I am simply hoping to qualify something you said, Mr. Trainor, so the Committee has a broader understanding and understands exactly what you refer to. You spoke earlier to crash data. Is that data derived from the Philadelphia Police Department, a statistical unit, or is that data derived from some other source?
That is data that is derived from the Philadelphia Police Department.
Ms. Del Rossi, did you also work on DS12187, a change in direction, 100 East Chestnut Hill?
This request came in, and I prepared the response. It's a private street so it's not our jurisdiction, per se. It's the jurisdiction of the private entity, which is SEPTA in this case. So we referred the requesting party to SEPTA to see if they wanted to make a change in the direction of 119 that particular street.
You didn't refer the person to the District Councilperson, you referred them to SEPTA?
It has ingress and egress onto City streets but it is a private street, it is not a City street.
Possibly a driveway. There are streets -- let me rephrase it. There are driveways that look like streets, they are actually private. A major example would be up at Franklin Mills. All the roadways within the Franklin Mills Mall are private. Across the street from the Franklin Mills Mall across Knights Road there is a development and the roadways in there, again, they are private roads, private streets. The City Streets Department does not have any authority or responsibility within them other than from a driveway or parking lot licensing 120 perspective. This particular street, I believe, coming off of Chestnut Avenue runs along side the train or SEPTA's train station and parking lot. It is part of their property. So the direction or the operation of that particular street, as the parking lot itself, is SEPTA's responsibility.
The letter, though, says that "We" meaning the Department of Streets, "will work with SEPTA to determine if the change is feasible and prudent to make." Is that what you said, Mr. Denny?
We would provide our accident statistics. And the driveway or private street intersects to City streets, so we would look at that and see what the operational effects are at those two streets and look at the condition if SEPTA came and asked us to do so.
First, you're waiting to see if SEPTA is going to agree to it? 121
Our response was SEPTA had to be part of it. She had to contact SEPTA. SEPTA would have to contact us and then we would work with SEPTA.
So these people are Philadelphia residents who live on a street that's owned and operated by SEPTA.
But they have no 14 ownership over it, no ability to control it themselves? There's no association like homeowners in that area? How did you know to refer them to SEPTA as opposed to just -- if you got a petition from all of the residents on that street, why wouldn't you just --
It's not on our records as a City street, so we would have researched the record in most cases. In this case, we actually had gone to a meeting prior to this request at the Chestnut Hill Train Station for 122 whatever line that is and had a discussion and we knew from that meeting that that was a private street under SEPTA's jurisdiction. This request came after that meeting.
So in this case, if the District Councilperson made the request, you would not move forward with it because you felt you don't have jurisdiction over it?
Does SEPTA own streets in the City of Philadelphia besides this one?
Again, if you use the term "a street," as far as I'm concerned, is on the City plan. If it is not on the City Plan, it's private; it can be considered a driveway. SEPTA has, in this case, a plot of ground which has a parking lot for a train, has driveway for ingress and egress to that parking lot which connects to two City streets. And sometime way back in the past, homes were built abutting that driveway. They may have even been built at one time on railroad property. That is the situation 123 there, just like Franklin Mills has private streets up in the Franklin Mills Boulevard Mall area and the association across the street of Knights Road has it, bakers Bay up in the Northeast, and I think there's a couple other condos that have private streets in there. This particular street with the SEPTA situation does have an appearance of a City street, but it is not a City street and we do not have jurisdiction over it.
Okay. Ms. Del Rossi, do you have other file folders that were subject to production of documents today?
Mr. Trainor, to follow-up briefly, you and the other gentleman spoke to the question of private streets in City and that there's certain developments, whether they be shopping plazas, condominiums, et cetera, that have private streets within them. My only question is, would there not be connection through the Board of Surveyors and 124 the City Plans Unit at the construction of said development to define what type of streets and size for the certain type of traffic there at that time?
At the time of development, there is review of these private streets/driveways. And that would also include the Traffic Unit. The Committee of Highway Supervisors would be involved in it. The Highway Division, and, yes, the Board of Surveyors. What involvements the other two units have, I really can't get into because I'm not real sure. We would look at it like a driveway from an operational perspective. Again, it's up to the property owner as to how he wants to approach it to operate it.
Okay. And just to follow that briefly, you define from an operational point of view that a street that is stricken from the City Plan is none of your direct concern and/or purview, correct?
