COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON RULES Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, December 4, 2024 1:14 p.m. PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN CINDY BASS, CHAIR COUNCILMAN MARK SQUILLA, VICE-CHAIR COUNCILWOMAN KATHERINE GILMORE RICHARDSON
240871, 241054, 241055, 241058, 241059, 241062 - - -
This hearing is called to order for the Committee on Rules. Madam Clerk, please call the roll.
And I am present, Councilwoman Bass. This is the public hearing of the Committee on Rules regarding Bill 8 Nos. 240871, 241054, 241055, 241058, 241059 and 241062. Will the Clerk please read the titles of the bills.
Bill No. 13 241055, introduced by Councilmember Gilmore Richardson on behalf of Council President Johnson, an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Packer Avenue, 7th Street, Pattison Avenue and Darien Street. To amend Title 14 of The Philadelphia Code, by adding Section 14-541 entitled "/PAK, Packer Avenue Overlay District," and making other related changes, under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 240499, introduced by Councilmember Phillips, an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Broad Street, Medery Avenue, Park Avenue and Godfrey Avenue. Bill No. 241054, introduced by Councilmember Phillips, an ordinance amending Section 14-520 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "/NDO, 9th District Overlay District," by reorganizing existing requirements and requiring special exceptions for certain uses in designated areas, all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 241058, introduced by Councilmember Lozada, an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Oxford Street, Cadwallader Street, Jefferson Street, Germantown Avenue and 4th Street. Bill No. 241059, introduced by Councilmember Young, an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Erie Avenue, 9th Street, Hutchinson Street, Ontario Street, Sedgley Street, 6th Street, Glenwood Avenue and Broad Street. Bill No. 241062, introduced by Councilmember Squilla, an ordinance amending Section 14-500 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Overlay Zoning District," by amending Section 2 14-502, entitled "CTR/Center City Overlay District and 14-702, Floor, Area, Height and Dwelling Unit Density Bonuses," and creating Section 14-542, entitled "/PCH, Philadelphia Chinatown Overlay District," and making related changes, all under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you. We're going to call for the first panel we have to testify. The first bill is No. -- we're going to start with Bill No. 16 241058. And if we could have the Clerk please call the witness for Bill No. 241058.
Paula Burns, Director of Legislation for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. (Witness approached Witness table.)
Thank you. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon, members of the Rules Committee. I am Paula Brumbelow Burns, Director of Legislation for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here to testify on Bill No. 241058, introduced into City Council on November 1st -- no, excuse me, November 14, 2024, by Councilmember Lozada. Bill No. 241058 amends the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of land located within an area bounded by Oxford Street, Cadwallader Street, Jefferson Street, Germantown Avenue and 4th Street in the Kensington neighborhood of the Riverwards Planning District. The bill changes the zoning for 1501 Germantown Avenue from RSA-5, residential single- family, to ICMX, industrial commercial mixed-use. This change in zoning will support the property's continued use as a school use and a religious institution. Al Aqsa Islamic Society is planning to expand the school into a new building on the site to accommodate increasing enrollment. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission considered Bill 17 No. 241058 at its public meeting on November 21, 2024 and recommended the bill for approval. I'll be happy to answer any questions at this time.
Okay. Thank you. Any questions from the panel? (No response.)
No. 4 Seeing none, is there anyone else here to testify on Bill No. 241058? (No response.)
Seeing none, we will now call Ms. Paula Brumbelow Burns for Bill 10 No. 241054.
Good morning or sorry. I am Paula Brumbelow Burns, Director of Legislation for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here to testify on Bill No. 241054, introduced into City Council on November 14, 2024 by Councilmember Phillips. Bill No. 241054 amends the Philadelphia Zoning Code by amending Section 14-520 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "/NDO, 9th District Overlay District," by reorganizing existing requirements and requiring special exceptions for certain uses in designated areas throughout the 9th Council District. This bill will create a subarea for commercial area review within the existing 9th District Overlay. It will include eight commercial corridor areas throughout the district. Each of these corridors will now require a special exception for the following uses: convenience sales, vehicle repair and maintenance, vehicle and vehicular equipment sales and maintenance and event assembly facilities. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission will consider Bill No. 241054 at its public meeting of December 5, 2024. I'll be happy to answer any questions.
Seeing none, okay. Thank you. And is there anyone here to testify on behalf of Bill No. 7 241054? (No response.)
Okay. Seeing none, we will now hear the next witness on 241059. Paula Brumbelow Burns, please state your name for the record and proceed.
I am Paula Brumbelow Burns, Director of Legislation for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here to testify on Bill No. 241059, introduced into City Council on November 14, 2024 by Councilmember Young. Bill No. 241059 amends the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning of the area bounded by Erie Avenue, 9th Street, Hutchinson Street, Ontario Street, Sedgley Street, 6th Street, Glenwood Avenue and Broad Street in the North Planning District. The Planning Commission staff worked closely with the neighborhood and Council Office to update the zoning maps. Two meetings were held within the boundaries. A print and digital survey was distributed and materials were provided in both English and Spanish. The neighborhood is currently mapped with the zoning that was created in 1933 without significant changes. The neighborhood participants requested to concentrate new housing developments adjacent to existing transit resources, rightsize the zoning of existing residential neighborhoods, support Germantown Avenue as a commercial corridor, encourage redevelopment or reuse of underutilized industrial buildings. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission considered Bill 7 No. 241059 at its public meeting on November 21, 2024 and recommended the bill for approval. I'll be happy to answer any questions at this time.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Any questions from the panel, from the Committee? (No response.)
All right. Seeing none, is there anyone else here to testify on the bill? (No response.)
Okay. Seeing no one, if we could now hear Bill No. 240871.
I am Paula Brumbelow Burns, Director of Legislation for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here to testify on Bill No. 240871, introduced into City Council on October 10, 2024 by Councilmember Phillips. Bill No. 240871 amends the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning for an area bounded by Broad Street, Medery Avenue, Park Avenue and Godfrey Avenue in the Oakland neighborhood of the Upper North Planning District. The bill addresses a split-zoned property at 6233 North Broad Street that is currently covered by two zoning districts, RM-1, residential multi-family, and CMX-2.5, commercial mixed-use. This bill will update the property zoning, which includes a building and a parking lot, to CMX-2.5 to allow for commercial use to be by-right in the existing commercial area. By correcting the split-zone condition on the property, it will allow for a more predictable development in the future. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission considered Bill 11 No. 240871 at its public meeting on November 21, 2024 and recommended the bill for approval. I will be happy to answer any questions at this time.
Okay. I want to recognize the presence of Council President Kenyatta Johnson.
Yeah, sure. Absolutely. Well, first and foremost, I want to thank you for giving an overview of the actual bill and I am the sponsor of the legislation. I asked the members of the Committee that voted out with a favorable -- oh, you ain't on my bill yet?
