You're saying 1430 is not on the list? There is a picture of it someplace.
Well, that house has new windows in it, new roof on it, all that now. Some of the blight that was there is not existing as of this moment. Prior to that, the pictures may have 93 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 been taken. But if you look at the property now, you'll see that that block could be a real asset to that community. I don't think that we need to tear down everything, you know.
No, it's not. But as far as the drug activity and the dereliction and the prostitution, I'm there every day, and that's one of the quietest streets on the block now. You know, if you want to go around there and look at it in the evening, it's a good block. All it needs is somebody to come there and just put a little care in it, and it doesn't need to be demolished.
I've had it about six months now. But I also want to do ask this question also. Now, all the friends in the community that have concerns about losing their property, they are members of this community for generations, not just for a certain amount of years. And then they come to a meeting or they look in the newspaper and find that their property is on the list. And what I would like to know is, if we as a community begin the process of rejuvenating and renovating these properties and we get 'em up to a standard that would be an asset to the community and they are condemned today, are they still in danger of being demolished after the people who do have --
Mr. Fields, I don't know if you were here earlier.
Okay. It was stated that none of the properties in question are owner-occupied.
Okay? Many of these properties have been vacant for 15, 4 years. For the most part, they are vacant lots. 5 Now, if people have had the properties for as long 6 as they have been vacant, why wouldn't they have 7 done something with them? And our not taking them 8 doesn't guarantee that somebody's going to 9 purchase them and rehab them. 10
Right, I'm not saying 11 that. I'm saying that supposing the property, 12 when they're ready to be demolished, is a asset to 13 the community at that time? They're not going to 14 be demolished tomorrow. 15 But I also have a friend that has a 16 concern. He has 753 South Hicks Street. He got a 17 citation from the City. He acquired the proper 18 architectural plans and went to L&I and got the 19 permits and is in the process of putting new 20 windows in, new doors, having a masonry working, having all the violations corrected that's on the citation. Will his renovating this property allow him to keep his property, or is he still going to be one of the guys that's going to lose because he's on the list? 96 12/1/99 RULES - 990716
Rahim Islam, Universal Community Homes. To address this gentleman's concerns and issues, I think that was the point of this whole process. If this individual is rehabbing that unit, then I think he should be extended a two-year agreement to get his unit into compliance. And if that's the case -- that's the whole purpose for this whole situation. It's not to put a disconvenience (sic) on anyone, but also at the same time, it's to begin to address the situation, and these properties have been vacant for a long period of time. So if this individual -- I don't know -- remember if it's 1430 Pemberton?
If that's the case, I would think the extension of the redevelopment agreement should be extended. I had talked to the gentleman for 753 South Hicks Street. And, yes, he -- Hicks Street is a street that if we could take, I think, the 97 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 five or six properties that's on that block, we will restore that block back to its beauty and make it a livable block. If he's taking that property, 753, and he's fixing that property up, that's what we wanted done. So if that individual is doing that and can demonstrate that, I would think that the extension of the development agreement would be recommended by us as the developers of this site.
How do you acquire this agreement? How would you acquire this agreement?
We will make that all a part of the record, also. (Mr. Eisenstat comes forward.)
My name is Noel Eisenstat, and I'm from the Redevelopment Authority. The question at hand is, what is the procedure by which you would be contacted as it relates to entering this agreement? Your actions today would proceed as any other with the necessary actions by the governing body of signing 98 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 the ordinance by the Mayor. Your property would be within the urban renewal taking and identified as such. Your property would be appraised as if it were to be acquired. In lieu of condemnation, you will receive a document, which is an agreement, which you would otherwise know as a contract. That contract would spell out that you would have a date certain period of time to bring your building into code compliance and that it would be in safe sanitary, standards. In absence of that contracting being met within the timeframe, which we have agreed upon here is two years, the Authority, after that two years, would have the legal authority to acquire the property as if it was a vacant lot that was not being rehabbed today. But you would be contacted by the Authority -- the property owner will be contacted by the Authority, and an agreement or contract would be provided with some negotiation about term. You know, there may be an attachment of what's the nature of the rehab so that there's no 25 disagreement once it was done, that it is what it 99 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 was said to be. And from there, things would proceed.