A street that is stricken from the City Plan becomes private property and there are certain things that 125 have to be done after its stricken. There's construction that has to be done basically to make it not look like a street any longer.
And when you receive requests for areas that you later deem to be private streets, all of those requests are first vetted and checked against the City Plan itself to ensure it is indeed a private street?
If we receive a request -- if I'm the first one that receives a request for something up in Franklin Mills Boulevard, I know it's a private street. I'm not going to go to City Plans to check to ensure that it's a private street.
No, because you have experience and you have so many years with the Department. But for a newer engineer, that would be their first point of contact, would it not?
Their point of contact, they would receive the request. Where is the street? They would go into our data system or we have GIS capability and they 126 will try to bring that street up. If the street shows up and there's data record of it and it could tell you that it's a City street. It may also tell you that it's a private street. So, yes, questions will be asked. You do ask yourself that question, especially as you're finding new streets or being taught new streets.
Yes, because there's approximately 2500 miles of streets within the City of Philadelphia.
I'll say yes. I think there's or 22,000 intersections. That's 15 what I go by. 16
Does the 19 Department have any standard for tests? " Is there any standard for what a test consist of? " I don't know what you look at and I 127 would prefer to know what you do. What does "look at" mean? What does trying something on a street test mean? Can you tell us? Does the Streets Department have sort of a protocol, procedure as to what has to be looked at, what conclusions have to be found before certain things happen? " And you say, "Well, if you want it, this is a procedure, sure, do it. " And that sounds good. People like tests. They think that means you're doing your job. And then you come to, what do you have to do to make a test, to pass a test? What causes somebody to flunk a test on a change of direction? I gather from the testimony so far that as long as a District Councilmember says he or she wants something, that nothing causes 128 them to drop, there is no test which they can flunk. Is that the case, or does the District Councilmember have to prove something in a test period? I'm trying to find out what does the Streets Department require. When a citizen makes a request, does the Streets Department look at that request and say, "How do we say no," because you know your Department is known to have a lot "Dr. No's" in it and a lot of people think that as long as a request comes from the public, the automatic answer of the Streets Department, instead of looking for a way to accommodate the request, the answer is always the reverse, the answer is no. 17 Does that mean no unless you get the District Councilmember? Does it mean no 19 because the request comes from a citizen rather than a District Councilmember? If you could explain some of these things to us, we'd know better how the Streets Department operates. Because as I'm listening intently, I find there seems to be no rules that apply. I wonder why we have a Streets 129 Department. Why don't we just absolve it and have the District Councilmembers make all the decisions? They do now. Because citizens don't -- do you have a department that deals with handicapped? I know the handicapped have all kinds of problems. Those that are lame, those that have difficulty walking, as I do now, need longer periods of time to cross the street or to get somewhere. Does the Streets Department have anybody that looks at that? And is your attitude, if a request comes in, let's work to try to make the City better for the citizens, or do you like to show your power by saying no? I'd like answers to that. And the only way we can get answers to those questions is by getting responses like there is a specific protocol. For example, if you want to change a direction of a street, you've got to make a study of how it impacts that street, how it impacts other streets, how it impacts schools, how it impacts fire departments, water 130 departments, police departments. I'm getting a sense that none of that exists, that really the Streets Department is kind of like a hoax. It just finds new ways and maybe nice ways, sometimes not so nice ways to say no unless the request comes from the one person you say is more important than even the Mayor on this, and that's the District Councilmember. Now, tell me if I'm wrong and where I'm wrong. Because I'd like to believe that the Streets Department does a real job, that when people come to it for help that they are looking for answers, that they don't get their jollies from saying no, that they get paid decently so they don't have to get paid by having power to say yes or no, that when a request comes in for a change of direction that somebody really is studying to see what's the impact on the City, is it good for the City, is it bad for the City, and that there's a report of such a test that's made so that if somebody ever raises a question you can bring out all the material; you can say, "Well, as a result of a change on this street, it affects 131 a pattern on another street or two others or five others or whatever. The request came in.
" Or do you just say, "no, you're asking for a wrong thing, there's no way of doing it your way and that's the end of it"? I would like to get information that helps me understand the Streets Department.
Councilman, from a perspective from a change of direction of a street, I would say 90 percent of our responses regarding a change of direction of a street is a yes.
That's just a change of direction because a District Councilmember asked for it, right?