My apologies. So we're coming to Bill 18 No. 241055. We're on 871.
Is there anyone else here to testify on 871, Bill No. 240871? Chair recognizes Councilmember Kathy Gilmore Richardson.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And thank you, Paula, for being here. I just had a very quick question on this one. You stated that right now it's split?
And it's RM-1 and CMX-2.5. And so, it's a building and parking lot, but what's the current use of the building?
The current use of the building I believe is currently vacant, but it is subject to a lease agreement to put in one of the remote City election offices.
Which is a different bill that has a 10-year lease I believe. The property owner is actually in the room today.
Okay. Great. All right. Thank you. That was the only question I had. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Are there any more questions from this panel? (No response.)
And seeing none, is there anyone else here to testify on the bill? (No response.)
All right. And seeing none, thank you very much for your testimony. And we'll now have the Clerk please call up Bill No. 6 241055.
(Inaudible) -- sorry about that. Michael Harris, Vice-president of Marketing and Government Affairs for the Philadelphia Phillies; Don Smolenski, President of the Philadelphia Eagles; Joe Meade, Senior Vice-president for Government and External Affairs for Comcast Spectator -- Spectacor, excuse me. (Witnesses approached Witness table.)
I was just not called. But, yes, I plan on testifying.
Okay. Very good. Why don't we begin, Paula, with you since you're already here.
Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. And again, we're hearing Bill No. 241055.
I'm Paula Brumbelow Burns, Director of legislation for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here to testify on Bill No. 241055, introduced into City Council on November 14, 2024 by Councilmember Gilmore Richardson on behalf of Council President Johnson. Bill No. 241055 amends the Philadelphia Zoning Map and Code by changing the zoning for property within an area bounded by Packer Avenue, 7th Street, Pattison Avenue and Darien Street and will add Section 14-541, entitled "/PAK, Packer Avenue Overlay District" in the Veterans Stadium neighborhood of the Lower South Planning District. This bill will rezone the property located at 700 Packer Avenue from I-2, industrial medium, to CMX-3, commercial mixed-use zoning district. The new PAK overlay will allow additional uses not permitted in CMX-3 zoning, which are assembly and entertainment, non-accessory surface parking and roof decks for non-residential use. This bill was requested by a developer who wishes to develop a collection of six mixed- use buildings. The development plan indicates 1,367 residential units with 1,234 parking spaces in addition to the commercial uses. This bill is consistent with the recommendations in the Lower South District plan, which calls on the City to encourage neighborhood shopping and services to be provided in any new development at the sports complex and recommends ensuring future developments as the sports complex balances the needs of existing residents and visitors. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission considered Bill 23 No. 241055 at its public meeting on November 21, 2024 and recommended the bill for approval. I'd also like to add that there is a proposed amendment and that amendment addresses the sunset clause, that after two years both the map and the overlay will disappear if zoning permits are not granted for the project.
So we're next going to hear from Hines Development to give us an overview of this proposal. If we could have them come forward and please start with stating your name for the record and proceeding with your testimony. (Witnesses approached Witness table.)
Good afternoon, Hercules Grigos, from Klehr Harrison representing Hines Development. I have with me my client Brandon Segal from Hines Development.
Good afternoon, Councilmembers. My name is Brandon Segal, and I'm the Managing Director and Market Lead for Hines in the Philadelphia area. For those not familiar with Hines, we're one of the largest privately- held real estate development and investment managers in the world where we operate in over 380 cities throughout 30 countries. Over the course of our 67 years in operation, we've grown in scale and complexity of our developments with a track record of over mixed-use 20 master plan projects similar to 700 21 Packer Ave that have been developed 22 or are in planning around the 23 country. , a 66-acre former Army Medical Center that's been redeveloped into an active mixed- use community, the development of Petco Park for the San Diego Padres and a plan redevelopment of the Gas Plant District in St. Petersburg, Florida in partnership with the city and the Tampa Bay Rays, where we will redevelop the 86-acre site, include a new ballpark, thousands of units, 2 million square feet of commercial and retail, multiple hotels and an immense amount of entertainment, civic and public space for the community to enjoy. Here in Philadelphia we've developed 1213 Walnut in partnership with the Goldenberg Group and also led the refurbishment of 30th Street Station in the early '90s, along with actively working on another large mixed-use project just outside of City limits. Additionally, before I joined Hines I developed 1919 Market and One Dock Street in Society Hill, both high-rise multi- family projects. 700 Packer or, as we call it, Stadium Square is a unique opportunity to bring our mixed-use placemaking experience to an environment within the Stadium District that is unlike any other district around the country, as it features three active stadiums and a casino. At Hines, we pushed hard into this thesis as we see that this platform is the next evolution of mixed-use development. With that in mind, we envision Stadium Square to be a community adjacent to the stadiums and not a stadium- adjacent community, which is an important distinction that guides our planning, design and uses with the goal of creating a 365-day-a-year community as opposed to only thinking about the project specific to what happens on days where there's events in the district. The end result of this planning will be a new neighborhood that'll feature a variety of living options, commercial space, abundant parking, dining, retail and entertainment for locals and individuals traveling into the district to enjoy. At the end of the day, I'm a father of three daughters that all love Philadelphia sports, but like many other fathers of young families we lack the options of where to take my kids before or after games as there isn't anything family-friendly within the district outside of the walls of the stadiums. Stadium Square will provide for the next evolution of the district where locals and visitors can come and enjoy the community before or after games and more importantly, on non-game days. Our engagement with our partner, Philadelphia Suburban Development Corporation, the owner of the property that housed the former Turf Club, began over two years ago. Since that time, we've had numerous meetings with our local stakeholders, including Comcast, the Phillies, the Eagles, Cisco, Philly Live, the local business district, our registered community organization, Council President Johnson and the Parker Administration. Through the evolution of this process, we've continued to learn about what Comcast and the Phillies have planned for the lots adjacent to their facilities and we are excited for the future of their project as we believe that their plans will be complementary to ours. To date, through the engagement process we've obtained support from the coordinating RCO and assigned a robust EOP, as we're committed to inclusion and creating opportunities for all as part of this project.