Okay. I have just one other closing thing. These properties in this area strategically are very valuable. And my feeling is that a lot of people don't have the resources to renovate properties or to do it or the knowledge to even begin to stop a leak, and a lot of times a leak is what causes the demise of these properties because we just don't have the skills in our community to do it. Why can't the poor people that have been living there for generations acquire a reasonable sum of money for their properties instead of just being taken? I mean, that's like -- you know, it's almost like Nazi Germany: I want your place 'cause it's worth $100,000 now. You know, I'm coming in and I'm taking it from you. And the bottom line is that, today, is that we as a community really don't have anything, the black community. We don't have the money and the resources to do it. Why shouldn't these 100 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 people be paid? I mean, I'm not in danger and I'm not in jeopardy; I'm just concerned that these senior citizens and these people who have inherited these properties are just going to take a loss, whereas some of the people that come in the community -- and I know of some properties that were bought that are in worse shape than this for 70, $80,000, as a shell.
My name is Noel Eisenstat. Let me first help with some clarification here. When the Redevelopment Authority speaks of acquiring properties, it sometimes uses the word "taking," and that is probably not an appropriate term. The Authority, by law, must have the property appraised. The Authority does that with an appraiser. You or anyone else will be asked to join the appraiser upon inspection. If you or anyone else is unhappy with the value that we have offered you, you're given the full right to question this or challenge this in what is known 101 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 as Board of Reviewers hearing. Recently, there was an article about how the Board of Reviewers works in the Inquirer this week. And it's an entity that meets and settles -- the attempts to provide an independent judgment for these issues. If, for some reason, the Board Reviewers makes a determination that the property owner's not happy with, they are automatically provided an automatic appeal known as an appeal de novo to the Court of Common Pleas, and a jury trial can be set, and the property owner can make his or her claim in front of a Common Pleas Court judge and jury in the County and City of Philadelphia to challenge the value. And even before we -- let me also go back. Even before we would get to the Board of U hearing, if the Authority makes an offer and you think it's wrong or that you've made improvements, the Authority has an obligation to negotiate with you and exchange appraisals. And if you have an appraisal, before having to go through the expense and time of these hearings, the Authority will sit down with you and if you have an lawyer or an appraiser and negotiate with you in good faith to 102 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 see if there's a way to compromise the claim. But people will be compensated for the value of their property based on an appraisal. However, I would also remind you that back taxes are something the City, I believe, in most cases plans on receiving first.
Yes, it's no doubt about that. Okay, when you go to get a loan and they evaluate your property, or you go to sell the property, you get comps. You know, like on the next block, this house went for $75,000, and this house, as a shell, sold for $80,000. Is that the type of appraisals you're going to be doing? Are you going to get comps around the neighborhood to see how much the other shells went for and give these people the fair market value that way? Or is it going to be like my partner Norman was told. Norman, Norman? He was told that his property was wanted and that he would receive $3,000 for a property that he just spent $40,000 for. Is that right? That you would receive $3,000 for --
Wait a 103 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 minute, wait a minute, we can't have this. Excuse me, Mr. Fields. We can't have this conversation across the room.
Council President, let me reiterate. I can't speak to you about any particular property today which is worth 70,000 or 50,000 or $150,000. I can tell you that our appraisals are conducted based on comparable -- there are a series of approaches. The primary approach for residential real estate is, in fact, a comparable approach, looking at similarly-situated real estate physically located and of similar size and in a similar area. And that is the approach that's used, and that provides the standard by which appraisals are made. And property owners are given the opportunity to undertake their own appraisals. There have been no determinations made as to the particular values at all in the situation.
Mr. 104 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 Eisenstat, thank you. Mr. Fields, if you have any further questions, maybe you could talk to Mr. Eisenstat personally.
Thank you. Our next witness. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is Wayne Williams, and I'm here on behalf of Miss Marielle Graves. She's one of the oldest property owners in the southwest of the city. She's -- her father was a doctor down there. Her whole entire family was a doctor down there. I just want to say one thing on behalf myself too. The redline situation came up earlier in this meeting. I was a committeeman back in 1980, and the only person who really helped us out -- and I'm not just saying this off the cuff as they say in the street, but the only person who really helped us out with redlining in that situation was Miss Verna. She came to the meetings and she was responsible for League Street, Kimball Street straight through getting 105 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 fixed up. I was the bad guy. Couldn't get a job nowhere 'cause I was the bad guy. We were fighting HUD then. And the only person that would come to our meetings and help us out with the redlining situation was Miss Verna. Now, on behalf of Miss Graves, she's interested in -- she's going to be talking and trying to talk to some people at Universal Homes, and I'm going to try to guide her through some things, but she's interested in 763, Miss Graves?
It was next door to her property that she owned. The property wasn't fixed properly. I think the contractors that tore the property down didn't come back, you know, and fixed the sides of her house, and she's concerned about that right now. 106 12/1/99 RULES - 990716
She's concerned about the contractors fixing up her house, the sides of her house that was torn down.