Because based on our -- we received a request from the District Councilman, but also based on our observations 132 of the request, our review of what we observed, of crash data, visiting the sites if need be, our knowledge of the streets that that particular request, whatever it happens to be, would not adversely affect safety and efficient movement of vehicles and traffic. And that's why most of these requests are in a positive nature.
Well, let's take apart from direction of streets because I know from my experience in City Council some Councilmen, as election times comes, you get loads of requests because they're trying to meet them before Election Day. Requests for directional changes. When Councilman Taoune was a member of City Council, it was well noted one week he might introduce a whole lot of ordinances to have a street go south or north, whatever direction, and next week introduce another directional for the same street. And Councilmembers, some have legitimate purposes, some may just have electioneering purposes which may also be legitimate or may not be. But I'd like to 133 see, what do you study? For example, in a change that occurred very recently around LaSalle University and 20th Street, a change was made in 20th Street. We know of no specific study that was ever made except a three-day expenditure of time as a counter. Since the traffic patterns changed for 20th Street, they caused change in a number of other streets. There's been no report by the Streets Department as to what the impact is on other streets, good or bad or whatever way the Streets Department found them. How do we get that material? Was there a study made? If there was, why doesn't the Streets Department produce the study? And that would be true in all cases. Now, is this a matter of just political strength or political influence, or is it a matter of studies?
Regarding the 20th Street intersection, I believe testimony was given recently, extensive testimony, regarding the change at 20th Street. As far as 134 providing the jacket on 20th Street, we would be glad to provide that jacket.
All right, we'd like to see that one. But we'd like to see in all these cases -- for example, do you have a department that deals with requests from the handicapped populations in the City?
We do not have a specific department that I know of handling requests from the disabled. I know there is a Mayors Office for the Disabled located on our floor. I do not know that the Streets Department has a specific unit for the handling requests from the disabled.
We have received requests from the disabled community regarding traffic signal changes from a timing perspective, from an aspect of we've receive 135 requests from the blind. We try to accommodate them when we can, where we can. We have --
If we have a request from a disabled community such as the blind, we have signals and we've had them for some time in a couple places, we have bells located at intersections for the blind so that they can know when the traffic signal changes. This is based on requests that we have received from those individuals.
Do you have any statistics which show the number of requests you get from individuals who the Streets Department is supposed to serve, from people in Philadelphia, not counting District Councilmembers, how many requests do you get a year with respect to changes? Not from anybody in political office, but from ordinary citizens.
As part of the data that we supplied digitally, within that 136 digital database, a lot of those requests are from individual citizens.
The data that we supplied to your office in a digital format, our engineering and sign database. Besides having the requests from City Council and other elected officials, it also has in there the requests from regular citizens.
Well, how about requests just from citizens, not a City Councilmember-At-Large or District Councilmember enters the picture. Do you have any statistics as to how many requests you get a year?
I do not have it broken down. We don't have any statistics -- I don't have any statistics based on traffic engineering broken down.
We can provide, I believe, data of how many requests that we get 137 from a citizen.
And how many are accepted and how many are rejected? If a citizen asks for relief, is the approach an effort to find out what the citizen really wants to accomplish or is it just a turn-down, no, you don't meet the test for lights.
It depends on the request, Councilman. If a citizen is requesting the posting of no parking signs at their driveway because they have a problem getting in and out of their garage because people park either in front of the driveway or too close to the driveway and therefore they could not turn in and out, we would not post the signs, but what we would allow the citizen to do is to paint an X in the box at the street. The reason we would not post a sign as a first step is because of resources. And signs do get knocked down and they become a maintenance problem and, again, that is a resource situation. If we paint an X in the box or if they paint an X in the box in front 138 of their driveway, we usually go three feet on either side of the driveway, and in some cases we've been known to go three feet past the driveway, allowing them to paint. Ninety percent of the time or greater, that solves the problem that the citizen has of getting in and out. Yes, we do delve into what type of situation, what they're trying to solve. From a traffic signal perspective, if we receive a request that the timing is insufficient, we will check the timing. We have our signals timed to provide what is known in the industry as the pedestrian minimum crossing time and we provide that to the minor street. This will allow the major street as much green time as possible. If because of changes in land use, et cetera, a senior citizen facility opens up that, that could precipitate us to change the time standard from four feet per second down to three feet per second which will increase the amount of green time that is given to a pedestrian crossing a major street. But if we're already at the three feet per second and 139 we get a request, we have to figure out some other way to handle that particular problem because we've also got to realize --
But isn't the way the Streets Department handles it is by saying no? Isn't that the typical way the Streets Department answers it unless somebody with some influence raises the question?
