
Asphalt. The other area would be a new area on the other side of the street, on the west side of West River Drive. And that would be for the -- I believe, the Park Commission needs that for when they close the West River Drive to permit parking on that side of the street. That's the second area.
You're saying you're going to create a new parking lot on the non-river side.
Right now it's a lawn area, and it's quite large. It's on the north side of Black Road and on the west side of West River Drive.
When the West River Drive is closed, there's an intense demand for parking. The lots that are on the Kelly Drive side accommodate a fair amount of traffic but not all of it. And what happens is people will go up as far north the Falls Ridge area and then park the lawn and keep parking. We're trying to provide closer access to the Drive and --
But you can access the Drive by vehicle after 12:00 to 5:00, right?
To get to the lots, but it creates a fair amount of conflict and we're 144 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 trying to alleviate some of that conflict by allowing parking right at the West River Drive on that side.
Well, the vehicles coming in to get to the lot with the users in the roadway enjoying the fact that it's closed.
But you're still going to have to go down on West River Drive to get to this lot, right?
No. You'll access from Black Road. The entrance will be on Black Road.
I thought the Black Road entrance, though, was closed.
I really like that 145 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 side as grass, personally.
Well, it's not all grass. There's a bunch of volunteer vegetation that's at the rear of that that will be cleared to provide for this use. There's a great demand for parking.
That's a fairly large area. I would really like to see a drawing on that. That's a very nice open space. You know, volunteer vegetation, I don't anything about plants. It's a very nice open space area there. And basically you're talking about blacktopping it?
Thank you. Madam Chair, I'm sure you want me to relinquish the rest of my time which expired about a half hour ago.
Thank you. 146 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. Question: The State has provided funding for 60th Street commercial corridor to the tune of $500,000, as you might know. We have received $100,000 and we're about ready to lose the money if we can't get the match. Would you check on that for me? Because we don't want to lose the State funding that we received to date.
Right. Thank you. They're threatening to take it back, that's why I raise it. Thank you.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a question about Fairmount Park street lighting and don't know whether I want Fairmount Park or the Streets Department, so I'll 147 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 ask the question and they can decide. A project I've been watching very carefully for years is the upgrading of the street lighting on Kelly Drive. My question is that that has not job yet been complete, but I have experienced a situation there where the old lights were out and the illumination was provided strictly by the lights that have been recently installed there. The idea was to move all the street lights to one side of the roadway to eliminate cable knock-downs and other problems associated with the lighting of Kelly drive. And I've noticed personally that the illumination level with the new lighting does not appear to be of a level of the old lighting that was on both sides of the street. So I'm hoping that when this job was laid out that there was some consideration of the fact that you're going to put all the lights on one side of the straight will the pattern of installation give the roadway the required lighting. And I'd like to thank the Street Lighting Department because this was a job that, again, I've watching for three, four, five years now. Because of the failure of the street light 148 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 cables, they had to put temporary wires up, tied them to trees. It really looked like a mess. So I'd like you to comment on the status of that job, when the old lights will be removed. And they are eventually removed, will the lighting level appropriate? To me, just looking at, at this point it does not look like it is as well lighted as it once was.
Good morning. My name is Joe Doyle. I'm the chief street lighting engineer for the City. Councilman, I appreciate your question about that project. You're right, we've been working for quite a few years to have that job completed. It's virtually completed as far as the initial construction is concerned. But there's some takedown work and there's some final tie-ins with PECO for electrical service for the lighting. To kind of recap quickly, the lighting was all placed on one side of the roadway in an effort to provide a more uniform light distribution through there. However, the light levels will be higher than the original light equipment for two reasons. One, we more street lights than there were there before. 149 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 And secondly, each of the units is brighter then the original ones. So there should be, actually, a multiplier here of the light intensity on the street. One possibility that could be entering into this is the fact that we went to a one-side lighting system, we put the lighting on the river side of the Drive to provide better light and back light for the pathway and for that side of the roadway. So there is some light that would fall back onto the pathway, especially where it's adjacent to the roadway. Another factor that may be influencing it is the fixtures themselves, if you've noticed are more designed what we call cut-off type fixture. There's less glare from the light fixture itself. There's a flatter profile to the fixture. And that means then that the light tends to fall more on the roadway and less into the drivers' eyes. That's a good thing because it reduces the glare to the driver, but it also may give the perception that there's less light out there when, in fact, there's actually more at the roadway level. But to specifically address your 150 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 question, we'll take a look at that just to be sure that everything is working properly. But there is a little bit of an overlap here while the contractor removes the old equipment, sometimes both light systems are up. We obviously don't turn out the old system until the new system is on. And what that may do is for a very short time have extremely bright section where all the lights are burning, both the new ones and the old ones. Then we remove the old fixtures and then someone feels that suddenly the light level is reduced. For the long-term before and after it should be an improvement overall. But I'll look at that myself, make sure that we're working properly up there.
