Committee Hearing, June 3, 2009

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA2 COMMITTEE ON RULES - - - Room 400, City Hall4 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, June 3, 2009, 10:21 a.m.5 - - - Bill 090128 - East Passyunk Avenue BID renewal Bill 090169 - Amend Philadelphia Zoning Maps Bill 090170 - Central Delaware Riverfront Overlay District9 Bill 090348 - Frankford Ave. Spec. Dist.10 Bill 090349 - Del. River Conservation Dist.11 Bill 090380 - Withdrawn at Sponsor Request12 Bill 090392 - Amend Philadelphia Zoning Maps13 COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Anna C. Verna, Chair15 James F. Kenney, Vice Chair Blondell Reynolds Brown16 Darrell L. Clarke Frank DiCicco17 W. Wilson Goode, Jr. William K. Greenlee18 Jack Kelly Donna Reed Miller19 - - -21 V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Specialists23 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 1910324 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Good2 morning, everyone. This is a public3 hearing of the Council Committee on4 Rules.5 I would ask Mr. Ericson to6 please read the title of Bill No. 090128.7

Bill No. 090128,8 an ordinance continuing the East Passyunk9 Avenue Business Improvement District10 ("District") beyond its termination date11 in an area that generally includes both12 sides of East Passyunk Avenue from the13 south side of Federal Street to the east14 side of South Broad Street, certain15 blocks of streets that intersect that16 portion of East Passyunk Avenue, both17 sides of South Broad Street from the18 south side of McKean Street to the north19 side of Snyder Avenue, and the west side20 of South Broad Street from the south side21 of Mifflin Street to the north side of22 McKean Street, and for which East23 Passyunk Avenue Business Improvement24 District, Inc., a Pennsylvania nonprofit25 3 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 corporation, is a neighborhood2 improvement district management3 association; approving a final plan for4 the report concerning the District,5 including a list of proposed improvements6 and their estimated costs and providing7 for assessment fees to be levied on8 property owners within the District;9 authorizing the Director of Commerce, on10 behalf of the City, to execute an11 agreement with East Passyunk Avenue12 Business Improvement District, Inc.,13 relating to the District; and authorizing14 East Passyunk Avenue Business Improvement15 District, Inc., to assess property owners16 within the District a special property17 assessment fee to be used in accordance18 with the approved final plan, all under19 the provisions of the Community and20 Economic Improvement Act and under21 certain terms and conditions.22

Thank23 you very much.24 Who do we have to testify on25 4 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 this? Anyone from the Administration?2 I know we did have a public3 hearing on this bill on April the 8th, at4 which time there was a question of5 amending the provision regarding rates.6 I believe that was raised, and the bill7 was subsequently rescheduled for today.8 Do we have any witnesses that9 would like to testify at this time on the10 bill?11 Please approach the witness12 table.13 (Witness comes forward.)14

Good15 morning. Kindly identify yourself for16 the record and proceed with your17 testimony.18

Good morning. My19 name is Ed Kirlin. I'm a resident of20 South Philadelphia.21 Thank you, Madam Chair and City22 Council, for this opportunity to testify.23 I am a participant in an ad hoc committee24 on East Passyunk Avenue. The shop owners25 5 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 there are discussing changes to the BID2 and bylaws in a number of specific ways.3 There was a meeting of this committee on4 May 6th, and the following are some of5 the recommendation that were made:6 First, it has been requested7 that the board be elected by the8 membership and not appointed by the9 existing board, except in the cases of10 vacancies.11 Second, it has been suggested12 that, just as the board now reserves one13 board position for a representative of14 City Council, that at least one position15 be reserved for those members whose16 current property taxes exceed $5,000, of17 which there are some 17, with St. Agnes18 Hospital and Verizon Corporation paying19 the highest property taxes, just under20 $800,000 combined. With these two21 corporations contributing nearly $180,00022 to the BID, they or the other BID23 planners on the avenue should be afforded24 a larger say in the decision-making at25 6 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 the BID.2 Third, there is interested and3 support on the Avenue for a change in the4 bylaws that would allow business owners5 who are not property owners to vote in6 the election of the board of directors7 and on all matters other members of the8 EPA Corporation are allowed.9 Fourth, it has been suggested10 that the meetings of the general11 membership be scheduled regularly, such12 as the second Tuesday of each month, as13 opposed to being called at the pleasure14 of the board.15 At the ad hoc -- at our ad hoc16 committee meeting, it was revealed that17 there is a committee now working on18 changes to the bylaws. It was19 represented to the ad hoc committee that20 the new changes to the bylaws would be21 completed before this bill was voted on.22 This, of course, brings a question as to23 whether the changes have had the24 opportunity to be discussed fully and25 7 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 voted upon by the general membership and2 whether there is adequate opportunity for3 public comment on those changes before4 this body.5 With regard to the legislation6 itself and given the interest and concern7 by many shop owners that changes to the8 bylaws be made, it is requested that the9 termination date of the BID be extended10 only one year instead of ten so as not to11 cause a break in the BID services or the12 operations, and that new legislation to13 extend the life of the BID be introduced14 again next year, thereby giving the BID15 members a year's time to work out changes16 to the bylaws that satisfy a majority of17 the membership voting upon them.18 I thank you again for this19 opportunity to be heard on this matter,20 and thank you very much.21

Are22 there any questions or comments from23 members of the committee?24 The Chair recognizes Councilman25 8 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 DiCicco.2 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you,3 Madam Chair.4 And good morning, Mr. Kirlin.5 I just have two very brief questions.6 The ad hoc committee that7 you're referring to, would you supply to8 the Chair the names and addresses of the9 folks who attended that meeting?10

Certainly.11 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: And my12 second question is: Do you own, operate,13 or have any vested interest in the East14 Passyunk Avenue corridor?15

I am in16 negotiations now to buy a property.17 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: And how18 close are you, and what property are we19 speaking about?20

I would like to --21 for that to remain, uh, not known at this22 point. And I'm not very close.23 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: You're not24 very close?25 9 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

No.2 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: But you3 represent an ad hoc group --4

I was asked by a5 number of shop owners on the Avenue to6 become involved, and I agreed to.7 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: If you can8 supply the name of the folks again who9 were at that meeting who requested you to10 be their spokesperson to the Chair --11

Certainly. I will12 be glad to do that.13 The person who I am looking to14 buy the property from gave me15 authorization to represent him in any16 matters relating to the BID, and he has17 given me that authorization.18 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Again,19 that would be helpful to us in our20 deliberations to know who that person is21 and what property we're speaking of.22

Certainly.23

'Cause24 currently, you're not a property owner.25 10 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

That is correct.2 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you.3

I am serving in a4 --5 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you.6

-- assistant7 capacity.8

Thank you.9

Thank10 you.11

You're welcome.12

Any13 other questions or comments from members14 of the committee?15 (No further questions.)16

Do we17 have anyone else to testify on this bill?18 Seeing no one, I would ask19 Mr. Ericson to please read the title of20 Bill No. 090348.21

Bill No. 090348,22 an ordinance amending Title 14 of the23 Philadelphia Code, entitled "Zoning and24 Planning," by amending Section 14-1619,25 11 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 entitled "Frankford Avenue Special2 District Controls," by changing the3 boundaries of the area subject to the4 controls of the District, by changing the5 name of the District, and by adding6 provisions with regard to signs.7 (Witness comes forward.)8

Thank9 you.10 Good morning, Mr. Kramer.11 Please identify yourself for the record.12

Good morning,13 Council President Verna and members of14 the Rules Committee. I am William15 Kramer, Division Director of the16 Development Planning Division of the17 Philadelphia City Planning Commission.18 I am here today to testify on19 Bill No. 090348, which was introduced by20 Councilmember Krajewski on April 30th of21 2009.22 This bill amends Section23 14-1619 of the Philadelphia Zoning Code.24 It expands the boundaries in the district25 12 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 to encompass an area bounded by Frankford2 Avenue, Harbison Avenue, Tacony Street,3 New State Road, State Road, and Ashbourne4 Street. The name of the district is5 proposed to be changed to Tacony Mayfair6 Special Controls District.7 Section 14-1619 currently8 consists of commercial controls along9 Frankford Avenue from Harbison Avenue to10 Solly Street, with some blocks of Cottman11 Avenue. These controls will continue and12 will not be expanded to the new13 boundaries of the District.14 The purpose of this legislation15 is to allow for businesses in the area to16 erect awning signage in order to have a17 more unified streetscape and business18 district. The awning signs will be19 permitted in addition to whatever20 existing signage is permitted on the21 property.22 The Planning Commission, in23 conjunction with the sponsoring24 Councilperson's office, is recommending25 13 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 that amended language be added to the2 bill in order to establish additional3 controls for the proposed additional4 signage. Those amendments have been5 submitted to the Clerk prior to the.6 The City Planning Commission,7 at its meeting of May 19, 2009,8 considered and approved Bill No. 090348,9 with a recommendation that the bill be10 approved, as amended.11 This concludes my testimony.12 I'd be happy to answer any questions you13 may have.14

Thank15 you very much.16 Are there any questions from17 members of the committee?18 (No questions or comments.)19

Thank20 you.21 Do we have anyone else to22 testify on this bill?23 (No response.)24

Do we25 14 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 have anyone else to testify on this bill?2 (No response.)3 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:4 Seeing no one, I would ask that Bill No.5 090349 be read.6

Bill No. 090349,7 amending Title 14 of the Philadelphia8 Code, entitled "Zoning and Planning," by9 creating a new Section 14-1636, entitled10 "Delaware River Conservation District,"11 providing for special use rules for12 development along the North Delaware13 River, under certain terms and14 conditions.15 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:16 Mr. Kramer.17

Good morning,18 Council President Verna and members of19 the Rules Committee. I am William20 Kramer, Division Director of the21 Development Planning Division of the22 Philadelphia City Planning Commission.23 I am here today to testify on24 Bill No. 090349, which was introduced by25 15 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 Councilmember Krajewski on April 30,2 2009.3 Bill No. 090349 amends the4 Philadelphia Zoning Code by creating5 Section 14-1636, entitled "Delaware River6 Conservation District." The purpose of7 this legislation is to create a 50-foot8 buffer along the Delaware River measured9 from either the bulkhead line or, in10 cases where the top of the bank has moved11 from that line, from the top of bank.12 This buffer will be required13 from Allegheny Avenue northwardly to the14 Bucks County line. This will allow for a15 recreational trail and open space, with16 allowance for outdoor furniture17 consistent with the proposed trail.18 The ordinance will also permit19 in this 50-foot area dock- and port-20 related activity, private marinas, boat21 storage, pipelines and conveyors, in22 addition to City-owned facilities23 provided the Philadelphia City Planning24 Commission approves the proposal.25 16 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 There are several technical2 amendments to the bill which have been3 worked out with the applicant of the4 bill, Delaware River City Corporation,5 the Philadelphia City Planning6 Commission, and the City's Law7 Department. I respectfully submit the8 amendment for consideration by the9 committee.10 The Philadelphia City Planning11 Commission, at is meeting of May 19,12 2009, considered Bill No. 090349 and13 recommended that it be approved.14 That concludes my testimony,15 and I'd be happy to answer any questions16 you may have.17 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:18 Mr. Kramer, what happens if Council is19 not in session when the Commission's20 determination is filed? I believe it21 says in the bill that if Council fails to22 act within 45 days of filing -- isn't23 that it? -- the Commission's action is24 deemed approved.25 17 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Based on the way2 that we handle current IDD regulations,3 which have much the same code, we do not4 consider -- when Council's not in5 session, the 45-day clock goes on hold,6 which is how we currently handle IDD7 master plan amendments, and it is the8 same 45-day clock.9

Are10 there commercial uses currently along11 this corridor that will likely want to12 place furniture, et cetera, within the13 boundaries?14 (Witness comes forward.)15

The way I16 understand this proposal, this 50 foot is17 coming from the top of bank, which is18 essentially area of ground that you're19 not going to usually develop, so there's20 generally nothing much there; it's right21 on the bank of the river.22 My suspicion is that the23 Delaware River Corporation -- Mr. Lonie24 is sitting next to me, who could probably25 18 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 address that better than I. I believe2 that they're going to be putting in most3 of the furniture and actually developing4 the trail itself.5 However, if someone wanted to6 come in and develop the property and7 said, Hey, we'll contribute, and, as a8 civic benefit, wanted to add furniture,9 we would not necessarily be opposed to10 that. We are drafting -- and it's not11 currently finished yet, but they are12 developing Delaware River Trail13 guidelines. That is scheduled for14 consideration by my commission in our15 July meeting.16 And once those are established,17 we would then ask them to file those18 guidelines for the putting in of that19 kind of furniture on the trail itself.20

Thank21 you.22 (Addressing Mr. Lonie.) Would23 you like to add anything to what's been24 said? Good morning.25 19 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Thank you, Madam2 President and members of the committee3 again. My name is Paul Lonie,4 Consultant, serving as Capital Program5 Director of the Delaware River City6 Corporation, 5801 Tacony Street.7 What we're doing with this8 ordinance is basically putting any9 development that's coming to the North10 Delaware that the plan for this is11 complete, the actual trail that will come12 all the way from Maine to Florida. This13 will be a part of that.14 We don't want to interrupt any15 commercial activities, we're trying our16 best not to interrupt any port activities17 or anything else. But in this, when18 someone comes in to develop, we're saying19 that the vision of the North Delaware is20 to keep this space open for public use21 and bring people back to the river.22

Thank23 you.24 Any questions or comments from25 20 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 members of the committee?2 (No questions or comments.)3

Thank4 you very much.5 Do we have anyone else to6 testify on this bill?7 (No response.)8 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:9 Anyone else to testify on this bill?10 (No response.)11

Thank12 you very much, Mr. Kramer.13 The record will reflect that14 Bill No. 090380 is being withdrawn at the15 request of the sponsor.16 I would ask Mr. Ericson to17 please read the title of Bill No. 090392.18

Bill No. 090392,19 an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia20 Zoning Maps by changing the zoning21 designations of certain areas of land22 located within an area bonded by Wyoming23 Avenue, Ramona Avenue, Adams Avenue, and24 Castor Avenue.25 21 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Thank2 you.3 Mr. Kramer?4

Good morning,5 Council President Verna and members of6 the Rules Committee. I am William7 Kramer, Division Director of the8 Development Planning Division of the9 Philadelphia City Planning Commission.10 I am here today to testify on11 Bill No. 090392, which was introduced by12 Councilmembers Clarke and Sanchez on May13 7, 2009.14 This bill amends the15 Philadelphia Zoning Maps for an area16 bounded by Wyoming Avenue, Ramona Avenue,17 Adams Avenue, and Castor Avenue. It will18 rezone approximately 15.3 acres of land19 from an existing zoning designation of20 partly R4 residential and partly C321 commercial to a single designation of22 IDD, Institutional Development District.23 The purpose of this legislation24 is to allow for the reuse of the old25 22 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 Parkview Hospital and grounds of the2 Greenwood Cemetery as a Cancer Treatment3 Center of America facility. The facility4 will contain inpatient and outpatient5 services, with many ancillary uses,6 including guest housing and both7 structured and open-air parking. The8 will center provide a total of 11319 parking spaces onsite, 514 of which will10 be in a structured garage.11 The IDD (Institutional12 Development District) requires the13 adoption of a master plan of development14 for the proposed site which will15 establish the zoning parameters of this16 district; that master plan is Exhibit B17 on this bill.18 The City Planning Commission is19 scheduled to consider Bill No. 090392 at20 its meeting of June 9, 2009. The bill21 will be presented with a staff22 recommendation of approval.23 This concludes my testimony.24 I'd be happy to answer any questions you25 23 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 may have.2

