Thank you. I thank all of you. Councilman O'Neill, I see your light's on. Did you want to be recognized?
Are there any questions from members of the committee? The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, gentlemen. Let me first thank all of you for your testimony; and, in particular, Mr. Sasso, for the acknowledgment of concerns raised by Councilmembers here when it comes to the issues of equal employment opportunity from construction to permanent jobs. That needs to be acknowledged. And let me commend the Chamber 85 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 for this past summer, for the first time in seven years I've been in the City Council, for stepping up in a magnificent way and putting as a priority giving young people in this city work and actually bumping your numbers up to address this issue of crime and violence. And with that said, I need to ask to our leader of the chamber here: When corporate civic giants like Fox Chase come to you, seeking support, where on the radar screen or the ladder do issues like diversity and equal opportunity for women and people of color fall? Where's that stack in terms of priority and importance?
At the top of the figurative list. It's -- you know, how can we help. You know, I can probably give a long response to our buildup efforts for last year's Working Solutions effort. You indirectly referenced Working Solutions, and I 86 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 couldn't adequately talk about its origin and its growth without acknowledging Joe Frick, the chairman, who certainly was earnest. And, as an aside, I heard Councilman Kenney appropriately so talk about what IBC has done as far as being really day-to-day advocate for this. But most organizations, large or small, I think, in their own way wish to help and pull the proverbial wagon and help us find opportunities for young adults. So it's right at the top of the list, and it's not going to stop with one summer's effort.
I can tell you that we've had deep conversations as far as approach and mechanics with Mayor-elect Nutter about what can be done. So I would -- and more to the matter at hand, Councilwoman, I know 87 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 how Fox Chase feels about their role not just as a cancer researcher or as a provider of clinicians. They know that they are a very significant corporate citizen, so they're going to -- my sense is, they're prepared to do plenty.
Councilwoman, thank you for both your question but also for your recognition of the meaningful effort that we collaborated on this summer -- 1,029 youth from economically- disadvantaged neighborhoods in our city worked in companies large and small around the region, and the feedback that I have received, and I've gotten involved personally, is that they did a great job and there's a tremendous amount of interest to take this initiative to the next level.
Let me just add a personal perspective. 88 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 I've always believed that the best way to achieve meaningful and appropriate goals and objectives, as it relates to minority employment or minority contracting, is to make sure that the decision-makers of any given organization reflect the rich diversity of the region, because if we have diverse leaders, then it's going to be much easier to do good things as it relates to diversity. And I'm very proud of the fact if you come to an executive committee meeting of the board of directors of the Chamber of Commerce, you won't see a more diverse group talented, capable leadership individuals working on behalf of the Chamber in this region as you will see today. And I'm very proud of that and it's something we've worked hard on. And so, by having a very diverse leadership group in the Chamber, it also helps us to make sure 89 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 that diversity and inclusion and community involvement will continue to be a key tenet of the Chamber's work now and in the future.
Excellent, excellent. And in your comments, you're saying, A, it's possible, once the leadership makes it a priority; and B, your organization has lead by example, as Councilman Jim Kenney has already indicated. Thank you very much, gentlemen.
Thank you. Are there any other commence or questions from members of the committee? (No further questions.)
Gentlemen, thank you so much. You've been extremely patient. MR. McPHERSON: Our next panel consists of Dr. Robert Young, Tom 90 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 Garvey, and Tom Leedy. (Witnesses come forward.)
As they're being seated, I'm going to ask my colleague, Darwin Beauvais, to make available a series of exhibits. One is the economic report that was testified to by prior witnesses; another is a reduced version of the exhibits, some of which are already mounted, showing the expansion plan. A third exhibit is what we call "park-friendly revisions" to our original plan, all of which were designed to make any expansion to be consistent with preserving and maintaining the park. So we'll have those passed to you as well. I also would like to say that great minds think alike. We have already started our own recruitment effort for a Diversity Recruitment Officer at Fox Chase. So if we hadn't thought of it, we would have thought of it today. But I've been speaking with 91 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 the leadership at Fox Chase, and they're already working earnestly in anticipation of growth to have a diversity officer specifically assigned to this program. So we think that the time has come to redouble our efforts, and we're proud to be a part of that. With that, I'd like to introduce Dr. Young, who many of you know from his prior participation, talking about the expansion effort.
