COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING AND PUBLIC MEETING BEFORE COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON RULES - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Weds., 12/1/99, 10:10 a.m. - - - BILL 990716 - Redevelopment of the South Central Urban Renewal Area. BILL 990642 - Amending Title of Philadelphia 8 Code relating to zoning and planning by amending Chapter 14-1600, entitled "Miscellaneous," by 9 adding a new chapter, entitled "East Falls Special District Controls," under certain terms and 10 conditions. 11 BILL 990643 - Amending Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing zoning designations of areas located 12 within area bonded by Weightman St., Ridge Ave., a line approximately 77 feet northwest of Calumet 13 St., Cresson St., Indian Queen Lane, Krail St., Roosevelt Blvd., Ridge Ave., a certain railroad 14 right-of-way, and the Schuylkill River. BILL 990723 - For the redevelopment of the Center City Redevelopment Area, Franklin Urban Renewal Area. (Full text of all bills in body of transcript.) PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN ANNA C. VERNA, Chair COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO COUNCILMAN W. THACHER LONGSTRETH - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 /99 COMMITTEE ON RULES I N D E X Page BILL 990716 Noel Eisenstat, Redevelopment Authority . . . Doug Norman, Executive Director, SOSNA. . . . 23 Rahim Islam, Universal Community Homes. . . . 15 6 Gary Reisner, President Regis Group . . . . . 32 Jack Kmetz, Director of Public Affairs. . . . 35 Graduate Hospital Ted Lee, Private Citizen. . . . . . . . . . . 37 Jessie Frisby, South St. West Business Assoc. 41 Helena Speller, President . . . . . . . . . . 43 Josephine Solomon Ellis Foundation David Bauman, Private Citizen . . . . . . . . 44 Alan Mandel, Private Citizen. . . . . . . . . 49 Barney Richardson, Private Citizen. . . . . . 53 Valeria McGriff, Private Citizen. . . . . . . 57 Lynn Juarez, Apartment Building Owner . . . . 68 George Fields, Private Citizen. . . . . . . . 91 Wayne Williams, Private Citizen . . . . . . . 104 Mary Graves, Private Citizen. . . . . . . . . 105 Georgette Fields, SOSNA . . . . . . . . . . . 108 Geraldine Mayo, Private Citizen . . . . . . . 111 BILL 990642 and 990643 Richard Lombardo, Planning Commission . . . . 115 Hansel Minyard, East Falls Resident . . . . . 123 Member, East Falls Community Association Leon Silvestro, East Falls Business Owner . . 124 Marilyn Shaffer, East Falls Development Corp. 131 BILL 990723 Noel Eisenstat, Redevelopment Authority . . . 138 - - - 3 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 P R O C E E D I N G S
Good morning. This is the public hearing of the Committee on Rules. I would ask the clerk to please read the title of Bill No. 990716.
An ordinance amending an ordinance approved December 14, 1971, as amended, which approved the redevelopment proposal, the urban renewal plan, and the relocation plan of the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia for the redevelopment of the South Central Urban Renewal Area, by approving the 11th amendment of the redevelopment proposal, the 11th amendment to the urban renewal plan, and an amendment to the relocation plan, which provide, inter alia, for certain additional land acquisition west of Broad Street, provision of certain relocation services as required by law for the individuals, families, and business concerns which will be displaced, all as contained in the 11th amendment of the redevelopment proposal and the 11th amendment to the urban renewal plan; and authorizing a funding agreement between the City and the Philadelphia Housing Authority to provide 4 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 the necessary funding for implementing said redevelopment proposal, urban renewal plan, and relocation plan, under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you. Our first witness is Mr. Noel Eisenstat. (Noel Eisenstat comes forward.)
Good morning. My name is Noel Eisenstat Executive. I'm the Executive Director of the City's Redevelopment Authority. I'm here to provide testimony on the bill that has already read into the record. You have received -- as of yesterday, not today -- my testimony, and let me refer to it for moment and then depart from it as well. We, as the Redevelopment Authority, were before City Council last spring and again in the fall concerning acquisitions on the east side of Broad Street surrounding the HOPE VI development that is being undertaken by the Housing Authority with its developer, Uni-Penn a joint venture of Penrose 5 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 Properties and Universal Community Homes. The uniqueness of this HOPE VI has been, in part, the ability to think in a broader scope to the west side of Broad Street, and that's what brings us before you here today. We're here to talk about the consideration of acquiring up to approximately 285 properties. The bulk of those properties are vacant. Of these properties, 155 properties will be utilized by the Uni-Penn Development to construct a series of housing units, 60 percent of which will be for home ownership units, 40 percent for rental units, and it will be a mix of housing. In addition before you today, there's an additional acquisition of approximately another 130 properties. Those properties come to you in a series of projects and activities to be undertaken directly and indirectly ventures with a group that you know well as SOSNA. You have a series of individuals who are here to testify on the project's behalf. I also understand that at this late date, there may be some requests by you, Council President, or by the community, to delete certain properties from 6 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 the list. I think you'd like to hear testimony of that from the community. And considering the number of other witnesses here, I'd really -- if you have more questions for me now, I'm happy to answer them, but you may want to go straight to your witnesses.