Thank3 you, Mr. Kramer.4 When is it anticipated that the5 new facility will be in operation?6

In discussions7 I've had with representatives of it, they8 are hoping to have it done by the summer,9 the end of the summer, but I'm not10 absolutely certain that that's what11 they're going to be doing.12 They had a number of components13 they were working out with Greenwood14 Cemetery in terms of relocating and15 acquiring properties and parcels in that16 area of the planned area.17

And18 the additional 514 parking spaces will be19 new construction; is that what I20 understand?21

Yes, ma'am. I22 believe so.23

And24 will that also be available at the time25 24 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 of opening?2

It is anticipated3 that they will be concurrent. I'm not4 sure if the one is going to be finished5 right at the same time, but very shortly6 thereafter.7

Thank8 you.9 Any questions or comments from10 members of the committee?11 (No questions or comments.)12

Do we13 have anyone to testify on this bill?14 Please approach the witness table.15 (Witnesses come forward.)16

Good morning,17 Council President Verna --18

Good19 morning.20

-- and members21 of Council. My name is Chris Cummings.22 I'm an attorney representing Cancer23 Treatment Centers of America. With me24 today is Andy Jarvis, the lead architect25 25 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 on the project, with the firm of Ewing2 Cole; and John Goodchild, an executive3 with CTCA.4

Good5 morning.6 PANEL MEMBERS: Good morning.7

Thank you very8 much.9 Cancer Treatment Centers of10 America is a company that was founded11 over 20 years ago by a man who lost his12 mother to cancer. He was very13 disappointed in the kind of care that she14 received and the coordination of that15 care. And after she died, he vowed to16 open a cancer treatment center that would17 treat people the way he would have wanted18 his mother treated.19 And that's really our guiding20 principle. It's what the -- it's called21 "The Mother Standard of Care." And it's22 a combination of leading-edge and23 conventional therapies, combined with24 complementary therapies like nutrition,25 26 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 naturopathy, mind/body medicine,2 spiritual support, all under one roof and3 all very coordinated.4 We came to Philadelphia in5 December of 2005. We opened after a6 15-month renovation on Parkview Hospital.7 We opened with 158 employees, and we now8 have grown over the last three-and-a-half9 years to about 625 employees.10 Only about 15 percent of our11 patients actually come from the12 Philadelphia television-viewing area; the13 majority of them come from as far north14 as Maine, down to Florida, and out to15 about Cleveland, Ohio. Actually, twice16 as many people come to us from New York17 as come to us from Philadelphia.18 We are landlocked at this19 point. We have, over the last20 three-and-a-half years, doubled the21 clinical space inside the physical22 hospital and filled up our parking lot.23 We have 625 stakeholders, we have 23224 parking spaces. And we have a constant25 27 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 problem of parking on Wyoming Avenue,2 both sides, from Castor all the way up to3 Ramona. So we're really looking forward4 to expanding our clinical services so we5 can help more patients who are in need6 and deliver our services to them.7 And that concludes my8 testimony.9

It10 sounds like a very good project.11 I'm assuming you have12 outpatient care too?13

We do. We14 have -- in fact, the majority of our care15 is outpatient because of the -- most of16 it is chemotherapy and radiation therapy,17 but we do have a very vigorous inpatient18 facility as well.19

How20 many inpatient members do you have?21

We have 3622 inpatient -- normal medical, surgical23 bedrooms and 4 ICU rooms. So we have 4024 inpatient rooms.25 28 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Thank2 you.3

And we'll soon4 be expanding that probably to about 60,5 pretty close to 60 rooms.6

Thank7 you very much.8

I brought a9 diagram of the expansion plan if you're10 interested. If you're not, we don't have11 to go through it.12

I13 don't think it's necessary. Thank you.14

Okay, thank you.15 Thank you very much.16 Oh, I'm sorry. Just a moment,17 please.18

No, that's19 okay. I don't have questions for these20 gentlemen.21

Oh.22

Madam23 President, I'd just like, if at all24 possible, we have a couple of community25 29 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 representatives here.2

Oh.3

For the4 record, we have had extensive community5 participation on this process, and I just6 wanted to make sure that everybody7 understood that we have done our due8 diligence in touching base with all of9 the adjacent community organizations and10 residents that came all the way down here11 from the lower Northeast.12 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:13 Wonderful.14

So I think15 it would be appropriate if we gave them16 an opportunity to say a couple of words.17 (Witnesses come forward.)18

Good19 morning, welcome. Kindly identify20 yourself for the record and proceed with21 your testimony.22

My name is Barry23 Howell. I'm the President of the24 Northwood Civic Association, and I25 30 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 represent the community.2

Joan Riles, and I3 am on the board of directors for the4 Northwood Civic Association and also a5 member of Concerned Citizens of6 Northwood.7

What I want to say8 is that, first of all, I want to thank9 Darrell Clarke for months and months of10 negotiations to pull the deal through.11 And I'm sorry my friend and my12 vice president can't be here, Frank13 Sianno (sp?), who's done a lot of work14 also for this, 'cause he's just got out15 of the hospital and he's sick.16 But we have a benefits17 agreement package that we worked out with18 the Cancer Treatment Center of America.19 I think it's the best thing that I've20 seen any civic in the City of21 Philadelphia work out. We have a22 guarantee of jobs. One of our members23 was put on the board of directors, a24 non-voting member, was put on the board25 31 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 of directors. And they have done a lot2 of work to assure the community that3 everything will work out well.4 I see bumps coming down the5 road and I see things happening, but I6 think that this is the best thing7 happening in Northwood. We started out8 with a dilapidated cemetery, and on the9 cemetery property, we had a house that10 belonged to Benjamin Rush and has been11 totally in disarray. And my first year12 as president, I've even went as far as13 asked for the demolition of this home14 because it was drawing street people,15 prostitutes, every kind of thing, crack16 addicts, everything you could imagine.17 My worst fear was -- we have a18 charter school no further than 75 yards19 away. If someone -- and you know the20 society we live in today -- was going to21 drag someone in there, a child in there,22 and hurt them.23 But we want Northeast -- not24 Northeast -- Cancer Treatment Center one25 32 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 hundred percent. And this has been long2 negotiations. This didn't happen3 overnight. And we think they're going to4 do great for Northwood.5 And Northwood's had its problem6 just like every other part of the7 community, every other part of the City.8 We have foreclosures, we have everything.9 Everything possible has happened to our10 community.11 They got hold of their package.12 They have the home buyer's agreement13 where they'll give their employees14 incentive to move into our community.15 They'll match funds, they'll put money16 down. That way, we could start17 rebuilding.18 And I'll tell you what: I've19 lived and negotiated for the20 longshoreman's union for years. Lucien21 Blackwell, Alexander Talmadge, guys like22 that. And I'll tell you what: I know a23 good deal when I see one, and I think we24 have a good package.25 33 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 You know, members of City2 Council have been at our meeting. Bill3 Greenlee's been in Northwood Civic, you4 know, Bill Green. And I also -- I talked5 to Maria Sanchez yesterday, and she's6 totally happy with this.7 So, I mean, we couldn't ask for8 nothing better. It's going to take a9 long time, ground hasn't been broken yet,10 there's going to be squabbles along the11 way, there's going to be problems along12 the way, but we think we could pull this13 through and make cancer treatment a14 better place and the cemetery a better15 place.16 I'm a can -- I'm real17 prejudiced. I'm a cancer survivor. I had18 two liver transplants. So, I mean, I've19 been there and I know what these poor20 people are going through, I know what's21 happening. I know the technology has to22 be improved.23 And these people come to town,24 they're bringing money, they're creating25 34 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 jobs, they're creating revenue for the2 City. And I think -- I ask City Council3 to approve this thing one hundred4 percent.5

Thank6 you, and we all thank you for coming in7 to testify.8

Thank you.9

And10 apparently, determination does pay.11

Thank you, thank12 you.13

Keep14 up the good work.15 Just a moment please.16 The Chair recognizes Councilman17 Greenlee.18

Yes, very19 quickly. Mr. Owl mentioned that I've20 been at their civic association meetings,21 and I can tell you, I can guarantee they22 did their due diligence on this issue,23 and I'm sure they (indiscernible024 Councilman Clarke and Councilwoman25 35 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 Sanchez closely.2 So I've seen Barry in action,3 so I can guarantee this is a benefit to4 the community.5 Thank you.6

Believe me,7 believe me, we're no nonsense. I'm in8 the Zoning Board more than the9 commissioners of the Zoning Board are in10 the Zoning Board. So we don't just let11 something slide by.12 And, believe me, this is a good13 deal, and I appreciate Council to approve14 this. Darrell has done a great job.15

Great.16 The Chair recognizes Councilman17 Clarke.18

No, I'm19 okay. No, I think Miss Riles wanted to20 say a couple --21

I'm not going to22 keep you guys long 'cause Barry said23 everything that needs to be said.24

I'm right here,25 36 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 baby.2

I just want to say3 that being a homeowner in the Northwood4 community, that the Cancer Treatment5 Center, they have a wonderful commercial;6 I don't know if you guys seen it. And7 when you watch commercials, you say, Oh,8 you know, I don't believe that, but their9 commercial is heartfelt. And also, when10 you enter their building, it's heartfelt.11 These people are very warm and very12 caring.13

Thank14 you.15

This is one of the16 biggest things that's going to happen to17 Philadelphia, in our community. Parkview18 Hospital was ready to be torn down and19 ready to be made into things that we20 wouldn't have agreed with, you know, so I21 think Cancer Treatment Center is a God22 blessing to the Northeast.23 Thank you guys very much.24

Just25 37 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 a moment, please.2 Thank you.3 Any questions or comments from4 members of the committee?5 (No further questions or6 comments.)7

Thank8 you very much.9

You guys have a10 nice day.11

Thank12 you. You do the same.13 Do we have anyone else to14 testify on this bill?15 (No response.)16 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:17 Anyone else to testify on this bill?18 (No response.)19 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:20 Seeing no one, we can now consider Bill21 No. 090408.22

Bill No. 090408,23 an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia24 Zoning Maps by changing the zoning25 38 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 designations of certain areas of land2 located within an area generally bounded3 by a line located approximately 220 feet4 north of Cumberland Street, the Delaware5 River, a line located approximately 3286 feet south of Berks Street, Beach Street,7 Richmond Street, Schirra Drive, Beach8 Street, and Cumberland Street.9 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:10 Mr. Kramer.11

Good morning,12 Council President Verna and members of13 the Rules Committee. I am William14 Kramer, Division Director of the15 Development Planning Division of the16 Philadelphia City Planning Commission.17 I am here today to testify on18 Bill No. 090408, which was introduced by19 Councilmember DiCicco on May 14th of20 2009.21 This bill amends the22 Philadelphia Zoning Maps for an area23 bounded by a line 220 feet north of24 Cumberland Street, the Delaware River, a25 39 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 line approximately 328 feet south of2 Berks Street, Beach Street, Richmond3 Street, Schirra Drive, Beach Street, and4 Cumberland Street. It will rezone5 approximately 60 acres of land from an6 existing zoning designation of G2 general7 industrial to a zoning designation of C38 commercial. The purpose of this is to9 allow the property owner of this vacant10 land to be able to market his property11 for mixed-use development.12 This site was previously13 submitted for consideration for a casino14 development. We believe that this is an15 indication that the property's best16 future use would be consistent with a17 mixed-use development, which would be18 indicated with a zoning designation of C319 commercial.20 The Philadelphia City Planning21 Commission is scheduled to consider Bill22 No. 090408 at its meeting, which is June23 9, 2009. The bill will be presented with24 a staff recommendation of approval.25 40 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 This concludes my testimony. I2 would be pleased to answer any questions3 you may have.4

Is5 this the... Mr. Kramer, you state that6 the property owner wants to market the7 property for mixed --8

Mixed-use9 development.10

For11 mixed-use development?12

Yes, ma'am.13

Is14 there one owner for the entire 60 acres?15

I do believe so.16 His counsel is in the chambers now.17 Mr. Chapman is here, who represents him,18 and it's my understanding that it is,19 indeed, one owner.20

Can21 you tell us what the current use of this22 property is?23

Currently, it's24 vacant land.25 41 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Do we2 have any indication as to what type of3 uses will be best, the best use for the4 property?5

At this point, we6 don't know exactly what that mixed use7 would be. We would imagine it to be some8 kind of commercial/residential mix. At9 what ratio, I don't know. It's probably10 an answer that's going to come out as a11 result of the Delaware River master plan12 that's currently --13

So at14 this point in time, there is no proposal15 --16

There is no plan17 right now, no.18

Thank19 you.20 Mr. Chapman?21 (Witness comes forward.)22

Good23 morning. Nice seeing you.24

Thank you. It's25 42 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 nice to see you.2 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:3 Kindly identify yourself for the record.4

Good morning,5 Madam President and members of the Rules6 Committee. My name is Tom Chapman. I'm7 an attorney with Blank Rome, and I8 represent the interested party today in9 the matter before you, James J. Anderson,10 of the Anderson Construction Company, and11 his partners.12 Mr. Kramer pretty much stated13 our case. It's approximately 60 acres.14 It's currently vacant land that's been15 vacant for quite some time.16 Much of the ground that's17 before you today for rezoning would have18 been part of the Pinnacle Casino19 proposal, if that had been chosen by the20 State Gaming Control Commission.21 However, as you know well, that site was22 not chosen.23 The site remains vacant -- the24 properties, rather, remain vacant. And25 43 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 Mr. Anderson would like to be in a better2 position to market the properties for3 mixed-use development.4 We -- there is no proposal5 before you right now as part of this6 rezoning request. There is no -- plans7 have not specific -- development plans8 have not been drawn, but we believe that9 changing the zoning sends a message to10 the development community that the11 Council has considered and views this as12 a potential mixed-use site for13 development.14

Thank15 you.16

Thank you.17

Thank18 you.19 Are there any questions or20 comments from members of the committee?21 (No questions or comments.)22

Thank23 you again.24

Appreciate the25 44 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 opportunity to appear before you this2 morning.3

I4 think you've been in this room a number5 of times.6

Just a few.7 And if I may, I'd like to thank8 Councilman DiCicco and Brian Abernathy9 for their leadership on this issue.10 We've had several discussions with both11 the Councilman and Mr. Abernathy about12 the future uses of this site, and they've13 been very helpful.14

Thank15 you again.16

Thank you.17

Do we18 have anyone else to testify on this bill?19 (No response.)20 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:21 Before we read the title of the next22 bill, I would like the record to reflect23 that we do indeed have a quorum.24 To my extreme left is25 45 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 Councilman Kelly, Councilman Clarke,2 Councilwoman Brown, and Councilman3 Greenlee. To my extreme right is4 Councilman DiCicco, Councilwoman Miller,5 Councilman Goode, and Councilman Kenney.6 We will now proceed to Bill No.7 090169, and I think we should read both8 bills at the same time?9