To highlight that effort, this past fall in advance of the zoning process my team at Hines ran in coordination with Project Destined, a 10-person internship program for Black and Brown students where they went through a 10-week training program on real estate financial literacy with a special focus on Stadium Square. Moving forward, we plan to run this program in conjunction with our dedicated Hines Skyline Scholars internship program annually, providing intentional equity for supporting underrepresented students of diverse backgrounds, access to institutional commercial real estate projects. In advance to getting to this stage, we performed a significant amount of project diligence and brought with us a few of our expert consultants. We have Gina Lavery, who is the Executive Vice-president and principal at Econsult; we have Janice Woodcock, principal at Woodcock Design and Planning and Guy DiMartino, the Regional leader at Traffic Planning and Design. 6 billion in direct economic activity for the City, over 31 million in tax and permit revenue fee alone and over 7,900 construction jobs. Further, once the project's fully delivered and it's operating, the project will produce almost $600 million in direct recurring economic activity and new resident spending in addition to over $7 million in annual tax revenue net of real estate taxes to the city. Woodcock Design conducted a planning and land use study. Janice found that the site parameters and conceptual program are congruent with the district and concluded that by creating the project program with intention, Stadium Square will rebrand the district, changing the perception of the area which is the first step in establishing a true Stadium District for Philadelphia in alignment with the City's future vision, as highlighted by Paula. Most importantly, we engaged a traffic planning and design to conduct a traffic analysis who found that car trips created from our project would have a de minimis impact on the area creating no change to level of service on non-game days. That being said, it's important for us and our future residents and guests that they can access the site and traverse the area seamlessly with ingress and egress, a concern that is no different than what you're going to hear from the teams after me. As such, we're committed to working with all stakeholders, including and most importantly the teams, to support a comprehensive traffic solution for the Stadium District at large. Through this process, we worked with PennDOT, Streets and SEPTA to make sure the district will thrive not just now for the next few years but for 13 years and beyond. 14 In conclusion, we 15 believe that Stadium Square will be 16 the catalyst for the future 17 transformation of the Stadium 18 District into an area that's looked 19 upon by cities around the country 20 as the model for mixed-use stadium- adjacent development. Thank you all for your time and consideration today.
I just want to say that the reports were sent to Council President's office and those for the record.
Brandon, how long have you been working on this particular project?
What is your company's track record in doing such projects?
Our company today has over 93 billion of assets under management, has national 4 mixed-use master plan communities, 5 and that's just national. There's 6 a variety of other projects around 7 the world. In total I think Hines 8 has done over 1600 large 9 institutional projects through our 10 history. So we've evolved over 11 time and this has become the bread 12 and butter of what we do and what 13 we do well. 14
In terms of this 16 particular location, obviously it's 17 in the Stadium District, what was 18 your vision regarding picking this 19 particular site and working in 20 partnership with Mr. Mark 21 Nicoletti? 22
Yeah, 23 absolutely. So when we look at 24 this and we think about an opportunity to create something unique, you're seeing as we said that next evolution of mixed-use development where individuals, retailers, commercial providers and residents are wanting to live near and adjacent to the stadiums because they want to be part of the action, right. At the same time, they want to be part of an all-inclusive community, right, that's self- containing so on non-game days there's something to do within their environment. So when we looked at the opportunity that was presented to us to partner with Philadelphia Suburban Development Corporation, who's been a long- standing owner-operator developer in Philadelphia, this is the type of opportunity that made a ton of sense. But the reality of the situation is Philadelphia is one of two cities in the country with this density of the teams in this district. So the opportunity here to truly create something special is really immeasurable for us through this process and we're excited at the potential of what the district could be in the future.
Okay. Now, I know there are -- and we'll probably get a chance to hear from the teams. I know there are some concerns that individuals believe that there should be more collaboration, more communication regarding your particular project, other projects that are taking place in the area and also in the context of the overall vision. Have you ever been invited to be a part of any Planning Commission at the City of Philadelphia as it relates to the Stadium District and the vision down there by our Planning Commission?
No, we have not, not to date. Through our process we've engaged and spent time with all of the local stakeholders and we have shared our vision for the project over the past two years to date, and we've still -- and we truly believe that the project is better when the district is looked at as a whole, which is why we are open to and have continued to offer to be part of a larger concept for the site.
And just for the record, I know we all met as stakeholders, and again members of the Committee will hear from other stakeholders who have different opinions about this legislation moving forward. But part of that conversation was, at least in my mind, thinking that individuals could still be a part of an overall vision and planning process moving forward in that particular area without hindering a private individual having that opportunity to build on his own private land, is that correct, just for the record?
Hercules, I just want to state for the record has anyone ever approached Suburban, Mr. Mark Nicoletti, to purchase his property?
My understanding is someone did approach Mr. Nicoletti, and he's here, but someone did approach Mr. Nicoletti to purchase his property.
And what company is that, were they representing to purchase --
My understanding was it was the representative Comcast Spectacor.
Okay. The actual land that they're actually protesting today as it relates to --
-- this project moving forward. Just want to put everything out there, transparent just for the record. Some of the issues that have come up is around traffic, right. And from my understanding, you did a traffic study, right. That should be released. I guess, if y'all would get around the table to talk about that actual traffic study, but also during the design phase, isn't there still opportunities for everyone to get inside the room and talk about how your project moves forward without having an impact or barriers on other projects in that actual area?
100 percent, absolutely. It's our intention through this process to continue to meet with the teams and discuss that. I received a phone call this morning from Phil Laws at Comcast who said and offered that, asked me if we were willing to continue to meet, they would love to set up that meeting. We said absolutely. Each team has a different traffic pattern based on where their stadium is, the times of the year that they use it, and each has a different impact. We want to make sure that as our project is planned specific to access, parking, loading, how that affects them and our neighbors in addition to Cisco as well. We want to make sure at the end of the day that our project is complementary and supports the district. So there needs to be a larger collective working group and we're leading to be part of that.
So as the developer, you are willing to sit down with all concerned parties to address and mitigate any of their concerns in terms of how you build your actual project so it won't be hindering in the Stadium District?
And, Council President, as you know the process to get a building permit is robust with PennDOT, Streets Department, trafficking impact study, which we will work through -- which would be necessary in order to get a building permit.
And also, would it be fair to say that to be quite frank not all traffic issues down there are related to this particular project, correct?
Yeah, that is correct. Our traffic study shows that there's a de minimus impact for our project based on the traffic on non-game days.
Next line of questioning: As a part of your process you coming to my office and part of how we operate in City Council before we normally sign off on anything, we ask for the registered community organization to sign off. Meaning, you actually met with the required organization to seek approval. What organization did you meet with and did they sign off on supporting thus project?
Veterans Stadium Neighbors Association. Mr. DeMarco is here. We met with them numerous occasions, public meetings and we came to an agreement. We're going to continue to work with them on a community benefits agreement, but they did support the project and they sent a letter of support to your office as well.
How was that process? Tell me about it. Did you have one meeting and they signed off on it and you got a letter and then you just brought it to me immediately?
I think we had at least three or four public meetings, definitely three that I recall. I believe some of the teams in the district were represented as well or attended, and there was a lot of, you know, typical RCO, I think, as everyone is familiar with in this room, concerns, responses, questions and we worked through it and I think they got comfortable with our plan.
Why this particular RCO? Do they have jurisdiction in that particular area?
Okay. All right. That's all I have at the moment. Any questions or comments from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Okay -- oh, wait. Chair recognizes Kathy Gilmore Richardson.
