You're welcome. Before you start, is there anyone else who wishes or anticipates 78 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 testifying today who has not identified themselves? (No response.)
Okay. All right. Please identify yourself and proceed.
Thank you. My name is Sarah Clark Stuart and I am Co-Coordinator of Free Schuylkill River Park, and I thank you, Mr. Chairman, Council President, Councilman Clarke and Kelly and O'Neill, thank you for inviting me here today to testify. I know that you all have my testimony. I don't want to read it all through, but I will just try to hit the highlights and cover some issues that weren't already touched upon by the other witnesses. First, just quickly, Free Schuylkill River Park was started by park users and neighbors who were alarmed when we learned that the railroad wanted to 79 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 cut off street-level access at Race and Locust Streets. Many thousands of people have been waiting for years for this park to be built and we couldn't believe that the fence would prevent us from crossing over the tracks into the park. We got organized about two years ago and we are supported by a thousand people and over 30 different civic organizations. Park users have used our website and e-mail actions to send thousands of letters and faxes to elected officials, including, I think, all of you, over the past year and a half regarding this issue, all with the same message, which is that they want to keep the street-level access open at Race and Locust Streets, and they are very much opposed to CSX's practice of parking trains on top of those streets. To summarize, you've heard of the story of how this park was built, how it's meant to go all the way eight miles down to the Fort Mifflin and the Delaware 80 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 River, but I want to emphasize that as new and wonderful as this park is, people have been walking to the riverfront for decades, if not hundreds of years. Frequently people who argue with me about this issue say, Well, the railroad was here first, and I just want to say for the record, it was not here first. The City was here first. The City streets were here first. Race, Cherry and Locust Streets have been leading all the way to the Schuylkill River for hundreds of years, and that's a fact and that is what has to be understood, and that's something CSX just refuses to acknowledge. As you know, the railroad has sued the City in federal court, and the bottom line, as you just heard, is that the railroad refuses to agree to street-level access at Locust Street even though they appear to be willing to live with it at Race. They want the City, you, me, everyone else who lives here, to 81 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 build an overpass at Locust Street. So let me just cover a few of the issues. First of all, the Schuylkill River Development Corporation has been counting very thoroughly for the past three months, and we've been supplying the park counters. We estimate based on those three months of counts that 10,000 people use this park on a weekly basis. This number is astonishing. If you go down there any day, you will not believe how many people are using this park for biking, commuting, exercise, walking their children to school, walking to the train station, walking to work. Secondly, as you heard, there's been tremendous development on the park and along the river and in the future, and enclosed in my testimony I have letters from five of the developers who have written to Governor Rendell and Senator Fumo about how upset they are that the railroad wants to close off access and how upset they are about the 82 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 trains that have been parked in front of their properties. Secondly, as I mentioned before, the railroad's position really begs the question of what right does it have to block a City street in the first place? The City should be making land use decisions. City Council should be making land use decisions, not a Jacksonville, Florida-based corporation.
And the City streets were here long before the railroad had, quote/unquote, crossing rights, which is all it got in 1885 when your predecessors on City Council passed an ordinance allowing the first railroad to lay down these tracks. That's all they are. They can cross the City streets on their tracks, but they don't have any right or have any other permission to park their trains for long periods of time. The City never vacated Race, Locust, Cherry Streets, Arch Streets. They never closed them down, and this 83 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 railroad shouldn't be behaving as if you did. Thirdly, with the help of Councilman Kelly and Senator Arlen Specter, some money has been found. Some federal money has been found to pay for the signalized crossings that the City has offered up in this lawsuit. So money is not a problem to build these crossings, but I think as you heard, the railroad wants all that money to be put towards an overpass, which I think is a true height of arrogance if I've ever heard it. I want to touch on why parking is the problem and I want to explain some charts that I included in my testimony. We set up an on-line form that people could fill out if they were ever blocked by a train. So we've been collecting data on parked trains since July of last year. We took that database and summarized the information in the two charts that you see. And I think it's 84 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 very interesting. First of all, it shows that Locust is much more blocked than Race Street, and Locust is much closer to the East Side Yard than Race Street. Secondly, the parking intensity happened during the summer of 2004 -- you can see by the total number of hours -- summer of 2004 and the summer of 2005. This just happens to be when people use the park the most. Whether or not this is a coincidence, I don't know, but I think it's very interesting how closely it's correlated. Secondly, another correlation is that the parking really built up right until they filed the lawsuit last October, and it's been building up as the settlement negotiations have become more intense. So while during the intense periods it can be upwards of 45 hours, 70 hours a month where parked trains have been on top of Locust, during the months of October, November all the way through 85 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 May, they were hardly ever there. And if you look at the Chart B, it's the same data but shows it on a per-day basis, the amount of time or amount of days where trains were parked all day were about 7 times. So that's 15 times over 15 8 months. 9 If you average out all the 10 amount of hours that we've estimated and 11 observed that the trains have been parked 12 on top of Locust and Race, it comes out 13 to about four hours a day, three or four 14 hours a day. Why should the public be 15 asked to bear the cost of building a to to to million dollar overpass over tracks that are empty hours out of the day? That just doesn't make any sense. Another problem that is created by the parking that was not mentioned before is noise. They leave their engines idling for hours at a time, and for the poor people who live right at river's edge and other developments right on the water, they have to listen to this 86 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 noise. It's very loud. It wakes people up at night, and it's becoming a very serious problem. Back to the chart, I just want to say that if an overpass is built over Locust Street, the railroad will have carte blanche to park as long as it wants. So you'll just have high bars all the time, because they will then have the freedom to just park however long they want all the time. So it's giving them permission to park ad infinitum. There are alternatives to parking. If I could maybe get, I think it's, Map B. There is a big siding area on the Belmont Plateau in the middle of the -- on the west side of the Schuylkill River Park. There is the high line.