Honorable committee chairs members and of the committee, I'm Dr. Robert Young, Chancellor of Fox Chase Cancer Center. In the three-and-a-half years since we began this effort, we've had over 80 meetings with representatives of the City, the Fairmount Park Commission, our City Councilman Brian O'Neill, our two homeowners association, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, PennDOT, and our neighbors. We have had two open houses 92 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 at Fox Chase, where neighbors come and see, hear, and comment on our expansion plans. And representatives of Fox Chase Cancer Center have attended every homeowners association meeting held in the past three years. During this complex process, the representatives of each of these groups have sought to balance the interests of the various constituencies with the overall goal of the project. Through their hard work dedication, this has been accomplished. The product of this three-and-a-half year effort is reflected in the bills proposed today. Their passage will result in a safer Burholme Park, funding for appropriate additional park land, traffic- improvement measures linked to the expansion, the creation of 4,000 new non-outsourcable jobs for the City, and the opportunity for Fox Chase Cancer Center to fulfill its mission of 93 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 scientific discovery, and the delivery of state-of-the-art cancer care to those who need it. We urge its passage. Thanks again to the City, the Fairmount Park Commission, and the City Councilmembers for all of their help and guidance through this process. Those are my prepared words. On the basis of the questions that arose earlier, I would like to speak to several things. I don't consider myself an authority on construction jobs. We have worked closely with the City of Philadelphia in drafting the document that you have before us. Certainly, we have no objection -- indeed, we have enthusiasm -- for trying to reach the optimum figures there to the extent that that's feasible. I can certainly, however, speak to the issue of diversity and minority recruitment inside the 94 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 institution. This is not something we have come upon just lately; it's something that we have worked diligently on for decades. Presently, about 54 to 56 percent of all of our employees are women. About percent of our 9 employees are minorities. And we have 10 at multiple levels within the 11 institution strategies for increasing 12 the minority representation -- not just 13 of hospital employees but scientists 14 and physicians. 15 We have just in the last two 16 years recruited five new minority 17 cancer research physicians, which, as 18 you probably can imagine, are 19 nationally, if not internationally, 20 sought after. So we're very pleased with those recruitment. We've had in place for at least fifteen years two parallel systems of reaching out to young people -- young minority populations in two 95 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 different categories: One, people who are interested in careers administratively. We bring these people in the summer, work with them, they get a chance to see what the institution does and how it works. And, indeed, a number of our subsequent employees have been recruited out of that pool. More challenging, but in a, in a scientific sense, more rewarding, are the group that we have put in place to recruit young people from minority groups who feel that they might have an interest in a career in science. And we bring those individuals in to get an opportunity to work in the laboratories to see how science is actually done. And these, too, have resulted in a number of employees on the technical side, and they've also resulted in a number of people who have made plans to go on in an academic careers for MD's and PhDs, which is an enormous sense of 96 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 pleasure for the institution.
We're deeply committed to addressing the need for more minority involvement in the practice of medicine. It impacts on the way patients see their care, it impacts on the way they feel about access. And it is certainly our goal to improve the participation of minorities in all aspects of our enterprise. This is also important from the vantage point of the National Cancer Institute, who has five-year reviews of our program. And when they do that, they review minority participation in clinical trials to see that the number of patients being involved in research programs mirrors the population and mirrors the population that we see in the institution. One of the things that we have done in the last five years or more is set up a very comprehensive program, 97 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 which Councilwoman Tasco mentioned earlier, addressing the various needs that we hope to be able to address through this multi-pronged strategy. So I hope that clarifies some of the things that were raised earlier. I think one of the other issues that was raised was how were these 4,000 jobs over years likely 11 to appear? The construction is being 12 done in phases, as you know. The first 13 phase is actually underway on property 14 that we currently own, and that will 15 bring about 400 new jobs into the 16 institution. 17 Phase 2, or Phase in the 18 park, is the biggest initial phase. 19 And that will probably bring in about 20 1500 new employees, so that the second 21 phase is the biggest phase, and the 22 rest will come in increments over 23 Phases 3, 4, and 5. 24
Thank 25 you. Thank you very much, Doctor. 98 1 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56
At this point, maybe it's best that what we do is very briefly show you the boards and have you go through the materials at hand. Tom, do you want to just briefly talk about the concept. We'll have the architects from Ewing Cole point to the particular boards. We'll briefly go through what really is an expense of the IDD, which we currently have, and then talk about the different phases and then maybe show you some of the boards that really talk about the preservation of the park and what the park will look like even at the end of our expansion. I think you'll be impressed that there's really more park that's going to be visible and maintained because the building that will be developed will be interior and surrounded by park. So I think you'll find I it very interesting. Tom? 99 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56
John, the first board, which is the zoning board, I think you can just acknowledge to the Councilmembers that this is the technical drawing associated with the IDD and the zoning requirements, and so it's rather flat and it gives an awful lot of detail. We can come back to that if there are questions. The next board is a demonstration of the expansion. In the background, you can see the existing Fox Chase Cancer Center buildings. And then as you move into the foreground -- and John, perhaps you can show where Cottman Avenue is and Central. Cottman running west-east and thens Central running south to north. And so in what I call "the Campbell Soup phase" is the expansion Dr. Young was just talking about, which is the first piece of expansion into the Burholme Park area. And I want to come back to 100 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 note -- John, if you could, could you just scum circumscribe the area that is now for the golf range and show how that -- essentially that square of space moves out over time and moves back into the other areas of the park.
Talking in terms of general phase timetables would probably be helpful.
Right. I'll do this without benefit of a note, Councilman O'Neill. The first phase of the expansion of the park, demonstrated on the drawings of Phase 2, would begin somewhere in the neighborhood of 2011, 2013, not later than 2015, in that range. And, that's -- as you know, when we first put this out, we were looking at ranges of '08 and '09, but we've since moved from our first discussions in calendar year '04 until now. So I would say 2011, in that range, and maybe a little bit later. 101 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 And then each additional phase, 3, 4, and 5, we had always envisioned as being somewhere in the range of five to seven years, following completion of the next. And so if you do that, altogether, you're looking at a 20- to a 25-year period. It depends certainly on -- it doesn't depend on demand; I think we've established that. I think it depends an awful lot on our ability to do the fundraising and to secure the kinds of funds we need. But our plan is reasonable; it is not pie in the sky. So I don't know if I've answered your question, Brian, or not.
That's fine. And just to reiterate, I will say that the traffic improvements that were discussed with Mr. Denny and placed on the record are all going to be a part of the Phase of the project 102 1 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 so they won't be waiting for later phases.
And, I think, to respond to Councilman's O'Neill's question, what we tried to do is to do some immediate improvements today that affect safety, and then prior to opening the Phase 1 in the park, we would have completed a whole variety of new improvements having to do with removal of parking, working with PennDOT. So we're committed to doing some right now and the rest before it gets finished up.