I apologize, Madam Chair. Thank you for the recognition. If you could just repeat your name for me and the organizations that you represent?
Thank you. And no other questions from the Committee. Chair recognizes Richard DeMarco. Please come forward and provide your testimony. (Witness approached Witness table.)
Good morning. Please -- well, good afternoon. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. MR. DeMARCO: Good afternoon. My name is Richard DeMarco. I am Vice-president of Veterans Stadium Neighbors Civic Association. So thank you for the opportunity to speak today. The Council President directed the Hines Development team to meet with the local RCO, Registered Community Organization. Veterans Stadium Neighbors Civic Association has jurisdiction for the area and at the Council President's direction, the developer met with our organization on several occasions. We had more recently an in-person meeting in May and then we had a Zoom meeting last month and I believe we had an inperson meeting last year, although I don't remember exactly when that was, but we also consulted numerous times during the process. The developer did make several concessions to the neighborhood and there is going to be a written community benefits agreement, but we have an agreement in principle. Therefore, we did submit a letter of support for the proposal. The developer has agreed to an ongoing continuous relationship with my organization as we go forward. There were concessions made as to the parking, which is one of the primary concerns. And the only outstanding item really was a minor issue with regard to the sunset provision. We're on the same with the Council President's Office with that regard. We do want to make sure the zoning reverts back to the I-2 should this development not move forward, but we trust that the developer and the Council President's Office will have that resolved. There was a concern that just zoning permits wasn't enough, but we're happy to have that be worked out between the Council President's Office and the development team. And that's really it. We do trust the developer's going to stand by his promises. There's going to be a written agreement anyway. And we thank the Council President for allowing us to be involved and making us part of the process and it worked out well. Obviously, we have a very busy area down there, but the parking really is the primary concern and there's been promises made and we do believe the developer will keep those promises to mitigate the parking in our area. So that's all I have. And I thank you, and again, thank you to the Council President.
Thank you for your testimony. Any comments? Chair recognizes Council President Johnson.
I just want to ask Rich -- Mr. DeMarco, give me an idea of that process. Did it take weeks? Did it take months? Was it a done deal as soon as he walked into the meeting? Give us just an overview of what that process was like. MR. DeMARCO: Yeah. There was a lot of back and forth. As I recall, there were two inperson -- this spanned over the course of a year really. I believe you directed that the developer meet with us last year, last calendar year, and we had a number of meetings. There's been consultations consistently throughout the process. There's been back and forth on what the key terms of the community benefits organization would be and it took a long time, but we eventually arrived at an arrangement that made sense for everybody. Again, we're going to be part of the process going forward. Obviously, we want the developer to make sure that we are included in all future discussions. But it was more than a yearlong process with multiple meetings and conversations.
From your knowledge or not, do you know if the Sports Complex Special Services District, are they a registered RCO for the area? MR. DeMARCO: I believe they may be. I'm not sure. I don't keep track of who maintains that status. I know that we have consistently maintained the status. We are I believe the only residentially-based RCO that claims jurisdiction over that area, but I'm really not sure whether they've maintained their RCO status.
All right. That's all I have. Thank you very much. Shawn Schillinger, do you want to answer the question just for the record? Not Schillinger. I'm sorry. (Witness approached Witness table.)
Good to see you. It's been a while. I just want to note for the -- and I see your testimony, the Sports Complex Special Services District, are you the registered RCO in your area as well?
We were removed as an RCO in 2016 when the requirements for an RCO were changed.
Yes. Shawn Jalosinski, Executive Director of the Sports Complex Special Services District.
Okay. All right. And I know you're reading your testimony. Are you going to be doing official testimony or submitting your --
Oh. Well, you can begin now since you're here.
Thank you. Good afternoon. Once again my name is Shawn Jalosinski and I am testifying today on Bill No. 12 241055 in my capacity as Executive Director of the Sports Complex Special Services District, a position I proudly held for 16 years. 17 The District is a 18 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation 19 that was established in 2002. The 20 District has been actively engaged 21 in a mission to, one, help protect 22 community interests and improve neighborhood quality of life and, two, help promote efficient operations in Lower South Philadelphia. The District is governed by a 21-member Board of Directors that includes elected community directors, City and state officials and venue operator executives from the Philadelphia Phillies, Philadelphia Eagles and Comcast Spectacor. The District serves an area that includes 9,300 residents living in 4,244 households. I'm very proud to share that the district has been consistently recognized over the last two decades for the positive impacts it has and continues to make in Philadelphia, including most recently being a stated model for a similar proposed entity related to the Sixers Arena proposal. Regarding the subject Stadium Square development proposal, I testify today with great concern over the process this proposal has taken, the lack of notifications in detail shared to date and the future impacts it could have on our area. Please let me clarify. This is a very large parcel located within the district boundaries and this proposed development will significantly impact the traffic and parking conditions that are already stressed on both game days and non-game days. It is imperative that all involved stakeholders have appropriate time to receive, review and provide feedback on the yet-to- be-shared project details. This has not happened. Again, please let me clarify. The district has not yet received project details, the district has not yet received the related traffic study. In review, the district has had only one private meeting with the developers back in May 2023, and attempts to re-engage with the developers on project details have been unsuccessful. This includes the district inviting the developers to join a meeting of the Sports Complex PIDC stakeholders group where 35 participating entities meet monthly on Lower South coordinating matters, including event scheduling, public safety and traffic parking and pedestrian management. The developers accepted this invitation to meet in May 2024 but later declined citing the need to postpone as their project was being revised. With respect to community outreach, it is understood that the developers have engaged and received approval from a registered community organization. I would respectfully challenge that approval from a single RCO, especially one not in closest proximity to the development does not constitute community approval. Again, my district, as an umbrella organization, includes elected community directors, representatives from all of the adjacent neighborhoods and there would be shared benefit by including all in the subject discussions and planning considerations. Lastly, please know that my district in its coordinating role remains available and willing to engage in any and all development proposals for the Lower South Philadelphia area if given the opportunity within the process. I continue to believe we all have shared goals that can be best addressed through sharing of details and collaboration. Development coordination, especially with respect to traffic and parking planning, is critical to the future of the sports complex and our surrounding neighborhoods. To that end, the Sports Complex Special Services District continues to offer its services and respectfully requests appropriate involvement moving forward. Thank you for your considerations and this opportunity to testify.
Thank you, Shawn. That was very optimistic testimony, more than my meeting. So thank you very much about the shared collective willingness for everybody getting inside the room to work on a shared vision. And as we mentioned, this is the beginning of the actual process and I believe -- and everybody, I know all the stakeholders, and I have worked as the District Councilman on behalf of all stakeholders, in actually moving the Stadium District forward since I've been here in 2011. I'm just one that's a pragmatic idealist, Madam Chair, that greater minds will sit around the table and kind of figure this out as we move forward, but thank you. I just did want to get on the record, are you the registered community organization in the area?