(Nods head.)10

I11 would also suggest that we consider12 090170 at the same time.13

Bill No. 090169,14 an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia15 Zoning Maps by changing the zoning16 designations of certain areas of land17 located within an area bounded by Berks18 Street, the Delaware River, Market19 Street, and Interstate 95.20 Bill No. 090170, an ordinance21 amending Title 14 of the Philadelphia22 Code, entitled "Zoning and Planning," by23 adding a new Section 14-1636 entitled,24 "Central Delaware Riverfront Overlay25 46 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 District," and by amending Section2 14-102, entitled "Definitions," under3 certain terms and conditions.4

Thank you5 very much.6 Mr. Greenberger, please7 identify yourself for the record and8 proceed.9

Good morning.10 I'm Alan Greenberger --11

Good12 morning.13

-- and I'm --14 we're going to do a little tag team. I'm15 going to ask Bill Kramer to talk about16 090169, and then I'll do 170.17

Mr. Kramer,18 please.19

Councilman Kenney,20 Bill No. 090169 is a bill that amends the21 zoning maps by rezoning a large section22 of land along the Delaware Riverfront in23 order to update the zoning designation of24 the property to match their current uses25 47 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 or to guide future development in the2 area.3 The proposed action is4 consistent with the guidelines of the5 civic vision for the Central Delaware.6 As part of this remapping, active7 industrial uses remain with their current8 zoning designation. Where there was9 vacant land, the zoning was changed to a10 designation of C3 commercial in order to11 facilitate development while, at the same12 time, limiting the amount of impacts that13 would result from a higher14 classification.15 Additionally, Penn Treaty Park16 was rezoned from a designation of G217 general industrial to a designation of18 recreational.19 I would ad that this bill,20 since we've drafted this testimony, has21 been amended. There were changes made22 that -- originally, we were changing the23 C4 and C5 designations to a consistent24 designation of C3 commercial. The25 48 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 amendment is being requested to revert it2 back to the existing designations on the3 current maps.4 The City Planning Commission,5 at its meeting of May 19th, considered6 this bill and recommended that it be7 approved.8 I will now turn over to9 Mr. Greenberger for testimony on Bill No.10 090170.11

Good morning,12 Councilmembers. Nice to be here. I'm13 Alan Greenberger, the Executive Director14 of the Philadelphia Planning Commission,15 and I'm here to testify on Bill 090170,16 which was introduced by Councilmember17 DiCicco on March 5, 2009.18 Bill 090170 amends the19 Philadelphia Zoning Code by creating20 Section 14-1636, entitled "Central21 Delaware Riverfront Overlay District."22 This overlay is an interim measure to23 protect the City's waterfront while a24 central waterfront master plan is created25 49 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 and its tenets adopted.2 The district will apply in an3 area bounded by Allegheny Avenue in the4 north, Delaware River, Oregon Avenue on5 the south, and I-95 Expressway.6 It will require, among other7 things, a waterfront setback, active uses8 to be located on the ground floor, with9 75 percent transparency or glass required10 for such properties. There will also be11 a waterfront access requirement that12 would place limits on the amount of13 front-yard setbacks.14 The bill also establishes15 prohibited uses in the district,16 including such things as non-accessory17 signs, buildings over 40,000 square feet18 intended to be used as a single retail19 store as principal use, newly-constructed20 parking garages, parking lots as a main21 use, and self-storage facilities.22 The bill will also require an23 approval of a plan of development by the24 Planning Commission for all commercially-25 50 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 zoned properties as well as properties2 adjacent to the Delaware River. This3 plan, the plan of development, must be4 approved prior to the issuance of any5 zoning permits.6 The Commission will have 607 days in which to approve completed plans.8 In addition, the bill requires the9 Planning Commission to adopt regulations10 providing objective standards for the11 required plan of development review.12 This legislation has been the13 subject of much discussion between the14 District Councilman's office, the15 residential representatives,16 representatives for the development17 community, as well as the Planning18 Commission staff, and the City Law19 Department. These discussions have20 generated an amended version of the21 original bill, and I respectfully submit22 the amendment for consideration by this23 committee.24 I'd also like to note that25 51 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 there's been considerable debate about2 the value of passing this legislation3 now, in advance of completion of a4 waterfront master plan for which the5 Planning Commission is currently6 reviewing consultant qualification7 statements.8 We anticipate that the master9 plan will require 12 to 16 months to10 complete. During that period, we feel11 that it is essential to codify the City's12 intentions for the kind of development13 and public amenities we would like to see14 on the waterfront. This overlay is the15 vehicle to accomplish that end.16 We view it, as it has been17 presented repeatedly by Councilman18 DiCicco, an interim measure that we fully19 expect to amend once the master plan is20 complete. In the meantime, it is21 essential that we have regulations in22 place that create appropriate23 expectations for the waterfront24 development.25 52 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 The City Planning Commission,2 at its meeting of May 19, 2009,3 considered Bill 090170 and recommended4 that it be approved.5 This concludes my testimony. I6 do appreciate the opportunity to appear7 before you and am ready to answer any8 questions you might have.9

Thank10 you very much.11 I believe you state that it12 will take 12 to 16 months to complete the13 waterfront master plan and that you are14 now reviewing consultant qualification15 statements.16

That's right.17 They are actually -- to be specific, the18 RFP was posted, and responses are due, I19 believe, on June 19th. And we expect to20 see a pretty substantial number of21 responses.22

How23 long has the City been considering the24 development of a waterfront master plan?25 53 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Oh, that's a2 trick question. How many decades back3 would you like to go?4 I think it's fair to say that5 in the current iteration, this really6 began at the instigation of Councilman7 DiCicco, along with then-Mayor Street, to8 create a current plan, a 21st century9 plan, for the waterfront that, I think at10 this point, must go back several years to11 start, that it started, creating a civic12 vision and action plan the adoption by13 the Planning Commission of the principles14 of that plan.15 So, at least in its current16 version, I would say that this is several17 years in the making.18

Great.19 Can you tell us if this plan20 would have to be coordinated with the21 work of the Zoning Commission?22

Yes. In23 fact, it falls at a perfect time to be24 coordinated with the Zoning Commission.25 54 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 We will, in the next year, be rewriting2 the code; and then following that, we'll3 be remapping the code.4 So the master plan, as any5 master plan in the City, is a way to6 guide the remapping, which would then be7 happening at about this -- starting at8 about this time next year. So the timing9 actually works quite well.10

Thank11 you.12 The Chair recognizes Councilman13 Clarke.14

Thank you,15 Madam President.16 Just a real quick question:17 How deep into the residential community18 does this overlay go, if at all?19

Very little.20 The only residential community that the21 overlay encompasses is a small segment22 between I-95 and Delaware Avenue, I would23 say, from about, uh, goes from Callowhill24 up through --25 55 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 (Addressing Mr. Kramer.) Can2 you help me with this, Bill? Do you3 recall? Do you want me to repeat the4 question?5

You're asking6 about the boundaries of the overlay7 district --8

That9 encompasses residential area.10

That would be11 residential?12 The entire district runs from13 Oregon Avenue to Allegheny Avenue. The14 residential component is probably --15 because it goes only as far west as I-95,16 I would say probably north of Spring17 Garden. Parts of it north of Spring18 Garden, maybe parts of it up to Allegheny19 Avenue, depending. I would have to look20 to be certain.21

There are a22 number of streets -- picture this.23 There's a number of streets, yeah, from24 north of Spring Garden. It's a small25 56 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 sliver of streets. Runs up right near2 the proposed SugarHouse Casino --3

Right.4

-- towards5 the Anderson property, and the I-95 --6

95 is a7 buffer?8

I think I-959 cuts it off at Girard Avenue, in fact, at10 the Girard Avenue interchange.11

Okay.12

So between13 Girard and about Spring Garden or14 Callowhill.15

Okay, thank16 you.17

Any18 other questions from members of the19 committee?20 (No further questions.)21

Thank22 you.23

You're24 welcome. Thank you.25 57 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 Okay. Our next witnesses will2 be...3

The first panel:4 Harris Steinberg, Steve Weixler, Timothy5 Kerner.6 (Witnesses come forward.)7

Good8 morning. Kindly identify yourself for9 the record and proceed with your10 testimony.11

Good morning.12

Good13 morning.14

My name is15 Harris Steinberg. 25 58 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 In 2006, Councilman DiCicco and2 his aide, Brian Abernathy, asked my3 office to lead a public planning process4 for the Central Delaware. 10 In November of 2007, Penn11 Praxis and the Central Delaware Advisory12 Group issued the civic vision for the13 Central Delaware. 20 Cities around the world are21 investing in infrastructure that can22 support a high quality of life for the23 people who live and work there. 8 Providing a framework for9 creating urban space along the river is10 particularly relevant today. 14 The greenway and trail system15 to be developed at the river's edge is in16 many ways what will define the riverfront17 for the future of Philadelphians. As we18 know from Fairmount Park and the trails19 on Kelly and Martin Luther King Drives,20 generous public space can be a tremendous21 legacy for future generations. 2 The civic vision and action3 plan recommend the greenway have a4 100-foot minimum standard width where it5 is achievable. This is an important6 standard because in some areas of the7 Central Delaware, a 100-foot setback is8 already impossible to reach. 21 A generous public greenway will22 be the signature of the revitalizing23 riverfront and distinguish Philadelphia24 from other cities which lack proximity to25 63 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 one of the nation's great rivers, the2 Delaware. 5 It's important to keep in mind6 that this bill is still limited and7 focused on the fundamentals. There is8 only so much that can, and should be,9 legislated in the absence of a master10 plan. For instance, the legislation does11 not provide guidelines for density and12 height of buildings. 23 These first steps are important24 ones. The legislation is the first25 64 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 official step to leave a legacy for2 Philadelphia's future. 7 Philadelphia has a rich8 tradition of bold planning, from Penn's9 original plan, William Penn's original10 plan, with its signature street grid,11 development parcels and open spaces, to12 Fairmount Park and the Benjamin Franklin13 Parkway and, most recently, with the14 creation of the commuter tunnel. 25 65 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Thank2 you. Are you gentlemen going to testify?3

15 I'm here this morning in strong16 support of the bill, as amended, offered17 by Councilman DiCicco for interim zoning18 overlay in the area of the Delaware19 River. 2 Industrial brownfields and neglected3 sites line most of our riverfront, and4 all of this has been supported by the5 lack of clear direction from the City6 through its zoning codes and through its7 urban planning functions. 12 A continuous public waterfront13 trail open and accessible to all for a14 variety of uses, encouraging neighbors to15 enjoy the river bank. 18 The Central Delaware Advocacy19 Group is aware of the rights of20 landowners and of the underlying zoning21 code and has no wish to infringe upon22 those conditions. 13 While other areas of Philadelphia have14 grown, the riverfront has not. 17 Third, the bill is an important18 step in new economic growth in19 Philadelphia. Shortly after the Trump20 organization announced the cancelation of21 its high-rise condominium project in22 Northern Liberties last fall, a prominent23 Realtor was quoted in the Philadelphia24 Business Journal as saying, "Those25 71 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 high-end buyers are never going to move2 to a neighborhood without amenities like3 Rittenhouse or Old City. "5 This bill would encourage the6 kind of renaissance we are seeing in7 Northern Liberties and other places:8 Neighborhoods seen by the civic vision9 with small businesses, restaurants,10 families, varied housing, and life on the11 streets. 24

Good25 72 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 morning.2

Good morning,3 Madam President and members of Council.4 My name is Tim Kerner and I'm a member of5 the steering committee of the Design6 Advocacy Group (DAG). DAG is a7 thousand-member volunteer organization,8 and we are dedicated to the promotion of9 quality urban design in our city.10 I have a statement to read11 today which was prepared by the steering12 committee of our organization.13 The Design Advocacy Group14 supports the civic vision for the Central15 Delaware, and we are pleased that the16 Philadelphia City Planning Commission17 recently adopted this vision, which is18 the product of a comprehensive,19 citizen-driven process.20 The civic vision's action plan21 calls for an interim overlay for the22 waterfront. DAG feels this is a prudent23 step to ensure that nothing occurs along24 the river that will preclude the25 73 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 realization of a vision before the actual2 rezoning of the waterfront is completed.3 It must be understood, however,4 that this is a temporary measure and that5 long-term growth along the waterfront6 needs to be guided by the Central7 Delaware Riverfront master plan soon to8 be undertaken by the Planning Commission.9 The master plan must be based on the same10 open and comprehensive process that11 created the firm foundation of the civic12 vision and the action plan.13 While DAG supports the creation14 of an interim overlay, we are concerned15 that the proposed legislation, or perhaps16 the previously proposed legislation,17 which has some current updates, does not18 directly address the density recommended19 in the vision plan.20 We, therefore, recommend that21 the Planning Commission use its powers to22 permit well-designed, higher-intensity23 development along the waterfront, as24 depicted in the vision plan.25 74 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 While the real estate market is2 now weak, it is essential that3 development be guided by the patterns of4 height, density, and intensity of use5 that participants agreed upon for the6 vision plan.7 The overlay seeks to ensure8 access to the waterfront and the creation9 of public right-of-way at the water's10 edge. These are crucial to the civic11 vision.12 Although this is a sensitive13 issue because of its effect on private14 property, a generous public waterfront15 trail at the water's edge will greatly16 improve the public realm and increase the17 beauty and value of adjacent development18 parcels. Therefore, we urge the City to19 seek a generous public right-of-way to20 adequately, while ensuring a structure to21 adequately address the concerns of22 property owners.23 The fact that an interim24 overlay is required to protect the25 75 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 long-term future of the civic vision2 highlights the urgent need to proceed3 with the development of a comprehensive,4 thorough, and well-crafted master plan as5 quickly as possible. We applaud the City6 for moving forward on the concepts7 established in the vision plan under the8 oversight of the City Planning Commission9 and look forward to the completion of the10 riverfront master plan.11 I appreciate the opportunity to12 appear before you today.13

Thank14 you very much.15 Are there any questions or16 comments from members of the committee?17 The Chair recognizes Councilman18 DiCicco.19 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you,20 Madam Chair, and good morning.21 Mr. Kerner?22

Yes.23 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Unless I24 missed it in your testimony, has your25 76 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 organization come to any conclusion or2 have an opinion on the appropriate3 setback requirement?4

Well, that's a5 complex question, and I would hesitate to6 speak for the entire organization or I --7 and even the steering committee.8 There is support for the9 proposed setback as it was originally10 framed, with a hundred feet and with11 provisions provided to address the needs12 of smaller parcels where that is13 difficult.14 But what I would hesitate to15 state is whether the steering committee16 would endorse what is currently written,17 but I would say that we do support the18 intent of the 100-foot setback.19 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you.20

Thank21 you.22 Any further questions or23 comments from members of the committee?24 (No further questions.)25 77 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:2 Gentlemen, thank you very much.3 PANEL MEMBERS: Thank you.4