And, interestingly, we have our traffic engineer here, but some of the strategies that we've already been using and we hope to expand upon are maximizing car pools. We have three shifts, so we have shift dispersion. We also have the ability to have public transportation, with vans picking up. So given the cost of public 103 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 transportation, given the comparative benefit compared to using cars and gas, we think that a transit-oriented approach to our expanded employee population will be very helpful. And already been something that's been successful. So with regard to not only engineering a solution and mitigating a problem or mitigating the problem less by having fewer cars and then also what we've been able to do is, we've put together a system where we're going to constantly monitor the process as we move forward that. And that way, as we experience the growth, which will be subtle but important, we're going to be able to arrive upon things that will make each step easier. And you'll see in our report, and we've worked with the Councilman on this, that the planning happens first, unlike being reactionary in a lot of situations. So this will be a smooth 104 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 transition with regard to both traffic and also parking. One of things we're doing now on our own property is the new parking garage, which is something that everyone's has encouraged us to do. And then also, Phase 1 includes a significant expansion of our hospital. We have people who have been literally waiting to be treated, standing in line in the halls; it's been a very difficult situation. So with the expectation that we would be here and have the support of Council, we've already committed to a serious expansion effort on our own property. It's the last piece of property available that we own, so we did it with the expectation that all future expansion would be as part of this sublease. Also, what I would like to do is just show you the nature of our current campus in photographs so you 105 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 will see the high level of design and then give you an idea of the type -- maybe the photographs show it better -- the kind of development that we do. It's very clean, state-of-the-art. Ewing Cole has been doing work all over the world, and they basically have a tremendous expertise in health-care architecture and design. So we really are proud of what will be very attractive buildings. We also, as I said, have this park-friendly criteria. We have design controls with the Fairmount Park Commission, we have landscape controls. So basically, a lot of what's happening will really be invisible as you go by. And unlike turning the lights on and turning them off, this expansion will be years in the making, so it will be very subtle, and people won't see an immediate change in their life because that's obviously something that we're concerned about. 106 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 Also, I did introduce Don Leedy, who's the COO, who's been instrumental in this process. Don, I don't know if you have anything further to state.
No, other than I think that this has been a very open process, that I think the participation and the input that we got back from the community allowed us to create a tighter design that has allowed us to bring this down the to a 19.4 acre, and that I think we're quite anxious to get on with the project.
Interestingly, it would have been easier to go higher, but people in Fox Chase and at Burholme have a certain sense that the water tower's kind of like the high point. So we tried to keep our height, you know, around that area, so we couldn't go as high as perhaps other people would like. And other people said, Well, minimize the amount of park area. Most 107 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 of what we're taking is an area that's now a commercial golf driving range, so it's already -- even though it's recreational use, it's not open and available unless you want to pay for it. So we think that the combination of keeping the height at a certain level is very helpful to keeping the communities feeling good. But also the ability to put the buildings in a dense package will minimize the intrusion into the park. You will also see the surrounding ball fields. They are in use, they're going to continue to be in use. They're going to be upgraded through this process. So the things that people are actively using will be, in effect, maintained and approved. You will also see the buffer area on the other side, which is a real environmental area. So, in effect, we have a 108 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 perfect placement of our development zone in a way that really is the least annoyance and the least inconvenience to anyone. So we're excited that we've been able to engineer this and, through cooperate prodding by the Councilman and Fairmount Park Commission, minimize the impact in terms of the amount of land. I have no further comments or questions with this panel, if the committee would like to either ask questions or move on to the next panel.
Tom, just a follow-up on the -- this is actually Phase 2 because Phase 1 is going to become what we did back in June, the parking lot and the parking garage and the building. But you mentioned that some of the traffic improvement won't wait for a Phase 2, and I'm using the old Phase as Phase 2. 109 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 Could you mention a little bit about that, what you're doing prior to Phase 2?
Absolutely. Yeah, prior to Phase 2 -- and I don't think -- do we have a plan up there John? I should introduce John Gerdner, President of Ewing Cole. Do we have the same view in plan or not? If you could just -- since it's easier over here. In working with the traffic engineer retained by the community, there are on Central Avenue and Shelmire Drive, which is -- do you know where that is, John? Right. There are three entrances there right now. One of them is a secondary entrance for Fox Chase Cancer Center. Immediately next to that is one for Jeanes Hospital. And immediately next to that is one of three for the Burholme Park. It was recommended for line of site and safety that those three be 110 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 combined, that they handled with new signalization, which does not exist, and we're committed to doing that immediately. We want to begin to design that right now with the community engineer with Jeanes Hospital and with the design help of the individuals in the Fairmount Park system. Also at Fox Chase Drive, if you will, as it comes down along and it comes to Central, a signalization there is needed also for safety and to, most importantly -- and, Brian, I think this is what you're getting at -- is to take the signalization that runs from Cottman Avenue all the way down through to Five Points and have that all recoordinated, and to work with PennDOT and Cheltenham to get a signal to be able to improve that flow. And we've made commitments to doing that.
Yes, sir. 111 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56
And then, as Carl was getting at -- and, again, we've had an awful lot of discussion about traffic. Our projections with Shore DePalma, the traffic engineering firm, looked out through to completion of Phase 2, or Phase 1 in the park, where the hospital building is, to mitigate all of that prior to that opening and then come back and take a look at that again, after that up is and in operation. And that would probably be 2017.