No, sir. We will provide you the data based on citizens requests, how many requests we get and how many requests that we provide actual work out there and what our responses are. I believe we can take that information out of our database.
Well, I would like to find out is there any way of getting the number of requests that come from your offices not through an office of Councilmember or other elected official? How many contacts are directly with citizens of the City making requests and how many of them are granted, how many of them are worked through even if changed and result in achieving the objective 140 even though doing it differently and how many are said no to you? And does your Department feel a responsibility for trying to figure out what does the citizen have in mind, what is he or she seeking to achieve and how to help them if it's a good thing? I know among the handicapped community there's strong feeling that there's very little, if any, consideration given to them. I appreciate the information you gave me about adding an extra -- how much time to, say, crossing Broad Street here, a street as wide as Broad Street, it would allow a number additional seconds?
A street as wide as Broad Street, which is 60 feet wide, at 4 feet per second, that's 15 seconds. We would add a 3 second initial time or reaction time, so you're at 18 seconds. If we went down to 3 feet per second, we would start off right away with 20 seconds and add the 3 and you're at 23. So you go from 18 to 23.
Well, aren't there some people more handicapped than 141 others? Aren't there some people that that would do the job for but others that would still need it at a slower level? Is there any method the City uses to help them and at the same time help the businesses that would benefit by extra business?
Councilman, we could not move traffic, both vehicle and pedestrian in the other direction if we take Broad Street down from, shall we say, seconds of green 12 time for the cross street and we give the 13 cross street now 30 seconds. Traffic on Broad 14 Street itself -- and even with 30 seconds, you 15 could say there's somebody that would not be 16 able to cross the street at that point in 17 time. 18
Well, that's 19 true, but let's not take Broad Street. Let's 20 say Broad Street is a different street and traffic is urgent but there are lots of streets with traffic not moving that frequently that could stand to have longer periods. Does anybody try to distinguish between them instead of having one rule for 142 the whole City? That's what I'm getting at. Is there any effort to accommodate people from Philadelphia?
The crossing time for an intersection is calculated based on the width of a street and a walking speed of either four feet per second or three feet per second.
Well, it seems to me, say, near a hospital or nursing home, something like that, you might need a little more time and maybe there you can slow down traffic and make it go slower. Why do you have one standard covering everybody? Because that's not how people are built. It's not how they develop into. People have different needs. Why can't you try to accommodate each one and see what the standard ought to be?
Because we are trying to accommodate everybody. We are trying to work with everybody.
Well, that doesn't seem to me to be a way to achieve it by treating everybody as if they're all alike 143 when they're not. I think there are many other divisions than three seconds and four seconds with three yards per second.
We've had situations where we've had requests -- the problem as we got into the problem was the pedestrians starting out not getting yielded to by vehicles making the turn. Two locations were just handed to me and I know there's a couple others. The VA Hospital area and also the University of Pennsylvania at 34th and Walnut. The traffic signals there were changed to bring up the pedestrian movement first and then the vehicle. So the pedestrian now gets out in to the intersection and the vehicle does not have a green light yet. The green comes up and the ped is already in the crosswalk and he has to yield to him. He sees him there and the ped's already got a jump on him. This is, again, to try to address a problem that was brought to our attention. We had the same situation and it's been out there for 15 or 20 years out at 63rd and Walnut. That was one of the first 144 locations we did it at. We've got it up at Aramingo and Lehigh. Actually, at Aramingo and Lehigh we instituted what's called a ped lead. It was instituted for the school crossing at that location because it's a heavy right turn off of eastbound Lehigh. After approximately a year to months of 9 operation, we got a request to make the whole 10 intersection what's known as a ped scramble. 11 Everybody stops, the peds cross the street 12 with everybody stopped. Now, one of the 13 situations is the ped is not allowed to cross 14 when the vehicles have the green. A lot of 15 people are used to crossing on the green 16 light, not standing there waiting for that 17 "don't walk." We made the modification. And 18 it came back at us, "The ped's not allowed now to cross on the green? The children are not allowed to cross on the green light?" That's actually what was being told to me, and he was not because it said "don't walk." We had to go back to this leading movement aspect. So we are working with the community and citizens of the Philadelphia. 145