The high line CSX owns also. We don't understand why these long trains can't be moved on that line instead of on the Schuylkill River. This line on the east side of the bank goes down to the East Side Yard. 87 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 Why can't they lay more siding south of the East Side Yard if that's where they need to store cars? And the railroad has been refusing to acknowledge these kinds of operational options and do any kind of analysis to demonstrate why it can't move its parking problem somewhere else. So as I mentioned before, we feel that the City's Law Department has offered up a very reasonable solution. We feel strongly since the City never vacated these streets, that there's no 15 reason for the City to give them up by agreeing to an overpass. And overall, the public has rights, and the railroad really has no right to trample on them. And lastly and just to close, if CSX can't be reasonable and co-exist with us, then I think that City Council and the City has to take matters in its own hands. The City has the law on its side in its case, and we are counting on you, City Council, to protect our rights. 88 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. " If you clarify that it does not mean that parking is allowed, that they must only transport and go through and pass, this would force the railroad to find parking space for its trains elsewhere on its own system and on its own dime, not the public's. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Any questions? (No response.) (Applause.)
Sure. Members of Council, my name is Rob Stuart. I'm a citizen of Philadelphia and I live near the Race Street crossing on Van Pelt Street. I'm very pleased to be here and 89 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 to not take up too much time, but maybe offer just an interested citizen's view of the issue. I've been going down to the park before it was a park, though I understood from speaking with my neighbor, Tully Speaker, who is here, ten years ago there's always been a plan for a park. In fact, we've learned that it may have actually been part of William Penn's original design for Philadelphia, was to have a green corridor along the river. It's come a long way, but it could go a lot further. Having looked at what's happened along the river over the last ten years and particularly over the last year and a half, where people have been using this park at all hours of the day, it didn't used to be that way. When Councilman Clarke and I went down, there was a certain set of folks that were using the park at all hours of the day, 90 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 but they're different now and it's really terrific. Housing is going in, apartments, luxury apartments, others. We are just seeing an explosion of Center City residents, and that is a good thing, a good thing for the future of the City. I've talked to folks that were involved in 1979 in signing that contract. I learned a lot about what's gone on on the river talking to people there, and it was a different time and the river was different and the City was different. It was really the past. The past was that we ignored our rivers, we polluted our rivers, we didn't structure our lives to recreate and to enjoy the outdoors as much as we do now and I believe that we will do in the future. That is a wonderful, wonderful place. If you've not been, and I know many of you have, I urge you to go. Go in the evening. I think it rivals Paris. There's only one problem with it, there's 91 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 tracks there. It hasn't been said today, but tracks, by looking at that map you see, are redundant. Those tracks came to CSX as part of the Conrail settlement or merger. In fact, there was an attempt in, I believe, '99, '98 to ask CSX to give up those tracks, because they already had a set on the other side of the river. Unfortunately, as I understand it, they didn't return the letter or answer the letter, which is kind of par for CSX's course. I think this is a great City. We've enjoyed living here. We plan on staying here. Great City because we have great neighborhoods, we have great neighbors, we have great not just citizens, people who turned out, but developers like Mr. Switzenbaum, corporations that commit time and energy to making this City a better place. I'm sorry to say but CSX is not on that list. They have proved and showed themselves time and time again to be bad neighbors, 92 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 and when they've been given the opportunity to compromise, to have a reasonable solution, they've not just turned their back but they've filed lawsuits, they've parked more trains, they've made our neighborhood unsafe, not just because of the smell and the wretched rotting garbage, which is really, according to the Stinkmeister, the worst thing that's ever happened to Philadelphia, but more seriously, by transporting materials, as your own City Council resolution states, that could be used as weapons of mass destruction, parking them in our neighborhood for hours at a time. I think there are some solutions before the Council that are maybe interim. Maybe they should have armed guards to ensure that these chlorine tanks, which Councilman Kelly correctly referenced -- it was just a year ago, that there was -- it was just a rupture. It wasn't a spill, just a 93 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 rupture of one small tank. Only a portion of the tank actually released and people died in a rural area.