Our5 next witnesses?6

Michael Sklaroff,7 Craig Schelter.8 (Witnesses come forward.)9

Good morning.10

Good11 morning.12

15 To begin with -- and I'll16 explain something about the Development17 Workshop in a moment -- we would like to18 thank Councilman DiCicco and Brian19 Abernathy for including us in the process20 of reviewing the bill. 23 The Development Workshop, who24 are we? 17 We have four former18 Philadelphia planning directors, two19 former commerce directors, several20 economic development leaders. 12 I would like also to say that13 among the Central Design Advocacy Group,14 to my knowledge, there was not one15 landowner who had actually developed at16 the riverfront. And we had offered to17 Harris Steinberg and Penn Praxis to sit18 down with us, and we would share some of19 the things that we learned about actually20 developing in the City, and Mr. 22 What do we support? We support23 comprehensive planning, including looking24 at assets of the City such as the Central25 80 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 Delaware Riverfront, in a citywide2 context. We support good design, and3 we've done good design, and some of our4 people are leaders in supportable green5 development and LEED development. 9 Now, the urban design exercise10 of the civic vision is not a11 comprehensive plan; I think everyone12 knows that at this point. We have been13 urging for several years for the Planning14 Commission to be supported in an effort15 to begin a comprehensive plan, and for16 two years, nothing has been done. And17 it's just started and, as Mr. 9 The Charter envisions that the10 standards for zoning will be decided by11 City Council -- that is you folks -- and12 it will be administered by the Department13 of Licenses and Inspections. 16 This creates an entire zone17 where it will not be this Council but it18 will be the Planning Commission that19 makes the stop or go decision on a20 parcel-by-parcel basis as to whether a21 landowner can build in the overlay22 district in commercial districts. That23 is a radical change, and it is24 unsupported by the Charter. 9 But there is a plan out there10 that was approved by the Planning11 Commission in 1982, and that plan12 provides for many of the things that are13 being discussed today. The plan is14 available. 7 Now, there are two major8 examples of how that plan was brought9 into fruition. The first was the10 construction of the Great Plaza at Penn's11 Landing, but that Great Plaza is used for12 at least 20 ethnic festivals during the13 year. 18 Now, if you go down to Piers 319 and 5, the residences or La Veranda or20 Dave & Buster's, you will notice that21 there's a river walk. In fact, the river22 walk is two-and-a-half miles long, and it23 supports public access. 10 And you know what? There is11 public access, there's a river walk,12 there are people jogging, there are13 bicyclists. 17 Mr. Lonie presented and Bill Kramer. And18 there, 80 percent of that is done on19 public property, and they negotiated with20 landowners. And they're funded for that;21 they had $23 million of federal22 transportation money, in stark contrast23 to what is being done here. 7 COUNCILMAN KENNEY:8 Mr. Sklaroff, just to interrupt you, and9 Council President will be back. 12

I'm talking13 about Dave & Buster's and La Veranda.14

From Oregon15 Avenue north to Washington Avenue --16

When you start17 there, there is sidewalk there, which is18 available for conversion to a river walk.19

Okay.20

As you know, we21 still have, thank goodness, some22 industrial base in the City of23 Philadelphia. We have shipping north of24 Oregon Avenue, okay? You wouldn't want25 86 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 it closer to the river, where stevedores2 and longshoreman are unloaded ships.3

I just4 wanted to orientate myself to what you5 were talking about from Oregon Avenue to6 Washington Avenue. I recognize the7 sidewalk in Penn's Landing Area --8

Yes.9

-- to Dave10 & Buster's.11

Right.12

And you can13 argue that that's available for jogging14 and recreation, but the area from Oregon15 Avenue to Washington Avenue, I don't know16 if I would want to necessarily jog there.17

Well, there were18 people there who were jogging this19 morning at 6:15.20

Okay.21

And it can be22 made a lot better.23

Okay.24

All I'm saying25 87 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 is, you don't have to now encroach on2 development --3

I didn't4 mean to interrupt you, but I wanted to5 orientate myself to what you were talking6 about 'cause I grew up in that7 neighborhood.8

Right. And it's9 not perfect.10

Okay.11

But I'm saying12 there is a basis for it already.13

Okay, all14 right.15

But if you look16 at the Penn Praxis material, it's as if17 they arrived from Philadelphia and18 thought they were William Penn.19

Okay, I20 understand?21

Okay?22

I just23 wanted to make sure I understood the24 area. Thank you.25 88 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Now --2 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: And it3 doesn't look much different when William4 Penn, from the time when he arrived --5

No, actually --6

-- in7 terms of development, Mr. Sklaroff, let's8 be honest.9

Well, actually,10 I don't think that's a fair statement.11 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I do12 because I hear you.13 And I hate to interrupt you,14 but you talk about developers and all of15 these folks who have done all of this16 development. What development are you17 talking about?18

Development19 that's there?20 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Along the21 river, yeah.22

Oh, well --23

Penn's24 Landing was a government development; it25 89 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 was not private.2 What private development other3 than the DePaul Group building the4 Dockside has occurred?5

Well, Councilman6 DiCicco, I hesitate to engage in dialogue7 with you on this; this is your district.8 But I will tell you -- I'll talk about9 the projects that we were involved in.10

Are you11 going to complete your testimony? And12 then this way, we'll get back to --13

I would be happy14 to.15

I'm sorry16 'cause I started it.17

I mean, you guys18 decide.19

No. Please20 proceed.21

Okay. You will22 see in the Penn Praxis materials that23 there are many good ideas for urban24 design taken from places all over the25 90 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 country, and some of them may be very2 relevant here and some of them not.3 But when you look at the basic4 assumptions of the Penn Praxis5 materials -- and I invite everyone to6 look at them -- there's some -- kind of,7 I would say, impractical -- some might8 say "elitist"; let me say "impractical"9 ideas.10 First of all, Penn Praxis11 proposes that we remove two vehicular12 lanes from Columbus Boulevard. That's13 one of the ideas.14 The second idea is that they15 proposed the demolition of the16 independent Seaport Museum. That's17 another idea.18 The third is, their design19 is -- when you look at the materials, the20 design is to build a concrete deck over21 I-95 and put six high-rise condominiums.22 Essentially what they --23

I'm sorry,24 and I don't mean to interrupt you, but25 91 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 since Councilman DiCicco and2 Mr. Abernathy have worked much more3 closely on this than us, they --4 Councilman DiCicco would like to talk to5 you a little bit about some of the things6 you're talking about now that he doesn't7 believe is actually in the overlay, like8 the demolition of the Seaport Museum.9

No, no, no. I'm10 talking about there's reference --11

But what12 I'd like to do is, in order -- and we're13 going to have a dialogue, obviously,14 about this once your testimony is15 complete, but if you can confine your16 testimony to what's actually in the17 overlay, and then we can go far afield on18 other issues when you're done.19 But I don't the record to be20 confused that somehow the overlay is21 recommending the demolition of the22 Seaport Museum.23

The -- the --24

The25 92 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 overlay.2

The overlay3 refers to the Penn Praxis civic vision.4

I5 understand.6

All right?7

And their8 testimony was that this is kind of a9 first shot at a framework of dealing with10 the overall vision. But the overlay, I11 don't believe, includes the demolition of12 the Seaport Museum.13

No, but it does14 include the civic vision, and the civic15 vision, as best we read, has these16 elements.17

But18 that's -- what we're dealing with now are19 the specifics of the overlay.20

Well --21

And then22 when you're done your testimony, we can23 have this discussion.24

I'm just saying25 93 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 the civic vision is embodied in the law2 in this proposal. If you strike the3 references to the civic vision, we won't4 get to that, but I think it's based in5 part on the civic vision.6

Okay, all7 right. Please proceed.8

Well, I think9 that the civic vision encompassed, among10 other things, the whole idea of this11 stopgap overlay. The civic vision had12 all these design things. 19 I think that the Dockside and20 Waterfront Square have brought new people21 to the City. 22 Dave & Buster's has been deprecated by23 some of their advocates. 3 There's a hotel on the river,4 all right? There's a Wal-Mart and Home5 Depot, which they've demonized. But I6 will tell you, on a weekend at the Home7 Depot and Wal-Mart, there are more people8 who shop there and work there than ever9 attended any one of the Penn Praxis's10 public meetings. 5 There is no basis. 19 We now have a blank on how wide the20 setback is, all right? 25 96 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 The recreational trail has not2 been plotted. 11 The setback is not defined or12 mapped. 21 And it's different from the22 North Delaware plan that Paul Lonie23 talked about. That was mapped, that was24 presented. 25 97 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 The costs have not been2 determined. Paul Lonie told me that3 $23 million of federal transportation4 money was made available for the North5 Delaware plan. 15 The landowner can either keep this open16 or devote it to the City. But if he17 devotes it or she devotes it to the City,18 the City is going to have to build that19 trail. And that's unfunded. We don't20 know how much that would cost. It's like21 a street but it's not mapped and it's not22 following the process. 13 As I think is known, this bill14 has not been reviewed by the Zoning Code15 Commission. So essentially, what this16 creates is a an area of -- I don't know17 if members of the committee saw the story18 today about the Schuylkill trail, which19 is on the front page of the local20 section, which is terrific. And the21 Schuylkill is a great resource; it's our22 scenic river. The Delaware is wonderful;23 it's not a scenic river. But the24 Schuylkill is a wonderful resource. 2 And I will just share with you3 an e-mail I got from one of our members4 of the Development Workshop, who has5 actually developed at the river. His6 company actually brought jobs and tax7 ratables and services to the river. And8 he wrote to me, and he said -- refer to9 the Schuylkill trail article, which is10 funded, which does cost money. And he11 says:12 If you want to create a public13 way along a riverfront, you follow the14 successful examples of the past and15 present. ), and charge them with19 responsibility to plan, budget, instruct,20 raise monies, and negotiate with private21 landowners to achieve an acceptable22 outcome. 6 All in all, there's a way to do7 this, a right way to do it. 15

Yes. Craig16 Schelter, Executive Director of the17 Development Workshop. Just a couple of18 points.19 I think what I want to do is,20 specifically using this article that was21 in the paper this morning, to contrast22 what's been recommended versus what, in23 fact, can be achieved. And I speak,24 having been involved on the Schuylkill25 101 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 trail back seven years ago, when I was at2 PIDC, and the idea of moving the trail3 further south first began to be4 implemented.5 What's being asked here is to6 create a setback the width of Broad7 Street over the entire length of this8 seven miles of waterfront. And when you9 go into the details of this article --10 and since Joe Cernik made the comments,11 I'll assume they're factually correct --12 they talk about a portion of the13 riverfront about 2,000 feet -- it's a14 little less than half a mile -- where15 they're actually going to have to build a16 15- to 17-foot river walk in the bed of17 the river because of the conditions that18 are there and that they couldn't reach an19 agreement with the landowner.20 Another area where they're21 talking about $3 million, where the22 Marshall Labs are, which was a project23 that the City engaged in to try and keep24 Marshall Labs in the City, agreed to take25 102 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 on some of the remediation of property2 there. Again, this has been a long-term3 proposition.4 So the importance of coming up5 with an estimate, not even detailed cost,6 but an estimate of the cost is critical,7 I would think, for this council to8 consider, given the current budget9 situation.10 In a comparable situation in11 New York, on the East River plan, where12 they were doing the same thing for two13 miles of improvements, it was14 $150 million.15 Assuming that you had a -- that16 developers knew what they could get17 approval on in a site, and the real18 estate cycle turns around, they could19 begin responding to that.20 But right now, as the bill is21 drafted, there is 180 days where no one22 knows what criteria the Planning23 Commission will come up with or what24 standards. After that, if there is a25 103 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 specific proposal, there's 75 days which2 a developer must wait.3 So in the meantime, the4 question is: What kind of message do you5 send out to the investment world, to6 people who would come and potentially7 make decisions in Philadelphia? And I8 think that's something else that's9 important to be considered beyond the10 urban design aspects of the vision plan.11

Thank you12 very much for your testimony.13 I just have a couple questions14 so I can frame who it is you represent15 and their situations. How many private16 property owners are involved in your17 group?18

I would say 20,19 with about at least a half dozen who have20 properties at the river.21

Well, let22 me further refine it. How many property23 owners are on the river side where this24 trail or this overlay is proposed will25 104 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 affect?2

I would say a3 half dozen.4

Six.5

Of that6 half dozen, if you know, the average7 length of time that those owners have8 owned the property, on average.9

I'd say about 1210 years.11

So on12 average, they've owned the parcels for 1213 years.14

Yes.15

Some of16 them are developed and some of them are17 not, correct?18

I'm sorry?19

Of the 1220 -- I'm sorry. Of the property owners21 that own the properties, and the average22 is 12 years' ownership, how many are23 actually developed?24

Have developed?25 105 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 At the river?2

Yeah. I3 mean, I'm sure Dave & Buster's owners,4 they've developed. I mean, how many5 private property owners have developed --6

I'd say four to7 six.8

And the9 other parcels that are undeveloped,10 they've been owned on an average of 1211 years?12

You know, I --13

Okay.14 Here's the --15

There are some16 people who have owned them for 20 years.17

Right.18

And some who19 bought them in the early to mid-year20 2000.21

Was that22 anything to do with gaming speculation or23 --24

Absolutely not.25 106 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Okay.2 (Indiscernible; parties talking3 over each other.)4

This was when5 the market for residential development6 blossomed in the City of Philadelphia.7

One of the8 many issues relevant to -- and this has9 got nothing to do with what we're talking10 about today or about anything you're --11 the government's done here -- is that the12 specter of gaming has always delayed,13 because of option after option after14 option, that was purchased by casino15 companies, has really retarded the16 development along the waterfront in many17 large parcels.18 My question is more kind of19 generic. If a lot of these properties20 have been owned for a long period of time21 and they've not been developed, would not22 something different or a different23 approach, despite all of the legal24 concerns and monetary issues, just25 107 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 overall approach, wouldn't something2 different perhaps spur development that's3 not happened in 12 to 20 years?4

The development5 is driven by the cost of money and the6 demand for use.7

But8 apparently --9

That's what it10 is. I will tell you --11

But between12 12 and 20 years, there's been no driving13 of anything.14

Well, some of15 them have developed. I mean --16

No, I'm17 saying the ones that have not been18 developed, the ones that are owned19 between 12 and 20 years, who have not20 developed, at some point in time, does21 that ability to sit on that property and22 not develop it go on forever? Is that23 something that's in the public interest,24 that for the next 10, 12, 20 years, I25 108 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 just don't have a project I really like2 and the money's not been right, and I3 just think don't think I want to -- I4 mean, I'm going to sit and keep it fallow5 forever.6

Well, you might7 own a house that you don't sell, that you8 own. I mean, this is fundamental, the9 right to own property.10

But do you11 believe that the location of the property12 has a public benefit or detriment13 overall? It's not a house on Mifflin14 Street, where, if I can't sell it, the15 other properties around me on Mifflin16 Street are not going to necessarily17 suffer.18 The issue is, if you're sitting19 on 40 -- 20 acres, 30 acres, 40 acres of20 land for 12 to 20 years that's not been21 developed, is that in the best public22 interest, even though you have private23 property rights? It is -- it does have24 an effect on the overall development and25 109 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 progress of a city.2