All right. I do notice that we do have many people from the community present. So, for the record, Mr. Eisenstat, can you please explain the definition of an "urban renewal area" so that everybody understands what we're about to do.
For the purposes of this bill and the actions considered today, the Redevelopment Authority is the designated-by-State law entity that has the legal powers with the consent and authority that's granted by City Council to acquire land for urban renewal or urban redevelopment purposes. The nature of what has occurred here is, there are a series of development requests that require the acquisition of privately-owned properties, and those acquisitions will be 7 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 undertaken by the Redevelopment Authority. And from that is the definition of an "urban renewal plan." By State statute, in order for the Authority to acquire property, it must go through -- it must develop an urban renewal plan, it must adopted -- the first scenario proceeding that is that the area must be termed blighted. That has occurred by the Philadelphia Planning Commission. And the steps of creating an urban renewal plan and the authorization of an acquisition is an action by the Redevelopment Authority Board, action by the Planning Commission and the ordinance which you are considering. The plan itself provides the legal authority for the acquisition and the reuse of properties. And, in fact, in light of my last visit here with Councilman Nutter, I actually did get a copy of the actual bill today. Usually I don't have one. And considering this is my last time here, at least I finally got it right. But the urban renewal designation allows the acquisition of various types of properties. And that's why we're here today. 8 12/1/99 RULES - 990716
All right. And can you also explain for the record how the condemnation process works in an urban renewal area.
Yes. There is the approval processes, which we're in today and which, as I explained, it requires actions by the Planning Commission, by the Redevelopment Authority Board, by City Council by ordinance, and by approval by the Mayor. Once those approvals occur, the acquisition process may then begin, and that is a process that requires the Redevelopment Authority to first basically engage a certified appraiser. That appraiser must contact the property owners, and the property owners will be given an opportunity to tour and view their property with the appraiser. Once appraisals are submitted back to the Redevelopment Authority and accepted, offers then may be made. And then, to the extent that offers are not accepted, the Authority then can take the action by its board to acquire the land via using its powers of eminent domain, which then 9 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 would require the Authority to act by resolution 3 and then file with the Court of Common Pleas its action, which vests title to the Redevelopment Authority. In doing so, properties owners then may have a period to object -- those are known as "preliminary objections." That is the process which generally concerns vacant properties, properties where relocation is not an issue. Where there are properties where there is either commercial or residential relocation, in addition to that process I've just explained, the Authority is also governed by federal and State relocation guidelines and regulations. And in doing so, the Authority has a staff of both commercial and residential relocation specialists. Early on in the process, before the appraisals are completed, there is an intake process of meeting with individuals and contacting families. Before an offer letter is made and before anyone asks anyone to move, a letter is addressed to each property owner saying that we're starting this process and this should not be taken 10 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 as request to move or do anything, but we wish to meet with you and discuss with you the intentions to follow the urban renewal process and follow the law. And that is done when dealing with all of our properties, whether they're commercial or residential occupied. That process requires the Authority to pay relocation benefits and other relocation benefits far above the appraised value to make the difference between what their property may be worth and the true costs of finding a decent, safe, and sanitary replacement home. Often those relocation benefits may be an additional to $25 above the fair market 16 value of the home. Commercial properties are a 17 little more difficult to evaluate on a 18 case-by-case basis. 19
Thank you. 20 Are there any questions from members of the committee? Councilman Nutter?
Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Eisenstat, good morning. In your 11 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 testimony, you talk about 285 predominantly vacant, vandalized buildings and lots. How predominant is "predominant?"
As it relates to. . . The last paragraph of my testimony, first sentence, speaks to that. Specifically if we want to get to the heart of the matter, nine of the buildings are occupied, with ten residential occupants. But I would also indicate to you that it --
Nine of the buildings are occupied with ten residential occupants -- occupants being families, not individuals, I believe. However, saying that, Councilman Nutter, as I said earlier, there may be some movement today before this Council session that would delete certain properties, which may further modify those numbers.
But as originally planned, that's what was submitted to Council. 12 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 But not unusual, the Authority has the ability, as the Council may direct at this time, to delete certain properties at this stage. Properties cannot be added; they may only be deleted. And Councilman DiCicco could explain this process after living through this for the last six months in his own district.