Well, it's good to hear that. We'll come back to that subject another time because it seems to me City government exists to make life better for the people in the City, not necessarily better for those who hold political power or political office but for the citizens. And I've never heard before this hearing today that District Councilmembers have the power because I'd like to find out where they get it from, get the power to decide directions of streets, that if they want to do it they can do it and the Streets Department may go through the motion or may not go through the motion of test periods or anything but that basically it depends on the City Councilmember. I know of no law that permits that to happen. I have to tell you I find it difficult to believe that if the Mayor wanted to and said he wanted a trial period put in, a trial approach put in tomorrow morning, I'm quite sure he'd get it. I think all of you would agree with me privately if not publicly. 146 But I think there's got to be standards that apply. And that's what we're trying to get out. Because when changes are made, it seems to me the main interest has always got to be the public good. I don't know that any one person ever always knows the public good. That sounds, to me, a wrong way to approach problems. That's why I raise these questions. And the Streets Department has a reputation, as I mentioned before, as being "Dr. No," that whenever there's a private citizen that asks for anything, the answer is no. 15 I know, for example, around Broad and York Road where there's a big Rite Aid development, the people there have been trying to get a traffic light or a stop sign for years, very heavy traffic there, but the Streets Department -- and I don't know whether the engineer involved in that is sitting as a witness today or not -- has said no for years. People don't understand it. I don't understand it. Why do you say no to places that are a mess to get across either by car or 147 by individual? And we get told stories about PennDOT, that the City Streets Department is really just an adjunct of PennDOT and therefore you're really State employees, which my answer is, well, then you ought to get paid by the State if you're State employees.
Councilman, I think PennDOT may disagree with you on that one.
PennDOT may disagree with you on that one, with the arguments we have with them.
They know we're the City of Philadelphia, with the arguments that we have with them.
Well, they always tell us when we inquire, we tell them the City says it's enforcing State regulations, they tell us often, "Don't pay any attention to that. As long as it's okay with the City, it's okay with us." And we've never been able to get an answer to that in the 35 years I've 148 been in City Council. I've tried in every way I know how to get an answer to find out what the bottom is. Maybe this is going to be the only way to keep banging away at it until we get an answer. Mr. Masters, go ahead.
Ms. Del Rossi, I think we're finished examining your cases. Can Mr. Ali and Mr. Washington come up? I had only three more I wanted to look at because I got the pattern that most of these documents we've requested are small streets that basically similar patterns of investigation happened. The ones I want to ask about, two of them were requests from Councilman O'Neill, and one of them is a request from Councilman Nutter. But I see Mr. Ali's name on the Councilman Nutter one. Mr. Washington, are you in the area for Councilman O'Neill?
Let me turn to you 149 first, Mr. Washington. There are two files here that I had questions about. One is only one page long, but it opens up a lot of questions. It's 1000 Regina Street, DS4867, it was August 29, 2002. In this letter, it was a request to make Regina Street one-way eastbound from Barlow to Stevens to divert traffic that previously used Stevens Road to reach Rennard Street before Stevens was made a one-way northbound. In the letter, this came under the name of the Commissioner of the Department. Councilman O'Neill was turned down from even having a trial period on the basis of a traffic flow study, it looks like. And it said that you strongly recommend that no change be made in the street direction, even though you can physically make it one-way you believe that it will create an unreasonable and unfair burden on the residents. Mr. Washington, were you involved in this or was this before you were assigned to this district?
This was before I 150 was assigned to this district and this was at the time I was on military leave.
What I don't have with this document request is anything beyond this letter. I don't have the traffic studies, I don't have any of the investigations that happened. Do you know --
There were no notes taken on any other piece of paper about the traffic flows?
Once the letter was bared, the notes weren't necessarily kept. Everything was put into the -- all the data that I needed was put into the letter itself, 151 so the letter contained all the information it needed.
I don't know that they were destroyed. We have the documentation. The volume records and the crash data we can generate now. I mean, we have the records involved. We used our database system to generate the volume and the crash records or the crash data.
How do you use a database system to generate volume? Do you send out equipment with a traffic count?
We had prerecorded information that was in the system. We used that.
If I may. Our crash data and traffic data is now all digitized. Anytime we make a count, we put that data into the database. We receive crash data, as I said earlier, from the Philadelphia Police Department. We may have to set it up because we can use it. We have that all now on a 152 master server. We do not necessarily go out and count a location based on a new request. We will check our databases to see what we have on it.