The Sports Complex Special Services District is currently not an RCO.
Okay. All right. But your boundaries as a base -- let me go back. Your support comes from where?
No. Why were you created because we're going through the same process right now?
Why was the Special Stadium District put together just for the record?
Yes. The district was established in 2002 as part of the puzzle for creating what would become the construction of Lincoln Financial Field and Citizens Bank Park. So it is funded per the lease requirements of the Philadelphia Phillies, Philadelphia Eagles and Comcast Spectacor.
Yeah, I wasn't really worrying about the funding, but I'm glad you did mention that. But basically the Special Services District of the Sports Complex was created as a result of the Eagles team as well as Citizens Bank, which is the Phillies. And being the Stadium Special Service District, you pretty much have a geographical area that you mentioned covers this area that you maintain the quality of life in the area and also keep the pulse on the issues and concerns in the area, correct?
All right. That would include traffic, that would mean overflow after games, police detail, things of that sort, correct?
Any residential issues in terms of when residents have issues, how do you deal with that in terms of development from that aspect?
So the way the Sports Complex Special Services District is structured is every four years we have four distinct neighborhoods, and those households elect a community representative and an alternate, which we call community directors and alternate community directors, to serve on our Board of Directors to be the voice on behalf of that particular neighborhood.
And just last for the record, in moving forward though you will be willing to have the developer of this particular stadium adjacent site have them as a part of a dialogue regarding that area in what's going to take place, you still want to entertain and see the details of the proposal and sit down and give your feedback; is that correct?
Okay. That's all I have. Thank you very much, sir. Any questions? I'm sorry, Madam Chair.
That's all right. Thank you, Mr. President. Any questions from the Committee? (No response.)
No, okay. Seeing none, thank you very much for your testimony today.
Now, if we could have the Clerk now call back the folks who previously were called to testify.
Michael Harris, Vice-president of Marketing and Government Affairs for the Philadelphia Phillies, Don Smolenski, President of the Philadelphia Eagles and Joe Meade, Senior Vice-president for Government and External Affairs for Comcast Spectacor. (Witnesses approached Witness table.)
Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Thank you, Honorable members of City Council. My name is Michael Harris. I'm the Vice-president of Marketing and Government Affairs for the Philadelphia Phillies, and I'm joined today by Joe Meade, Senior Vice-president of Government and External Affairs for Comcast Spectacor, and Don Smolenski, President of the Philadelphia Eagles, to provide testimony on Bill No. 241055 designating the Packer Avenue Overlay District. We each operate our stadium facilities in the Sports Stadium District under long-term leases and development agreements with the City through PAID. As City Council is aware, the Sports Stadium District is home to three world-class venues with a combined capacity of over 133,000 seats and 22,000 parking spaces. These venues host approximately 380 events and over million visitors each year. Managing the safe and controlled flow of traffic and pedestrians in and out of the complex is of critical importance to the health, welfare and safety of the city. Historically, proposed new uses within and adjacent to the Sports Complex, like the Live! Casino, the Casino hotel and Xfinity Live! have been subjected by the City to detailed impact analysis regarding, among other things, traffic, transit and parking and police and emergency service responses, their routes before the introduction of zoning amendments to accommodate such uses. We sincerely thank Council President Johnson for listening to our concerns earlier this week, but this customary analysis has not preceded the introduction of this bill. Accordingly, as set forth in our joint letter dated November 21, 2024 to Council President Johnson, the Philadelphia City Planning Commission and Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation, we believe this legislation has not been the subject of an appropriate comprehensive review process and critical details have been overlooked. Next, the Packer Avenue Overlay map includes two parcels under lease to the Phillies. The ordinance rezones and creates an overlay district for a single parcel at 700 Packer Avenue under private ownership. Nevertheless, it also includes in the overlay district two City parcels on Darien Street under lease to the Phillies. The Phillies use one of those parcels for a ballpark services building, employee parking, to house the offices of the Sports Complex Special Services District as well as the hub for public parking operations, and the other parcel serves as a surface parking lot for a range of sports complex events. Both of those City parcels are within the Sports Stadium Special Zoning District, SP-STA. The Phillies did not request a change in zoning or amendment to their lease terms for those two parcels, nor did the City alert the Phillies of any plan to change the zoning for those parcels. Pursuant to the sublease and development agreement between the Phillies and PAID, the Phillies were required to obtain all necessary zoning changes to establish the SP-STA zoning district with respect to those parcels and a change to the SP-STA zoning by this bill would amount to a prohibited unilateral modification of the sublease. The bill attempts to limit the application of the overlay district requirements to 700 Packer Avenue, but it includes the Phillies parcels in the overlay district nonetheless. And in doing so, supplements the underlying SP-STA zoning on the Phillies parcels. It is unclear how the overlay district will be applied to these parcels in the future and the impact on the Philly sublease. Accordingly, we ask for these parcels to be removed from the rezoning and overlay district. The bill currently limits the CMX-3 rezoning to 700 Packer Avenue, but the Phillies parcels remain within the boundaries of the overlay district. Next, the schedule has not provided sufficient opportunity for stakeholder engagement given the dramatic changes proposed for the primary lot.
The bill was introduced on November 14, 2024 and City Planning quickly moved the bill for approval on November 21, 2024. We did review the video of the Planning Commission meeting. And as mentioned, there was no 16 report of a comprehensive review of the traffic and safety impacts of the proposed uses for the site. In fact, the Planning Commission representative noted that the project "does not match the zoning recommendations of the comprehensive plan" for that district. The adjacent stadiums, casino and hotel operate within a well-designed Streets Department Traffic Management Plan for the Stadium Complex events, which governs event-day traffic on the streets surrounding the proposed overlay district. That plan has evolved over time to accommodate uses. In each of those cases however, outside traffic engineering experts were retained by the developer and the City to review the impact of each proposed use. The Streets Department and PennDOT reviewed those proposals and then the respective parties collaborated together on a final plan. For example, the teams were informed of the casino and hotel development plans in advance of zoning amendment consideration by City Council and were afforded the opportunity to collaborate with the developer and the City on the final design and traffic circulation plans. I think it's important to note that the traffic studies mentioned in the developer's testimony have not been provided to any of the teams as of today. Both the Streets Department and PennDOT share responsibility for execution of the plan on event days. The plan addresses all traffic contingencies along those critical arteries from multiple event days to single event occurrences. The regulatory approval process require that traffic and community impacts reached a published consensus before zoning amendments advanced in each of those cases. We see no reason to depart from that precedent in this case. Next, the proposed scale and residential use for the site poses new challenges for the public patrons of the Stadium Complex and private users of the new site. The primary lot on this bill, 700 Packer Avenue, is over acres. 883 million square 12 feet of proposed development with a 13 possibility for much more under the CMX-3 zoning designation. The Planning Commission presentation showed 1,367 apartment units with 10 new curbcuts and new streets, creating new intersections with Darien and 7th Street which bear extremely high traffic on event days. That represents an unprecedented introduction of people, use density and vehicle circulation impacting the Sports Stadium District in a new 24/7 year-round property use permitted as of right under CMX-3 zoning. By way of contrast, the Live! 1 acres. There are a number of unanswered questions about the project's impact. Is the developer's reliance on SEPTA bus service realistic given local experience to date? Are SEPTA and OTIS being consulted on the transit access for this development? The Streets Department plan converts Darien Street to a one-way exit on large event days. What pedestrian safety features are included to protect their tenants and invitees on large event days? The Darien Street and Packer Avenue intersection is by far the largest traffic chokepoint in the Sports Complex. There are fewer proposed parking spaces than apartment units. Where do their employees park? Where are the non- accessory parking spaces for employees and apartment tenant guests? How many spaces are under contract? Will the developer restrict property access to tenant vehicles for designated dates and hours? What are the plans for emergency response routes and access to the development, particularly on event days at the Sports Complex? Do the stormwater management plans align with the surrounding district properties? These are the types of questions we would like answered. I need to be crystal clear and it's exceptionally important, we do not oppose new development in the Stadium Complex area.