People who own3 land, okay, because of the dynamics of4 the world, want to develop it, and if5 there were a market -- a stronger market6 in Philadelphia, and if there were more7 transparency and predictability,8 more-this land would all be developed.9 And I will tell you, let's not10 pit the good ideas that are in the11 Planning Commission's mind against the12 developers because many of these13 developers --14 For example, let me talk about15 Trump Tower, which became very16 controversial, which wasn't built because17 of the market. And in that Trump Tower,18 there was negotiations with the19 community. It was a green building, it20 was going to bring people to the City,21 there was waterfront access, there was a22 tot lot at the end of it, there were four23 spaces for Car Share. That developer24 wanted to do a development that was a25 110 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 terrific development. And it was because2 of the delay in the process, the market3 shifted, and we don't have that4 development. That developer wanted to go5 ahead.6

And I agree7 with you and I'm going to go to8 Councilman DiCicco in a second.9 But I agree with you: The10 market has changed everything.11

Yes.12

Now, prior13 to the market changing so drastically,14 there wasn't any movement then, either.15

Well --16

And my only17 point is, while I recognize the18 importance of landownership and private19 ownership, when that land is in a20 location that can detrimentally affect21 the development of the City, it's in a22 different category for me.23

The land isn't24 detrimentally affecting anything.25 111 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

It's doing2 nothing for anyone.3

Yes, because it4 can't be developed.5 Some of these people, by the6 way -- and I don't want to say that7 there's a lot of land that's been fallow.8 This Pier and is developed for9 condominiums, okay?10

Right.11

Pier 25, they12 want to develop, some of the same people,13 okay? Dockside has one development, and14 they would like to develop another.15 There are other piers they would like to16 develop.17 These people are looking to18 develop, and they're looking to the19 develop in sensitive, sustainable ways.20

Okay.21 Councilman DiCicco.22 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you.23 You mentioned transparency and24 predictability as one of the reasons why25 112 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 development may not have occurred; did2 you not say that in response to3 Councilman Kenney's question?4

Yes.5 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Doesn't a6 plan, a vision, an understanding of what7 the City would like to see its waterfront8 look like remove some of that9 uncertainty?10 Because you mentioned the Trump11 Tower. And then the negotiations between12 the community in getting what they13 thought was important delayed the process14 to the point where the market changed and15 the project was not built.16 If it were done on the front17 end, if the answers to all of those18 questions and concerns of the community19 had been recognized when the project was20 first being proposed, wouldn't that --21 could not that have shortened the time22 period to get the approval, and possibly23 it would have been constructed?24

That particular25 113 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 case is a little different because there2 was a waterfront property --3 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Well, you4 raised it; that's why I'm --5

No, no, no.6 It's a little, but let me tell what you7 should happen, all right?8 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: All right.9

If there are10 standards that should guide it and a11 plan, when we get a plan that should12 guide development, here's how it happens13 under the Charter, all right? You have a14 plan and you have all of the good idea15 and the good minds that you can get, and16 you can get a plan, all right?17 And then the Planning18 Commission presents an ordinance to City19 Council, and all those values are put in20 an ordinance which is clear, all right?21 And where the standards are in the22 ordinance.23 And then a developer comes in.24 And a lender knows that it doesn't depend25 114 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 on the whim of the committee; it depends2 on what City Council has put in the3 ordinance. And let me give you the best4 example.5 The best ordinance we have in6 the City of Philadelphia today is the7 Center City Zoning Ordinance, which, some8 of you will remember, that was passed on9 October 31, 1991. It created all of this10 civic vision at the time, civic values11 for dense development, which gave you the12 ground rules. So that under that, you13 could -- without negotiating with the14 Zoning Board, you could go and build a15 terrific development as of right.16 Now what developments were17 built under that? Comcast Tower, with18 all kinds of public benefits. The Cira19 Center. To a certain extent, the20 Residence at the Ritz, although it did21 need a variance for a couple of more22 floors. That's the way it should go.23 But when you send this for24 subjective review, not based upon25 115 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 Council's rules, but the Planning2 Commission's subjective review -- and3 I've been on the Historic Commission;4 I'll tell what you subjective review is.5 It's not fun for anybody. But if Council6 sets the rules, and it's clear, we can7 bring development and investment and8 people in the City who are willing to9 risk their money.10 The biggest problem the11 Development Workshop has with this12 ordinance is that it depends on the13 subjective review of the Planning14 Commission. Put aside that there's no15 authority under the City Charter. It is16 so confusing, people don't know the rules17 until they spend hundreds of thousands of18 dollars on design plans so that the19 Planning Commission can make the20 decision.21 The Planning Commission is not22 equipped to make that decision, it's not23 authorized under the Charter, and that24 sends fear into the hearts of the25 116 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 development community. We need to be2 welcoming to capital and to development3 in the City of Philadelphia. That's one4 of the major problems with this bill.5

Can I expand a6 little bit on what Michael said?7 I think one of the questions --8 or answers to your question, Councilman9 DiCicco, deals with the notion that if10 the plan were done now, I don't think the11 three of us would be sitting here,12 because we'd have some sense of13 standards.14 You questioned whether or not15 having a vision was a good thing to have.16 Well, having a vision may be a fine thing17 from an urban design point of view, but a18 plan is something that would look at:19 How do you fund it?20 Does the City have the capacity21 to do it?22 If the City was going to take23 property and then they were going to24 create a walkway trail, when would they25 117 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 do it?2 All those questions would deal3 the way we used to deal in urban renewal,4 where you knew you either had city money5 or federal money, state money for site6 improvements, things like that.7 We don't know any of that8 today. So as such, as you and Councilman9 Kenney went through on the Penn's Landing10 project was a set of controls. We stated11 what we wanted, and we also knew that we12 were going to come up short, and we had13 to come up with major public subsidies in14 order to make the vision work.15 And I don't think we have any16 sense today of what it would take except17 to know, by example, looking at other18 cities -- New York, Boston, Providence --19 where they've done this, the kinds of20 costs that are involved. So we just21 think they got the cart before the horse.22 And if you were to take the 1523 months that Alan Greenberger mentioned to24 do the plan and then let that then be the25 118 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 basis, I think you have both a design2 vision and a sense of reality in terms of3 how you would actually make it happen.4 When I came to Philadelphia in5 1968 to work for the City Planning6 Commission, the first assignment I was7 given was to figure out the funding in8 the Capital Budget for Schuylkill River9 Park. It took over 35 years to get all10 of the pieces together, Councilwoman11 Verna remembers, to get that piece done.12 And all we're saying is,13 let's -- we have to look at these14 developments in terms of the strength of15 the market as they come on and what a16 developer can do at a given point in17 time.18 The project of Waterfront19 Square is one which is a good example.20 Only two of the five towers have been21 built on that --22 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Three.23

Well, the third24 one, I guess, is under --25 119 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Three.2

Three towers are3 done. There are still two more. And at4 that point, there will be sufficient5 magnitude of residents there to build the6 retail along Penn Street.7 Now, if you were to go with8 a -- with the way the controls are9 suggested in this ordinance, you would10 have to do the retail upfront, when11 there's not the market to do it.12 And I think these are the kinds13 of things that we've been involved with14 on various projects where that15 development reality hasn't been brought16 to bear.17 And, you know, I'd also state,18 I'm a steering committee member of the19 Design Advocacy Group, along with Jim20 Kerner, who testified, and we had big21 debates within the steering committee,22 you know, in terms of what we did and23 didn't support. And I would say while,24 conceptually we all agreed that it would25 120 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 be great to have this recreational trail2 along the river, the sense of what the3 scale of that varied dramatically because4 we know situations where it's worked5 extremely well at 12 feet, where it's6 worked at 25 feet. I personally think at7 a hundred feet, at the width of Broad8 Street, is extremely excessive.9 So that this debate has been10 going on. And yet, when you codify this11 as law, the notion that this is a12 temporary agreement, if the Planning13 Commission finds that they can't come up14 with a plan in 18 months, if they find15 that the sources of funding aren't there,16 this stays as the effect of law in an17 ongoing manner.18 So this could go a year-and-19 a-half, it could go five years, it could20 go seven years if the economy doesn't21 turn around. And in the meantime, when22 we're trying to bring investment capital23 in from outside the City, how do you do24 that? because we can't proffer to outside25 121 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 investment that there's a clear way you2 can go.3 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I'll try4 to remember some of the things I wanted5 to ask you based on your statement.6 But at the tail-end, if the7 economy doesn't turn around, would you8 agree that there's not going to be any9 investment anyway, for the most part? I10 mean, Mr. Sklaroff talks about projects11 that people want to build. I have dozens12 of them in my district, but none of them13 have begun because of the state of the14 economy. The lending institutions aren't15 there.16 So are you suggesting that we17 just leave everything as is for the next18 year, two years, or whatever, and try to19 figure out what that plan would be?20 But if something does change21 between now and the time we have the22 plan, things will be built in a manner in23 which they have been built, although only24 a few of them have been built, and don't25 122 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 we miss this opportunity to create an2 environment which would make it more3 attractive? Now, I see you're shaking4 your head.5

(Indiscernible.)6 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: But, you7 know, you may be right and I may be wrong8 --9

(Indiscernible.)10 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: -- I'm11 just curious that does not the12 environment -- if the environment were to13 change and we allow the status quo to be14 in place, don't we lose that opportunity?15 Because in the time of a16 crisis, when there is no development, I17 think that's kind of like the blackboard18 is clear, let's try to figure out what19 we'd like to see going forward, because20 we have an opportunity, unfortunately,21 because the development community isn't22 developing because it's not -- they can't23 get the financing. And shouldn't this be24 the time we should be working on those25 123 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 future plans?2

Let me give you3 an example. Currently I'm involved with4 a development team that's trying to move5 a project at 2116 Chestnut Street. It's6 an outside developer from Chicago,7 probably one of a handful of developers8 that you'd want to bring into this city9 at this time. They -- on this particular10 site, they do happen to have the11 financing.12 And they have been extensively13 involved with the community, with the14 City Planning Commission. They started15 out their process with the Planning16 Commission, and they're going to have to17 go the Zoning Board. And these things18 are all happening in a methodical kind of19 way.20 I think the thing that's21 different now is, when Mayor Nutter came22 in, he said all these things are going to23 start with the Planning Commission. So24 there's been a planning input. You're25 124 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 staying with the process of going to the2 Zoning Board, where the Zoning Board is3 giving serious consideration to that, and4 the process can continue.5 As opposed to, if someone were6 to come in today from outside -- New7 York, Boston, whoever -- you couldn't8 guide them through what, in fact, they9 can get approved. And if, for some10 reason, someone didn't like what they11 were proposing, you would have to wait 612 months plus 75 days before could you get13 an answer.14 Now, maybe the Planning15 Commission would speed up the process,16 but you don't know that, and it sends an17 uncertain message.18 So here's a case where a19 developer's coming in, spending a lot of20 money to move a project go forward21 because they believe they can go forward22 even in this economy. And that's the23 kind of thing that we want to be --24 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Well,25 125 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 hasn't it been a problem for us with2 developers who want to come into a3 community, have a project proposed.4 Community groups -- and I'm not5 discounting their importance, 'cause6 without them, I don't think we'd have a7 city.8 But community groups engage in9 a process that ultimately slows that10 process down in 90 percent of the cases11 that I have, causing the developer12 excessive amounts of dollars because the13 project is not moving along as quickly as14 he or she would like it to.15 I'm not trying to get community16 groups out of this process. I'm trying17 to give a sense for developers coming in18 to have an idea as to what would be19 expected of them and the type of20 development that would be acceptable to21 both the communities, 'cause their part22 of this plan, this public process that23 we've gone through for a couple of years.24 Doesn't it save you time, which25 126 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 ultimately translates into saving money2 for the developer, knowing on the front3 end as opposed to the back end?4 And adjustments could always be5 made. I mean, even in those areas where6 I have height restrictions in Old City,7 two developers came after we put the8 limitation, and they proposed buildings9 that were in excess of 65-foot height and10 were approved.11 So it's -- as much as we want12 it to be in stone, it's not. But I think13 it's a plan, it's a model of what we'd14 like to see it built. And I think -- and15 I could be wrong, and I said this from16 Day One, as early as that 8 o'clock17 meeting at Penn's Landing three years18 ago, when I called all the developers and19 all you guys in, doesn't it make sense20 for people to know ahead of time what21 some of the expectations are and not to22 come up with a plan, having spent a lot23 of money, and then, boom, a community24 group says, You know? What we don't like25 127 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 the color of the bricks.2

Yeah.3

Or this4 doesn't have what we like, too much5 glass, not enough glass. And we engage6 in that dialogue for many months.7

Absolutely. And8 there's a way to do that. And the model9 is the 1991 plan for Center City, which10 has civic values in the standards, and11 you know what's expected.12 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Is this13 that far away from that?14

Yes, because15 what you've done is, instead of16 putting -- instead of City Council17 controlling the rules, it goes to the18 Planning Commission to make it up as they19 go along on standards that they haven't20 promulgated on value judgments.21 And if you've ever been before22 the Art Commission, God bless them, or23 even the Historic Commission, when we get24 beyond our historic roles -- I should say25 128 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 "their," no longer "our." When you get2 into esthetics and when you get into3 scope and being harmonious and so forth,4 that's the wrong way.5 The best way is the way the6 Charter has it. Be clear. Don't put a7 of 65-foot height limitation unless you8 need it, okay?9 And I think it is really the10 domain of the City Council to set the11 rules. And when you delegate it to the12 Planning Commission, it not only violates13 the Charter, but it makes it opaque and14 difficult for outside investment.15 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I just16 want to finish up.17 Based on your comments and your18 letter -- and I could be reading it19 wrong -- it almost sounds like you're20 gearing up for a lawsuit, which I would21 be disappointed in, if that's where22 you're going, and we don't know what a23 judge would do, obviously.24 But wouldn't that almost act25 129 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 like a moratorium?2

Councilman, let3 me say this: We're not gearing up for4 anything.5 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Okay.6

We're asking7 Council and the Law Department to take a8 serious look at these issues; that's what9 we're doing. It will be to individual10 landowners what their response is.11 But it is to point out12 important issues that we hope the Law13 Department is taking seriously.14 Mr. Lombardo wants to say a15 word.16 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Yeah, but17 just for the record, there are a number18 of developers who have looked at this19 and, in the last 48 hours, have said that20 they agree and think that this is21 actually a good plan. So it's not one22 hundred percent opposition.23

We never said it24 was --25 130 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: No, no,2 I'm not saying you are, but I want the3 record to reflect that there are4 developers who have looked at it, had5 their input, and I may ask Mr. Abernathy6 to come up and say a few words, if he'd7 like, to address some of the issues that8 have been raised, because he's done all9 of the heavy lifting on the legislation.10

So he has. But,11 again, the purpose of the letter was to12 point out issues that we sincerely13 believe, having thought it out, are five14 major defects in the law.15

Excuse me. I16 suppose you're wondering why I'm here,17 and I'll tell you very brief.18 Rich Lombardo.19 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: You have a20 new job.21

I have a new22 job. I'm still a planner.23 And, first of all, I do want to24 say (indiscernible) I really appreciate25 131 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 the difficulty in trying to do an2 ordinance where you have so many moving3 parts and the moving parts go right up to4 the day of the hearing.5 But I just wanted to address6 the reason why I feel that this ordinance7 is not ready for prime time, and it's the8 unforeseen consequences. In paragraph9 12, all commercially zoned properties10 have to go to the Planning Commission.11 That means if, tomorrow, you12 own 25-by-90 feet, three blocks, one13 block east of Christopher Columbus14 Boulevard, you're zoned commercial, you15 can't do anything with that property16 without going to the Planning Commission17 to get a plan approved.18 And that means this whole19 waiting period of time: The six months20 for the Planning Commission to develop21 guidelines, the 75 days to review your22 plan.23 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Not to24 interrupt, but that has been changed.25 132 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Well, I have2 what's purported to be the latest copy --3