I go through airports a lot. I get searched. I have to take my shoes off. We have to do that here. I don't think it's a waste of time to do that, but I think what's fair for us in terms of protecting our airports and our airlines, we should extend the same kind of scrutiny to what is on our rails. That's certainly an interim step, but I would say that really this whole issue is about the future of this City, the future of the use of the river. I oftentimes when I'm wanting to know what is the right thing for the future, I ask my children. We have an 11-year-old and a 7-year-old, and I ask Marina what should happen with the railroad, because we were anticipating going to this hearing, and she said it quite simply, The train shouldn't be there. 94 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 In the interim, we need safe crossings, but I think as we envision the City of the future and as we do our planning and contemplate how it is that we want to structure development and recreational opportunities and the great City that Philadelphia will become is and will become going forward in the 21st Century, we should not be planning to have those tracks there, and we should do everything we can now to lay the park and expand the park both further and wider. I thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Thank you. Can I have the gentleman in the back and can I also have Mr. Glazer back for a second? Thank you very much for your testimony. Mr. Glazer, let me just add to the items that I mentioned earlier. I'm 95 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 really trying to look at this more as an overview by a variety of City departments, again, this issue of what can we do, what is within our jurisdiction and capacity. A couple items from the testimony we just heard. The issue with regard to odors, again, would you ask within the various agencies. I'm assuming maybe the Health Department would look at that from a citation standpoint and our ability to cite based on odors, as well as excessive noise, and has anyone done any research with regard to these streets, which I assume are still legally open on the City's Plan and notwithstanding the fact the railroad was allowed to go over it, if you could provide some clarity to the status of those streets, where their end points are. I would assume that the track is going over the street at a certain point and the street continues. So even with that, we do not allow people to, 96 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 quote/unquote, block our City streets. They certainly don't have a permit to do that. And do I understand that someone is investigating this issue of the location of the switch box or the shed or whatever that particular unit is? Is that being investigated?
Mr. Eichert had indicated that his department, the regulatory section of the Law Department, would be reviewing that specifically. I hear him to say that the actual ownership of the land seems to be not -- seems to be a lack of clarity on that, but I heard him to say he's actively looking at it.
Okay. And then, again, through the Managing Director's office and the Law Department, if there could be coordination on these items as you report back to the body, that would be very helpful.
I'm happy to do it. 97 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148
Good morning. My name is Hal Schirmer, S-C-H-I-R-M-E-R. I'm also a member of Free Schuylkill River Park and I'm also an attorney and have done some of the historic -- I'm also an amateur historian and I have done some of the research into the background and the history of the area and the crossing. So I just wanted to -- I will put in some testimony later, but I wanted to put through four quick points that I thought were very interesting and fill in some of the material which has been brought up. This park really is a return to the river. CSX really has sort of cordoned off this property and said, This belongs to us forever, which is patently untrue. At one time, the City of Philadelphia had a Port Warden Station on 98 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 the Schuylkill River. The Schuylkill River was a living, breathing river where people walked to work, people worked at the waterfront for years and years. One of the things people forget is that that whole section of the Schuylkill River historically had coal wars, marble wars. People were loading and unloading food, goods all throughout the 1850s, late 1800s into the early 1910s, and they all had to walk across the tracks of the Schuylkill River East Side Railroad Company, which eventually became the B&O Railroad. Although CSX would ask us to forget our history and forget that this river belongs to the people and belongs to commerce and is an attraction, when you look, you still see the indications that this is a working river and was a working river. The University Avenue Bridge and the South Street Bridge are both drawbridges because you would have masted 99 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 ships coming up to Philadelphia in the 1880s, 1890s, 1910s, 1920s docking in Downtown Philadelphia and off-loading their goods. You have lights from river traffic. There's a reason why Market Street and the SEPTA Bridge are so beautifully lighted with the big lanterns. That's because people used to continue to work on the river. There were barges, there were ships moving through that whole area. You have the B&O Railroad Station right on part of what's now Schuylkill River Park where people were getting on trains to New York for the Blue Comet, I believe it was. This is an area where people have constantly had access back and forth. They have not had access in the last 50, 60 years too consistently, but CSX is asking us to forget the legal question of who owns the river. Well, the river belongs to the people, and you have to have a right to get there. 100 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 The second point was that really this section in the Schuylkill River, what got me interested is, this really represents roads to other locations. It's not just a question of this is really sort of a gateway and that the Locust Street crossing and the Race Street crossing really provide important gateways into the Rittenhouse Square and Fitler Square areas of the park. One of the problems we have with Fairmount Park is, there are a lack of locations to eat, to stop, to have the facilities. And especially the Locust Street crossing is a direct line right into the gem of the Rittenhouse-Fitler Historical District. Beautiful architecture, small cafes on the sides, one of the premiere parks in the City of Philadelphia, and the easiest way to get there is to follow the trail from wherever you live, go down past the beautiful architecture of the Art Museum, go down through the architecture of the 101 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 area, turn left on Locust Street. And people are not going to be able to do that, and they're going to miss out on the economic boost that you have from people being able to access these important commercial areas and these showplace areas of the City. Third, we just have to look at this with a little bit of, I think, common sense.