Well, I want to state -- and I'm glad Dr. Young is here because he's got sort of the sweat equity in this, in a manner of speaking. Between the meetings you had with the community which caused you to change the design in many ways, listening to my heartfelt plea to put a parking garage on your own property -- prior to that, it wasn't in the original 112 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 plan. And while things took long, much of it was figuring out what to do with traffic and also getting all of the governmental approvals. But I want the record to reflect that I never heard "no." There was never a "no" to a request that would benefit the community that came from Dr. Young or anyone at Fox Chase. It was a matter of trying to figure out how to make this a win/win and get to where we are today. And I just want to thank you and the entire institution for that.
Thank you, Councilman. We've been right there since about 1948, and our desire is to continue to be there and to serve the community and the rest of the country that requires more and more innovative cancer care and discoveries which will change the course of cancer. That's what we're all about. 113 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56
Any other questions of this panel? The Chair recognizes Councilman Greenlee.
Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Primavera talked about how sometimes, in the present state, you get a little backed up in trying to take care of patients. Is there any estimate on, with this proposed expansion, either how many more people you can serve or in how quicker a fashion you can?
Yeah. I mean, the whole impetus to doing this expansion was based on taking a look at the last decade of growth in patient population that we are taking care of at Fox Chase and a careful look at the demographics of the region that we serve. And, indeed, the region that we serve is getting older. And as a 114 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 function of that, there is more cancer care required by that population. We looked at expansion that would be somewhere in the range of 5 to percent per year increase in new 7 patient volume. And if we just prorate, project that out, we're looking at something in the range of 12,000 new patients a year as compared to the 7,500 that we serve now. And we realized back in -- this is now back in 2002, that we simply did not have either the hospital facilities or the outpatient facilities to deliver state-of-the-art care in that kind of volume. And so this expansion will include a 200-bed hospital to replace the 100-bed hospital we have now. And the major part of the early expansion, the building that we're building right now, will be chiefly devoted to outpatient care. 115 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 In the present state of cancer care, about 85 percent of all of the cancer care is given on an outpatient basis. But in order to do that, you need a space so that people can sit down, and you need enough space so that you can hire enough employees so that they can rapidly respond to the needs of the patients that are trying to get care. And that's what we're committed to with this expansion.
So just so I'm clear on the real number, you said 12,000 new as opposed to now 7,000 --
Yeah. We look at two figures basically. The number of new patients, we see each year we currently see about 7,000 new patients is year, and we anticipate seeing about 12,000 new patients a year. That translate now into 70,000 outpatient visits. 116 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 So that we will probably be in 2012, 2015 taking care of 120,000 outpatient visits.
That's a lot of people. Thank you very much, Madam President. Madam Chair, thank you.
Thank you. Any other comments or questions from members of the committee? (No further questions.)
Gentlemen, thank you very much. MR. McPHERSON: Our next panel consists of David Marshall and William Avery, Board of Directors of Fox Chase Cancer Center. (Witnesses come forward.)
I know many of you know Mr. Avery and Mr. Marshall from many other civic, philanthropic, and opportunities and things that they have 117 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 done for our great city. I think I really want them not only to thank you for being here today and hearing these bills but also to tell you a little bit about the search that they did and why they were so excited about trying to maintain Fox Chase in Philadelphia. So, with that, Mr. Avery and Mr. Marshall.
-- good afternoon. My name is William Avery, and as you've been told, I'm the retired Chairman and CEO of Crown, Cork & Seal. I think I established at that time my love for the City by keeping one of the major corporations here in the City, with the help of Councilman O'Neill. And I've been the chair now for a little over five years at Fox Chase. So during this period of time, 118 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 I've been involved directly with what's going on. And as Councilman O'Neill said, if this had been just strictly a business function, it would have happened three years ago, two-and-a- half years ago, realizing that when you try to expand a park and you're also dealing with neighbors, it was going to be a problem. And so many of the things that I had prepared have already been stated, so I'm just going to make a few comments. As has also been stated, the major area that we're going to be using is a golf course. And when you stop and think of what we have going forward for all of our community here, at Fox Chase, one of the leading Cancer Center City centers in the world, with two Nobel Prize winners -- there's only one other of the 63 cancer centers in the country that have two Nobel Prize winners. 119 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 I've been a patient at Fox Chase, I'm a cancer survivor, and so I know firsthand the kind of care that you can get at Fox Chase. We have, in the last two-and- a-half years, three years, in anticipation of this project being approved, we have gone out and searched the country for the best surgeons, the best researchers, the best oncologists, and we have many of those on our staff. But we've made promises to those individuals about additional building space, where they could have additional people and a research center, additional facilities, operating rooms, hospitals equipment. And we're here today -- or I'm here today, and David going to give you his ideas and thoughts, but I'm here to ask you to move us forward. We are ready. The Board of Directors is behind us. But I have to be honest and 120 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 say that after three years, it's getting hard to keep them together, that we're getting close, and to try to explain that when you're in a major city, there are things that you have to put together; it's not like being out in the country somewhere. So we're delighted that we're here today, and we ask you for your approval of these two bills. David?