Oh, so they demolished the property adjacent to her, and they have not stuccoed your property?
We'll get that information and contact L&I for you.
Do you want to add anything to this bill. Are you in favor of it?
You know, I'm like the old rabble-rouser down in the community. And I think that it's -- I really like the bill, I really do. I mean, it's time for us to clean the community up. I know there's a lot of bitter feelings over the years. I can now point out to the individual people who contributed a lot, like 107 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 Barney, people who came in after that. But I mean, you was always there for us, you was always there for us, and I think you are there for us now. And I'm in favor of the bill. I like what Rahim is doing. I mean, it's something that we tried to get done a long time ago. But, Miss Graves, do you have anything you want to say on behalf other than that?
I had a contractor to fix up a home at 772 South 15th Street and he was stopped on the job.
He didn't say who, but he left the job because I was out of town at the time, and I thought my house was ready to be rented. And he said no, someone came and stopped him and said he didn't have --
She say he didn't have 108 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 the permits, Miss Graves.
We'll take care of that. We'll take care of that, Miss Verna. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good morning. My name is Georgette Fields. I'm here as a representative of our neighborhood group, South of South Neighborhood Association. And we've been here quite a while and most of us are not young. We haven't had our breakfast. I'm just here to speak for the organization, and I'd like to ask for those that are here from SOSNA to stand, please. (SOSNA associates stand).
And inasmuch as we're now going to go into the individual situations, I'm going to ask your permission for us to leave, but 109 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 I'd like it to go on record that we're here in support of the plans.
Thank you very much. And the record will reflect that there were approximately people from SOSNA present 7 since early this morning. 8 Thank you very much. 9
Hello. My name is David 10 Bauman. I just wanted to add a caveat about the 11 redevelopment proposal. 12 It seems like I share some of the concerns that Miss Valerie Harris had, the woman on Smedley Street, who wasn't really notified about a number of these meetings and so forth. And I'm also somewhat concerned of if there's a kind of a thorough-going demolition that -- because I feel like a lot of these houses still can be saved and the opportunity to do kind of rehabbing these houses for the people who own them or people of low-income to retain the character of these places, because a lot of the places that go up have a kind of tract-house look that just looks like it's going to get deteriorated quickly. In fact, some of those houses at 16th and Catharine 110 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 that were just constructed are already getting graffitied. And my concern is that -- and as a matter of fact, I even volunteered at Neighbors in Action in your office on Wharton Street to help people who wanted to rehab houses because I have some skills in rehabbing houses. And I was -- I was wondering if it's possible for the Council to have an oversight committee for the specific purpose of kind of keeping track of things, about how things get rehabbed and what gets torn down so that there's not a rush to just tear things down. Because I think a lot of these --
Excuse me, sir. I think the Redevelopment Authority already does that.
And they will -- is there someone that you could tell me that I can contact?
Mr. Eisenstat is in the room, and I think before you leave --
Mr. Eisenstat is the person to contact? 111 12/1/99 RULES - 990716
Thank you. All right. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? (Witness comes forward.)
Good afternoon. My name is Geraldine Mayo, M-A-Y-O. And I own the lot at 1522 Bainbridge and the adjoining home of 1524 Bainbridge. My thoughts about this matter are split. The reason being, I was mysteriously paged two nights ago by a resident of Bainbridge who informed me of this meeting and also offered me a sum of money for both the lot and the adjacent property and told me to get back to him. I have paid my taxes on both the lot and the home. It started out seven years ago when I purchased both homes by different Realtors. I spent $15,000 of my own money, cash, to demolish, through the Thorn Equipment Company, the property 112 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 of Bainbridge and Lowell, which is a small alleyway street. I spent more thousand dollars 4 erecting a 12-foot fence with razor barbed wire to house that lot. As far as the development of the City goes, I was told eight years ago that there was a plan. This was before the Avenue of the Arts took effect. And they said that in the next ten years, this area was going to be developed and that it was going to be very beneficial for investors. In the area, I see residents that have been there for generations. I also see the new Yuppies and the Buppies who maybe cannot afford the Society Hill yet, but have nestled into that Graduate Hospital area. This area, this square does need to be developed. Upon placing $5,000 worth of vinyl windows behind boards and doing the structural work on the adjacent house, the remaining house, through contractor Randazzo, the door was kicked in, the front and back doors were stolen, the marble steps, three outside the residence, were removed, and the electrical system was also removed. This was four years ago. 113 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 As a lover of Philadelphia as far as the cultural activity goes in the city -- and I'm still awaiting those glass fixtures that were promised on Broad by, let's say, near the automobile, I guess, sales area near the Academy of the Arts, it was promised ten years ago that a sculptor was supposed to make glass fixtures on each side of the corner there, and those plans were abandoned. The frustration is this: as we put in thousands of dollars into these properties only to see them walk out the back door, some of the young developers have ceased. So going on to the last conclusionary (sic) point of my thought process, which is in favor of the development of the area, I feel as though if some townhouses were erected, that maybe the inclusion of other faction factors in the area would stabilize it so that the young investors and some of the residences that are already there might keep the vinyl windows that they placed in the slots instead of seeing them walk down the street. So my -- my -- I guess my thought 114 12/1/99 RULES - 990716 process is split. Yes, I'm in favor for it because I think so that it's a positive situation to revitalize the area and it also gives us more stability in the area. And maybe knowing that I would like the community to be informed, we received our tax statements in the mail, but I did not receive a formal letter of this forum. I was paged anonymously. And the offer of the money for the properties, I guess, is still on my mind. Thank you for listening to me.
