COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING AND PUBLIC MEETING BEFORE THE COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON RULES - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thursday, 3/14/02 9:33 a.m. - - - BILL 010635 - Re Philadelphia Zoning Maps BILL 020041 - Re Philadelphia Zoning Maps BILL 020050 - Old City Res. Area Spec. Dist. Controls BILL 020078 - Held at request of sponsor BILL 020088 - Re Philadelphia Zoning Maps BILL 020095 - Main St./Manayunk Spec. Dist. Controls (Full text of all bills attached hereto.) PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA, Chair COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY, Vice Chair COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 3/14/02 RULES COMMITTEE MEETING - INDEX WITNESS BILL 010635 Paul Deegan, PIDC.............................. Richard Lombardo, City Planning Commission..... Catharine Califano, Empowerment Zone........... BILL 020095 Richard Lombardo, City Planning Commission..... Otis Haigler, Jr. ............................. F. Aegiano, Wissahickon Neighbors Civic Assoc. Kay Smith, Manayunk Development Corporation.... BILL 020050 Richard Lombardo, City Planning Commission..... Richard Tom, Old City Civic Association........ Beth Richards, Elfreth's Alley Association..... Carl Primavera, Esquire........................ 31 15 16 BILL 020041 17 Richard Lombardo, City Planning Commission..... 41 BILL 020088 Richard Lombardo, City Planning Commission..... 44 Paul Deegan, PAID.............................. 45 PUBLIC MEETING................................. 49 * * * 3 3/14/02 RULES COMMITTEE - BILL 010635
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for your patience. The Council Committee on Rules now has a quorum, which consists of Councilmembers DiCicco, Clarke, Nutter and Council President Verna, and myself, Councilman Kenney, as vice chairman of the committee. There's an announcement this morning that Bill No -- at the request of the sponsor, Bill 11 No. 020078 will be held; there will be no hearing today on that bill. That is a bill which deals with -- it's an ordinance amending Title of the 14 Philadelphia Code, entitled "Zoning and Planning," by amending Chapter 14-200, entitled "Residential Districts," by amending Section 14-204, entitled "R-3 Residential District," by amending the uses permitted; and by amending Chapter 14-1400, entitled "Parking and Loading Facilities," by amending Section 14-1402, entitled "Parking in Residential Districts," under certain terms and conditions. There will be no hearing on that bill 23 today. The first bill on the agenda is Bill No. 25 010635, which is an ordinance to amend the 4 3/14/02 RULES COMMITTEE - BILL 010635 Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Susquehanna Avenue, American Street, Diamond Street, and Third Street (Witness comes forward.)
Paul Deegan representing PIDC. I'm here in support of Bill No. 010635. This bill rezones the area bounded by American Street, Third Street, Diamond Street, and Susquehannah Avenue -- as you can see, the Planning Commission has a very nice map over there -- from various classifications to a single classification of G-2 industrial. This will permit the development of this site by Reline Centers of America, a brake manufacturer, now located at 148 Poplar Street, near Third Street and Girard Avenue. The Commerce Department and PIDC, working together, have assembled this plot from a number of individual residential, commercial, and industrial properties as part of an effort to create new development sites in the American Street Empowerment Zone. Many of the properties are 5 3/14/02 RULES COMMITTEE - BILL 010635 vacant and blighted, with some already in City ownership through the sheriff's sale process. I may add, I think the Rules Committee has seen this project before when the redevelopment plan was amended; I think it was, last spring, there was extensive testimony on this property, and we've also had a Public Property bill in November. By combining all of these properties and removing a small street, Bodine Street, between Diamond and Susquehannah Avenue, and rezoning the block to G-2 general industrial, we will create a site with adequate size and depth for modern industrial facilities. Reline Centers is an existing company being relocated as part of the Schmidt's Plaza retail development in the vicinity of Third and Girard. They would like to stay in the area, and they intend to build a new 50,000 square foot facility, retaining 30 existing jobs and creating 30 new jobs. I ask that the committee consider the bill favorably and that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading at the next regularly scheduled meeting of Council. 6 3/14/02 RULES COMMITTEE - BILL 010635 Thank you, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you very much. Please identify yourself for the record. and proceed.
My name is Rich Lombardo, Deputy Executive Director of the Planning Commission, and because of your crowded calendar, and we've all seen this so many times, I'll just cut to the bottom and Paul did such a good job making a thorough presentation. The Planning Commission actually has approved this re-use several times, most recently in May 9 of 1999, and we would recommend approval of this bill.