Thank you very much, Bill. Councilwoman Verna and members of City Council, thank you very much for having us here today. The benefit of going last is that everything else has been said already. I'm a local businessperson having, having spent basically my entire business career in Philadelphia, and I've been very active in the community in a number of areas. I'm most proud of my 121 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 affiliation with Fox Chase. I'm a member of the board, I'm a member of a number of their key committees, and it is the most satisfying board that I have ever been involved with. A couple of questions were asked about the growth of Fox Chase, and I think that they were already covered, but just to reiterate, because it really is important: The number of new patients that Fox Chase saw in 1980 was 739. By '96, 1996, it was 3,736. By 2005, it was 6,644. It's already over 7,000. The outpatients in the same periods of time were 29,000, 45,000, 70,000, and our anticipation by 2010 is 135,000. We're a victim of our own success, in effect. And one of the problems that it's created with this success is the fact that we have to have people who are literally suffering from cancer waiting in the halls, waiting for 122 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 employment, and this is intolerable and unacceptable as far as the board is concerned. Se we'd like to move this process along as quickly as possible We have people in our cancer dermatology that are waiting for a month for an appointment. And in our breast cancer clinics, it's two to three weeks to get an appointment. And invariably, these create the backlogs where people that come in for treatment have to wait two to four hours. And, believe me, as members of the Board of Directors, we hear these complaints of "How come you can't treat us faster?" We would love to do it. We are ready, willing and able to do it. So we're asking your indulgence to move this as quickly as possible. And I thank you very much for your time.
We thank you for your involvement, and you've been extremely patient here 123 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 today. And, again, I want to thank you for coming to testify; it's been very important. And, I'll tell you, I never realized that the hospital would be handling so many patients. It's incredible. It's frightening. It's frightening. Thank you again. Thank you. MR. McPHERSON: Our next panel consists of Bernard Griggs and Michael Nakowski. (Witnesses come forward.)
Mr. Griggs is here on behalf of Mr. Gillespie. And Mr. Nakowski wears several hats, but I will say this: He's been with us every step of the way. We had many meetings in the Northeast. He lives in Fox Chase, and I don't think he missed a meeting of the Fairmount Park Commission in the Northeast. He's been one of the most loyal people we've had, and we appreciate him taking off 124 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 the day to come down here to testify. Thank you.
My name is Mike Nakowski, a lifelong resident of Philadelphia, over a 20-year resident in the Fox Chase area. I want to, first of all, thank Councilman O'Neill who put all these pieces together. All right, as a person who raises his family in the Fox Chase area, whose sister is a cancer patient treated at Fox Chase Cancer Center; she's been cancer-free for quite a few years now. My kids sled and play organized sports on Burholme Field, so I know the area very well. It's a grates place to live. And we're very blessed that we have such a good organization like Fox Chase Cancer Center in that neighborhood, okay, for quality care and what it does 125 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 to the neighborhood. I could be redundant with everything that was said here. It is an economic engine, it's a great quality care. Look at the 120,000 patients. I mean, at the end of the day, okay, it's to cure cancer, in my opinion only. But at the end of the day, it's to get a cure for that horrible, horrible disease. Until your family's ever been affected by it, all right, then you'll understand. And I hope nobody's family ever gets affected by that horrible disease 'cause it doesn't look at race, color, creed, religion or anything else. All's it does is tear your family apart and watch a person -- it's just a horrible, horrible thing. So I want to thank the Councilman. I strongly urge your committee to come out with a strong recommendation 'cause this is good for the -- it's a win/win, as the 126 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 Councilman said for the City. It's an economic engine. And at the end of the day, as someone had said there's two Nobel Peace Prizes for guys who work at Fox Chase Cancer Center. I mean, to let something like this slip through our fingers, as a life long resident, I pray to God it doesn't happen. Again, I want to thank you for your time, Fox Chase, Councilman, and everybody else. Thank you.
Good afternoon. My name is Bernard Griggs, and I'm here to testify today on behalf of Pat Gillespie and the Philadelphia Building and Construction Trades Council. The Building Trades Council is the umbrella organization that represents all of the building trade 127 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 unions for the Philadelphia and five-county area. As many of you know, I've testified in front of this committee before, that the Building Trades Council fully supports Fox Chase. We have in the past, we have in the future, and we continue to support them in all of their endeavors to, you know, complete the expansion of the Fox Chase Cancer Center. And I got to tell you, you know, I've heard a lot of wonderful things here today, and we support them for all pf these reasons. You know, I heard things like, you know, particularly for the first-class cancer research and treatment that they have provided over the years and that they will continue to provide in the future, the fact that they've been a great neighbor in the community. And I know, with this expansion, they'll only be a better neighbor. 128 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 But most importantly, for the Building Trades Council, we support this expansion for the many, many construction jobs that it will provide for our members. You know, anytime you talk about putting our members to work, that's a win/win for us, and we hope, you know, that you will really support this and can move forward with this probably. Thank you.
Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I would be remiss again not to do what is always necessary in major efforts like this that come before us, and that's to seize the moment and put 129 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 on the record the commitment or not when it comes to equal opportunity across the board from construction -- in your case, through permanent opportunities for local citizens first, 'cause there are many times here when we've seen construction projects and there's been no commitment to Philadelphians, which is completely unacceptable. So speak to, if you will, the building trades' commitment to ensuring that goals established and that have actually been tweaked and amended up at the request of Councilman Clarke, speak to your organization's commitment to ensuring that this project indeed meets those expectations.
You know, our commit was not only to meet the aspirations and goals that were once mentioned, but, you know, the numbers have risen, and we still plan to meet those numbers. And I can tell you firsthand 130 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 that when it comes to any type of affirmative action program, I mean, I've been involved from the grassroots level. We've always, in my opinion, always either exceeded or met those goals, and we continue to do that with Fox Chase.
Now, we know that there would be many, including some of is us in this body, who would respectfully disagree, with very tangible evidence and documentation that at times, your organization has not been able to meet those goals. So assuming that what you're saying is true, what strategies or new efforts do you have in place that substantiate what you've just mentioned?
Just to continue to look at the community and just to do what we've always did in the past, and that is, meet those goals. We will meet the goals. 131 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56
And in the past, you've done what with regards to recruitment and training and then ultimate employment opportunity in the trades?