Thank you very much. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
I want to really thank everyone for their patience. The next bill to be considered is Bill 20 No. 990642. I would ask the clerk to please read the title of that bill.
An ordinance amending Title 14 of the Philadelphia Code relating to zoning and planning by amending Chapter 14-1600, entitled "Miscellaneous," by adding a new Section 14-1616, 115 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 entitled "East Falls Special District Controls," under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning. Is it morning? No, it's not. It's afternoon.
Good afternoon, Madam President and members of the Rules Committee. My name is Richard Lombardo of the Planning Commission. And I'm here today to speak on behalf of Bill 990642 and Bill 990643.
Would the clerk will please read the title of Bill 990643.
An ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bonded by Weightman Street, Ridge Avenue, a line approximately 77 feet northwest of Calumet Street, Cresson Street, Indian Queen Lane, 116 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 Krail Street, Roosevelt Boulevard, Ridge Avenue, a certain railroad right-of-way, and the Schuylkill River.
Good afternoon again. I'm Richard Lombardo of the Planning Commission, and I'm here today to speak on behalf of Bills 990642 and 990643. We're here today as a sort of culmination of a process that began over a year ago, which, in my many years of doing this type of zoning work for Planning Commission, was probably the most inclusive, thorough participatory process, beginning with the subcommittee meetings that made recommendation to the larger group, right through the final adoption of these bills at general membership meetings, several general membership meetings which were held in the community. This bill sort of tried to reach out, through the good efforts of Councilman Nutter, to reach out and make sure that everyone in the community was informed about what was going on and 117 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 was participating in the process. And there are representatives here from the community, and we have letters from the four major stakeholders in the community, which, very quickly, is the East Falls Community Council, the East Falls Development Corporation, the East Falls Business Association, and the Schuylkill Falls Tenants Council, all of whom have sent letters to us and to Councilman Nutter, endorsing the passage of both of these pieces of legislation.
Do you have extra copies of those letters to be made a part of the record for the stenographer?
Yes, we'll make sure you have copies. These bills, as I said, are companion bills, and they do two separate things. And first I'll talk about the goal here. The goal here was to try to have the East Falls community reestablish Ridge Avenue and Midvale Avenue through the East Falls community as a commercial area to serve the larger East Falls community. Presently, the area is zoned as a mixture of residential and commercial and 118 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 industrial buildings. A lot of commercial -- those commercials are inappropriate and doesn't lend to be developed as commercial. It's office commercial, which envisions strictly office building type of use. It's been zoned that way for 20, 30 years. There obviously is not a market for office development, and that property has never been developed. But the underlying zoning, for example, doesn't allow retail. It only is limited to office type of use. A lot of the property are zoned heavy industrial and are not no longer industrial -- they're not industrial, they're rowhouses and store fronts. They're not industrial properties. But the purpose of this effort was to reestablish these two streets as retail areas to serve the larger community, as well as, looking at the success of Main Street and Manayunk, to try to recreate in East Falls a similar type of retail area as Main Street in Manayunk. So the first of these bills -- the second of these bills, 990643, is the bill that changes the zoning of various properties along 119 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 Ridge Avenue and along Midvale Avenue to C2 commercial. The only blocks that aren't being changed to C2 commercial is the block of Ridge Avenue between the Boulevard and the railroad right-of-way, as you can see on the map, and that's being changed from G2 to L4 limited industrial. I'd like to add here that in the original -- somehow in the original draft of the map that was put -- that was introduced, it showed two of the blocks remaining as office commercial. We have an amendment which we've talked to the clerk's office about, and we will hand 'em up, to replace the map with a map that shows the block between Calumet Street and Weightman Street, Ridge Avenue to River Drive, all being changed to C2 commercial. And we would recommend at the end of this testimony that the bill be amended to show that C2 commercial. So let's say the purpose of this bill 22 is to rezone all of these properties from various noncommercial classifications to a single C2 classification. Now, C2 allows a broad spectrum of 120 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 commercial uses, some of which are not necessarily appropriate to a commercial strip, neighborhood commercial strip. So the second of these bills, 990642, establishes a zoning overlay which limits the types of uses, the hours of operation, the size of buildings, it establishes both use restrictions and zoning controls, which this committee is probably familiar with 'cause we've been before you a number of times with various community and business associations to establish zoning overlays, and will be with you in the future, at the next Rules hearing, to talk about zoning overlay from Manayunk. But, basically, this is a method of reining in the underlying zoning to make it more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. In this particular instance, the overlay would limit -- restrict uses or take out uses out of the C2, which is thought to be inappropriate for the type of commercial area the community is trying to establish.