Thank you very much. Any questions for this witness? Councilmember Clarke.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning. Just one brief question. Has this project received Empowerment Zone funding? 7 3/14/02 RULES COMMITTEE - BILL 010635
The sites now are being assembled. We're using City capital funds and money that's available in the Industrial and Commercial Development Revolving Fund; that's how we acquired the first property, 2114-16 North American Street, we've already acquired that, PAID has. And we also are using other City capital funds available for American Street to fund the Redevelopment Authority's condemnation of the properties and on Bodine Street and Third Street. So I don't think there's Empowerment Zone money. I think there is a representative, Catharine Califano, from the Empowerment Zone here, and she, I guess, more than anybody has been spearheading this project and has testified several times on various bills for this project. So she's going to tell me if I'm right or wrong.
I have the same problem; I think I'm getting those moments more often than you are, Councilman. I'm a little bit older. 8 3/14/02 RULES COMMITTEE - BILL 010635 (Witness comes forward.)
Please identify yourself for the record, if you remember who you are. (Laughter.)
Good morning. I'm Catharine Califano, Director of Economic Development for the Philadelphia Empowerment Zone.
Did you have the opportunity to hear Councilmember Clarke's question?
I did. At this time, there's no Empowerment Zone dollars that are going into the acquisition of this parcel.
Do we anticipate any Empowerment Zone funding for the development of the facility?
The company will be 9 3/14/02 RULES COMMITTEE - BILL 010635 seeking dollars from the lending institutions in the development of this site.
And is there a commitment to hire a certain number of individuals in the Empowerment Zone?
There are. We anticipate that there will be 30 new jobs in the first year and then an increase incrementally by percent 10 over the next 5 years mand he is committed to hire all of the people from the Empowerment Zone.
No problems at all. Any other questions? (No further questions.) - - - 10 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020095
We're going to go a little bit out of order and we will now move to Bill 020095, which is an ordinance amending Title of the Philadelphia Code relating to zoning and 6 planning by amending Section 14-1615, entitled 7 "Main Street/Manayunk Special District Controls," 8 by amending certain prohibited uses and the sunset 9 provision, all under certain terms and conditions. 10 Please also let the record reflect that 11 Councilmember O'Neill is also in attendance. 12 Please identify yourself for the record. 13
My name's Richard Lombardo, Deputy Executive Director of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission to testify on Bill No. 020095. This bill was introduced by Councilmember Nutter on February 21, 2002. It amends the provisions of the Main Street/Manayunk/ Venice Island overlay. The currently existing zoning and land use controls under this overlay are due to expire March 19, 2002 because pursuant to a sunset provision, this bill would remove that 11 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020095 sunset provision. Additional amendments include the removal of restaurants and takeout from the list of prohibited uses within the upper portion of the Main Street/Manayunk area -- that's the area above Shears Lane (ph). The Planning Commission hasn't considered this particular bill; we are scheduled to consider it on our meeting on March 20th. In the past, we have supported all of the (indiscernible). As a matter of fact, we were the people that worked with the Councilman and the various community organizations that crafted these in the first place. I don't anticipate we would not approve them once they are before the Commission on March 20th. I'm available for any questions you may have.
Thank you very much. Mr. Haigler. Would you like to be recognized and testify in any way?
My name is Otis Haigler, Jr., Legislative Affairs Manager for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. I'm only here to read into the record 12 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020095 information that I received from the Chief Deputy City Solicitor of the Law Department this morning regarding this particular bill on behalf of Councilman Nutter. The communication I received was a memo dated on the 13th of this month. It was in reference to Bill No. 020095, and the communications states that "This will confirm our discussions regarding the pending ordinance 11 doctrine. "As you know, Bill No. 020095 is currently scheduled for hearing before the Council Committee on Rules on March 14th at 9 o'clock a.m. The bill 0would, among other things, extend the life of the Special District Controls for Manayunk currently set forth in Code Section 14-1615 and currently scheduled to sunset on March 19, 2002. "Assuming the bill is favorably reported by the committee at the close of the hearing on March 14th, this is to advise you that pursuant to long-standing City policy and practice, the pending ordinance doctrine should apply at that time, and L&I should, at that point, treat the zoning restrictions set forth in Bill No. 020095 as if 13 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020095 they have been enacted. "More particularly, should any zoning permits be requested on or after March 19th on the premises that the Manayunk Special District Controls have expired by that date, such permits should be denied if Bill No. 02095 would call for their denial. "The restrictions of Bill No. 020095 should be treated as if in effect for a reasonable period of time, generally considered at least one year, pending final enactment."
