And listen, there's no attempt on my part to eliminate vending in the City of Philadelphia. And you brought up the issue of Broad and Snyder. And politically myself and one of my staff people worked for the better part of two, maybe two and a half years, monthly meetings to talk about the way they were doing their business and what we needed to do to get some order out there and to make it a more attractive area for vending -- not to vend from their trucks, which was illegal. They were taking up 20, 30 parking spaces at a meter 8 hours a day, which, quite frankly, didn't make sense to me because that was for potential customers. But they just ignored repeated warnings for a better part of two years. And it took me 108 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 that long 'cause I'm a pretty patient person to just say that's it. The Licenses and Inspections, Streets Department, Police Department were all a part of the task force to create what I thought could be a really unique kind of like a European-type of outdoor vending district. And day after day, they continually ignored it. And not just little infractions; I'm talking about major infractions.
Side of the truck, using the parking meters, putting a pole -- attaching it to the parking meters to hang dresses and other materials and they just always figured that I really didn't mean what I said if you don't pay attention. As I said to the people on Pine Street, it's up to you to do what is proper, and if you don't, I have no problem saying you can't vend on -- you won't be able to vend on Pine Street. Again, my issue is I think the thing that drives me crazier than even vending is honor boxes, and I've been dealing with this for a long 109 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 time and it kind of ties in. What rights -- you mentioned your dad who came here and started out as a vendor. What did he vend?
My father, who came here speaking no English, graduated number one from South Philadelphia High School, got a scholarship, the University of Pennsylvania scholarship to the University of Pennsylvania Law School and practiced law here for 65 years. That generation is no more.
That doesn't exist, I know, unfortunately for all of us.
But, I mean, had your father decided to open up a storefront someplace, I don't know how you would have felt about someone vending on his sidewalk because the 110 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 government says he can -- that person could be there, and what right would your father have had? I mean, look, you can't argue, I mean you could assume what your father would have thought about that, but I have some concerns that your father, who worked very hard and succeeded in life to become a prominent person in a society, I believe that he figures a part of what his mission in life was, in this country at least, was to be able to own a piece of real estate and enjoy it and not have somebody else come along and decide what to do with his property.
We have to balance the needs of these people, the new people, with the needs of the people who have been here. Isn't it -- wasn't it the same for your folks?
Yeah, but I think, as you said, those days have -- I live near Ninth Street. There are very few vendors on Ninth Street in the street because people don't want to 111 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 do that kind of work. It's very hard work and I admire them for --
You're not talking about what we still call the Italian Market?
Yeah, but it really was an international -- it was mostly Jewish and Italian, but because Jewish people and Italians looked alike, it was always Italian. Now, the Asians looked a little bit different than the Italians and people are upset that it's no 12 longer the Italian Market. I mean, that's the reality of it.
And 40 percent of the businesses that were on Ninth Street were owned by Jewish people, but now that 40 percent are owned by Asians, people think that something happened to the Italian Market, it's no longer Italian. But needless to say --
But there are a lot of other opportunities and I don't want to debate this, we can ago on for hours, and I know 112 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 we're getting a little tired here, all of us. But, you know, there are opportunities in Center City on Chestnut Street. There are dozens, dozens of vacant storefronts that people could go into business with. It isn't as though it is the only thing you can do to make a living in this country is just to vend, although it's a good start for people who don't speak English and are not familiar with the ways. It's an opportunity -- and I'm not looking to erase that opportunity, but I think there are other opportunities as well for people who -- and I have many people in my community who are of Asian persuasion who have taken over the dry-cleaning business, as an example, because people don't want to work in those sweat shops anymore, and they're running the dry-cleaning shops, they're running the little produce and grocery stores on the corners, they're doing that. And I don't know if they started out as vendors; maybe some of them did, maybe they didn't.
And many of the vendors have moved off of the street. And let me tell you 113 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 about somebody in your district. Mario (indiscernible), Bella Vista Beer Distributor, Eleventh and Fitzwater. Know him?
He came to this country with $2 and a hole in his sock in 1975.
And from the food carts, he bought a building, and from the building, he got himself a beer license and he's got a half a block now.
And he bought the Bozio Sheet Metal Company and now has garages for vendors.
Isn't that what we really want? 114 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658
It is, it is, but I don't know if he would appreciate somebody setting up a vending cart on his property to do -- to compete with his business as well.