I believe he is the resident expert in that aspect of the process. Last quick question. The 285 properties -- further down in your testimony, you talk about 155 buildings on the west side of South Broad Street and vacant lots to be developed into 110 new housing units. So does that mean we are, to some extent, shrinking the density, going from 285 either buildings and lots, down to 110 actual residential units? Or what happens when --
No, we're going from -- this bill, although it's in one urban renewal area, we're generally dealing with two developments. The first development is the Uni-Penn HOPE VI development, and that is taking 155 parcels and transforming those 155 parcels to 110 new housing units, through either new 13 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 construction or rehab.
And those 130 properties, as we can discuss with the help of testimony from SOSNA today, will be then undertaken into a series of activities. Some of them will not just be housing; some of them will be some recreational and open space, community activity space as well.
There will be an overall reduction. However, this is a neighborhood that has a certain density and context that you're not going to -- although there is some lowering of density, it's not the lowering of density that you will, say, have seen in other parts of Philadelphia. This is a much more -- this has been much more a process of identifying the houses on a block that are in need of rehabilitation or demolition and addressing them. This is not a -- 14 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 although the sheer number of parcels is rather large as a taking, we're not taking blocks here, we're taking units on a block to save a block, versus taking the whole block.
Thank you. Are there any other questions from other members of the committee? (No further questions.)
And, Mr. Eisenstat, I would invite you to stay with us till the conclusion of this hearing, please.
Yes, I will be here through the conclusion of this hearing.
Thank you. Rahim Islam, Kenny Gamble, and Doug Norman. (Witnesses come forward.)
Who's going 15 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 to testify first?
I will. I'm Rahim Islam. I'm with Universal Community Homes. We're a community development corporation in South Philadelphia, the south central area. And our primary responsibility with this development is the development of the Martin Luther King Plaza, a revitalization of the Martin Luther King Plaza, which will extend from -- roughly from 11th Street to 17th Street, from South to Washington Avenue. It includes the development of roughly about 350 townhouses, both rental and for home ownership. These sites will be -- which 100 percent are vacant lots or vacant properties, will be used to be rehabbed or for building new construction for the development of those units.
Mr. Islam, I think that it's important for the members of this committee to know how we got to this hearing today. Can you please tell us the history of this project, where we were, where we are today, and how we got here.
Yeah. We -- this has been a process that we've been working on for about four years. In the planning of basically just trying to eliminate the blight that exists in the area, we've done roughly about 110 units in that area, and we just wanted to continue moving the progress and just taking those vacant properties and abandoned lots and doing something with them. In that four-year period, we started the planning of the revitalization of Martin Luther King Plaza, which is at 13th and Catherine, Fitzwater, a 6-1/2-acre site, with 560 units. During that planning, we knew that development had to be treated. As part of that planning, we were able to get a planning grant -- well, the Philadelphia Housing Authority was able to get a planning grant that actually detailed a plan for that development. We then were -- competed to be selected as developers of that development, and we extended that plan because we knew that in order for to us 17 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 adequately deal with that development and the blight that had existed and the concentration of poverty that existed, we had to extend the development. So we extended it from the actual site, proper site, the treatment of it to, actually dealing with -- which was a requirement of the HOPE VI program, which we made application to, was a requirement that we actually deal with the things that caused the blight that surrounds the site itself. We took an area of roughly two blocks on the east and west of this site to deal with and roughly two blocks in the north and south of this site to deal with. And approximately then, we wanted to treat every vacant property in that area. We went through a process some time ago here on the east side of Broad Street. And the combination of roughly 300 or so vacant properties, some were occupied. That number was narrowed down roughly to about 181. And basically this here is a complement to that east-taking, where we will have enough parcels now to deal with the entire blight that surrounds the MLK development and also surrounds also the Avenue of 18 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 the Arts entails. And it entails both, again, from 11th Street to 17th Street from South to Washington Avenue. There was a lot of planning and a lot of community planning and a lot of community meetings. And the bottom line is that this here development will allow for us, given the site control of these units, will allow us to take these properties and turn 'em back over and put people back in 'em and/or beautify them and rebuild this community in part of our rebuilding efforts. I don't know how much other detail that you want, Madam President, but I think, again, that this here development is a significant development for this area, for the city. It represents a major, major revitalization. And, again, I think it's being done with the consideration of everybody involved, and we're not dealing with any -- we're not dealing with any occupied properties. These are all vacant properties, they're all dilapidated properties. And basically this gives us an opportunity to take those properties and to rehab them and to put 19 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 people back into those properties.
Can you explain to the committee how you determined what properties you requested to be placed on the list for condemnation?