Otis, it takes a lawyer to complicate things. You're going to enforce it till we pass it, right?
We will enforce it. As a matter of fact, we've already made the proper notifications to our chief of the zoning unit as well as the head of our license issuing unit. Because one part of the bill relates to sidewalk cafes, that's not generally treated as a zoning matter; it's treated as a licensing matter. So we've already made the proper notifications.
Very good. Thank you, Mr. Haigler. I appreciate you working 14 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020095 cooperatively with us and sending the message through the Department of Licenses and Inspections that we will have enforcement and a smooth transition. We will take the necessary action to get the bill passed as quickly as possible. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Any questions for these witnesses? (No questions.)
We will now call Kay Smith, Jane Glenn, and Forest Aegiano. (Witnesses come forward.)
Please identify yourself for the record. Good morning.
Good morning. I'm Forest Aegiano, President of the Wissahickon Neighbors Civic Association, and I'm here this morning to endorse Bill 020095.
We will have it submitted for the record. Is there anyone else who would like to add anything? Please identify yourself for the 15 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020095 record first.
I'm Kay Smith, Manayunk Development Corporation, and I'd like to offer support for this bill.
And you'll be glad to see the three of us sitting here today, right?
Very happy. Everybody's in a good mood today. Any questions for these witnesses? (No questions.)
Thank you very much for coming and thank you for your patience. Anyone here else to testify on this bill? (No response.) - - - 16 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050
Seeing none, we will now move to Bill No. 020050, which is an ordinance 4 amending Title 14 of the Philadelphia Code relating to "Zoning and Planning," by amending Chapter 6 14-1600, entitled "Miscellaneous," by amending Section 14-1610, entitled "Old City Residential Area Special District Controls," by amending permitted uses and zoning controls, under certain terms and conditions (Witnesses come forward.)
Actually, my testimony will be very brief. We have again not considered this legislation; we are scheduled to consider it on March 20, 2002. At that time, the staff will be recommending that the Commission support the bill. However, the Commission has not considered it. Parenthetically, we have in the past supported similar height limits in Center City, most notably for Chinatown when there was a concern that there would be a desire to tear buildings down and replace 'em with larger buildings, which the underlying zoning would allow, you know, larger buildings, so it was done as a way to preserve the 17 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 neighborhood, and we've supported those in the past.
It's kind of like the pending-approval doctrine, right? (Laughter.)
My name is Richard Tom, Chair of the Developments Committee, Old City Civic Association. I'm here today with Beth Richards of Elfreth's Alley and with members of the community and the Community Association in support of Bill 15 020050. In 1990, Old City faced the prospect of the onslaught proposed restaurant and nightclub business uses in a predominantly residential portion of our national registered historic district. With the support of our elected officials and the Philadelphia Planning Commission, we introduced a landmark Old City Residential District Controls amendment to the zoning code. As passed by Council, this legislation ensured that such entertainment-type uses did not affect the 18 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 quality of life for our tax-paying residents, property owners, and other existing businesses in the area. Over the past years, this has served 6 to protect our historic neighborhood and has 7 actually reinforced the present upswing in 8 residential redevelopment by ensuring the 9 compatibility of adjacent land uses. 10 Now in 2002, we are faced with another 11 vexing land-use problem. Our very success north of 12 Market Street has driven land costs to valuations inconceivable in the past two or three years ago. While this has proven a boon to owners willing to sell, it has forced purchasers to consider ever-more dense redevelopment scenarios to justify the land purchase costs. As land prices have soared, the intensity and height of proposed projects have risen to new levels as well. We are now facing the prospect of a half a dozen 15- to 20-story buildings looming prominently over our historic district nationally renowned for its Victorian era cast-iron facades of only five to six floors. Elfreth's Alley faces the very real eminent danger 19 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 of being walled in by high-rises, darkening forever the renowned cobblestone walk. We are well aware that the zoning permits for exactly such construction have been acquired as a matter of right for the past several years for the thoroughly incompatible and inappropriate projects. Furthermore, the developers have repeatedly refused to meet with my committee to discuss these plans, as community input is not necessary, nor desired when the designs are carefully crafted to meet the code. We have virtually no say in how these projects will affect our neighborhood. These projects reflect the fact that there was no height limit present in the zoning code for C-3 commercial districts, the predominant designation of our area. The present zoning mechanism of floor area ratio, intended to control the density of development by a factor of total floor area related to land size, has failed in its current marketplace. Developers have managed to assemble parcels (indiscernible) overall land area to thwart the FAR intent. This has happened on former 20 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 historic-building sites now vacant after arson fires as well as empty lots resulting from the failure of City agencies to protect our dwindling stock of historic buildings. This latter demolition by neglect leads to smaller historic sites being cleared for larger parcel assembly, which works to boost the total floor area permitted under the FAR. No one could have predicted this unintended outcome when height was not capped in the code in the historic district, but Old City, as a community, can foresee the impact of future high- rise development crystal-clear: Overcrowded streets, more cars competing with tourist vehicles, overburdened 100-year-old sewer and water systems, and daylong shadows on sites, and the jarring visual intrusion of buildings on mega parcels truly out of proportion in every sense to the urban design texture of 250-year-old district. This is simply not the environment we want for tourists to experience and for our residents to have to reside in.