Some is based on an individual hour count, depending on the study, you put it in there. Some of it is collected by the DVRCP force and they transmit it over to us. Some of it is collected by consultants who are doing studies for their own or other projects. That data is transmitted to us. I think my database right now goes back to 1980 for the volumes and to 1990 at least digitized for crashes. Although we could probably pull up back to the 1970s.
I understand you're saying that every time there is a study done you put it in your digital database and you have that record. But in this case, what was done to generate that data? Was there a particular study done?
Again, with this 153 particular location -- and I'm going to let Charlie answer it -- I don't believe that we actually went out there and counted the location.
But it says specifically during the p.m. peak hour 144 vehicles traveled southbound on Stevens and turned right onto Regina Street. It also says, "If we made Regina Street one-way, then the 11700 block of Barlow would have to carry an additional 144 vehicles in the p.m. peak which would be the same vehicles." So that looks like there was a traffic study done during a p.m. peak period.
The information we have has daily volume and it also has broken down hourly volume. So it was those hourly numbers that were used.
When the device was placed in the street, it recorded the numbers, and the numbers then are recorded electronically. 154
I'm not sure whether it was our forces or DVRCP forces that had done it and when they did it at the moment.
Was it done at the request -- in connection to this request?
Somebody just happened to be studying the same place that Councilman O'Neill wanted to change the direction of?
We had information. We go around the City and try to get counts in different areas where we haven't got counts. And if we're doing a study in that area or some work in that area, we'll use that information.
So do you have a regular practice of just doing traffic counts throughout the City at all times?
Yes. We have a request we send the DVRCP. Actually, the DVRCP does traffic counts for us under a contract. 155
How do you do the contract with DVRCP? Do you do quadrants or do you cover a certain percentage of City in any one year or do you study every major street in the City every year?
We can't do every major street. It takes several years to cover the City, particularly for the number of counters we're putting out. But we send them a list yearly where we would like counts made. And if there's specific data we need, we'll add that to that list.
So this is historical data that was done in the regular course of mapping the City's traffic flow?
Besides the traffic flow, was there any other investigation that was done before you turned Councilman O'Neill down on this?
Well, this was a 156 recommendation. The Councilman didn't have to take the recommendation. If he wanted the trial, he could have said, "I want a trial." If he didn't want a trial, he didn't have to have a trial. He could then take what information we provided, go back to his constituents and see if they wanted to proceed with this or if they wanted to do something else. They actually came up with a different alternative, which was making Stevens Road one-way from Regina Street Barlow.
Right. So they didn't change Regina Street, they've come forward and they've asked to make the change to Stevens Road.
Did you work on that also, Mr. Denny? It looks like Mr. Trainor did because most of the petitions were sent to him.
Well, sometimes people prepare petitions and they mail them in. Actually, we would then forward them to the 157 District Councilperson, the petitions, if we get them.
It says, "Good day, Charlie. Please see attached. Charles Null met with Councilman O'Neill. Petitions are self-explanatory. Please see what can be done. Thank you, Peggy" something with an R from Councilman O'Neill's office.
Charles Null would have been talking to, I guess, Margaret Recupido is the individual, or Peggy.
So there's a lot of petitions here and people asking for all kinds 158 of different things in this file. I've only glanced really briefly, but there are some people who wanted certain streets made one-way, certain streets reversed and made two ways, other streets made one-way, people complaining that you did something, that you didn't do something. What did you do about this? How do you sort this out and how did you make a decision?
We wrote work orders and we're starting the trial -- I don't believe the work is done yet -- to make Stevens one-way from Regina Street to Barlow.
The trial has not started because the work has not been done yet, but there will be a trial starting. We wrote work orders to do the work, but the work has not -- physically, we have not put the one-way signs up on the street yet.
I have a letter dated July 27, 2001, to Brian O'Neill that says, "The enclosed represents the outrage felt by 159 the 31 homeowners on Regina and Barlow Streets over the recent traffic pattern change that resulted with the 1100 block of Stevens Road becoming one-way from Rennard Street and Regina."
Right. There's all these different things going on on Stevens Street.