Sure. It was very easy. We took over an area that -- again, in that area, we just looked at every vacant and dilapidated property that was in the area. Many of those properties where we were able to do concentration development or a large tract, we were able to do significant development, we were able to -- we put those properties on the list. So where there was an ability to come in and treat a block, put the block back on track or even take large parcels because there were a lot of vacant properties, then we were able to do that also. But the bottom line is, I think the 100 or so properties that we're asking for, other than MLK, represent vacant properties and vacant lots that exist in that area that I defined. And on the west sides of that area is between Broad and 17th and South and Washington Avenue. It does not take into consideration every vacant property. 20 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 And the distinction is, we believe that if we're able to treat the two predominant streets, which are 15th Street and 16th Street, if we're able to treat those two street, that represents 70 of the 100 or so that we requested. If we're able to treat those two streets, we believe that the market will be able to take care of some of the other hidden streets, some of the other smaller streets. But the visibility was required because these are two well-traveled streets that if people see that the progress is taking place -- for example, we just completed a development on the 800 block of South 16th Street. That was once a crime-infested street. It's a well-traveled street, and everyone who comes through that street, you definitely knew you better, if it's the summer time, roll your windows up if you had your windows down. But now that street is taken care of. So we believed that if we dealt with 15th and 16th Street, as the real visible streets, it would lend itself to the other market activity that's already started in the area and will 21 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 continue. So that was a distinction between taking one property versus another, what we believed that would be marketable and also would give us the highest visibility.
Thank you. I believe that you have a slide show that you have put together at a considerable cost to show the committee the conditions of the properties in question. Can we see some of the slide show? Is it very lengthy?
Well, I didn't know -- it's -- it really represents roughly about 120-something properties. You have a copy of -- you should have -- you should have -- I made four copies -- I think three copies or four copies. You should have a copy of every property that's being requested.
And the Council, you can take a look at it. We could do the presentation and I could show you some of those properties, but they're all vacant properties and vacant lots. And our -- 22 12/1/99 RULES - 990716
So are you saying that we don't have to see the slide show?
I don't think you do. And I don't want you to put us on the spot here because our technical staff here leaves a lot to be desired. We're not -- we're not -- we tried to do this, but we had a backup and --
It's not a problem. We do have the photographs here. And I believe the committee saw them.
Would you please detail what properties you are asking to be removed from the condemnation list, and why you have made this request?
Yes. Myself and Doug Norman and other members of the community have basically requested that -- Doug, you could do that. I requested -- there was approximately six properties on our list that are occupied.
Now, you're saying six, and it's my -- I think I understood Mr. Eisenstat to say that there were nine? 23 12/1/99 RULES - 990716
My name is Doug Norman, Executive Director of South to South Neighborhood Association, and we're a CDC and funded by OHCD. We originally put in, at the request of John Kromer, a very large condemnation package, and it was not mentioned whether it should be occupied buildings or not. Some of the properties we had been surveying for years through OHCD with Scott Wilds, especially in the Carpenter Street area and Kimball Street. If you refer to my report, there's a letter to you, Mrs. Verna.
I have it, but it I'd like you to say it aloud so that it will be on the record and have the stenographer take it down.
I will. I will name the properties. It's: 722 South 15th Street, 24 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 1520 Bainbridge Street, 2105 Kimball Street, 2115 Kimball Street, 2114 Carpenter Street, 2125 Carpenter Street, 760 South 16th Street, 616 South 16th Street, 618 South 16th Street, 749 South 15th Street
I'm sorry, excuse me. Isn't that 749 South 16th?
Yes. 755 South 16th Street, 766 South 16th Street, 907 South 167th Street, and 931 South 22nd Street.
Could I make one correction to your list? Your 760 South 16th Street should be 760 South 15th Street. That's an error, so if we could correct that, that's 760 South 16th Street, as indicated by Doug Norman is really 716 South 15th Street.
Every other property on the list is an unoccupied building or a lot, and we request that these properties be taken off the list.
I know that both of you gentlemen have been longtime members of this community. On the average, can you tell us the length of time that these properties have been abandoned and have not been redeveloped? I'm sure it's been many, many years.
Well, Doug has been here much longer than I have. I've been in the area for seven years, working the area. And these properties have been vacant for at least the seven years that I've been here.
I would guess the average is to years. 4 And we have a problem of people in that 5 particular area, of finding owners. Many of them 6 are heirs that have since left Philadelphia. We 7 have particularly targeted these properties and 8 researched them. We've been working on this for 9 about four years. This isn't something we did 10 overnight, because we simply can't do anything 11 about these buildings. We have a fencing problem, 12 we can't even find the owners. 13 And SOSNA also included PHA lots and 14 buildings that they told us they had no immediate 15 plans in the next twenty years, and we included 16 all of the City properties -- PHDC and 17 (unintelligible) properties on all of these 18 lists. And those have been -- we have PHA 19 buildings in our neighborhood vacant for twenty 20 years and vacant lots.