We simply urge that developments follow a comprehensive review consistent with the City's practices at the Sports Stadium Complex. Historically, in order to safeguard public health, welfare and safety at the Sports Stadium Complex prior to considering zoning amendments to facilitate new development in and around the Sports Stadium Complex, proposed new uses have followed a comprehensive transparent multi- agency review and impact analysis based on specific development plans. We would expect any proposed future developments being integrated with the Sports Stadium Complex to simply follow this process, as all other major developments in or around this district have done. The proposal for 700 Packer Avenue should be evaluated in the same context and integrated with Stadium District uses. Lastly, we request that the Committee hold the bill and delay consideration for 60 days, which should provide sufficient opportunity for us to review the developer's plan in detail in a collaborative setting. Each of our facility operators pledges to participate in a collaborative process with the developer of 700 Packer Avenue and the requisite City agencies on a comprehensive review of the proposal for that parcel. We respectfully request that you delay consideration of this bill for 60 days to enable constructive engagement in this process. We will also require assurances that the two parcels leased by the Phillies will be removed from the boundaries of the Packer Avenue Overlay District. I know that was a lot. Thank you very much and I appreciate your consideration.
No. Thank you, Mike. Appreciate your testimony. Thank you, Don, for being here as well as the awesome Joe Meade representing Comcast Spectacor. I'm sorry, Madam Chair.
No, no. It's all right. Is there anyone else -- I just want to ask for the record is there anyone else who would like to testify among you? (No response.)
Okay. All right. Well, thank you very much. Chair recognizes Council President for questions or comments.
Yeah, just real quick. Paula, could you please come to the -- you have to move over a little bit -- just to the podium. I just want to clear up the record just on a couple things that I thought was cleared up the other day. Paula, could you talk about -- there's an assertion that in this legislation there are parcels of land that's owned by the Phillies. And from my understanding, that issue isn't correct. Could we address it because we talked about this in the meetings. Let's go on the record and be clear on --
Yes. I'm going to make this a little bit more simple and plain language just to make sure everybody is on the same page. So when we write legislation and we do zoning legislation, we're going to change a zoning map or create an overlay, we have to create what's called a bounding area. And the bounding area needs to be bounded by streets, waterways, railways, highways, county borders, City County borders. And so, what it is, we need to somehow create this box. And so, in order to create a box we have to look at the closest streets available. And for this case, it was Packer, 7th Street, Pattison and Darien Street. So it's basically what we would call a super block where you can bind smaller blocks into one and by removing Dari -- or the street that goes across. There's a street that's been removed that would separate where 700 Packer is and where the address 3300 South 7th Street, which is I believe the Sports Stadium District's maintenance facility which is zoned SP-STA, which is Special Purpose Stadium District. So we had to look at the bounding area of the streets. We couldn't just split in the middle of a block. So when we changed the zoning on this, we went from 700 Packer which was a large parcel and it was zoned I-2, whereas the property that is owned by the City or the Sports Stadium District and leased to the stadiums is zoned SP-STA, which is under a master plan. And so, we did not touch anything that was zoned SP-STA that is remaining. And so, the bounding area is larger than what the property is changing, but that is what the Law Department requires for us on our zoning bills.
So for the record, are we rezoning and are we taking the two parcels of land from the Philadelphia Phillies in this process?
No, we are leaving those Sports Stadium District. They are also under a master plan so we are not amending the master plan either.
Okay. I think after this you're probably going to do another follow-up after the meeting we had with my good friend Mr. Michael Harris to make sure their toll is clear as well as the lawyers probably want to talk to our City Solicitor's Office as well just to make sure that there are no parcels of the Phillies' land being taken and/or rezoned in this process.
Yes. And our office is available to have a meeting again if you'd like.
Director of Legislation for the Planning Commission.
And Planning Commission is responsible for doing what?
We as a service to City Council along with the Law Department we can draft bills for City Council in this role. We also have a role of doing the comprehensive plan working on the capital program and looking for the orderly growth of the City.
What does that look like when you and your team is going over a piece of legislation for such a large parcel? Who do you consult with? Who do you have discussions with or is it just you in the room in the evening just typing up and saying this is what I want the legislation to look like?
We tend to have a collaborative arrangement with multi-city agencies, so we usually work with Licenses and Inspections, the Commerce Department, and if we have to reach out in a case of another bill to the Health Department or to any other agency, we try to -- each bill we get a little working group together and we coordinate that with the Mayor's legislative office.
Okay. Mr. Harris, I think you wanted to respond.
No, I was just going to say we appreciate the opportunity to have that conversation with you. There's certainly some uncertainty and some confusion, so we'll certainly have some questions. And to the Council President's point, I think our lawyers are going to have even more questions, so thank you.
Yeah. I just want to make sure we go on the record, and I thought I was clear about that the other day because that's definitely not the intention in terms of this process. And respect the process, though I do hear you loud and clear. I guess in the past maybe Council President Ann Verna might have called the Stadium team and said, hey, somebody wants to develop in FDR Park, we're doing a 10-year master plan, this is what's going on, we need y'all to know what's going on. And so, I do hear you from that aspect. But is there still a willingness to still work with the developer regarding not only what their plans are, as you laid out very meticulously which I think was great, but also my own personal interest? I know when we had our meeting we talked about the traffic issue, right. I'm not going to put all the traffic issue on one particular development project because it was already expressed that this has been going on through various administrations. It just really hasn't been the political will to actually sit down and say, okay, now, here's a plan and let's execute and address the issue. But again, and my members asked me as well -- and I'm going to ask for the representative from Hines, Brandon, can you come back up as well? I just want to put it on the record.