We urge Council to swiftly enact Bill 25 020050, capping the height of new construction at 21 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 65 feet so that the integrity of our historic district is preserved, the quality of life protected, and the visitor experience enhanced for all future generations.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Are there any questions for these witnesses? The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco for the purposes of offering an amendment.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There's a technical amendment in brackets on Section B at the bottom. We're removing the brackets before the word "enhanced" and after the word "and" on .
Okay, I just want to make sure I get this panel taken care of. Any questions for these witnesses? (No questions.)
Thank you very much. Yes, Mr. Lombardo? 22 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050
In preparation for our Planning Commission meeting next week, we did a survey of all of the properties within the boundaries of this proposed legislation. There are 589 buildings. Of those building, only 29 buildings, or 4 percent of the buildings, are over 65 feet in height; all of the other buildings would conform to the height regulation.
Are they scattered throughout the area, or do they more or less favor one particular direction -- north, west, east south? We have the north-south at the 4 percent?
I didn't do the survey. I've been told that they're scattered throughout the neighborhood.
My sense of it is -- and I could be wrong -- that the majority of the 4 percent, even though there may be some scattered, would favor the 5th Street corridor; is that correct or not? With the exception of church steeples, I'm not talking about church steeples.
Some are on Arch Street, there 23 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 are several larger buildings on Arch Street. There's the occasional office building at the corner of Third and Church. There are some on Fifth, on the mall, but the majority of them are scattered. There happens to be a couple concentrations on Orange, that's about it. The only significant concentration is Arch Street.
From a technical standpoint, in the future, if someone -- a developer wanted to come along and develop a building that exceeds the 65 height limitation, what's the process for that?
Yeah. And no variances are guaranteed; I mean, the purpose of this is to at least let people know they have to go talk to someone.
So that would be a part of the process, to work with the community. I just want to make sure -- I understood it to be 24 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 that way, but I wanted to make sure on the record that that's what we're talking about. 'Cause my sense is -- and, again, I could be wrong -- that when you get closer to Fifth Street, going from east to west, there are a lot of office buildings there, and maybe, maybe not, that might not be -- people may not find that offensive at some point if something needed to be, you know, over 65 feet, but I understand around Second and Race Third and Third and Race and Second and Arch that we want to maintain that height restriction to the 65-foot limitation.
As your office is aware, we entered into extensive negotiations with property redevelopers. We are currently renegotiating a deal at the corner of (indiscernible) and Front to meet the needs and the impacts on Elfreth's Alley, and we're successfully concluding those negotiations. So we are not a group that is automatically exclusionary; we're willing to talk. Show us the right site, the right project.
But it brings the developer to the table with the community to work 25 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 it out, which is what I'm all about -- process all the way.
Let me just ask you a question before you go. I don't remember the restaurant; what was the restaurant that started this? Wasn't there a nice, high-class restaurant on Front Street, then all of a sudden, it went and converted into a dance club. Isn't that how this got started?
It was like a really good restaurant in the beginning and then it wasn't making it, so they went to some late-night dance club kind of thing?