Well, it comes down to, you know, when our apprenticeship programs open up, you know, many, many people from the community apply within, and they get into the program just like anybody else would. But, you know, it always seems to be a particular amount of people from the community, and so that's how we're able to meet and exceed those goals.
And you will be using that process for this project as well that folks in the immediate area of Fox Chase will have first chance at recruitment, training, et cetera?
What are the demographics of the -- what's the racial makeup of people -- I go to that area all the time. I use a cleaners up there, and my campaign posters are made right in that area, at Cheltenham Printing. What would be the demographics of the zip codes that are in that immediate vicinity?
Would you know that? I'm sorry, I don't even know who you are. I just came in from another meeting. You know, maybe I shouldn't be asking you that question. But if you happen to know it, you can answer it anyway.
Okay. We'll find it out from someone else, 133 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 because the demographics of that area, as I see it, probably does not include a lot of minorities. I see some, but -- so I think what you're looking for you won't get if you're talking about diverse workforce. I'm not really sure.
One of my issues is making sure that local residents from the community get the opportunity. So in that case, it's those who live in and around Fox Chase. That's part A of my angst. The second part is making sure that the workforce looks like Philadelphia.
Any other questions or comments from members of the committee? (No further questions.)
Thank you for your 134 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 time. MR. McPHERSON: Our next panel consists of Nancy Ostroff.
Yes. We have one other person who has asked to speak. And while she's getting situated, there's one issue that we're not going to pursue; we're going to hold that for rebuttal. It was a panel of lawyers from Pepper Hamilton. It hasn't been mentioned but I'm sure you may know that because part of the area in question was the result of a bequest by a Mr. Ryers, that we need Orphans Court approval in order to complete, and that's envisioned after, hopefully, City Council approval. And the Orphans Court judge has said that the case will be ready for adjudication if, in fact, you were to authorize a lease. And we will be responding to some questions about the 135 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 process, but we wanted to let you know and to remind you that there will be Orphans Court approval necessary involved in this process, and we don't believe that that will be a problem, and it's just another step. Thank you.
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is Maria Carasella, and I am a patient at Fox Chase Cancer Center.
Thank you. I'm not as eloquent as some of the people who have been here, so I've written some things down.
Just be yourself. 136 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56
My name is Maria Carasella. I am a four-year, four-month metastatic-colon-cancer survivor and a patient at Fox Chase Cancer Center. I came to Fox Chase as a patient in 2002. I was 37 years old, a wife and mother of two-year-old twins, and I had just learned that my cancer had spread to my lung. Fox Chase is close to my home, so my going to Fox Chase was obvious. However, once there and in the hands of such wonderful and caring individuals, it became clear that I was the luckiest unluckiest person in the world. At the scariest point of my life, I felt so safe and cared for, all of this so close to home, making it possible for family and friends to join the Fox Chase team in nursing me back to health. I could go on and on about the level of care that I received at Fox 137 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 Chase. There is an entire team who watched over me then and continues to watch over me today. I have a surgeon, an oncologist, a nurse practitioner, a social worker, a genetics doctor, and a genetics counselor, and I also have -- oh, I mentioned her, my most wonderful social worker. In addition, there are other members of the Fox Chase family that have cared for me, people who put my port in and took my port out; members of diagnostic imaging, who have seen firsthand the internal damage done by my cancer. All of these individuals who have taken care of me worked at Fox Chase's main campus. I can seamlessly and effortlessly go from one appointment to another. I cannot tell you how comforting it is for a cancer patient to be able to stay in one location and see all of your doctors in one day. Cancer is overwhelming enough 138 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 without needing to navigate multiple locations or multiple appointments on multiple days, especially when you're a mother. I feel so fortunate to have such a wonderful institution so close to home. I believe with all my heart that the Fox Chase family saved me. But more importantly, I believe that Fox Chase will save my children, who have an elevated risk of getting my cancer at an even earlier age. Please give Fox Chase the space that they need to do the work and the research necessary to help save me in the future and to help save my children. Thank you.
Thank you very much. We appreciate your testifying.
We 139 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 certainly all wish you the best of luck, hon.
And we have nothing to say, especially after those statements. Nothing more needs to be said. So thank you for your time.
You're welcome. Mr. McPherson? MR. McPHERSON: The next panel consists of Nancy Ostroff, Gerry Waln, Fred Maurer, Paul Canty.
Just a minute, Mr. McPherson. Are any of the witnesses that have been called here? If you are, please approach the witness table. (Witnesses come forward.)
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.
Let me start first so I can get some (indiscernible). Fred Maurer, and I have two testimonies 140 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 because this was supposed to be testimony on law and testimony about parks. I came prepared for those committee hearings today. Before I start, there was a man here who was scheduled to testify who had to leave at 3 o'clock. His name was Tim Kearney, and he left his testimony here with me.
Excuse me, please. We will provide that to the stenographer, and it will be transcribed in full. Thank you.