How many vacant lots are in this package; do you know?
How many vacant lots are in this package? 27 12/1/99 RULES - 990716
Actually, I didn't count them. I think we do -- we have this. . .
Jeff Brown has indicated it's 146. I was just going to do it off the top of my head. I thought there were more vacant lots than vacant properties.
I would like to comment, though, that on both of our lists, many of these properties have to be demolished. They are not rehabable because of fires or whatever, and I would say that would amount to about percent of 15 our properties. 16
Thank you, Madam 19 Chair. 20 Mr. Norman, just a quick question on something that you touched on. When you were talking about these properties and the condition of them, you started talking about the vacant lots and then you made reference to some fencing problems. Could you elaborate on that? What did 28 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 you mean by that?
Well, we have lots that may not be a problem for the neighborhood, as 99 percent of these are, and some of them we did not put on the list. So if an owner has taken care of it, sometimes an owner may own the adjacent lot. Our big problem in our neighborhood is -- and SOSNA has actually, and so has Universal Homes, had to fence in these lots at our expense because they turn into city dumps and drug havens. And when we did a neighborhood plan in 1993 and in 1994, we were rather shocked that these vacant lots came up to be the number-one priority problem in the neighborhood, and we had about twenty categories, and I wouldn't have thought vacant lots would have been number one, but it was number one overwhelmingly. The owners -- and I'm never sure what the law is, and I know that the City can't take everyone to court. The owners in that area had been very negligent and so we particularly picked these lots so we can either -- there will be three categories of what we want to do, and we will be making this much less dense from your previous 29 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 question to Mr. Eisenstat. I'd say it's going to be at least one-third less dense.
It will either be open-space parking or new construction. And we've had so much demolition in our neighborhood that without this happening, I don't think our neighborhood stands much of a chance of rehab. And the fencing is there for the crucial. And if I may, I have a letter for you. I believe you have a hearing today on another matter, and I would like to give that to you before you leave.
Councilman, can I add one other thing to that? Many of those vacant lots are the result of houses being demolished because of the structure.
If Doug is as close to being right as being an average age of 15 years 30 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 that these properties have been uninhabitable and not being well maintained, the likelihood of these properties that we're talking about now being in that same situation over the next couple years is very significant. So that problem will just continue. And this is an opportunity for us to arrest that situation and actually put this thing back on track to prevent that type of thing happening.
Thank you. Are there any other questions from members of the committee? (No further questions.)
Mr. Kromer, are you here to testify on this bill? (Mr. Kromer comes to the witness table.)
Good morning. I'm John Kromer, the Director of the City's Office of Housing and Community Development. I have no formal presentation to make today, but I just wanted to say that on behalf OHCD that we, of course, are strongly in support of this bill. OHCD, in collaboration with the Philadelphia Housing Authority, will be providing the financing that will support the eminent domain taking that has been described to you. And I'll be available for any questions that may arise during the course of the hearing.
Thank you. Is City Planning prepared to testify on this? (No response.)
Okay, the next witnesses will be Gary Reisner and Brad Akerman (ph.). (Witnesses come forward.)
Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. 32 12/1/99 RULES - 990716
My name is Gary Reisner, and I am President of the Regis Group and Regis Development Corporation. Our company is partnering with SOSNA, the South of South Neighborhood Association, to develop seven affordable home-ownership properties on the 700 block of South 15th Street, to be called the Emerson Homes. Should I continue with my testimony?
Okay. The development is named after Emerson's Bar and Grill, at the corner of 15th and Bainbridge, a famous blues and jazz venue where Billy Holiday performed, which was demolished several years ago. This development originated several years ago when residents from 15th Street attended a SOSNA general meeting and complained about the large number of shells and the drug activity on 15th Street. Council President Verna attended the meeting, listened to the complaints of residents, and has supported this development program. Regis has had the good fortune to work with SOSNA previously on developments in the area. 33 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 We developed Artists Village, at 17th and Bainbridge Streets, a 36-unit affordable rental development. We also served as the general contractor for Doctors Row, on the 1600 block of Christian Street. And we are currently working with SOSNA on St. Anthony's Senior Residences, a 38-unit renovation of a historic school at 23rd and Carpenter. In addition to the Senior Residences, we are renovating or newly constructing affordable rental townhomes on 12 blocks adjacent to St. Anthony's. In addition, we 13 have also renovated and now rent and operate 17 14 market-rate properties in the area, including 15 apartments, townhomes, and community-based day care center. In all our development and construction activity, we adhered to HUD Section 3 requirements and to the Mayor's Executive Order 2-95, which seeks to maximize the hiring of low-income persons residing in the area and spending for purchases and supplies from project-area firms. We also adhere to Chapter 17-500 of the Philadelphia Code and Executive Order 1-93 for participation of minority, women's, and disabled- owned 34 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 businesses. SOSNA will undertake the marketing meetings for the Emerson Homes. These properties can be purchased by income-eligible applicants who make no more than 80 percent of the median income in Philadelphia. In 1999, those income limits ranged from $31,150 for a family of 1, to $58,700 for a family of 8. These limits are adjusted each year and will probably rise in February of 2000 to account for inflation. All homes will be marketed on a nondiscriminatory basis, pursuant to the fair housing laws. We in the Regis Group are excited by this opportunity and look forward to this development. Thank you.