Basically, these uses are large assembly-type uses, athletic and drill hall, automobile-related uses, automobile repair shop, automobile sales lot, drive-through restaurants, 121 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 drive-through sale windows, sale of live poultry, live fish or live animals for human consumption, radio and television carriers, penal and correctional institutions, various utility type of uses, water booster, sewer substations, telephone exchange building, electric transforming. It also limits the size of other uses. It doesn't say they're inappropriate, but one of the (unintelligible) was the large blocks, some of the large blocks that are in this area. I know it's late and I don't want to take a long time so I'll try to run through this. The large blocks of property involved here, they did not want to have one single user come in and put up a big hardware store or a big appliance store -- not to disparage American Appliance or Circuit City, but that type of big, single-box type of retail establishment. So they're limiting the size to 1500 square feet of gross floor area for certain types of commercial uses. And those would be electrical appliances, floor coverings, furniture, garden supplies, hardware, household appliances, office equipment and supplies. You get a flavor, of the big Office 122 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 Max, the Staples, the big type of freestanding retail, radio and TV sets. So that's the two -- the purpose of the two bills. The two bills are to reestablish the area as a commercial area and put limitations to make sure it develops as a sort of neighborhood services type of retail area. And as I said, this was a very participatory, inclusive process. Tom Chapman and myself attended a number of meetings spanning over a year, and the Councilman's staff attended a number of these meetings. For the record, the Planning Commission, at the meeting of December 1, 1999, recommends approval of both bills.
Why would I expect you to have said that? (Laughter.)
Are there any questions from members of the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else to testify on this bill? (Witnesses come forward.) 123 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43
Madam President Verna, thank you very much. Councilman Nutter, Councilman Kenney, Councilman DiCicco. I'm Hansel Minyard. I'm a resident of East Falls and a member of the East Falls Community Association and the Development Corporation. Rich gave a pretty thorough account of what we went through to get before you today, and it's been a long morning and I know you want to leave, so I'm going to be real quick. Actually, this process is more like three years old. We did a master plan for the area, we did a marketing study. The meetings encompassed everyone in the community. We mailed lists, we found out who all the owners of the properties were and invited them to attend. I can't tell you how many nights we did meet. We did the initial draft, it was reviewed, we revised it, and it is now submitted to you. What I want to add is that Councilman Nutter and his staff was extremely helpful to us, and the people from City Planning, particularly 124 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 these two gentlemen, spent at least hours in meetings where I was in attendance in the evenings, helping us out, getting us through the process, showing us what could be done. And that's one area of city government that our newspapers don't write about. And I just, for the record, want to say how appreciative I am and how much help these folks were. The gentleman to my right, whose name I forgotten, and the lady's here are my colleagues. The gentleman to my right recently bought a property in the industrial section when it was -- what was it, G2? G2. Which permitted a certain use that we aren't certain is consistent with the L1. He has a concern, and I think my colleagues and I are willing to address that in any way that we possibly can. Thank you very much for your time.