Maybe the4 --5 (Indiscernible; parties talking6 over each other.)7

Again, that's8 the moving parts I'm talking about, the9 moving parts keep on being moving parts.10 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Well, that11 happens. I mean, you know.12 (Indiscernible; parties talking13 over each other.)14

And I'm not15 criticizing. I'm just saying that's the16 problem with --17

Right.18

It's always19 moving parts. And I just wanted to20 address that one little un -- what I21 think is an unforeseen consequence.22 We're all looking at the big sites along23 the riverfront and the trail and all that24 type of thing but we're forgetting about25 133 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 this area that covers something bigger2 than Center City. It covers I-95 over to3 the river, Oregon Avenue to Allegheny4 Avenue, and there could be -- and there5 seem to be unforeseen consequences the6 way it was moving. That's all I wanted7 to say.8 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I just9 would like to go back to one thing I was10 just thinking about.11 Earlier, Mr. Sklaroff, you12 talked about development that has13 occurred, we talked about Dockside, we14 talked about the hotel, I think Dave &15 Buster's and Wal-Mart and Home Depot.16 I agree that many people who go17 to Home Depot and Wal-Mart added jobs to18 the community and all, but if we had to19 do it again, and Wal-Mart and Home Depot20 were not there, would you not agree that21 they would not be in a master plan? They22 are not the highest and best use for that23 location.24

Let's --25 134 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Don't you2 think we could have maybe placed it3 further south, down by Ikea or --4

No, absolutely5 no. And let me tell you why.6 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Well,7 you're the only person that I've talked8 to who thinks that.9

Well, let me10 tell you why. It was the (indiscernible)11 site, okay? It was the only thing that12 could be put there.13 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: But what14 happened to the master plan of 1982; was15 that a part of that plan? Would that16 have been permitted?17 Because the environment in18 1982, along the waterfront, was totally19 different, the landscape then, than what20 it is today.21 (Indiscernible; parties talking22 over each other.)23

We were24 still (indiscernible) industry there.25 135 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Remember, this2 is the way it happened. It was to create3 jobs, okay? To keep taxes in the City4 and to provide -- to provide convenient5 shopping.6 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: To keep7 Philadelphians from shopping in8 Washington Township, to stay in9 Philadelphia.10

Right, it was11 the same thing that we did -- and Council12 President will remember -- at the13 Quartermaster site, all right? There was14 a site, the former Quartermaster site was15 terribly polluted, it was being16 remediated, and it's a -- a Home Depot.17 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Isn't that18 apples to oranges?19

It's not on20 the waterfront.21 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: You've got22 an industrial site sitting out close to23 some residential communities, close to24 major highways. We're talking about the25 136 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 waterfront, whose purpose is not what it2 was 20 years ago.3 And maybe at the time -- and I4 said this during the casino hearings --5 15, 20 years ago, I probably, if I was6 here, I might have thought Wal-Mart and7 Home Depot was a good idea because there8 was nothing else there. And, yes, for9 the purpose of creating jobs and keeping10 tax revenues here.11 But if I had the opportunity12 today, I would not be supportive of a13 Wal-mart or a Home Depot at that14 location.15

That may be so.16 But remember, 1993, this came to City17 Council. I was at the hearing.18 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I wasn't19 here yet.20

Okay, all right.21

I was.22

But I -- we came23 to City Council, and it was controversial24 because Wendell Young III was not happy25 137 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 with this, all right?2 It came to Council and Council3 did the right thing. You rezoned it to4 commercial, which was certainly5 consistent with the sense at the time.6 It's hypothetical whether you7 would do it today, but it does -- real8 people shop there.9 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: And I just10 want to -- if I may finish.11 For the record, you mentioned12 earlier that you thought that -- and13 paraphrasing some legal problems with14 this as it relates to the Charter, it may15 not be legal what we're trying to do?16

I sent a letter17 with a copy to you, Councilman.18 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Right.19 The Law Department disagrees. They think20 it's legal. So I just want that to be21 for the record. I'm not saying you're22 right and they're wrong or vice-versa.23 But I just want that as part of the24 record that we have talked to them, and25 138 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 they believe that it has legal standing.2

Well,3 Councilman, you will be guided by the Law4 Department. I would hope that the5 Council would ask for a written analysis6 because these are important issues.7

So be it.8 Thank you.9

Thank10 you.11 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: And Madam12 Chair, if there are any questions,13 Mr. Lombardo brought up some things that14 could be answered, would be able to be15 answered by Mr. Abernathy; he's available16 to respond to those questions.17 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:18 Mr. Lombardo, did you want Mr. Abanathy19 to --20

While he --21 I just want to say one thing before he22 comes up, 'cause I'll be done after this.23 First of all, on the issue of24 Wal-Mart, Home Depot, there was another25 139 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 element to that discussion, and that was2 the ability to swap land for industrial3 port use. It was a paper operation that4 was getting land, and it was kind of a5 land swap. In addition to saving or6 keeping the jobs and tax ratables in the7 City, there was a port industrial use8 that was a component of that whole9 discussion.10

It may well have11 been. I don't remember, Councilman.12

The only13 thing I could say to you -- I mean, I've14 been in politics for more than 30 years,15 I've sat on Penn's Landing Corporation in16 one form or another for over 25, and the17 only thing I could tell you I know: With18 the exception of two or three, maybe four19 accident developments, it's very20 disappointing what's happened or not21 happened in the last quarter century, and22 I'm willing and ready to make somewhat of23 a leap of faith --24 (Applause.)25 140 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Willing to2 make somewhat of a leap of faith. And I3 grant it, it's a leap of faith, 'cause4 there are moving parts, and there are5 potential bad results.6 But there's also so much upside7 potential that I think we got to go in8 some direction that's going to get a9 waterfront that we're going to be proud10 of and is usable and attractive and a11 national kind of icon for development.12 And I know you have the same13 goal.14

Absolutely.15

But I can16 tell from you experience, over the last17 25 or 30 years, we haven't gotten there18 under the current system and set of19 rules.20 So I think at this point, it21 may be time to take that leap of faith22 and go in another direction.23

And if you24 believe that, I would just add one other25 141 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 thing: Plan it, plot it, and price it.2

Okay.3

Because it would4 be unfair to everybody, everybody5 involved, if we're going to -- if the6 plans are pie in the sky. And the heavy7 lifting is normally done by the Planning8 Commission and it hasn't been done here9 yet.10

But under11 our current rules, every iteration of12 waterfront development that I've13 experienced was pie in the sky too, from14 the Crystal Pavilion to the -- thank God15 we didn't do the Simon project. Thank16 God every day that didn't happen.17 And every other iteration18 between the Crystal Pavilion and then was19 all generated and conducted under the20 current rules, and none of that happened21 either.22 So I know there are other23 elements as to why it didn't happen, but24 we need to go, I believe, in a different25 142 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 direction because the other stuff has not2 worked.3

Councilman --4

And I was5 there.6

-- I guess the7 question is, if you were advising a8 landowner, what would you say to the fact9 that there are still blanks in this10 legislation? I mean, if someone said to11 me, Well what is my waterfront setback?12 what percentage of my land? I couldn't13 begin to tell him.14 They can't price it, they can't15 look at the soil conditions, they can't16 --17 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: It will be18 filled in by the end of this year.19

Thank you.20 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:21 Mr. Lombardo, did you want Mr. Abernathy22 to address your concerns?23

No. I was just24 going with the copy I got at 4:30 on25 143 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 Monday. If it was changed again, I2 wasn't aware of those changes. So I was3 testifying from the copy I was provided4 at 4:30 Monday.5 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:6 Mr. Abernathy, has that been changed7 since Friday?8

We received it9 Monday, June 1, at 5:20 p.m.10 (Mr. Abernathy confers with11 panel members off the record.)12

Well, I think13 there ought to be -- it ought to be14 stated on the record. I think this may15 be an important point.16 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Brian?17

Sure. All18 right.19 From my understanding of the20 question, it was that -- and this was an21 issue in previous drafts, is that because22 of the requirement for the Planning23 Commission to develop regulations for24 plan of development, that prior to the25 144 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 development of those regulations, you2 have an ad hoc moratorium for development3 along the waterfront.4 We adjusted that by clearly5 stating -- by actually changing one word,6 which was prior to implementing the7 provisions of this section, which related8 to the entire waterfront overlay, to this9 Subsection 12, by relating it to the10 specific paragraph, no longer will a POD11 be needed -- a POD will not be required12 until those regulations are adopted.13 Therefore, the moratorium issue has been14 resolved.15 Did I understand the concern16 correctly, Rich?17

(Nods head.)18

It would be19 helpful to see this in writing.20

It's actually21 in your draft too, Michael.22

Where?23

It's right here24 (indicating).25 145 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

So2 Mr. Abernathy, what you're saying is that3 understanding is that now we don't have a4 six-month moratorium, that during the5 six-month period, a landowner will be6 able to proceed under the existing7 zoning, which is under the 1982 plan; is8 that correct?9

That's not10 wholly accurate.11 The property owner will not be12 required to submit a plan of development.13 However, they will be required to adhere14 to the -- the property owner will not be15 required to submit a plan of development16 in order to pull zoning permits.17 However, they will be required to adhere18 to the other provisions of the bill; for19 example, a waterfront setback.20

And also, they21 would have to agree to the trail, without22 design guidelines, under a POD?23

They have an24 opportunity to dedicate the recreational25 146 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 trail to the City, or they must build the2 recreational trail and accept that3 liability to the guidelines that are4 actually contained within the legislation5 as a condition of their zoning permit.6

Well, it's worth7 thinking about, but I think the confusion8 is going to put us way back into the9 original moratorium, but -- well, we10 haven't understood it the way Brian is11 explaining it, and we'll take a look at12 it.13

Thank14 you very much. Gentlemen, thank you.15 Our next witnesses?16

Thank you very17 much, Madam President.18

Dr. James Plumb,19 Patrick Star, Larry Silver.20 (Witnesses come forward.)21

Council President22 Verna, I have been informed by others23 that Mr. Plumb is not in the room.24

Good25 147 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 afternoon. Please identify yourself for2 the record and proceed with your3 testimony.4

Good afternoon. My5 name is Patrick Starr, and I'm Senior6 Vice President of the Pennsylvania7 Environmental Council, which is a8 statewide environmental organization, and9 I lead the regional office. ,2 zoning. 4 I urge that the setback be 1005 feet, I think, recognizing that no more6 than 20 percent of a particular parcel7 should be impacted. 19 We've heard a lot about takings. There's20 a less well development concept called21 givings, which has to do with public22 investment in infrastructure raising23 property values. 4 I want to share just a couple5 of observations from the North Delaware6 greenway project that I think are very7 important here. We too had a vision. We8 developed a greenway master plan. It was9 accepted by the Planning Commission. 20 An optional zoning district was21 created, called the Waterfront22 Redevelopment Zone, prepared by staff at23 the Planning Commission and introduced by24 Councilwoman Krajewski. It was helpful25 151 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 but imperfect. It was optional. 11 They did not create connecting12 streets for public access, as this bill13 would mandate. They did not -- the plans14 did not clearly indicate public15 improvements that were promised. And the16 upshot was, developers were greatly17 enriched by the approval of entitlement18 on development sites without any real19 public development clearly ever20 resulting. 24 This zoning overlay also25 152 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 regulates use in building relationship to2 the street. I endorse that. It is3 important to rebuild Philadelphia4 neighborhoods back to the river. 18 The greenway shouldn't be19 stingy. 3 And, lastly, I would just say I4 wish that we would not be establishing5 setbacks on the Delaware River by6 Councilmatic District. 12

Thank13 you very much.14 Please identify yourself for15 the record.16

Thank you, Your17 Honor. My name is Larry Silver. Good18 afternoon. 6 Just so you know, I commute to7 work by bike most days, year round,8 almost 20 miles roundtrip. I try to stay9 off roads where possible such as on the10 Schuylkill (indiscernible) trail. 14 When I'm riding on the streets15 of Philadelphia, I do not have the word16 "lawyer" stitched on the back of my17 spandex -- safety first. And safety18 first is my theme today. I want to talk19 about the bill and make sure it gets20 passed. 21 It seems apparent that the bill22 may be challenged in court following23 passage. 16 I think it's a mistake for the17 bill to give the City Planning Commission18 the power to grant such exceptions. 21 My concern here is that the22 contemplated exception is the equivalent23 of a zoning variance. 3 Philadelphia's Home Rule4 Charter provides that the Zoning Board of5 Adjustment, the ZBA, shall herein decide6 appeals and zoning matters and authorizes7 variances if not contrary to the public8 interest. 18 So I ask you to protect the19 bill by making it consistent with the20 Home Rule Charter and provide that the21 exceptions to the setback go to the ZBA22 for consideration. 24 And, again, I would be25 157 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 interested in hearing what the Law2 Department says about that issue. 7 I see no problem with the bill8 in transferring that review authority to9 the ZBA. 11 My second concern is a concern12 raised by Mr. Sklaroff in Section 12 of13 the bill. 21 Under the bill, the City22 Planning Commission's decision is final23 and appealable directly to Common Pleas24 Court. Now, this is a process that's25 158 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 been used in the City at (indiscernible)2 Square and at the American Commerce3 Center. 6 There is a concern about7 whether that power can be delegated to8 the Planning Commission. 11 I think there's an easy fix for12 that one, too. My suggestion is that the13 Planning Commission still consider and14 hold hearings on proposed plans of15 development (indiscernible) after the16 regulations are in place, but the17 Commission should be tasked with making a18 recommendation rather than a final19 decision, and the recommendation would go20 to City Council for ultimate approval or21 disapproval. 23 Again, my intent here is to be24 supportive of the bill but to try to25 159 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 insulate it from legal challenge. 4 Finally, the last comment I5 have addresses the regulated access6 provision of the bill. This is not a fix7 in terms of legal challenge, but I think8 it's an improvement. 9 Section 8 provides that two or10 more adjacent property owners may share11 access via an easement agreement between12 the parties. My concern here is that13 this language is too open-ended and14 subject to abuse. It is possible, if15 this is awarded, for example, for ten16 adjacent property owners to agree that17 one access route on one of the properties18 will be provided to satisfy the19 requirement. 21 The civic vision contemplates a22 model access point to the recreational23 trail on the river. Again, the fix here24 is easy. 10