Thank you. Are there any questions from members of the committee? (No questions.)
Thank you very much. Betty McGurk? Is Betty McGurk here? (No response.)
Jack Kmetz? 35 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 (Jack Kmetz comes forward.)
Good morning. I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to appear today in support of this condemnation proposal. I am Jack Kmetz, the Director of Public Affairs at Graduate Hospital, and a resident at 620 South 19th Street. As most of you know, when the hospital revitalized in 1997, significant and much-needed market-driven renovation and revitalization began in the area to the south of the hospital. Much of this continued during the 1980s, but the 1990s saw a decline in the number of housing starts in the community south of South Street and adjacent to Graduate Hospital. As you're also aware, market-driven renovation frequently leaves behind middle-class and low-income residents. It is important at this time to provide for stabilization of the South Street west area by enhancing low-income and middle-income housing revitalization in this neighborhood. And that is why Graduate Hospital wholeheartedly supports this proposal. Because of significant vacancies in 36 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 this area since the 1960s, widespread market-driven private redevelopment and investment will only result from infusions of public funds which provide general improvements in the housing stock. Graduate Hospital's mission can only be enhanced by improving the housing stock of this community. Our eventual long-term success, as one of the largest employers in the city and as the largest employer in the South Street west community, depends upon the vitality of the South Street west area. Additionally, I think it's important to note that the South Street west area has a long tradition of more than a century of multicultural and multiracial harmony, which continues today. It is one of the city's truly diverse communities, where people of race, creed, national origin, and background live in cooperation and in mutual respect. Every religious group and economic group is represented in this community. If any area of the city represents hope for our city's future and our city's future success as a melting pot, where all people can live and work with respect for each other and in 37 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 harmony, South Street west represents the best of the future, which we should seek for every area of our city. It is an area where people understand that we may not have come here in the same boats, but we're all in the same boat now. I'd ask Council to support this proposal and to help us float our community boat. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Are there any questions of Mr. Kmetz? (No questions.)
Good morning, everyone. I didn't really have a statement or anything prepared.
I don't have a statement prepared so I don't want to be up here that long. 38 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 I just wanted to say that I'm --
Mr. Lee, just pull the microphone closer to you because we're having difficulty hearing you, and the stenographer is having the same difficulty.
All right. I've been a resident of this neighborhood now ten years. And as Jack stated, it is a very diverse and a very (unintelligible) community. I'm in support of this program if you want to condemn property because it seems that's the only way that we can get things down there, like sidewalks and new homes built. It's been my experience since I've lived down there that any new construction that takes place in the community, homes are usually sold down there, newly constructed homes are usually sold down there before the bricks are laid. And this is a neighborhood -- this is a neighborhood that is truly deserving, you know, of a second chance. So I would support this program and I hope that you could implement it as soon as 39 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 possible. I would like to think that -- I would like to think that this neighborhood will be a showplace, you know, if the city and the powers that be were to spend a little bit of time and effort up to come down and, you know give us a play. I'm certainly in favor of looking at the 2100 block of Carpenter Street and the 900 block of 22nd Street. These are properties I've been trying to get town down for the last four or five years now. And so I would like to know, how soon can you guys get this program implemented? (Laughter.)
You were ready yesterday, huh? I'm sure that we'll work on this as quickly as possible.
Thank you. Are there any questions of Mr. Lee? (No questions.)
Our next witness is Mitch Ripkin. Is Mr. Ripkin here? 40 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 (No response.)
We're requesting -- may I do this? We're requesting a development agreement to the RDA with Mr. Ripkin. I've met with him, and Kathy Murray has been talking to him. He owns several of these lots, and he does have plans, if that is possible, and I included that in the letter that we took, where we requested some properties be taken off. And he understands this only happened last Thursday and there was no time to do this ahead of time, and he trusts the City and the RDA and us to follow up on that after, if that is okay with the committee.
Thank you. Priscilla Blackman Johnson. Is Miss Johnson here? (No response.)
Jessie Frisby? 41 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 (Jessie Frisby comes forward.)