My name is Leon Silvestro. I was born and raised in East Falls. For the last 20 years, I've been living in 125 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 Roxborough, which is the next neighborhood over. I purchased a property down at the 4000 block of Ridge Avenue about five years ago with a partner, to develop that property. Since then, my partner has changed his mind, I bought him out, but my intentions on the property was to put in a cabinet shop. I'm also a (unintelligible) fabricator, high-end cabinetry. I can reproduce these desks here in the room. My concern is with the change in the zoning there, that it would limit me in my fabrication of, you know, these products that I've been doing most of my life. I've been a general contractor and cabinetmaker my entire life, which is close to 30 years in the business. I'm really not sure of what zoning is what, other than when I purchased it, my architect had said that I was capable of doing everything that I wanted to do. And recently, I got notice that they wanted to change that, and I've made an investment to this property, I've started developing the back of it. I've done a lot of work to the inside of it. And now they're telling me that they're going to limit me to what I 126 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 intended to do with it.
Mr. Lombardo? (Richard Lombardo returns to the witness table.)
I don't believe he's gotten a permit yet, have you? Have you applied for permits?
I was under the understanding that I didn't need a permit to start a business there.
Well, you would -- your architect would have needed to get a use registration permit for any kind of a use. When you change your use from whatever. Say you go from a grocery store to a barbershop, you need to get a use registration permit.
He said that the zoning that it was at the time that I purchased it, that I didn't need to do anything, that I could open up tomorrow without notifying anybody.
Well, he gave you some 127 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 misinformation. I mean you do have to get a permit. I mean, it's not -- it's a -- you go in and you apply for it and you get it right across the counter, but you have to get a permit. But as the question of grandfathering, it's whether or not he has a permit. I don't think it's necessary. I can't give him a permit, but I don't think it's necessary to issue. L4 allows the manufacturer of furniture, manufacturer of shelving, I believe carpentry are all permitted uses in the L4 district, so he should be okay. I hate doing this because he could go over to L&I and an examiner could deny him a permit. I can't give permit. My reading of the code is that he should be okay under L4 to do what he wants to do. He'd have been better if had gotten correct advice from his architect and had gotten a use and registration permit because then, to answer your, he would have been grandfathered in, and it wouldn't matter whether we changed the zoning or not.
Mr. Lombardo, I mean, it sounds to me like there are a couple of 128 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 potential solutions to this situation. One, he could, in fact, go over to L&I today, tomorrow -- it's not like we're going to pass the bill 5 immediately -- and get whatever permits he needs. He can get, hopefully, better advice, if he got bad advice from the architect, but also talk to the examiners over at L&I. That's one route that he can go. Two, if for some reason he doesn't do that now and the bill passes, I think with his working with the community, I don't get the impression that there's opposition to his business. And even with the overlay, anyone has still the opportunity to go to the Zoning Board to get a variance. And it would seem to me that under the current circumstances, you would more than likely have support from the four groups that are supporting the overlay to support you to get your variance. I mean, obviously, no one's trying to put you out of business. Your quickest route, naturally, is to just go and get a permit for whatever it is that you need immediately.
But my concern was that 129 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 the rezoning was going to limit me to my hours and the noise that would come out of my shop.
No, L4 does not impose those types of limitations. There's a limitation that -- do you make anything that weighs more than a ton, 2,000 pounds? The only limitation is the limitation of how big a thing you can make.
TV sets are getting bigger and bigger, so I make cabinets for 'em and I can't say that it wouldn't --
It's just no heavy manufacturing of things that weigh a ton, but that's the only limitation. There's no noise limitation; it's a limitation on the total weight of what you produce. The other thing is that, in fact, the community is going in this direction to L4 to open up more possibilities for reuse of these properties. Right now, they're limited to industrial use, and L4 would allow both industrial uses and commercial uses. So it's expanding the use. So I think the community is in a mode of trying to get these buildings rehabbed and 130 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 reoccupied and used, not in a mode of stopping people from doing that.
Again, let me just make this suggestion. You can talk to the Planning Commission and work with my office, and we can help you through the L&I process. But the testimony today seems to indicate that you should be fine.
We understand that and want to get you through the process. I think, most importantly, you just need to get your permit from the change in use from what it was to what you're doing today. It's an across-the-counter sort of item.
Is that the ground floor of MSB still? If you would talk to --
Right. Just talk to those guys right there. They'll help you out. 131 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 And you can touch base back with my office either today or tomorrow or whenever you decide to go over there, and we'll help to walk you through the process.
Although if there's a line, you will have to stand in line 'cause I don't do expediting services. (Laughter.)
Madam President and members of the committee, thank you for not breaking for lunch before you heard us. I would like to speak to the need for these -- my name is Marilyn Shaffer and I'm on the Development Corporation. I'm also on the Business Association. I'm a tree-tender, I'm a founder of Saving the Lost Arboretum. But more importantly, 132 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 I was co-chair with Hansel for the zoning overlay and the zoning changes because I realized that was the first necessary step in changing East Falls.