They all go together so they all got put into the same file because Stevens Road between, I believe, Rennard and Regina was made one-way northbound in the past. The people who lived on Barlow Street thought they were getting additional traffic because he of that change and they asked to have Regina Street changed. We recommended not having Regina Street changed. Subsequently, people came in and asked to have Stevens Street between Regina and Winton Street made one-way, and that is what we've issued work orders to do. That's an additional section. 160
So it's like a domino effect, you changed part of Stevens Street and then you have to now keep changing --
There was a section of Stevens Street between Winton and Byberry that was one-way northbound for some time and then Stevens Street from Rennard to Regina was made one-way, and now we're doing the middle section.
Here's a Trouble Report, July 2001, from a police officer -- no, Jim Favor, 6 Highway, is that one of your guys?
He says that you recently changed the direction of the above street and that people are not obeying the signs and there have been many near misses, please contact him? 161
Was that during the trial period or was that after a permanent change?
I do not know because that was a previous ordinance. We got this request yesterday to come up with the data, and a lot of additional information is in this jacket because all of it was related and we really didn't have time to look it over. We just gathered the data because our request came in yesterday. We got the data and got it to you this morning.
And I appreciate you giving us the data and acting with speed on that. But what I'm trying to figure out is, it sounds like there was a big mess going on on Stevens Road in that neighborhood where people were jumping up and down saying that now that you've changed one thing now you should change another thing, you should change this back. Some people on one block wanted to do something that the people on the next block 162 didn't want to do. I wanted just to figure out how do you respond to that, what do you do?
That's not a factor in safety or anything else that you look at.
When we post the trial, we post it to provide the information to the public making it one-way and the appropriate intersection controls, and it's up to the citizens to obey those controls to maintain the safety. If they have a problem with the change or the trial, they have to make their voices known to the City Councilperson. That's where the community input comes in.
Haven't you had any conversations between your Department and the Councilman's office concerning all these communications?
As we receive complaints on this one or any of the other ones, we would have communications with the 163 Councilperson. We would refer these people to him first of all and then also, depending on what's going on up there, what our concerns are on to the Councilperson.
So have you had face-to-face meetings with Councilman O'Neill or his office on this?
No. I received letters and documents requesting to investigate the situation.
Letters, yes. Letters to investigate the request to do any work regarding directional changes.
All you do is just forward them to Councilman O'Neill, you don't have any telephone conversations with people there?
The last request that 164 came in came in not too long ago. When I got that request, because I remembered the Regina letter that I prepared earlier, I called the Councilman's office to confirm what they wanted to do. And what they wanted to do was to make Stevens Road one-way Regina to Winton Street. And when I confirmed that, I then passed it on to Mr. Washington and he went through to do the necessary work to prepare a trial ordinance and then we'll see how it is.
Have there been community meetings since 2001 concerning all these changes or proposed changes?
They did not involve us. There was communication between the Councilman's office and the people in the area, but we were not party to those communications.
If we were invited, we would have come, but I do not believe we were invited.
Okay. So the status 165 at this point is some of these changes were made permanent and other ones are in trial period right now?
The changes that were made permanent, we have a request to have a trial to make Stevens Road one-way from Regina to Winton Street, and that's what we're going to be implementing soon.
And already Stevens Road was made one-way, some other segment of it?
Two sections of Stevens Road are already one-way in the same direction
They're on either end of the one that's going to be on trial. One is to the south of Regina --
So on each side there's a one-way and then in the middle there's a two-way?
Okay. And the two 166 one-way norths, were they done at the same time or they were done at two different times?
This is just below Byberry Road where Woodhaven Road ends and there's a lot of people who come off of Woodhaven Road and try to work their way into this neighborhood. Some of them live in the neighborhood, some are beyond the neighborhood. And this is people trying to respond to the additional traffic they get off of Byberry Road. So they're willing to take traffic direction in one way but they don't want two-way traffic in the area.
But this trial period was not preceded by an ordinance, correct?
No ordinance has been introduced. We've been asked to start the trial. The ordinance will be introduced after the trial starts.
I understand. But first, Councilman O'Neill wanted to do a trial period on Regina Street and you turned him down.
We actually thought this was a better idea than doing Regina Street. Making Stevens Road one-way in this section 19 was better than making Regina Street one-way. Basically, if we made Regina Street one-way, we would have made the two-way section on Stevens Road a dead-end. They would have come down to a stop sign and would have had to turn go back, make a U-turn and go back, which is one of the reasons why we recommended against 168 it.
Did you sit down with Councilman O'Neill and say, "Regina Street is not the way to go, you should do Stevens Street"?