There were several that did that, but the most famous one was a developer who still does work in this town who opened a restaurant called Justin's at 110 South Front.
And the day it was open or a week, it served high-quality food, and then from 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 then on, it was a nightclub, and we even had State police doing stakeouts, doing drug arrests right out in front of it. That was 1990. Good memory, Mr. Chair.
I don't remember the name of it, but I remember the incident.
Thank you very much. Councilmember DiCicco has an additional amendment.
My legislative assistant just informed me of one more amendment. On at the bottom, Section A, remove the s in the word "additions" so that it reads: "The maximum height of a building or an addition... " It should be "addition" as opposed to "additions."
If you wouldn't mind, Beth Richards of Elfreth's Alley would like to add on.
I am Beth Richards, Executive Director of the Elfreth's Alley 27 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 Association.
Thank you for listening to me regarding this bill. The Old City neighborhood is undoubtedly the richest area in Philadelphia in terms of its historical and cultural significance. S. Mint to old Philadelphia Congregations such as (indiscernible) Israel Synagogue, the Arch Street Meeting House, and Christ Church, a world-class monument whose spire has greeted Philadelphians for hundreds of years, and finally, to Elfreth's Alley, of which I am most familiar. The Department of Interior recognized Elfreth's Alley in 1958 as a national historic landmark, defined as a site possessing exceptional value or quality in illustrating and interpreting the heritage of the United States. " The alley is recognized as the country's oldest continuously-occupied residential street and is a remarkable surviving example of intact contiguous 18th Century vernacular urban fabric. With 32 buildings constructed between 1720 and 1836, the exemplary architectural integrity and historic value of Elfreth's Alley provides a unique setting of public discovery of 18th and 19th century middle-class urban life. Today, the alley is a vibrant part of the Old City community, home to 70 people, mostly professionals and young families. The alley is neither reconstructed 18th century urban block, nor a place frozen in time by ambitious restoration campaigns; rather, the alley is a continuum of history, a unified collection of historic structures which are utilized in their original capacity. The streetscape has not been modified significantly, and the surrounding neighborhood retains many 19th century structures important to the alley's history. 29 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 Elfreth's Alley is a location with an exceptional integrity of setting, association, and feeling, which, in combination with its architectural, historical, and social significance, makes it a unique and exceptional heritage site. There is no better place than Old City and Elfreth's Alley to be transported back in time, and the rash of proposed new construction dramatically affects the rich character and historic significance of this Philadelphia neighborhood. The possibility of mid- to high-rise development in Old City is similar to proposals for new construction within the site of battle fields like Valley Forge. While the development may not occur on these battle fields, new construction on the periphery of important historic sites impacts the experience one has when visiting those sites. For example, visitors will not be able to stand at the entrance of the alley and see the spire of Christ Church, or stand on the alley and be transported in time. Just yesterday, I had school children from New York visiting the alley that were so excited to be standing on a street that their made history books come to life. 30 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 Hundreds of thousands visit Old City to engage with its rich history. This is why they come to Philadelphia. The Greater Philadelphia Tourism and Marketing Corporation ranks history as the number-one reason why people visit, and the top market segment is visiting families and friends and relatives; so do Philadelphians and tourists alike who come to Old City, because of its historic character and integrity of setting. Three hundred thousand visit the Betsy Ross House, 250,000 visit the alley, tens of thousands tour Christ Church, and they spend money: They Shop in Old City, eat in Old City, and because they are here for the history, take away its character, and you rob Old City of its strongest economic driver. This bill aims to protect the historic district of Old City by encouraging development and new construction responsible to its 300 years of history. A decade ago, successful development projects understood this, and made Old City one of the quickest-growing residential neighborhoods in Philadelphia. This bill ensures the same can be true for decades and centuries to come. 31 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 Thank you.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Are there any questions for this witness? (Applause.) (No questions.)
I know we're in transition between Council Committee meeting and Council session, and I need to keep the outside conversations to a minium since we still have testimony. If you need to speak, please go into the hallway Is there anyone else to testify on this bill? Mr. Primavera? (Witness comes forward.)