Okay, thank you. This is on Bill No. 070955. My name is Fred Maurer, and I'll give my copy to the clerk so that she will have a copy. 141 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 This ordinance aims to dividing and placing an IDD zone in Burholme Park. It is an illegal act and its companion action to amend an existing IDD zone in Jeanes Hospital is also wrong. Burholme Park is a dedicated and federal WPA project developed in 1939 as a landscaped, open-space public land -- park land and it is not fee simple for vacant land for non-park uses or abandoned and placed out for competitive bidding, which is a municipal mandate. Both actions are sponsored by Councilman O'Neill to destroy Burholme Park and give its heartland to a private institution, Fox Chase Cancer Center, as his private motive. Good public planning placed since Burholme Park inside of (indiscernible) since 1910 to isolate it from the land uses with a public street named Shelmire. There was no 142 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 public claims to justify a missing or urgent need. This is an outrage demonstrated that was demonstrated in local newspaper of his betrayal after election. The code for other buildings in rec zones are for recreation uses, and it does not include permitted-use certificates for hospitals or parking garages in the REC code. The Councilman's interests to use the IDD zoning as his means to override park zoning is a violation of the City Planning Commission mission for good planning, and it has many flaws. The IDD code requires an approved Master Plan, but it has six limitations to satisfy -- gross floor area, percentage of land covered, setbacks, off-street parking, off-street loading, and signs. There is no report that all of these limitations were studied and approved. The Planning Commission has 143 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 not produced its environmental assessment and development division to report for a factual analysis. The City code for a storm-water plan was not addressed. With acres of land to be 8 covered in an IDD zone by buildings and 9 address, there is a one hundred percent 10 volume increase to flow across the park 11 land and to erode Burholme Creek. 12 The unique value of Burholme 13 Park as the highest northeast place 14 with a vista to the river and the 15 skyline will be obscured by high 16 institutional buildings. Our park 17 vista is a valuable and protected right. The residential building height caps of buildings is the an art code for protection of good city planning, and this will be lost as tall IDD buildings interfere with the light and fresh air to sustain our quality of life. Public policy to create an IDD 144 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 zone for hospitals are supposed to be contained inside its own parcel, and no 4 spill-overs. Code 14-1103 regulations require that boundaries shall be designated to afford a reasonable line of division between the district and abutting non-institutional development area. The reasonable line of division is a public street where a park setback or a vacant right-of-way. This ordinance does not conform to the City streets plan. The IDD plan to build over Shelmire Avenue violates the City street plan because Shelmire was not actually vacated, and it has existed as a public way and a legal easement, and it is a public fire street for both sides, and it has over 21 years of public uses to serve as a dead-end from Central Avenue. And it has heavy traffic, including cars, service vans, and trucks. There wasn't a Streets 145 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 Department or a certification, and PennDOT has not given approval to the proposals, and there was no community involvement in the City Code mandatory practices for an IDD zone over extended Shelmire. I think the information of PennDOT is very misleading. We talked to PennDOT, and they told us much differently.
The state municipal code defines any zoning change as a subdivision. And no subdivision ordinance was made to divide or remove the park REC code. Public planning for an IDD zone requires an approved Master Plan after a 45-day notice and community input and satisfactory certifications before presenting it to City Council for a first reading. None of these IDD mandates was satisfied before the Planning Commission. They acted within one week 146 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 before the introduction, and it was not acted before the City Commission before City Council for the Commission made its public notice. This rush was not done for pure justice. The advocates praise is not unique. The advocate here is all these people from the Chamber of Commerce and the Council. The same statement can be said from several other cancer centers who have not asked to encroach on park lands. We have no good reason to ordain bragging rights to one councilman's district. Burholme Park has bee there for over 100 years, and it is the single and main public amenity to enhance a desirable residential community that was planned on the City borders and is its namesake. This park was here long before any Cancer Center, because Fox Chase Cancer Center did not exist until 147 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 much later, when Jeanes Hospital -- after Jeanes Hospital sponsored treatments, and in 1929, as the American Oncologic Hospital. Burholme Park began and is this vital, economical benefit with City taxpayers who pay high taxes and still need this public park. Councilman O'Neill has misused this park to fluster his private relations, and he wants to transfer our wealth of a public park into someone else's plan and their private wealth. It is wrong to measure a public park with private economic schemes. The flimsy economics as justification show an arrogance and misquotation of truths -- boy, there was plenty of that here tonight. Do we base public policy on temporary jobs and nonresident workers? How much do we gain when Fox Chase paid staff has two-thirds residency in the suburbs, and professional staff are not 148 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 taxed, and they are not integrated into local commerce and part of the City population. As a tax-free institution, why should we not tax Fox Chase for services that we provide, including streets and school taxes. Jonathan Saidel, the former City Controller, warned us that we subsidize institutions too much, and we lose our tax ratables. The so-called City economic benefits are false. All those tax abatements punish us by rewarding the wealthy and make residents pay too much. Councilman made a statement that it's no longer practical to use all of as a public-service park; it's is his fantasy and an insane falsehood. His promise that Fox Chase will provide funds for the mansion and grounds deny the fact that Fox Chase Cancer Center has been here since 1949 and has not provided any benefits. The fiction 149 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 they gain -- they use the same fiction to gain a driveway across park land. 4 acres of land was not for Burholme Park. Meanwhile, they violate the gate rules and misuse the policy on the driveway easement, and they place overflow parking on the park premises for free use. I think City Council needs to terminate this giveaway lease and get its true value of 99 years. I think the Councilman's new statement of funding is an attempted bribe to mislead us. Councilman O'Neill's scare word that Fox Chase may locate new facilities outside the City is farcical. There is no need to go because Fox Chase Cancer Center has already insides its 48 acres plot with inside land managed by Temple University with vacant land available. Or just go 1,000 feet, and you will be 150 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 in Fox Chase in Cheltenham. Or go a bit --
Excuse me, Mr. Maurer, excuse me. Do you still have much?
I'm almost finished with this page, and I would also like to testify about the Fairmount Park ordinance.
If you have written testimony for the Fairmount Park issue, we will give that copy to the stenographer to be transcribed in full.
Well, I think you gave the advocates about two hours of speech.
We're not going to debate the issue. I suggest you complete the testimony that 151 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 you're giving now. And if you will abbreviate the one about the Fairmount Park, we'll be happy to listen to it. And if you don't want to do that, we'll give the testimony to the stenographer, and it will be transcribed in full.