I'm sorry, Council President. Was there -- did you ask a question? Was there a question in there?
That was a statement, Mike. Oh, there was a ques -- are you willing to work in partnership with the developer? And, Hines, are you willing to work in partnership with the Sports Complex Stadium Service District, the sports teams, as they build out this grand vision for -- I know Comcast Spectacor has some big plans as well as Live! Casino moving forward. And also, it seems like y'all have a competing project. That's what it comes down to, to me. He has a project that he wants to do. I got something similar from Comcast Spectacor, residential units, office space, like 13 entertainment complexes that you're going to build which is going to be very, very massive. So there's going to be a lot of traffic down there, right, and a whole lot of activity, which I think is great. I think more jobs. We're the largest poorest city in America, so the more jobs that we have that could put people to work I think goes toward us eliminating us being the largest poorest city in America. But hopefully, there's some level of synergy. Again, I'm a pragmatic idealist. What I said when we had our personal meeting I don't have a problem saying publicly is that I think the powers that be should be in the room trying to figure it out. And so, that's why I brought you up there, Mr. Hines, to get your perspective. Is there a willingness to work with the teams around your particular project?
No, absolutely. And I think that creates a better district in general where we can create again complementary uses and support each other through the redevelopment of the district, so we're more than willing and happy to work in lockstep with Comcast, the Phillies, the Eagles.
Now, I want to see how serious this is though. Now, we had our meeting about two, three days ago. Has anyone even picked up the phone and said, hey, let's get in the room and talk based upon the meeting we all had with the Council President?
Yeah. So I received a phone call this morning from Phil Laws, President of Comcast, which I very much appreciated who offered to get together to talk about traffic and the future of the district. So we appreciate that. It's from our side the first time the call has come from the other side to us to meet and be collaborative, so we're welcoming to that.
And so, for me -- and I'm going to turn it back over to my members, and I know all of you and I work with all of you in a variety of different capacities and I always try to be fair. What I want to do is put together my own official working group. I've already reached out to Michael Carroll regarding the traffic. My head Planning person name is Eleanor Sharpe. She will take lead to get all of the key stakeholders inside the room and work in good faith to try to come up with that comprehensive vision. I know there's another table that's working with the Port, the Bellwether District as well as the stadiums, that one is head up by Michael Carroll, but I'm going to put this in a more nuanced hands-on approach with my lead planner to kind of see if we can continue having people at least having some dialogue in good faith, right, to try to be supportive of everyone. I am asking my team, and the same thing I said at the table, to vote this out with a favorable recommendation with the commitment that the parties that be will continue to still work on this particular issue.
And from our perspective, Council President, I mean as the testimony states that's what we want. We want a collaborative process that goes through the typical standard process that other projects have been held to and that's our concern right now is that as of right now --
You have my commitment, right. My yeses are yeses and my nos are my nos. And I've pretty much been straight up and transparent about this process. And as we move forward, any issues and concerns regarding other departments, levels of expectations of how people should operate, we will monitor to make sure that that is done, at least that's my commitment. Thank you, Madam Chair.
You're very welcome. Thank you, Council President. Any additional questions from the panel? Chair recognizes Councilwoman Kathy Gilmore Richardson.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And thank you, Council President, for being here this afternoon and for clarifying that all parties have agreed to continue to work together regarding this issue and reviewing the documentation. I did see that you all typically collaborate with the Special Services District in the area and also reviewing the existing zoning maps as well as the proposed zoning maps with the change from I-2 to CMX-3 and clarifying that that does not impact the parcels that you all currently lease for your ballpark employees. Again, along with the commitment from Council President, I am confident that you all will continue to work together as this will continue to move forward in the process. And I'm looking not only at those at the table but the individuals to my left and the rear of the gallery as well, that you all would just continue to please work together to ensure that everyone's interests are represented and taken into account as you move forward. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Is there anyone else here to testify on behalf of Bill 21 No. 241055? (No response.)
If not, thank you so much for your testimony for being here today. Anyone else to testify on Bill No. 241055? (No response.)
Okay. Seeing none, can we have the Clerk call forward the next panel and bill.
5 -- or 062, please Paula Brumbelow Burns, Director of Legislation for Philadelphia City Planning Commission. Please come forward. (Witness approached Witness table.)
Okay. So that was 241062. And up first, Paula, please state your name for the record and proceed.
Good afternoon. I'm Paula Brumbelow Burns, Director of Legislation for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. I am here to testify on Bill No. 241062, introduced into City Council on November 14, 2024 by Councilmember Squilla. Bill No. 241062 amends the Philadelphia Zoning Code by creating a new PCH, Philadelphia Chinatown Overlay District in an area bounded by Vine Street, 9th Street, Cuthbert Street, 11th Street, Arch Street and 13th Street in the Chinatown neighborhood of the Central Planning District. This bill will remove the Chinatown section of the CTR Overlay and create a standalone overlay for the community with the existing regulations. The bill 22 will create supplemental use controls to limit adult-oriented uses, assembly and entertainment and smoking lounges. There will be a height limit of 65 feet and the only density bonus that can be earned is for mixed-income housing with an additional height to be kept at a total of 125 feet. New housing developments of over units will 9 be required to meet a certain 10 standard to include affordable dwelling units. There will be a new limitation on restrictions to the square footage for retail and commercial spaces, and it aligns with the Philadelphia 2035 Citywide Vision by maintaining the scale of the neighborhood and preserving the cultural heritage of the neighborhood. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission will consider Bill No. 241062 at its public meeting on December 5, 2024 and will recommend the bill for approval. I'll be happy to answer any questions at this time.
Thank you, Ms. Brumbelow, and appreciate your work and effort on this. There was a couple other conversations we had. And I know there's an administrative amendment in this one. We received some other additional requests from Chinatown this morning that we would like to discuss. But as doing this, is there also an ability to look at and that we spoke about as far as franchises, looking at franchises in the overlay?
It is something that we are able to look at. We wanted to work with the Law Department to make sure because this would be something so new to Philadelphia that we want to make sure that we're covering it within the scope of state law and local law. So I'm not the Law Department and I don't want to speak too fully on all of that. And it's just we did not get to that in time because of the turnaround, but we always say that legislation zoning is a living document and Council has the right to update the Code as they see fit at any time so --
And we are happy to continue working to get to that place.
We as Council also do amendments of bills as we go through and seeing what works and what doesn't work. Like I said, we did receive some request right before the hearing today. So what we would like to do is try to get this out of Committee, work with PCDC and the community to set up a time and a meeting to go over with you and them and possibly amend this on the floor in order to pass it out before the end of the year. Is that something you'd be willing to do?