Good morning, Carl Primavera. I'm not really here to debate the wisdom of the bill, and I'm sure Council will use good judgment, but for the record, there are two properties that I'm aware of that have been recently acquired by Jeffrey Brown, who is 32 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 well-known as a commercial developer and who's now expanded into residential development. One is 108 Arch Street; the other is the National Wholesale building, Harry Kaplan's old building. Permits have been issued, and they were over-the-counter, as-a-matter-of-right permits following the rules that City Council and the Planning Commission had previously developed. So I don't think you can criticize any developer for following City Council's mandate on what was considered the appropriate zoning. My purpose here today is twofold: One, to make sure -- and I don't think there's any dispute -- that those permits are vested and that, you know, if you have permits that were issued before any change in the zoning, obviously, they are vested, and they are going to be, you know, protected under law. But the other point is, following 9/11, we know how delicate the financial markets are, and these properties were acquired based upon the permits and the yield that the code allowed at the time. Arch Street is 13 stories, and National 33 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 is 21 and 15 stories. And at one point, they would have been considered a tribute to Philadelphia's vitality and kind of our Soho renaissance, but tastes change over time, and what was in vogue one time may not be in vogue another time, but the prices that were paid for these properties reflected the permits that were issued based upon the then-rules of the road established by City Council. So in addition to just alerting Council about the vested rights, it would also be my hope, if Council is so inclined, that they maybe consider an amendment that would say that the ordinance 15 would be effective immediately, except for those properties for which zoning and use registration permits have been issued in the past six months, which would otherwise allow for construction exceeding the height and width limitations of the bill; and for those properties, the effective date would be, say, January '03. The purpose is to give a little bit of flexibility for developers like Mr. Brown, who've come in, expended real dollars based upon plans that have been approved by the City that would 34 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 allow them a certain return on their investment. Quite frankly, if we had another blip in the market and these properties couldn't be financed and then the permits were to become lapsed and we had to go back to Old City, my suspicion is that to get the variances, we would have to dramatically alter them under the new version, and that, in effect, the purchaser, Mr. Brown, you know, would, in effect, no way be able to realize a return on an investment. And it's just really just kind of a message that says, If you play by the rules of the road in this city, we'll protect you. But this isn't a situation where he ran in at the last minute to try to anticipate the ordinance; these projects have been going on for quite a bit of time. I think Alan Kaznov (ph) had started development of the national site years ago. So this isn't in response to this new ordinance; these are ongoing projects that I think are going to happen pretty quickly, but God forbid there's a problem in the financial markets. I think it would be unfair for Mr. Brown, who had a big investment in the city based upon permits and 35 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 based upon the rules of the road as established by the Zoning Board, to be caught in the switches and have to come back and basically have to take a humongous hit. So that's our plea today. I know Council doesn't want to unwittingly hurt anyone who has made an investment in the City.
So for those properties that the developer comes in, you know, I recommend that they go to Old City and work something out and either follow the new code, if this is amended, or reach some accommodation. But for situations where people have come in and spent hard dollars based on legitimate expectations, I just think that it would be appropriate for the City to recognize them. There may be others than Mr. Brown, but Jeffrey Brown is the one, you know, has these situations.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Primavera, for your 36 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 testimony. When did Mr. Brown purchase these properties; do you know?
Probably within the last six months. They had been previously brought through development through another --
The original permits were pulled probably six months ago. I think a revision was pulled, like, a month ago. You know, they keep revising them. I think Mr. Brown had his own engineers look at the plans after he bought the property.
I'm sorry. What is that in terms of feet, approximately?
About 84 feet? Is 37 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 it foot per floor or foot per floor? 3
No. The only thing that would help would be the 10-year abatements, which everyone gets, but there's no --
From an economic position, if Mr. Brown -- and I don't know if we can be any assistance here. If Mr. Brown, as the developer, would be willing to reconsider the height of the building, there may be a possibility that there may be some City dollars that could go towards that project. So I would like to engage in 38 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 that conversation with you. Again, I can't speak for the Commerce Department or for anyone else, but if it means getting the properties developed, which I think people would like to see, but finding a solution to the height issue and maybe putting some stimulus dollars into the financial package and allowing the development to be reduced in height and still get the similar economic return, 'cause we tried to do that -- unsuccessfully because we could never get the community support when we tried to develop Pier 9.
We were actually putting some City economic stimulus dollars into the deal that would offset the cost of the entire development by reducing the height of the building, but we never could get the building down to a height that was acceptable. So I offer that as an accommodation to see if there's something we could talk about.