That's right. And let's take the 300 vendors who finally were authorized for Center City back when the Center City bill was passed. I don't think that there's 200 left. They've gotten out, they've gone into business, they've gotten into storefronts. And you're going to see more and more of this, especially if we don't have another immigrant migration like we had. I think it's great, really I do.
Okay. I appreciate all of your testimony. Any questions anybody? (No questions.)
I appreciate your testimony and your time here. We're probably 115 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 going to wind up holding the bill anyway, but I appreciate your testimony. Any other witnesses? Please approach the table. And I thank all of you for your patience. Thank you, sir. (Witness comes forward.)
Good morning, Chairman DiCicco, members of the committee on Streets and Services. My name is Robert Martin. And as president of Building Owners Management Association, BOMA, of Philadelphia, I would like to present testimony on Bill 000658. Founded in 1916 BOMA Philadelphia represents over 500 members who own or manage approximately 100 million square feet of commercial property or provide services and supplies to the properties of the tristate area. It is also one of more than 100 local associations with 18,000 members who own or manage over 8 billion square feet of downtown and suburban commercial properties and facilities in North America and abroad. 116 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 BOMA supports Bill 000658 requiring the consent of abutting property owners to place certain forms of vending activities on their sidewalks. We support this ordinance because it would limit proliferation of such sites and ensure compatibility with building tenants. It would also help to preserve appearance of our central business district. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and member of the committee.
Thank you, Mr. Martin. I know it was a long day and I appreciate again your patience in waiting. Any questions for Mr. Martin?
Thank you. Good afternoon. I just have a quick question that kind of relates to my earlier statements with respects to determining what vendor or what type of vendor should be in front of any of the buildings that you represent. Have you given any thought to that, who would set the 117 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 criteria? I mean, how would you determine it?
I'm assuming the ordinance 4 would set some level of criteria. There's already an ordinance that deals with a lot of Center City, but we don't just represent just only Center City buildings; we represent buildings all over the City.
I didn't get a sense that the ordinance did and that's one of my concerns.
No, I'm saying the ordinance that was spoken about previously for vending deals with a lot of Center City. This ordinance is more global, as I read it, as it's written now.
I'm not sure how you would deal with criteria, but I'm sure certainly some of our members, if they had the opportunity, would prefer maybe not to have vending on such-and-such corner of their property.
I'm not saying any vending. Say they have a vendor today on one of 118 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 the corners of their property and if they had the opportunity, they certainly would not have that there, given the choice. Maybe it congests the sidewalk, maybe the person is leaving a mess behind periodically. Maybe it's competing with one of their tenants that's paying rent in their facility.
I'm saying you -- potentially this person would have to make this determination up front. Someone applies for a vending opportunity with L&I and that owner now has to make a decision as to whether or not I'm going to allow this person to vend on the sidewalk. What determining factors will that owner use to make that decision? That's what I'm trying to get at 'cause --
I would believe the owner would look at the mix of his tenants. If he has retail tenants on the ground floor, he certainly would look at the mix of those tenants. For instance, suppose he has a stall-box coffee tenant and they need a high-end coffee tenant in his building, he certainly is not going to want a food cart or kiosk right outside of there that's 119 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 selling high-end coffee that's competing with that tenant that's paying high dollars for that space that's he's in.
Yeah, I would -- that's the -- I am a building manager in a high-rise. I would go through that process myself.
So the bill should -- 'cause I want to have some specific language in whatever we end up doing as it relates to what criteria that person should have to determine whether or not a vendor can be in front of or on their property. If you're saying now that that property owner may say if there's a like-use tenant on the first floor, then the legislation should read that owner has the authority to deny that person an opportunity to vend.
Owners and managers today and leasing folks today have retail space, and they look at the mix of what they have today 120 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 before they bring something else in to make sure that it goes together with that. It's not something that would take away business from an existing tenant. So --
And if that person didn't have a like-use as the first-floor retail tenant as an example, then that property owner should not have the wherewithal to make a determination as to whether or not that person should --
That certainly would be one criteria. The other criteria, I think, is there sufficient space on the sidewalks to support it for egress of people. Those types of things would also enter into --
I'm assuming that L&I makes that determination and the Streets Department.