CSX is asking us to ignore the fact that if you drive down Delaware Avenue, you're likely to see a freight train cutting across Delaware Avenue. You're likely to see a single engine cutting up in front of traffic and driving down the center of Delaware Avenue. Anybody who has gone down that way has seen it a couple times. You may have to stop, wait for them to go through, but the fact that you can run a freight yard along with Delaware Avenue, along with shops and people really shows the idea that you can have the railroad with people walking across. You have 102 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 cars on Delaware Avenue. If cars and the railroad and freight trains can co-exist across a six-lane highway, people who are on a stroller or bike can stop, look either side and then cross. Further, CSX does have another crossing, which they don't seem to mention, but if you take the trolley out to Darby, the trolley to Darby crosses the CSX Main Line. I believe that route runs every minutes and has run that 13 way since they put in the trollies at 14 Darby 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago. So the 15 idea that we can't cross there because 16 there's some problem, we need to have 17 crossings, we already have crossings of 18 the same railroad where the trolley goes 19 back and forth, where traffic on, I think 20 it's, Main Street for Darby goes back and forth. And then, finally, since I had done some of the research, it was very interesting that this is a very strong case of deja vu. We've been here before. 103 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 The City and the Schuylkill River East Side Railroad Company hammered out their differences back in 1885 or '87 about, well, these are roads which run to the river and you, the railroad, would like to have permission to cross them, and one of the things which was very important to the city fathers a hundred years ago was access to the river. You see this in the focus on the river being the new location and the new park. At that time, the new park was Fairmount Park, which is now up by Spring Garden Street and all along Kelly Drive. Access to the river and access to the new park had always been important. That was one of the reasons why the Reading Railroad and the Pennsylvania Railroad actually placed under the ordinance for the benefit or in return for their ability to run the railroad through the City of Philadelphia, the Reading Railroad buried their entire line along Pennsylvania 104 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 Avenue, especially because at that time, access from the City -- at that time, North Philadelphia was one of the most densely populated areas of the City, but the interest was so that people could get to the river, and it was important even back then for people to get from the residential neighborhoods or from the City out to the river, out to the recreational areas. Same way with the City had made decisions and had made agreements with the railroad that if there was a problem, it was up to the railroad to move and to accommodate the City, which is the exact opposite of what is happening here. The railroad is staking a claim and saying, These tracks belong to us, we're going to park across your streets. If six or seven tractor-trailers started driving on 22nd Street and they all stopped to go to lunch and blocked Locust Street, blocked Race Street and every street in between, 105 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 nobody would think for a second before they get towed out of the way. It's the exact same situation. This is a public street, has been for a hundred years, and the idea that you can block the street when it does not belong to you and act as though it belongs to you in contravention of the ordinances and the old settlements in untenable.
And I applaud you gentlemen for having the neighbors and the other supporters out here to give them a focus and an arena to bring up what hopefully is common sense, because we still haven't heard any good reasons for blocking off the access at Schuylkill River Park.
Well, thank you, and as I say, often common sense is not all that common. Any questions for the witness? (No response.)
Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to testify? 106 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 (No response.)
Seeing none, there has been an active amount of work going on behind the scenes. As we've laid out in the course of this hearing, I think the Committee has heard some excellent testimony and excellent ideas, and we, I think, possibly in the coming few days will take some action on a number of ideas that have been suggested here at this particular hearing. In addition, there's also been discussion about the continuation of this particular hearing in order to receive information from the City, as well as certainly the opportunity to potentially have CSX representatives eventually come to this Council. I expect later on today, more than likely we'll have the documents necessary to issue the subpoenas. This hearing is going to be recessed until November 15th, 2 o'clock 107 10/18/05 - TRANSPORTATION - RES. 050148 p.m. The hearing will be recessed until November 15th at 2 o'clock p.m. right here in the City Council Chambers. Unless there's any other business, this hearing is adjourned. Thank you very much. (Committee on Transportation and Public Utilities adjourned at 11:55 a.m.) - - - 108 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings, evidence and objections are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the foregoing matter on October 18, 2005, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. ______________________________ MICHELE L. MURPHY RPR-Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)