We are going to try -- I have a copy of the list that got sent last night. I did not have enough time to fully review it today. There is some of the things in there that we may be able to incorporate. Some of the uses they've listed are already not permitted in all of the zoning districts, so I think we may have some easy things that we can address quickly. Some of the issues were not zoning-related. It may be larger scale projects or Streets requirements. So we're still working through that and we just were not able to do it in the short time today.
So the goal is hopefully we'll meet one day next week and we could iron that out. So thank you so much for your time.
Thank you and thank you for your time and your testimony today. And can we have our next witness come forward to testify. Mr. John Chin from PCDC. (Witness approached Witness table.)
Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Sure. John Chin, C-h-i-n, Executive Director of the Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation. So again, Madam Chair, thank you for allowing me to speak today. I want to say that PCDC is an RCO for Chinatown. We also are a community development corporation and the planning agency for Chinatown. We fully support this zoning overlay that has been introduced by our District Councilman, Councilman Mark Squilla, with some suggested amendments to the bill. But overall this zoning overlay does align with the Philadelphia 2035 plan. It also aligns with our Chinatown Neighborhood Plan, which was last compiled in 2017. The zoning overlay is long overdue due to the growing population in Chinatown as well as the increased density and the pressures that lower-income residents are experiencing due to rising real estate prices and real estate taxes. With that said, I want to highlight a couple of core components of the bill here which we think are very beneficial to the Chinatown community. One is the opportunity to create more affordable housing, which is very important and in high demand in Chinatown. With the density bonuses which will only be allowed if the developer provides affordable housing is the right thing to do for Chinatown. That's number one. Secondly, we have asked the Councilman and the City Planning Commission to consider the borders to better align with the existing Chinatown RCO area, specifically extending the boundaries from 9th Street to 8th Street which would align with the Chinatown Planning District. Right now, as Councilman Mark Squilla also said, we have some suggestions on prohibited uses and I'm glad to hear that Ms. Brumbelow testified that they may already be prohibited in Chinatown. So that's my testimony for today and thank you.
Thank you, John. And I think what we'd like to do since it'd be time- sensitive, if we could set up a time, I'll have our office set up a time with Planning, my office and your planning people to sit down maybe early next week. It would have to be amended -- well, it'll be amended on the 12th. We can amend it on the floor on the 12th so we have a week to work on it, to go through that. So we'll send out a request to continue that conversation. Thank you for your diligence and your team's diligence on offering some suggestions to even make this a better piece of legislation and looking forward to amending it to add some of these changes to it. So thank you.
Thank you for being here and thank you for your testimony. And we will get ready to proceed and go into a public meeting while we await a quorum, so please stand by. (Recess.)
The Chair recognizes Councilmember Kathy Gilmore Richardson -- okay. So we'll now go to the public meeting. But before we do so, we'll call the roll and I'll acknowledge Councilwoman Kathy Gilmore Richardson, Councilman Mark Squilla, Councilman Isaiah Thomas and myself as a quorum. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Kathy Gilmore Richardson for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 241055.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I offer an amendment to Bill No. 241055. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of the Committee. I move that the amendment to Bill No. 2 241055 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill 7 No. 241055 be approved. All of those in favor of the motion will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Squilla for a motion on Bill No. 241055 as amended.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 24 241055 as amended be reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit the first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It's been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 241055 has been reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation as amended and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All of those in favor of this motion will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Kathy Gilmore Richardson for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 240499.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I offer an amendment to Bill No. 240499. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of the Committee. I move that the amendment to Bill No. 15 240499 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill 20 No. 240499 be approved. All of those in favor of the motion will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Squilla for a motion on Bill No. 240499 as amended.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 13 240499 as amended be reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 240499 be reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation as amended and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All of those in favor of the motion will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
Okay. The ayes have it and the motion carries. (Recess.)
Thank you for your patience. And so, Bill No. 240499, there is a correction to the Bill No. The accurate Bill No. is 240871. And so, I want to recognize Councilmember Kathy Gilmore Richardson for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 240871 -- actually there is no amendment to Bill No. 240871. So we will go directly to recognizing Councilmember Squilla for a motion on Bill No. 7 240871.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 11 240871 be reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit the first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 240871 be reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All of those in favor of the motion will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
Okay. So the ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Squilla for a motion on Bill No. -- (Recess.)
Okay. So we are going to go back into our public meeting. And once again, we're going to revisit Bill 22 No. 240871 for action. Chair recognizes Councilmember Kathy Gilmore Richardson for a motion to amend Bill No. 240871.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I offer an amendment to Bill No. 240871. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of the Committee, and I move that the amendment to Bill No. 11 240871 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill 16 No. 240871 be approved. All those in favor of this motion will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. And now, we want to report on Bill No. 240871. Chair recognizes Councilman Squilla for a motion on Bill No. 240871 as amended.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 11 240871 as amended be reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended at the first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 240871 as amended be reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All of those in favor of this motion will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
Okay. The ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Kathy Gilmore Richardson for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 241054.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I offer an amendment to Bill No. 241054. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of the Committee. I move that the amendment to Bill No. 3 241054 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill 8 No. 241054 be approved. All of those in favor of this motion will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Squilla for a motion on Bill No. 241054 as amended.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 241054 as amended be reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit the first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It's 10 been moved and properly seconded 11 that Bill No. 241054 as amended be 12 reported from this Committee with a 13 favorable recommendation and 14 further move that the rules of 15 Council be suspended to permit 16 first reading of this bill at the 17 next session of Council. 18 All of those in favor of 19 this motion will signify by saying 20 aye. 21 (Aye.) 22
The ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Squilla for motion on Bill No. 241058.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 10 241058 be reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit the next reading at Council. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 241058 be reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All of those in favor of this motion will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Chair recognizes Councilmember Squilla for a motion on Bill No. 241059.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 18 241059 be reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move the rules of Council be suspended as to permit the first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
The Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Kathy Gilmore Richardson seconds the motion. And it has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 8 241059 be reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit the first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All of those in favor of the motion will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. And Chair recognizes Councilmember Squilla for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 4 241024.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I offer an amendment to Bill No. 241062. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of the Committee and I move that the amendment to Bill No. 15 241062 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill 20 No. 241062 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
All those in favor of the motion will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. And the Chair recognizes Councilmember Squilla for a motion on Bill No. 241062 as amended.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 14 241062 as amended be reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to submit the first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
For the record, Councilwoman Kathy Gilmore Richardson has seconded the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 4 241062 as amended be reported from this Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All of those in favor of this motion will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. And if there are no 22 additional remarks from the Committee or from the guests, this concludes the business of the Committee on Rules today. Thank you very much for your attendance.
Thank you, Madam Chair. (Committee on Rules concluded at 2:50 p.m.) C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence noted are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me in the foregoing matter, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. __________________________________ TANEHA CARROLL