And, again, thank you. The project once completed and the old lights removed will be a real asset to the park. And that was obviously -- you know, I do know a little bit about that -- a big job to accomplish. Once it started to move, it went forward without any difficulty. But the interesting thing, all the problems we had with the old lights being on, off, on, off, since you the new ones up, the old ones haven't gone out for three months. 151 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029
By the way, we appreciate your support in this project, Councilman. It's been very helpful as we've been moving this forward.
You're welcome. Are there any other questions from Members of the Committee? The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Doyle, did you really think that I wasn't going to ask you a question day? It wouldn't have been worth your while to come over here if I didn't ask you something.
That's pretty good. Commissioner Johnson, let me commend you for having a conversation with Mr. Doyle. I appreciate it. We had a discussion last year and some information has been provided on the issue of street 152 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 lighting. We've had, I think, conversations the last two budget hearings about the level of lighting. What's that called, footcandle power?
The term for measuring the intensity of light on a roadway is referred to footcandles.
And you had gone out and done, I think, some survey work of half a dozen neighborhoods. And I think our discussion last year was contrasting the light levels in a regular residential neighborhood with some of our brighter areas downtown, I think specifically, South Broad Street and maybe Walnut Street. And I think we had some discussion about the difference in the light levels. Then I recall getting a piece, I believe from Commissioner Johnson, laying out that while there was an obvious distinction -- and naturally, no one wants to light up a regular residential street like Walnut Street or South Broad Street, there might be a need to do some lighting upgrades in many of our neighborhoods. Can you give me a status update on any kind of citywide neighborhood lighting upgrade problem?
Well, Councilman, as you 153 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 said, we performed an analysis of light levels at, I guess, six to eight neighborhoods to compare the relative intensity of the lighting in those neighborhoods versus the higher intensity downtown. And as I recall, the numbers were in range that we had discussed at Council testimony last year. As far as any type of a citywide program to address the issues, we really don't have any program in the Capital Budget for new or additional lighting to add lighting into areas where the lighting, per se, is not -- where perhaps one neighborhood intensity on average was different than another neighborhood's intensity on average. However, we do look at individual locations. If specific locations are requested for City Council, we take a look at that specific block, that exact location. And if we feel that an additional light is appropriate, we've been doing that. But as far as a broad overview --
We do that out of Operating 154 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 Budget, Councilman.
I was going to add that we also look at opportunities when we get these requests to look for locations where we may already have a power source and an existing pole. And on occasion we do add an additional light, kind of almost as a stopgap measure where there is a specific complaint or concern about lighting. We do not have a specific budget set aside for a citywide program at this time.
Okay. Tell me about this, because I think we also had some discussion and then there was correspondence with regard to an effort, for instance, to research some of the best practices across the country, how different cities are dealing with lighting issues. We were looking at developing a citywide standard, I guess, for a least a minimum level of lighting out in many of our neighborhoods. And also, we've had discussion about a UC Bright type program expanded throughout the City. You're familiar with the UC Bright program. 155 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 It's a University City program where, I believe, many of the neighbors in University City in conjunction with University of Pennsylvania and other entities worked with neighbors who actually ended up putting out usually a light pole standard or something maybe in their front yard or near their steps which provides additional lighting out on the walkway in conjunction with whatever light happens to kind of shine from the street light back out. And it kind of lights up the neighborhood, and talked about the ability of neighbors to do joint purchasing or discount lights and doing something in conjunction with PECO. Any movement or progress on that? We had a little meeting about that last summer, I think.
Councilman, as you mentioned, the program that began out in the University City area was really initially the instigation of Penn in cooperation with PECO to address a specific problem that had arisen with some criminal activity in the area. There had been a murder. And as a result of that, the property owners kind of in conjunction and coordinated with both PECO and with University of Pennsylvania were 156 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 able to supplement their own lighting to address a specific location immediately in front of their houses. That was private initiative. There really was no City money involved in it. I was only involved as sort of a friend of the court, if you will, to give a little bit of technical information on it. However, that's really limited to that area. That was not intended as a citywide effort. It was strictly at the initiative of Penn.
I understand. I guess what I'm suggesting here and where I've been trying to take this conversation is this might be something that the City, working with various neighborhood groups and organization, possibly through the NTI network, framework, umbrella, you might just want to have such a program throughout the City. I mean, University City is not the only place that has either a darkness problem or a crime problem.
Councilman, I'm always available to address any community group or talk with any organization that would like to begin that. I frequently do that. While it does not always result in such a high profile project as you would 157 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 see in University City, but individual property owners and through organizations have tried to instill that interest in their members. Often times it does not come actually come out to be an implementation because the members realize that there is a cost associated with it and that's not always what they were looking to do.