Thank11 you very much.12

Good afternoon. My13 name is Matt Rubin. 3 090170 with the proposed amendments that4 Councilman DiCicco and the Planning5 Commission have been offering. 8 I want to first address9 something that I feel compelled to10 clarify. The community I represent,11 which is a member of CDAG, is perhaps the12 fastest-growing community in13 Philadelphia. 15 We have 150 businesses. Those16 business owners, many of them live in the17 neighborhood, and every business is also18 a member of our association. 23 I am available most any day at24 this time of the year to take25 162 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 Mr. "8 Secondly, I would like to say9 that this bill is important to be passed10 out and recommended out of committee now11 for two related reasons. One is, it12 provides safeguards and clear rules of13 the road for future development, allowing14 time for a proper master plan to be15 created. 24 So by setting down an overlay now, we25 163 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 help protect the riverfront from a for2 rush permits while we are developing the3 master plan. 7 The NLNA also advocates in the8 strongest terms that the waterfront9 setback in the bill be set with a formula10 of 100 feet or no more than 20 percent of11 the lot. 2 I am aware of no concrete3 evidence that has been offered anywhere4 that shows why another different formula5 would be superior to this one. 16 I would just briefly say that17 you've heard an objection that this bill18 would institute spot-zoning. 6 So I think it's important to7 note that communities are giving up a lot8 of their prerogative and are doing so9 willingly, precisely because this marks10 an end to spot-zoning. 19 You also heard objections that20 this bill could affect takings of private21 property, and I think that it's important22 to note that many of the underlying23 zoning categories have open-space24 requirements, and this setback would25 166 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 contribute to that. 8

Thank9 you.10 Are there any questions or11 comments from members of the committee?12 (No questions or comments.)13

Thank14 you, gentlemen.15

Thank you.16

Our17 next witnesses?18

Maya Van Rossum,19 Brian Glass, Rachael Vassar.20 (Witnesses come forward.)21

Good22 afternoon, welcome. Please identify23 yourself for the record.24

25 168 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 My name is Maya Van Rossum. 14 And I would like to thank Councilman15 DiCicco, of course, for leading the16 charge to bring this forth. 18 As you can imagine, based on my19 title, the reason that I'm here is20 because the Delaware River needs 100-foot21 vegetative buffers in the City of22 Philadelphia. 12 There are many reaches of the13 Delaware River that have already been14 damaged by development that, already15 suffer from hardened banks. 8 With regards to some of the9 specifics, to deliver all of the benefits10 that a buffer can provide, it can't11 simply be a setback from the water; it12 has to be a vegetative buffer. 6 And I think that there's been a7 lot of effort to do that here, and8 successfully so. 11 So I am urging you to put back12 into the text -- the version I have sort13 of took out the number. I am urging you14 to put pack a 100-foot minimum vegetative15 buffer requirement in Bill No. 090170,16 and I would like to ask that you increase17 the setback in Bill No. 19 There are a couple of specifics20 in the language that I wanted to raise21 that are important. In provision22 number -- well, it's numbered as 13 in my23 version, but I think it's supposed to be24 number 12. It talks about providing25 172 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 automatic approval if the Commission2 fails to act within 60 days. 7 I think if we're going to have8 a presumption of a decision because of9 failure to act, the presumption has to be10 for a denial. And if you're going to11 have a presumption for approval, then12 you've got to give a longer timeframe13 than merely 60 days. And you also have14 to put in place a mechanism that the15 public can take advantage of to make sure16 there is not that lapse of time without17 any action. 25 174 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 I would like to say -- I do2 feel that I have to speak just a moment3 to some of the assertions that were made4 before. 10 And I think that not only are11 these unsubstantiated claims, but when we12 look at experiences in other communities,13 we find that they are altogether not14 accurate and not truthful. 8 One of the things I do as the9 river keeper is, I do tour the10 riverfront, I do tour the river waters,11 looking for pollution, looking for12 threats to the Delaware River. And as I13 do these tours along the Philadelphia14 waterfront, one of the most wonderful15 things I see -- and in some ways, the sad16 thing that I see -- is so many people,17 young and old, battling to get to the18 natural part of the waterfront. 22 They will climb over anything,23 they will climb under anything to get to24 those natural areas in order to fish, in25 176 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 order to swim, in order to just relax in2 the beautiful, lush green that is a3 naturally vegetated river bank. 7 And I think that it is unfair8 to suggest that these hardened banks that9 we have and these cement pathways we have10 way above the water that makes darn sure11 that you can't touch the water and makes12 it really difficult for particularly a13 young child to put a fishing rod in the14 water. 6 So I thank you for putting7 forth this bill. 11

Thank12 you.13 Our next witness?14

18 Penn future works to create a19 just future, where nature, communities,20 and the economy can thrive. 11 Next Great City has identified12 ten affordable actions that the City must13 undertake to revitalize Philadelphia's14 neighborhoods. Among the ten agenda15 items is a recommendation to create16 public riverfronts. 7 The greenway that the vision8 imagines, with a hundred-foot setback9 along the bank of the river, will create10 a network of green public spaces that11 will connect neighborhoods and bring12 residents and tourists alike to the13 riverfront. It will be an esthetic,14 cultural, and ecological resource15 contributing to the health, vibrancy, and16 economic development of our city. 19 We should aim for consistency20 and apply the same standards to all of21 our riverfronts. 3 A full expression of the civic vision4 will enable the Delaware Riverfront to5 finally live up to its enormous cultural,6 economic, and ecological potential. 11 The City's support for12 SugarHouse Casino development makes13 adjacent parcels more susceptible for14 change, reinforcing the need to enact15 interim zoning now. 21 I look forward to hearing your22 position on this proposal. 24

Thank25 182 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 you very much.2

Good afternoon.3

Good4 afternoon.5

Good afternoon. My6 name is Brian Glass and I'm a staff7 attorney at Penn Future. I'd like to8 focus my testimony today on the takings9 concerns that have been raised in10 connection with the zoning bill before11 you.12 Government can regulate the13 permissible uses of private property14 without compensating the owner of that15 property when the regulation advances16 legitimate state interests and does not17 deny the owner of all economically viable18 uses of his or her land.19 To determine whether a20 government regulation has denied an owner21 of all economically viable uses such that22 a taking has occurred, courts focus on23 the parcel as a whole, meaning that24 courts consider not only the geographical25 183 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 dimension -- that is, how much of the2 land is unavailable for all uses -- but3 also a temporal aspect; that is, for how4 long the property will be unavailable for5 all uses.6 The bad news: The analysis7 involves a complex of factors, often8 referred to as the Penn Central analysis,9 after the United States Supreme Court10 case in which it was first adopted.11 The good news: The United12 States Supreme Court has already found13 that a taking did not occur when14 considering an ordinance that was far15 more restrictive than the Central16 Delaware Riverfront Zoning Overlay17 District that you are considering today.18 In Tahoe, Sierra Preservation19 Council versus Tahoe Regional Planning20 Agency, the Tahoe Regional Planning21 Agency enacted two moratoria lasting for22 a total of 32 months on all development23 in the Lake Tahoe Basin to maintain the24 status quo while studying the impact of25 184 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 development on Lake Tahoe and formulating2 a comprehensive land-use plan for the3 area.4 Analyzing the case within the5 Penn Central framework, the Supreme Court6 upheld a decision by the court below that7 no categorical taking had occurred with8 respect to the enactment of the two9 moratoria.10 Given that the United States11 Supreme Court determined that a 32-month12 complete prohibition on development does13 not constitute a taking, it is indeed a14 stretch to argue that the less15 restrictive Central Delaware Riverfront16 Zoning Overlay District, a far cry from a17 complete prohibition on development, is18 vulnerable to a takings attack.19 Because the proposed zoning20 overlay appears to survive constitutional21 scrutiny and given the overwhelming22 public support for the civic vision, Penn23 Future respectfully requests that the24 Rules Committee approve the Central25 185 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 Delaware Riverfront Overlay District.2 Thank you.3

Thank4 you all very much.5 Our next witnesses?6

The next witness7 is Marilyn Jordan Taylor.8 (Witness comes forward.)9

Good10 afternoon. Please identify yourself for11 the record.12

Good afternoon,13 Madam President and Councilmembers. I am14 Marilyn Jordan Taylor. I am the Dean of15 the School of Design at the University of16 Pennsylvania, and I am here representing17 the Delaware River Waterfront18 Corporation. I'm a board member of that19 corporation and also the chairman of the20 planning committee.21 We are here today and we have22 submitted in writing our comments to you.23 There are just two comments that I would24 like to reinforce verbally for your25 186 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 consideration and in contribution to the2 discussion you're having here.3 First of all, the Delaware4 River Waterfront Group is strongly in5 support of this overlay. Its purpose is6 clear, and that is to protect the7 characteristics of the natural8 environment until the time when the9 master plan and zoning can be put in10 place. We endorse that both as property11 owners and as a corporation charged with12 the -- with ensuring the implementation13 of the vision for the Central Delaware14 Riverfront.15 The particular item I would16 like to comment on, as everyone else, is17 the waterfront setback. The intent of18 the working guidelines to be derived from19 the civic vision for the overlay district20 is that no new encumbrances should be21 created in the waterfront setback zone22 that would make the implementation of23 continuous waterfront access more24 difficult to accomplish than it is today.25 187 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 This continuous set back -- this is very2 important -- must be applied to all3 properties in the district, in all zoning4 districts within the overlay district,5 not just to the commercial properties.6 The intent is not to preclude7 ongoing and allowed industrial activities8 but to avoid further encumbrances to that9 future continued connection.10 Ultimately, whatever the11 dimension is, the point of measurement12 should be from the bulkhead line, with13 the Planning Commission determining from14 existing information or survey where that15 bulkhead line is physically located.16 In our opinion, the continuous17 open space need not be of continuous18 width. In fact, there are urban and less19 urban areas that may dictate different20 widths ultimately being realized. We21 assert, though, that there must be a22 minimum of approximately 50 feet in order23 to accommodate emergency access, safe24 pedestrian circulation, a separated25 188 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 bikeway, and seating and natural areas,2 as well as the ability to protect the3 river edge.4 Greater dimension may be5 required in some areas of irregular6 edges. Less dimension may be needed in7 select areas of special existing8 conditions, which should be identified,9 as the regulations direct, by the10 Planning Commission, within 180 days of11 the effective date.12 Just to summarize quickly. It13 must be continuous across all properties14 from north to south. It needs to be of a15 character that feels consistently public16 and similar. And, finally, it needs to17 have a minimum of 50 feet for function in18 addition to whatever else is required to19 meet the natural edge of the river.20 Thank you very much for the21 opportunity to testify.22

Thank23 you so much for coming in to testify.24 Our next witnesses?25 189 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Caryn Hunt and2 Rene Goodwin.3 (Witnesses come forward.)4

Good5 afternoon. Please identify yourself for6 the record and proceed with your7 testimony.8

My name is Rene9 Goodwin, and I'm here representing -- as10 Pennsport representative to the Central11 Delaware Advocacy Group.12 I want to thank you, Madam13 President and members of Council for14 allowing me to speak, and I want to15 particularly thank Councilman DiCicco and16 Brian Abernathy for the laborious work17 that they have done to bring this18 legislation forward.19 I want to just also mention20 that I shop at Wal-Mart, I'm a real21 person, and I support the overlay.22 (Laughter.)23

Location,24 location, location. It's the real estate25 190 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 agent's mantra and is repeated three2 times for emphasis. It is the phrase3 that sums up the most important4 principles of successful real estate5 marketing and development. It means that6 an identical house can increase or7 decrease in value due to its location.8 It means different things to9 different people. To the first-time10 homebuyer, it may mean a good school11 system, proximity to jobs and shopping.12 To empty nesters, it may mean distance to13 cultural events and dining. And to14 developers, it may mean access to major15 highways and other means of16 transportation, and it may also mean a17 location where the developers can have18 access to a workforce and the supplies19 they need to build.20 But you may wonder, how does21 this relate to today's hearing regarding22 overlay legislation? It relates because23 although there are many items on a24 homebuyer's or developer's list to25 191 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 determine value and desirability of a2 property, one of the top items on that3 list throughout the world is proximity to4 water.5 People who buy first or second6 homes on the water know that. They know7 that they pay more. Developers know8 that. Why, some developers know it so9 well that they have even land-banked10 property along the Delaware River for11 years, knowing that its value would12 continue to increase due to the proximity13 to the river.14 In Pennsport, we all know the15 river has value, for it has given us life16 in the form of an active port, which is17 about to expand and create yet more18 family-supporting jobs.19 Harris Steinberg, Penn Praxis,20 and thousands of people who worked to21 mold the civic vision know the value of22 the riverfront land. So does the Central23 Delaware Advocacy Group and the24 residents, the taxpayers and voters of25 192 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 the waterfront wards who are situated in2 and on the edge of the seven-mile stretch3 that comprises the civic vision.4 There is nothing wrong with5 seeking profit. Seeking profit is an6 integral part of the system that keeps7 our country going, but there is also8 nothing wrong with giving to citizens9 their right, their access to the river.10 This overlay does not11 discourage development, as some would12 have you believe. On the contrary, many13 believe that development based on good,14 sound principals, the guiding principles15 of the civic vision, as included in this16 overlay legislation, will result in17 better development, more marketability,18 increased profit margins, and the true19 prize: Philadelphia and its waterfront20 will finally take its place as a21 first-class city.22 So, members of Council, I'm not23 going to ask you to support this24 legislation; rather, I'm simply going to25 193 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 thank you, for I have complete confidence2 that you will support it and support it3 now. I can't imagine you wouldn't want4 to generate increased revenue, make5 Philadelphia a world-class city, protect6 the interests of the citizens you7 represent, and leave a legacy far beyond8 your wildest dreams. Location, location,9 location.10 Thank you, thank you, thank11 you.12

Thank13 you very much.14 Please identify yourself for15 the record.16

Hi. 19 We're a member organization in the20 Central Delaware Advocacy Group. 24 Thank you for this opportunity25 194 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 to speak. 8 Councilman DiCicco and9 then-Mayor Street got the ball rolling on10 the civic vision process. 23 NABR members, like residents of24 all of the neighborhoods in Philadelphia,25 195 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 worked hard and good faith to do our part2 in this most community-inclusive planning3 project that was ever undertaken in our4 city. The result of this process, the5 civic vision for the Central Delaware, is6 both bold and reasonable. 10 The economy will not always be11 bad, and that's why now is the time to12 plan. 14 NABR advocates for a15 hundred-foot setback without an16 alternative percentage provision. If a17 landowner believes this requirement is a18 hardship, they can seek a variance at the19 Zoning Board of Adjustment. 2 Unless the percentage is 20 percent,3 which would be consistent with public4 area requirements in normal commercially-5 zoned properties, we will end up without6 a hundred-foot setback. 17 Many -- creating this amenity18 for the City will draw people to the19 river, which is what we all want. 23 Also, with respect to the24 hundred-foot setback, we continue to urge25 197 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 greater clarity on the point from which2 the distance is measured. 8 In general, we want to9 encourage a diverse waterfront with10 active uses, one that is busy both day11 and night. 13 In addition, NABR would like to14 see a requirement for regular public to15 the river at intervals of not more than16 500 feet. 23 NABR saw an opportunity in this24 bill to add gaming facilities to the list25 198 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 of prohibited uses so that we never again2 find Harrisburg dictating land uses on3 our river. You know, that's our4 recommendation. 8 As NABR has stated, we would9 like to see history preserved along the10 waterfront. 13 Our history is also the14 nation's history and the primary driver15 for our tourism. The minimum we should16 require is a Phase I survey of properties17 within the overlay district. 2 Access, diversity of uses, honoring our3 history, the ecological needs of the4 river, and the recreational needs of5 Philadelphia; in short, creating a6 riverfront that people want to visit is7 the best use of the Central Delaware8 Waterfront. 11