And that could be helpful. The real concern is, although he expects 39 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 to move forward with these permits, but if something were to happen and it were to be delayed a year or two, I could very easily see the project being dramatically reduced. And then based on the purchase price reflecting stories, he would lose 7 his shirt, and that's a message that Philadelphia 8 can't afford to, what I would call, "creditable 9 investors." 10 So it's really just to, one, you know, 11 put on the record what everyone knows, that there 12 are permits that were issued under the prior rules 13 that should move forward, but in the event there's a glitch, there will be an unfortunate situation. And maybe if it does happen -- and we hope it doesn't happen -- and he comes back and talks to the City, there could be some remuneration. But my recommendation would be that there would be a saving provision for those permits that would at least extend out the effective date so that people who come in as of today would be bound by the new limitations because they're the new rules of the road, but people who have made investment-backed expectations on what had been 40 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020050 considered prudent wisdom of City Council should be penalized because of change in taste. So we just offer that up to the committee, and we thank you for your listening, and we know that you'll consider this carefully.
Thank you very much. Any other questions for this witness? (No further questions.)
Anyone else to testify for this bill? (No response.) - - - 41 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020041
Seeing none, we'll move to Bill 020041, which is an ordinance an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia zoning maps by changing the zoning designation of certain areas of land located within an area bound by Gillingham Street, Tackawanna Street, Orthodox Street, and Ditman Street. (Witness comes forward.)
Richard Lombardo, Deputy Executive Director for the Philadelphia Planning Commission, and I'm here to testify on Bill No. 17 020041. This bill was introduced by Councilmember Mariano on February 5, 2002. This bill concerns the rezoning of a property located in a block bounded by Gillingham Street, Tackawanna Street, Orthodox Street, and Ditman Street. The purpose of this bill is to change the zoning designations of this property to allow residential development of this site. 42 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020041 The proposed redevelopment of this site will be called "Gillingham Court." The plan calls for construction of six semi-detached and one detached single-family dwelling. The site is currently a vacant parcel of land zoned G-2 general industrial, and the zoning change would be to R-10A residential development, which would permit the single-family residential development. Residential is not be permitted under the G-2. For the record, the Planning Commission, at its meeting on February 20, 2002, recommended approval of Bill 020041. I'm here to answer any questions.
Thank you very much. Any questions for this witness? Councilmember O'Neill.
Could you explain the difference between R-9 and R-10A?
Yeah. R-9 allows multi-family and also requires an eight-foot setback from the street. R-10A is strictly single- family and requires no setback from the street.
They're both rowhome 43 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020041 districts, but as rowhome districts, as you know, they won't allow anything higher than the rowhomes. They allow rowhomes, semi-detached homes, and detached homes as well.
R-7 is multi-family and R-7A is single-family, the other way around.
I'm going to have to ask one more time for people to please refrain from conversations or go into the hallway. Anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Thank you very much. - - - 44 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020088
We will now move to Bill No. 020088, which is an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Oregon Avenue, 19th Street, Johnston Street, and 20th Street.
Good morning. My name is Richard Lombardo, Deputy Executive Director of the Philadelphia Planning Commission, and I'm here today to testify on Bill No. 020088. This bill was introduced by Councilmember Blackwell on behalf of Council President Verna on February 1, 2002, and it concerns the rezoning of a block bounded by Oregon Avenue, 19th Street, Johnson Street, and 20th Street. The property is currently zoned R-9 residential. It is proposed to be rezoned to an AFC area shopping center, a commercial designation. This property, which is 3.5 acres, though zoned R-9 residential, was, in fact, used as a parking lot to serve the former Defense Supply Center across 20th Street. The Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development acquired this property in 45 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020088 2001 from the Department of Army. This rezoning would permit the development of this site with a 50,000 square foot Acme Supermarket. The Planning Commission will consider this bill at its meeting of March 20, 2002, and the staff will be recommending the Commission to support this legislation.