Although the Streets Department, probably more than L&I, makes 121 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 those determinations. I mean, I know there's a newsstand at southeast corner of Seventh and Chestnut that's been there for a lot of years. It was actually not in use for three years but someone just reappeared and reopened it. There is probably less than two and a half feet from the curb to the front of that newsstand. Literally people who -- if you're buying a newspaper or a product, the person has to literally walk into the street to get around to the other side of the newsstand, which is a public safety issue. You're smiling, I know, but I think that's a -- I understand where you're going and that's a good question. That's the only problem I could find with that is today you have -- you don't care if there's a fruit cart out there because you don't have any of your tenants that are selling food. But a year or two up the road you get a tenant that's going to be selling food in the building, you may not want that cart out there. It could be a temporary business for the vendor.
That's even more troublesome to me. 122 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658
Yeah, it could literally turn out to be temporary. And I don't want to see that happen to anybody either. I don't want to have somebody thinking that they're going to be able to establish a business, put two years of their life into it, and then it's, oh, by the way, the coffee guy showed up, you got to go.
And if he leaves in a year and the lease is over in a year, then you can come back if you want.
And I don't think our membership's looking for that either. I think it would be a conscious decision made on the front end.
Yeah. And, again, I could be wrong, but I think in many cases -- and I don't know what the percentage would be -- that in many of the cases that the building owners don't have a problem with vendors who conduct business on their sidewalk and maintain it and 123 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 clean up at the end of the day. I think the problem I know of, at least that's been brought to my attention, is when you have the competing business. And I use the guy that sells the eyeglasses off of a cart table, and even if it was in not a cart table, it was a proper size vending cart, competing with the eyeglass company -- and the guy literally is four or five feet away from the entrance to the eyeglass business, and that's a tenant who's trying to survive and is competing with a guy who has no insurance and none of the other issues to deal with that the tenant does. And that could be problematic for business people. And I know this argument, I'm sure, has been argued many times before over the last 17 years when they were dealing with vendors, not 18 only in Center City but throughout the City, but I 19 guess it's more, you know, prominent in Center 20 City. You know, who has more rights. Anyway, did you want to add something when I mentioned Seventh and Chestnut? I saw you stand up and then --
I'm familiar with that situation and that's -- 124 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658
And that's different than every other newsstand. That's not at the curb; it's up against the building.
But there's less than two and a half feet, and I don't know the ADA requirements, maybe it was grandfathered in, maybe it preceded the ADA requirements, but it's got to be two and a half feet, I'll say three.
The building owner wanted that newsstand there and he rents the space to him. What kind of deal that ever got to be, I don't know.
That's interesting 'cause we were talking earlier about do we really 125 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 want to get into that and here we have somebody that's doing it.
As far as the newsstand you're talking about, I think, at Fourth and Market?
Yes. It's been nonoperating at least three years, probably longer.
And the Streets Department can pull it down, and they do bring down --
Well, there is a jurisdictional issue as to who is going to take it down. It's been going on for three years. I'm ready to send my guys out, 'cause it's made out of wood, and just tear it down. I think that's the best way. L&I won't do it, Streets Department won't do it, the Managing Director said he'll get it done and nobody want to take responsibility.
I'll tell you what, if you'll go on vacation and give us a nice quiet 126 5/16/01 STREETS, SERVICES - BILL 000658 weekend night, we'll take it down. (Laughter.)
Thank you, thank you. I have a nonprofit -- my guys are going to take it down but thanks for the offer.
'Cause I hate to admit it, but it wouldn't be the first thing we took down.
All right. Any other questions? (No further questions.)
Thanks again for your patience. I appreciate you coming here today. We're going to recess this committee to the call of the Chair. Do we have to vote -- we're going to the public meeting and then we'll vote -- we can't vote any bills out 'cause we don't have a quorum. We will now go into the public meeting of the Committee on Streets and Services, and since we do not have a quorum, we will continue this to a date certain: Thursday, May 24th, at 9:15 am. Thank you. (Adjourned 1:00 p.m.) 127 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 Wednesday, May 16, 2001, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of same. RE: COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON STREETS AND SERVICES BILL NO.'S 000658, 000720, 010150, 010168, 010193, 010194, 010212, 010229, 010232, 010263, 010264, 010270, 010271, 010272, 010301, 010304 __________________________________, JOSEPHINE CARDILLO, Registered Professional Reporter