Thank12 you.13 Does the stenographer have a14 copy of Ms. Hunt's letter?15 STENOGRAPHER: Yes, I do.16

Our17 next witnesses will be...?18

Alicia Footes,19 Dave Hammond, John Gallery, Tim Kerner.20 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Madam21 Chair, if I may, I would ask these22 witnesses and the other witnesses who may23 follow, assuming they're all here, there24 are at least eight witnesses. Come25 200 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 forward, please.2 If they can summarize, it would3 be helpful. I will have a Streets and4 Services Committee hearing shortly after5 this committee, of which I have over 306 bills, so we'd like to get that in as7 well.8 And I appreciate your coming9 here and your interest in this, but if10 you can summarize, that would be helpful.11 Thank you.12 Thank you, Madam Chair.13 (Witness comes forward.)14

Thank15 you.16 Good afternoon kindly identify17 yourself for the record and proceed with18 your testimony.19

Okay. Good20 afternoon. Hello. My name is Alicia21 Footes, and I was born and raised in22 Philadelphia. I'm also 17 years old and23 I'm a senior at the (indiscernible) day24 school of the Sacred Heart, which is25 201 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 located in Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania.2 I'm also a five-year3 participant of the mentoring program,4 Students (indiscernible). This program5 trains adolescents like myself to run in6 different Philadelphia races such as the7 Broad Street Run, the Philadelphia8 Distance Run, and the Philadelphia9 Marathon in November.10 As a participant of this11 program, I'm always outdoors in different12 areas around the City. As I run, I have13 noticed the developments going on in14 these areas. Students from Philly Style15 have done a wonderful job of training16 many of their students to participate in17 these activities. And with the18 developments in the City, you have19 allowed them to complete their goals20 productively.21 In my opinion, the development22 is a great addition to Philadelphia for23 two reasons.24 First is safety. The new25 202 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 projects allow young people like myself2 to feel safe when going out to do3 positive recreational activities outside4 after school. In my case, when running5 three or even fifteen miles during6 practice, I like to feel relaxed by not7 having to worry about my safety.8 Another reason is more9 opportunities for the youth in the area.10 New projects open doors for young people.11 It allows us to do more recreational12 activities around the City, without13 disrupting our fellow residents in the14 City.15 In conclusion, I do believe the16 projects are not a problem for the City.17 Instead, it is an aide to put our city18 back on the map for something positive19 and can help the young people in our city20 to stay out of trouble.21 Thank you for listening to me22 today, and I hope my opinion helps future23 with decisions about what is going on in24 our city.25 203 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Thank2 you very much.3

My name is David4 Hammond. I'm the Executive Director of5 the South Street Headhouse District and6 was also an appointee to the original7 CDAG.8 I am here today to testify in9 favor of Bill No. 090170, the Central10 Delaware Riverfront Overlay District.11 As the Executive Director of12 the South Street Headhouse District, I am13 quite familiar with zoning overlays, as14 the District has had one since its15 inception in 1993. I feel strongly, as16 does our board of directors, that the17 zoning overlay has helped the District to18 control its own destiny.19 Without an overlay, there is no20 leverage available to encourage the21 desired development and/or discourage22 uses that would be detrimental to the23 district. Zoning overlays have been24 proven to be quite successful in urban25 204 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 planning, as evidenced by the number2 enacted, including Center City District,3 Manayunk Development Corporation,4 Rittenhouse Row, City Avenue, and5 numerous others throughout Philadelphia.6 In my six years as executive7 director, we have only had a few8 challenges to our overlay. In my9 experience, a very large majority of10 developers and prospective tenants prefer11 to know the rules going into a project12 prior to spending any money on project13 development that may be turned down by14 the Planning Commission or the Zoning15 Board of Adjustment.16 As a member of CDAG, I, along17 with numerous others, worked for over a18 year to shape the civic vision for the19 Central Delaware. Almost all of us were20 unpaid volunteers on our own time. We21 all spent many early mornings, late22 evenings, and the occasion weekend23 working to develop that vision based on24 the input of over 4,000 citizens of the25 205 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 Philadelphia.2 We are proud to have received3 Mayor Street's, Mayor Nutter's, and the4 Planning Commission's support for the5 civic vision and are anxiously awaiting6 the master plan for the seven-mile7 stretch of the river.8 But therein lies the problem.9 Until the master plan is completed in 1210 to 18 months, do we want to go back to11 the old way of developing the Delaware?12 If we do not have this zoning overlay in13 place, the efforts of all of those14 citizens of Philadelphia would be wasted15 if developers could pull permits to do16 projects under the current zoning.17 I too shop at the Wal-Mart and18 the Home Depot, as I'm a resident of19 Queen Village. And despite the fact that20 I see that they are often busy on a21 Saturday afternoon, I find it difficult22 to believe that the people would say that23 that's the best use of that parcel of24 land.25 206 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 And the people have already2 spoken, telling you what they wanted. It3 is imperative that the Council adopts4 this bill to protect the efforts of the5 people to shape their waterfront as they6 choose and not have a developer do it for7 them.8 The people are aware that most9 of us will not be around when this vision10 is realized, but you have to start11 somewhere, you have to start sometime.12 You cannot keep putting things off for13 the next generations.14 The Central Delaware is rare15 and the time is now. I ask your support16 for Bill No. 090170. And thank you for17 the opportunity to testify.18

Thank19 you very much. Thank you very much.20 Our next witnesses?21

Pete Hoskins.22 Todd Baylson, Tatiana Granados, Eric23 Cheung.24 (Witness comes forward.)25 207 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921

Good2 afternoon. Welcome.3

Thank you. Am I4 all alone?5 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:6 Apparently you are.7

Well, I want to8 thank you very much for the opportunity,9 and I will paraphrase in the interest of10 time.11 I'm Pete Hoskins, and I'm here12 as President of the Board of the13 Philadelphia Parks Alliance. And on14 behalf of the Parks Alliance, I'm here to15 testify in support of an interim zoning16 overlay to the Central Delaware that will17 ensure that a continuous riverfront18 greenway and trail can be ultimately19 created.20 This much needed zoning will21 protect the civic vision that will enable22 the riverfront to reach its extraordinary23 economic, environmental, and cultural24 potential.25 208 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 In my full testimony, I do2 allude to the groundbreaking Trust for3 Public Land Study sponsored by the4 Lendfest Foundation that clearly5 documents very strong economic benefits6 from parks in many, many ways, health,7 environmental, and certainly real estate.8 And I would encourage Councilmembers to9 use that study as you look at this10 investment as well as other investments11 in our parks.12 I'll leave my summary behind,13 but I would like to say a special thanks14 to Councilman DiCicco and to Councilman15 Kenney for their insightful comments this16 morning. I think that, as Councilmembers17 representing this area, you really do18 understand the vision and are looking at19 this in a much longer perspective, and I20 give you great credit for doing that21 So thank you very much22

Thank23 you.24 Do we have anyone else to25 209 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 testify on this bill?2 Kindly approach the witness3 table.4 (Witnesses come forward.)5

I6 would ask you to try to be as brief as7 possible. Thank you.8 Please identify yourself for9 the record.10

Thank you. My11 name is Sarah Clarke Stewart and I'm here12 to speak on behalf of the Bicycle13 Coalition of Greater Philadelphia and the14 Schuylkill River Park Alliance, a15 nonprofit advocacy organization that16 advocates for public access and17 stewardship of the Schuylkill River Trail18 below the Art Museum dam.19 We support this bill. We urge20 that there are four areas where the bill21 would be greatly strengthened. I'll just22 talk about those for one minute.23 We strongly recommend that the24 ordinance specify a hundred-foot setback25 210 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 to provide sufficient room for riverfront2 greenway. If a hundred feet is not3 possible, 20 percent of the parcel is4 recommended.5 Secondly, we recommend that the6 right-of-way dedicated for pedestrian and7 bicycle traffic be specifically cited as8 being a minimum width of 14 feet.9 Thirdly, not all open streets10 are wide enough to accommodate a bicycle11 lane. So if the bill, is going to12 provide that legally open streets be used13 instead of a path, that a five-foot wide14 bike path be provided in addition to the15 legally open street16 And lastly, we recommend that17 reasonable intervals for perpendicular18 access be provided, preferably every 50019 feet, as recommended by the civic vision,20 but no longer than a half a mile.21 Thank you very much.22

Thank23 you.24

Good afternoon,25 211 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 Madam Chairwoman. My name is Hal2 Schermer. I am also with Schuylkill3 River Park. 7 One thing which I think is8 important to remember briefly is we are9 taking about the public riverfront. So10 when we hear that there are only so many11 owners of the riverfront; no, there are12 not. That is a public riverfront; it13 belongs to the citizens of Philadelphia,14 the citizens of the State of15 Pennsylvania. 19 Several years ago, we were here20 talking about access to the Schuylkill21 River Park. We have the same situation22 where a small number of property23 interests are vehemently against public24 access. 8 The same situation applies here. 17 Where the bill speaks to the18 bulkhead lines, one of the concerns is19 that that's actually the wrong line. 25 213 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 One of the things to look at2 is, picture in your mind the sidewalk and3 the, quote, riverfront trail that you4 have along the Delaware, the sidewalk5 outside of Dockside. Then contrast that6 with the mental picture of the Schuylkill7 River Trail. 21 The draw for this property is22 to make it like Rittenhouse Square. It23 becomes an outdoor square. 13 Also to note that the language14 in the ordinance, I believe, talked about15 an economic hardship. "18 Finally, I just wanted to note19 there was a mention about the Venice20 Island overlay. The Venice Island21 overlay is a bit of a Jacob Marley22 showing you what not to do. The Venice23 Island overlay includes a requirement for24 a riverfront trail. The very first25 215 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 development after that put in a2 chained-link private parking lot on the3 first property that was to be the4 riverfront trail. 10 There were multiple projects before the11 Venice Island overlay, where the Planning12 Commission went through and did the13 measurements and figured out, This is the14 floor area ratio that we need to have a15 good project. 23 I wanted a quick follow-up. We24 have two visions of the Delaware. One is25 216 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 the vision with Northern Liberties, a2 vibrant community done on small,3 block-by-block bases. We have the4 (indiscernible) division of large, big5 parcels separated by wide swaths of6 river. We should follow what we know7 works, which is to take the Delaware8 River zoning and make it look like the9 Northern Liberties zoning. 11 Finally, for many years, City12 Council -- well, for many years,13 Philadelphia was controlled by an14 informal height ordinance that nobody15 built any taller than William Penn's16 statue. Only partially tongue-in-cheek,17 I would suggest that City Council look at18 a similar idea that when it comes to19 public rights to access the public river,20 the public should have the same amount of21 access that you have on the north side of22 City Hall, about a hundred feet. 8

Thank9 you very much.10 Are there any other witnesses11 to testify on this bill?12 (No response.)13 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:14 Seeing none, this will conclude our15 public hearing.16 We will now go into our public17 meeting, and the Chair recognizes18 Councilman Kenney for a motion on Bill19 No. 090128.20

Thank you,21 Madam President.22 I move that Bill No. 090128 be23 reported out of this committee favorably24 and a request made for a rules suspension25 218 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 to allow for first reading at our next2 Council session.3 (Motion duly seconded.)4

It5 has been moved and seconded that Bill No.6 090128 be reported out of committee with7 a favorable recommendation and, further,8 that the rules of Council be suspended so9 as to permit first reading at our next10 session of Council.11 All in favor will indicate by12 saying aye.13 Those opposed?14 The ayes have it, and the15 motion carries.16 The Chair recognizes Councilman17 Kenney regarding Bill No. 090348.18

Thank you,19 Madam President.20 I move to adopt the amendments21 to Bill No. 090348, as circulated.22 (Motion duly seconded.)23

It24 has been moved and seconded that the25 219 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 amendment, as circulated, be adopted.2 All in favor will say aye.3 Those opposed?4 The ayes have it, and the5 motion carries.6 And the Chair recognizes7 Councilman Kenney.8

Thank you,9 Madam President.10 I move that Bill No. 090348, as11 amended, be reported out of this12 committee with a favorable recommendation13 and a request made for a rules suspension14 to allow for first reading at our next15 Council session.16 (Motion duly seconded.)17

It18 has been moved and seconded that Bill No.19 090348 be reported out of committee with20 a favorable recommendation, as amended,21 and further that the rules of Council be22 suspended so as to permit first reading23 at our next session of Council.24 All in favor will say aye.25 220 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 Those opposed?2 The ayes have it, and the3 motion carries.4 We will now consider Bill No.5 090349.6

Thank you,7 Madam President. I move that amendments8 to Bill No. 090349 be approved.9 (Motion duly seconded.)10

It11 has been moved and seconded that the12 amendments, as submitted earlier on Bill13 No. 090349, be approved.14 All in favor will say aye.15 Those opposed?16 The ayes have it and the motion17 carries.18 And the Chair again recognizes19 Councilman Kenney.20

Thank you,21 Madam President.22 I move that Bill No. 090349, as23 amended, be reported out of this24 committee with a favorable recommendation25 221 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 and a request made for a rules suspension2 to allow for first reading at our next3 Council session.4 (Motion duly seconded.)5

It6 has been moved and seconded that Bill No.7 090349 be reported out of committee with8 a favorable recommendation, as amended,9 and further, that the rules of Council be10 suspended so as to permit first reading11 at our next session of Council.12 All those in favor will say13 aye.14 Those opposed?15 The ayes have it, and the16 motion carries.17 Again, the record will reflect18 that Bill No. 090380 has been withdrawn19 at the request of the sponsor.20 The Chair again recognizes21 Councilman Kenney regarding Bill No.22 090392.23

Thank you,24 Madam President.25 222 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 I move that Bill No. 090392 be2 reported out of this committee with a3 favorable recommendation and a request4 made for a rules suspension to allow for5 first reading at our next Council6 session.7 (Motion duly seconded.)8

It9 has been moved and seconded that Bill No.10 090392 be reported out of committee with11 a favorable recommendation and, further,12 that the rules of Council be suspended so13 as to permit first reading at our next14 Council session.15 All those in favor will say16 aye.17 Those opposed?18 The ayes have it, and the19 motion carries.20 Again the Chair recognizes21 Councilman Kenney regarding --22

Thank you,23 Madam President.24 I move that 090408 be reported25 223 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 out of this committee with a favorable2 recommendation and a request made for a3 rules suspension to allow for first4 reading at our next Council session.5 (Motion duly seconded.)6

It7 has been moved and seconded that Bill No.8 090408 be reported out of committee with9 a favorable recommendation and, further,10 that the rules of Council be suspended so11 as to permit first reading at our next12 session of City Council.13 All those in favor will say14 aye.15 Those opposed?16 The ayes have it and the motion17 carries.18

Thank you,19 Madam President.20 The next bill is Bill No.21 090169. I move that the amendments22 offered by Councilman DiCicco be23 approved.24 (Motion duly seconded.)25 224 6/3/09 RULES - 090128, 169, 170, 348, 349, 3921 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:2 Councilman, did you want to --3 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Next one.4

Oh.5 All in favor that we adopt the amendment6 will say aye.7 Those opposed?8 The ayes have it, and the9 motion carries.10