Thank you. Paul Deegan, representing PAID, Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development. I'll try not to duplicate Mr. Lombardo's testimony. This was a vacant parking lot as part of the Defense Personnel Support Center at 19th and Oregon. It's being rezoned to commercial. As PAID was acquiring the property, we were also marketing the site for retail developers in the region, and on the basis of a selection process, we selected Net Asset Properties. They have a track record of commercial development in Philadelphia and in the surrounding area, and they made the best offer for the purchase and development of the property. We have an agreement of sale with Net 46 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020088 Asset Properties, and as Mr. Lombardo said, they will develop a 50,000 square foot Acme Supermarket on the site. The offer for the -- the agreement of sale is contingent on a change in zoning designation to area shopping center. The zoning change will allow the developer to invest more than $8 million to build the store, creating dozens of job during construction. When it's open, the market will create 200 permanent jobs for residents of surrounding neighborhoods. This will also contribute to the revitalization of Oregon Avenue -- of the Oregon Avenue retail corridor by replacing an empty City black with an attractive and active store. Since we entered into the agreement with Net Asset Properties, they have met with Council President Verna's office and local community groups, notably the Girard Estate Area Residents and the Broad Street West Civic Association to ensure that the supermarket incorporates the needs and desires of the community. I'm pleased to report that both groups support this bill and look forward to the opening 47 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020088 of the market. And if I could, could I submit letters of support from both community groups for the project?
Please. The Sergeant-at-Arms will take it and submit it for the record.
It's the Broad Street West Civic Association, John Furi, President; and the Girard Estate Area Residents, Joe DiDellabarbara (ph), President. (Copies of above not submitted to stenographer for attachment hereto.)
Right. We do have Mr. Robert Lange, who represents the developer. He's here, if you wish additional testimony or if you have any questions.
Thank you very much. Any questions for this witness? (No questions.) 48 3/14/02 RULES - BILL 020088
Could I ask for the suspension of the rules also, Mr. Chairman?
You sure may. Thank you very much. Let the record reflect that Councilmember Cohen is also here. Is there anyone else to testify for or against this bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, that will conclude the hearing of the Rules Committee. - - - 49 3/14/02 RULES - PUBLIC MEETING
We will now convene a public meeting. The Chair recognizes Councilmember DiCicco for a motion on Bill No. 010635.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No. 010635 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and a further recommend that the rules of Council be suspended. (Duly seconded.)
Moved and seconded. All in favor, aye? There are none opposed. Bill No. 010635 is reported out of this committee favorably, and a request will be made for a rules suspension to allow for first reading at our next Council session. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Nutter for a motion on Bill No. 020041.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 0022041 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and a further recommendation that the rules of Council be 50 3/14/02 RULES - PUBLIC MEETING suspended so as to permit first reading next session (Duly seconded.)
Moved and seconded. All in favor? There are none opposed. Bill No. 020041 will be reported out of this committee favorably, and a request will be made for a rules suspension to allow for first reading at our next Council session. The Chair recognizes Councilmember DiCicco for a motion to approve the amendments offered to Bill No. 020050.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that the amendments to Bill No. 18 020050 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation. (Duly seconded.)
Moved and seconded. All in favor, aye? There are none opposed. The amendments offered to Bill No. 25 020050 are approved. 51 3/14/02 RULES - PUBLIC MEETING The Chair recognizes Councilmember DiCicco for a motion on the amended Bill No. 4 020050, with a rules suspension.
I move that Bill 6 No. 020050, as amended, be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and a further recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended. (Duly seconded.)
Moved and seconded. All in favor? There are none opposed. Bill No 020050, as amended, will be reported out of this committee favorably, and a request will be made for a rules suspension to allow for further reading at our next session of Council. At the request of the sponsor, Bill No. 20 020078 is being held. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Clarke for a motion on Bill No. 020088.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I make a motion that Bill No. 020088 be 52 3/14/02 RULES - PUBLIC MEETING reported out with a favorable recommendation and a request for a suspension of the rules as to permit first reading at our next session of Council (Duly seconded.)
Moved and seconded. All in favor, aye? There are none opposed. Bill No. 020088 will be reported out of this committee favorably, and a request will be made for a rules suspension to allow for first reading at our next Council session. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Nutter for a motion on Bill No. 020095.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 020095 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and a further recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session. (Duly seconded.)
It's been moved and seconded. All in favor, aye? There are none opposed. 53 3/14/02 RULES - PUBLIC MEETING Bill No. 020095 will be reported out of this committee favorably, and a request will be made for a rules suspension to allow for first reading at our next session of Council. That concludes the business of the Rules Committee this morning. We will proceed to caucus, and then as soon as possible, proceed to start the Council session. Thank you for your attention. (Proceedings end at 10:18 a.m.) - - - 54 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia's meeting of the Committee on Rules of Thursday, 3/14/02, 2002, are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. RE: Ordinance No.'s: 010635, 020041, 020050, 020088 020095 _______________________________, Josephine Cardillo Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)