Good morning. My name is Jessie Frisby. I come representing South Street West Business Association as well as Jessie's Ladies' Shop, located at 1537 South Street for 31 years. I'm in support of this condemnation because we have been struggling in this area for over 30 -- from my knowledge, it's over 47 years. But since the '60s, this area has been allowed to go down. We have speculators that has come into this area who has abandoned the properties. We have vacant lots. It has been very, very difficult for us. Any community needs a viable business street or section for a community. We have not been able to attract people. Our community has been left abandoned. I don't know how long I can make it. I believe in South Street west, I was there when it was viable. I don't understand how we are allowing people to come in and not pay their fair share of taxes and let our community go down as it 42 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 is. That community has a wealth of history. And I'm in support of it, I want to see it done yesterday. I certainly want to see it done in my lifetime because it's been a struggle for us. This city needs money, the area needs to be very advised, and we want a decent neighborhood, that's the bottom line. So I'm here to make this testimony on that behalf. I want my business to live, I want the community to live, and I don't understand why it's allowed to go down the way it is. Get rid of these folks. Or these properties.
Thank you very much for coming in to testify. Are there any questions of Miss Frisby? The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
I'm in favor of it, I'm in favor of it. We've been living with a war-torn area all these years.
Good morning. My name is Helena Speller. I am the President of the Josephine Solomon Ellis Foundation. I am from First Tabernacle Church in this community, and I am here in support of this proposal 100 percent. Our church, we just celebrated 100 years. And we, the Speller family, represent six generations of this immediate community until this very day. And in the 1600 block of Fitzwater and the 700 block of South Chadwick, we have been donated some property in that area. The 700 block of South Chadwick is a eyesore. It's also on your list roll number 3, vacant lots and shelled buildings that we have a concern about condemnation, and that is the purpose of why I'm here today, to give a testimony in support of having condemnation in our immediate community. And thank you for your time. 44 12/1/99 RULES - 990716
Thank you so much. Are any questions from members of the committee? (No questions.)
Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? (Witness comes forward.)
Good morning. My name is David Bauman. Madam Chairwoman and members of the committee, I purchased my house at 623 South 17th Street in April of '97. Let me just preface this by saying that I'm in general favor of the redevelopment proposal, but this is a matter 45 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 regarding the lot next to my property. I was told by the neighbors that the adjacent lot, 621, had been vacant for about five years, since the City tore down the house that was standing there. In May of '97, I went to the Redevelopment Authority to apply for the lot in their vacant lot program. I was notified that the City did not own the lot and that I should try to acquire it through sheriff's sale. After further inquiry, I was told by both the City Revenue Department and the Redevelopment Authority that the lot had been put in lien sale inventory and was not eligible for sheriff's sale. From '97 till '99, I have periodically queried lien sale personnel about the status of the lot, only learning that the lot would be in lien sale too. During the spring and summer of '97, I cleaned the lot of garbage, household trash, appliances, tires, human and animal waste, and drug paraphernalia. I cut the weeds and planted trees. I stuccoed the side of my wall on the side adjacent to the lot a soft-yellow color in anticipation of putting up a ceramic tile mural. 46 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 I also fenced-off the lot to keep out trash and vagrant activities. From 1997 to the present, I have maintained the lot, cutting weeds as well as adding a flower garden. Less than two weeks ago, a neighbor informed me that this lot was listed in a newspaper ad by the Redevelopment Authority as one of the 285 properties to be condemned as part of the South Central redevelopment program. I went back to the Redevelopment Authority and was again told that the lot would be in a lien sale too. Only this past Monday, when I went back again to the Redevelopment Authority and persisted in asking to see a copy of the redevelopment proposal, did they confirm that 621 South 17th was indeed one of the properties cited for condemnation in the redevelopment program. The bureaucratic confusion over the status of 621 has deprived me the opportunity of obtaining the lot. Out of a normal sense of civic responsibility and the appreciation of an attractive living space, I have made improvements to 621 at my own experience and effort and with the unanimous moral support of the neighborhood. 47 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 I believe efforts like this constitute a commitment, a significant part in this city's effort to eliminate blight and deterioration. I would like to be awarded the lot so that I can continue developing a green space with a colorful mural on the side of my house. Thank you.
Thank you for your testimony. The Chair, and Council President, is returning. So I don't know if there's any questions. Hold on one second.
Mm-hmm. I would like to put probably the front feet for parking and the 18 back 45 feet as a garden. 19
I believe 20 what is presently being proposed is that this property be developed into modern townhouses rather than a garden. And that, you would oppose?
You would 48 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 oppose this lot being made part of townhouses, modern townhouses rather than a garden?
I don't think there's really -- yes, I would. It's a single lot. There is a parking lot owned by some developer in the neighborhood, a paved double lot next to it. And then next to that is property owned by the University of -- or the hospital, the Graduate Hospital, which will be developed, I assume, at some point. But there's just a single lot there, and I don't think it -- I think it would be more significant to make it a green space, a garden.