Marilyn, I'm sorry. Could you bring that mike a little closer to you for the members. Thank you.
We need these zoning changes in order to prepare East Falls for revitalization. We need a vital main street that the C2 zoning change will allow. We need the zoning overlay to provide control over the kind of development in order to safeguard the community. We envision a beautiful and revitalized Ridge Ave. and a Victorian theme that reflects the existing architecture, with stores to service the local shopping needs and to capture the park users' commerce. This two-pronged development objective will eliminate the blight now existing on Ridge Avenue and will create jobs for un- and underemployed residents. Our goals for development are guided by our goals to preserve green space and to enhance our views of the river and to encourage pedestrian rather than auto 133 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 uses. We developed these goals through many public meetings, with the guidance of land use professionals. The zoning overlay committee began meeting with members of the City Planning officials over, I think, a year and a half ago, with members from all the neighborhood organizations and many property owners. We have crafted a plan that meets everyone's needs. The L4 area -- in fact, it was G2. Many of the residents, like Leon, were artists, and they wanted to be able to live there and yet have their studio and their work space there. So Rich Lombardo suggested an L4, which provides for all of these uses and yet doesn't provide, you know, for a slaughterhouse and stuff like that, which we didn't want there. So the HOPE VI Program is going forward, and this zoning change and overlay is the first step in the manifestation of our vision for a beautiful and revitalized East Falls that celebrates its connection to the river. It is very important that this bill 25 pass. I'm sorry, we had four other members of our 134 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 local civic organizations here to testify for this bill, and they had to go. And, again, we want to publicly thank Rich Lombardo and Tom Chapman for making this, in their words, the most inclusive, thorough and participatory process that they have participated in. Thank you.
Thank you for your testimony and thank you for your patience. We really appreciate your waiting. Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name's Carolyn Sutton, and I'm a 13-year resident of East Falls and Vice President of the Development Corporation. I'll be very brief because I think most of what we all feel has been said. But I did want to identify the other people that were here today and had to leave. Julie Cambern (ph.) Is the editor of the Fallser, the newspaper that we use on a consistent basis to let residents of the community know what's going, and she's also Vice President of the Business Association. Alice Rife (ph.) and Peggy Gertz 135 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 (ph.) are both homeowners of longtime standing along Ridge Avenue and also Midvale, and they came also to show their support. Ron Bedner (ph.) Is a technical advisor to our group and he is with the Department of Economic development for Pennsylvania, and had a great deal of input into our work. And the last person who left was Roberta Ginsberg, the President of the Development Corporation, and who certainly has been an inspiration in this process. I agree fully with the viewpoints that Marilyn expressed, but I did want to say that one of the our goals in putting together the zoning change recommendation and the overlay was to support full community requests for buildings and services that would provide us with retail products and services, parking, recreational appeal, and employment potential for our neighbors. And that could be all from me.
Fine. Thank you very much. Are there any questions or comments from any members of the committee? 136 12/1/99 RULES - 990642, 43 (No questions.)
Do we have anyone else to testify on Bill No.'s 990642 or 990643?
Thank you. Very briefly, we have letters from each of the presidents of the four community-based organizations that were submitted, and I would ask if they could be added to record as if they were read in as testimony. That's the Schuykill Falls Tenant Council, the East Falls Community Council, the East Falls Business Association, and the East Falls Development Corporation, who are all in support of these two bills.
Thank you, Councilman. I believe that the stenographer already has copies of the letter. Thank you all very much again.
The clerk 137 12/1/99 RULES - 990723 will please read the title of Bill No. 990723.
An ordinance amending an ordinance approved August 30, 1965, 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 Center City Redevelopment Area, Franklin Urban Renewal Area, by approving the fourth amendment of the redevelopment proposal and the fifth amendment to the urban renewal plan, which provide, inter alia, for the expansion of the southwestern boundary to include the blocks generally bounded by 11th Street, Ridge Avenue, Wood Street, and Vine Street; applying the mixed-use category to the expanded area; modification to the mixed-use category to prohibit certain specific uses for the additional land acquisition of approximately three properties; and provision of certain relocation services, as required by law; all as contained in the fourth amendment of the redevelopment proposal and the fifth amendment to the urban renewal plan.
Mr. Lombardo, are you testifying on this bill? 138 12/1/99 RULES - 990723
Who do we have to testify on this bill? (Noel Eisenstat comes forward.)