Well, there maybe areas, at least in the district that I represent, that might have an interest in something like this. I'd certainly like to encourage people to pursue those kinds of activities. I think the benefits far outweigh, quite honestly, any financial costs that may be involved. And ultimately, the citizens and the City, I think, are the beneficiaries.
Councilman, I might add one more thing. I'm sure you're aware that as far as the NTI funding and the availability of that funding, it kind of extends beyond the scope of what the Streets Department would be able to do, but we can certainly pursue any opportunities that may be there with the appropriate individuals.
I should add that in the context, at least the planning component of the NTI 158 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 umbrella and framework, we would be looking to increase safety in communities. And there's a component of our planning that includes that and we will take this up within that framework.
Now that you actually mention that, based on some of the activities in some of the neighborhoods, I mean, we'll have this unusual combination. There won't be many people there, but it's also going to become little darker in some of our communities at least initially because there won't be any buildings there and with relocations and the like. Now, there won't be any people there so maybe you don't need the lighting at a certain level, but you're going to have massive areas of the City that are actually going to become darker as a result of the initial NTI activities.
And how we treat those areas is key, one of the reasons that the Police Department is part of our deliberations.
I think we better get the officers extra flashlights or something. Councilman Rizzo, I think, has a point.
The Chair 159 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Mr. Doyle, I'm sure you're aware of the -- and Councilman Nutter mentioned a minute ago about the public utility PECO Energy having a contractual outdoor lighting program, which I would encourage you, especially when we're talking potentially temporary situations during the Transformation Initiative where the utility installs the lights, whether it be a flood or an actual mast arm type fixture, provides the energy, provides the maintenance for short-term applications. That might be something that you want to discuss with the utility company.
Yes, Councilman. We often suggest that when a community group or a private individual are asking for additional lighting, especially when it falls more onto a private property area. I mean, obviously, the Streets Department has its responsibilities and an adjoining property, though, that is private and in private hands, the opportunity exists for a private outdoor light, as PECO refers to the POL system, to supplement the street lighting from a private use. And that has been used and we've had a log of 160 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 cooperation with PECO Energy on expanding that system to the private sector. So we do try to make that option always available.
Well, I'm not talking about entirely the private sector, I'm talking about areas -- since you have no Capital Budget for additional lights -- that installing a light that possibly won't be needed a year from now, two years from now, that a temporary contractual arrangement with the utility might be a good alternative. Since you brought that up, I'd appreciate you, for the record, what exactly is the responsibility the City of Philadelphia, is it to light the street, the sidewalk and the street? What is exactly is the charge? When you design a street light system, are you lighting the sidewalk and the roadway or are you just responsible for the roadway?
Councilman, traditionally, the Streets Department has taken a, I guess, somewhat conservative view that the roadway is the lighting responsibility of the Streets Department, not the sidewalk. However, in today's world, we try to be so rigid on that and what we have attempted to do is to improve the lighting of both. And how 161 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 we're doing that is by actually mounting the street lights closer to the curb line in a way that some light will backfeed down onto the sidewalk area and also to spread the beam further across the way. This is complicated because there are many other competing light sources that are out there. And very often, we're not able to do that if the street width is such an extent that there's no utility poles on both sides of the street; we have to work from one side. So we try take, no pun intended, an enlightened approach to this to improve the lighting adjacent to the roadway. But we cannot really be totally responsible for that. As you're aware the sidewalk is in an area that while technically within the City's right-of-way is the property owner's responsibility for maintenance and for safety. So we have to try to do a balance between improving the lighting on the overall roadway and adjacent areas, but we cannot take total responsibility for lighting all of the sidewalks throughout the City. We don't have the resources to do it and, in fact, the physical conditions are sometimes impossible to do that.
It's a great 162 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 approach. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Nutter.
Commissioner, let's talk about , Line 91, Item 2, historic streets, $200,000 listed. What are these funds used for?
There are certain streets in the City of Philadelphia that has a historic designation and when one of those streets is in need of repair, we're required to basically restore that street in the same form that we found it. This often will involve many of the cobblestone streets that you see around the City. And that type of repair is more of a specialized type of repair.
There are a number of streets that have designated by the Historical Society as historic streets.
And do you know if in the current realm of funding Skiddoo Street is going to get restored?
I'm not familiar with what needs to be done on that particular street. So the 163 2/13/02 - WHOLE - BILLS 020028, 020029 answer is no, I do not, but I can find out.
That's a nice little street. It's a cute little street. It has been designated historic and we'd like to get it repaired. It's in bad shape. You can check on that?
Okay. Director Griffith, we've had some direct contact about this. On the same page, on in the book, Line Item 92, No. 2, Lancaster Avenue. Can you tell me -- you've got $500,000 in City funds, $2 million -- I'm "FB" is federal. And 200,000 in SB, is that State.