Can either somebody from SOSNA or Universal approach the table, please? (Mr. Norman comes forward.)
Mr. Norman, please identify yourself for the record.
Doug Norman, Executive Director. The history of this building goes back about 18 years. It used to be a drug house that we had torn down. 49 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 There's two objectives to taking this lot. One of them is to get rid of a very recalcitrant owner that, I understand, owes 30-plus thousand dollars to the City. The other objective is, in order to do the two home ownership package in the 15th Street-Bainbridge Street, we actually might need that lot. I can't say that today. We are not opposed to having a garden there, and I live across the street. However, the real objective is -- the owner lives in Virginia. We have not been able to contact him for these many, many years. The City has -- I'm sure he ran into the same problem that we have for years, 16 and I really recommend that the RDA take it. It 17 doesn't mean it can't be a garden, but we really 18 need to get it away from this owner. Thank you. (Alan Mandel comes forward.)
I'm Alan Mandel. I live at 618 South 17th Street, just about directly across from the subject lot. We really needed an additional house on 50 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 that street. It's a very interesting block. You've got -- between South and Bainbridge, you've got really the side of a Graduate Hospital garage, you've got a church. You really -- you've got a large community garden. You really only have four occupied buildings that front onto 17th Street. I have been mugged twice on that street in front of my house, and we could use the development of an additional building at that site to provide eyes on the street and to add to safety at that site. There really is too much vacant space and also with the church and the garage institutional space, which might not have traffic at many hours of the day and night.
Thank you. In any event, we could never get this lot unless we go through this process. And if, in fact, it is not needed for a townhouse, then this gentleman could be considered for having it as a garden, right?
I understand that. And I'm sure you understand that too, sir? 51 12/1/99 RULES - 990716
I appreciate Mr. Mandel's concern about that. I have the same concern since I live right next to this lot, and it is a problem. I think that, though, over time, this double-wide community garden that's there, that's owned by Graduate Hospital, is going to be developed, and it won't be a garden any longer, nor will the space that's now a paved parking lot -- I think that's going to -- these fellows that own it are being very active in the South Street corridor in developing properties.
And I'm assuming that it's in this package here? I was just flipping here trying to. . .
We don't have a photograph of it, do we? 52 12/1/99 RULES - 990716
I can bring you in a photograph, but unfortunately, that's not going to help you now.
I don't think that's necessary. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
No, I was just saying, apparently, it's -- the final decision is, neither of the two gentlemen can be satisfied unless ownership is taken away from the person that presently owns it.
And that's all we're doing today, is giving the RDA the opportunity to acquire the lot under condemnation.
Actually, I believe owner died some time ago. I tried to trace -- I went back and tried to trace relatives and next of the kin, and I just got second cousins on Christian Street who didn't want anything to do with it, so 53 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 I think that's the best --
Perhaps in the meantime, the two gentlemen can be discussing together the problem of the lighting and seeing what can be done, and maybe you can both be satisfied ultimately.
Thank you. Are there any other questions or comments by members of the committee? (No further questions.)
Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Please approach the witness table. (Witness comes forward.)
Kindly identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
My name is Barney Richardson, and I have a property at 730 South 15th Street. The property I have there has been -- well, I've been in the neighborhood since I was about five years old. It used to be a candy 54 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 store. It was very active. It was Goode's headquarters when he first ran. It was Charlie Hunter's place of headquarters. But what my problem is, I was in the area there before Southwest Center City became Southwest Center City. I was there when (unintelligible) was 20th and Dickinson. I also was very active in the neighborhood. I have a property -- I think it's in the 700 block -- not in, but it is the 700 block of South 15th Street. It's probably not -- (unintelligible) that I worked for in '71, before anyone, I imagine, that's involved here today can remember, it was redlined. And the properties in that area just didn't go down because people didn't care. It was owners who was renting properties, they had tenants that walked away, they couldn't get any rent. They was getting six months extension. Nobody had any money to do repairs, and yet, still, the owners was very old. And then we had the other problem of the southwest cross-town expressway. But I stayed there, and I would like to be an independent developer. And we didn't have 55 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 the opportunity to say, Well, let's go here and get money. And many, many people -- there's a lady here who's been in the neighborhood in the 700 block of 15th Street for 60 or maybe 75 years. Her father was a doctor. So I'm asking that my property come off that list, which is 730 South 15th Street.
Did you say that you live at 730 South 15th Street?
It's occupied by me as a storage place, as a electrical contractor.
I don't believe that 730 South 15th Street is on the list for condemnation.
There's a gentleman coming to the table. Our lists don't indicate that we have any South 15th Street properties. 56 12/1/99 RULES - 990716
It doesn't? You just mentioned the Emerson Development. (Doug Norman returns to witness table.)