Good afternoon. My name is Noel Eisenstat. I'm the Executive Director of the City's Redevelopment Authority, and I'm here to comment on Bill 990723, which is in the Franklin Town Urban Renewal Area, which is part of the Center City Redevelopment Area, and I'm here to discuss the Holy Redeemer Catholic Church and School expansion. My testimony explains to you that the Authority has undertaken a series of activities, including a 51-unit mixed-income-unit housing development, and an 11-unit mixed-income development. We're here today to talk about a very small piece of property, and I think that my testimony is self-explanatory. With me is Reverend Tom Betz, who really can explain why this property is so important.
Good afternoon. My name is Father Tom Betz, and I am the Director of 139 12/1/99 RULES - 990723 Holy Redeemer Chinese Catholic Church and School. I have served the Holy Redeemer for more than eight years. During these years, I've seen dramatic growth in Chinatown, at Holy Redeemer, and in the Asian community of Philadelphia. Chinatown and the Asian Community are growing rapidly, and I'm happy to say that Holy Redeemer has grown rapidly during these years, also. Our school enrollment has increased over the 8 years that I've been there by more than 85 students, and we're now bursting at capacity. All of our programs -- the English for adults, recreation, tutoring for kids -- are thriving. The recent construction of 51 homes at Ninth and Vine has stabilized the neighborhood and opened the possibility of other new homes and businesses in the area surrounding Holy Redeemer, north of Vine Street. Because of generous benefactors, Holy Redeemer is planning to build a new building, consisting of a lunchroom for the school, two classrooms, and a library. The new lunch room will allow to Holy Redeemer to use its gym seven days a week. It's now used as a lunch 140 12/1/99 RULES - 990723 room and a gym both for the school and the community. The library would be for Holy Redeemer School children; however, we also plan to open it several nights each week for the local public school kids. Some of the land within our church wall is burdened by old, unused interests long ago condemned for the Vine Street Expressway. The growth of Holy Redeemer and Chinatown requires us now to acquire title to these three parcels of land already located in our church and school yard. We ask the assistance of the City of Philadelphia for this project. Madam Chair and members of the Committee on Rules, I respectfully urge favorable consideration of Bill No. 980335 and also request a waiver of Council rules which would allow for the first reading of this bill at the next meeting of City Council, on December 2, 1999. Thank you.
Thank you, Father. I'm very happy to hear that Holy Redeemer is doing so well.
That's great. Are there any questions? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Thank you very much, Father, and thank you for your patience.
This will conclude public hearing of the Rules Committee. - - -
We will now go into our public meeting. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney regarding Bill No. 990716.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 990716 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and with an additional request made for a rules suspension to allow for first reading at our next Council session. (Duly seconded.)
It has been 142 12/1/99 RULES - PUBLIC MEETING moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 990716 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and also a recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next meeting. All in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it and the motion is carried. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter regarding Bill No. 990642.
Madam Chair, I move that Bill 990642 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 has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 990642 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and also a recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit 143 12/1/99 RULES - PUBLIC MEETING first reading at our next meeting. All those in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it and the motion is carried. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter regarding Bill No. 990643.
Madam Chair, on that bill, I believe Mr. Chapman or Mr. Lombardo mentioned in their testimony that there's an amendment in that bill. That's an amendment to Map B-1, a proposed zoning map, which is presently on in the bill. And I would move the adoption of the amendment. (Duly seconded.)
It's been moved and seconded that the amendment be adopted. All those in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it and the motion is carried. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter. 144 12/1/99 RULES - PUBLIC MEETING
Madam Chair, I move that Bill 990643, as amended, 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 has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 990643 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation, as amended, and that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. All those in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it and the motion is carried. The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco regarding Bill No. 990723.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill 990723 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and a further recommendation that the rules of Council 145 12/1/99 RULES - PUBLIC MEETING of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of City Council. (Duly seconded.)
It's been moved and seconded that Bill No. 990723 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and also a recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next meeting. All those in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it and the motion is carried. At this time, the Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
Madam Chair, I move that the Rules Committee approve the revision to the University of Pennsylvania Institutional Development District Master Plan. That's the plan -- the revision was requested by Councilwoman Blackwell as the District Councilmember and was further approved by the Planning Commission, and all that is necessary for approval of the plan now 146 12/1/99 RULES - PUBLIC MEETING is for this committee to approve it. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded. All in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it and the motion is carried thank you all very much. Thank you all very much. Thank you for your patience. (Adjourned at 12:50 p.m.) - - - 147 C E R T I F I C A T E I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Wednesday, December 1, 1999, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of same. RE: COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON RULES BILL NO.'S 990642, 990643, 990716, 990723 __________________________________, JOSEPHINE CARDILLO, Registered Professional Reporter