And I will abbreviate. I will just give you a little summary.
I attend the Fairmount Park Commission meetings. I follow their rules, and I know what happened at the Commission meetings. Mr. Focht, who just testified 152 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 here today, misrepresented what happened. They do not have a committee. That committee terminated in -- two years ago. They have not made any decisions. So they have an agreement that is terminated because they cannot enforce it, and they know it. Unfortunately, this is a public park. And as a public park, there are revisionary rights. If you're not going to use it as a public park, it's not land to give away; it goes back to other people, and it cannot be used for anyone else except back to the heirs, so we have a major problem. I think there's falsity of Fairmount Park. I will submit my Fairmount Park testimony for the record so you will have my words there, and I will defer to the next speaker.
Thank you very much. 153 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 Do we have any questions or comments? The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Good day, Mr. Maurer. Are you a resident of the Burholme Park community?
I'm a member of the Ryers -- Friends of Ryers, which is the park. Burholme Park is a regional park, and I am a member of their organization, which, one time, had the name Friends of Burholme Park and Ryers.
I think the question was, Mr. Maurer, are you a resident of that area?
I think Councilwoman Brown just asked the 154 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 question. Is it yes or no?
Well, no one else is a resident that testified. Why am I getting a residency question that no one else did?
Typically, when we are considering measures of this scale, we are keenly interested in residents who are intimately involved and who will be ultimately --
I'm very intimately involved. I have what's called substantial interests.
Very well. You've answered the -- 155 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56
So I have a wide -- just like he has a wide district, I have a wide interest too.
We thank you for the answer to the question, sir.
Mr. Maurer, I know you do come in to Council to testify quite frequently, and we're very grateful to you. Thank you very much, sir.
I'm Gerald, and that's spelled W-A-L-N. And I have come today on behalf of the family of Robert Waln Ryerss, who, in the will of 1902, gave his dwelling house and 80-some acres to the people of Philadelphia; the house to be fitted out as a library, reading room, and museum, to be free for the community; the grounds to be used as a park and to be free for the use and enjoyment of the people of Philadelphia forever. The park and library is 156 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 steeped in my family history, my family heritage, from the name Burholme, which comes from our ancestorial home in Yorkshire, England, to all of the various activities that take place in the park. For clarification on the relationship here, Robert Waln Ryers' paternal grandmother was a Waln, and his maternal grandfather was Congressman Waln, who served in the United States Congress. I come here today on behalf of the family that live throughout Pennsylvania and throughout the country. For me and for the family, we have many happy memories there from family reunions to all kinds of family gatherings. But probably even more importantly is the place, the park, and the library have had for thousands of people living in Philadelphia. I know on snowy, cold days, I've watched hundred of children and 157 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 parents with happy faces sledding down the hills of Burholme Park. I've watched participants in many different activities participate in those activities provided for children there at the library. By the way, our Victorian Christmas Bazaar is coming up on December 1st, and I'd like to invite each one of you to attend that and have a sample of the Wassail. It's an old family recipe; I think you'll like it -- I've listened to lots of people tell me how they've grown up in the park as, their parents, their grandparents and their great- grandparents. And just two years ago, I had the honor to cut the cake for the celebration of the 100th birthday of Burholme Park. I sometimes joke with the family and some of my friends and say, "Why didn't Robert give the money to 158 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 the family? Why didn't he give us the fortune?" Instead, he gave it to the people of Philadelphia. Robert was an individual who was very much interested in community. He had a number of different things he did in the Philadelphia community -- providing shelters for animals, he worked for crippled children, and the list of activities could go on and on. And he, in his will, provided that his fortune, instead of going to the family, would go to the people of Philadelphia so that they could enjoy it as a park and as a library forever. Our concern as a family is: Can wills be broken, wishes disregarded when something better comes along? It's true that we are looking at a very lofty goal here, a very lofty thing that can be accomplished, but how about the wishes that were set forth in the will? If wills can be broken, if 159 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 wishes disregarded, why would I or other members of the family or others in the community wish to leave things to the City for the betterment of the community? I think it was the benevolence of Robert Waln Ryerss who helped to better our community here. I think this kind of benevolence that we have seen is what has made our community, our city, a great city. So on behalf of the family president Verna and members of Council and the committee, it really is within your power today to save our park. And as we prepare to celebrate the 103rd anniversary or birthday of Burholme Park and the Robert Waln Ryerss Library and Museum, I would like to ask you, on behalf of the family, that you preserve it in its entirety for the good of the people of Philadelphia forever. I want to thank you for this opportunity to speak to the Council. 160 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56
Thank you very much. Do you mind coming over to the map -- I'm not familiar with this area -- and point out where the area of the museum is located, please. I think the map here would indicate exactly where it's located, the map. Can anybody indicate where it is on the map? Okay. So the baseball field is being saved.
Oh, it's going to remain; that's what I thought. How about the library? Where's the library?
President Verna, Tom Garvey can speak to it. 161 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 Part of the arrangement is not only to maintain the museum but to provide an endowment. Fox Chase has really treated it with a lot of dignity, and you will see from the document -- and, Tom, you should be pointing as I speak -- that we're really far off in the development from where the mansion is. And we look forward to the continued availability of the mansion for everyone. The collection, the -- basically, the most important part of the bequest will remain intact and preserve, which is a wonderful thing. So Tom, could you just describe that.
Oh. So your concern is about the park as a whole? 162 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56
The park as a whole, but also the breaking of the will. Can wills be broken like that, which is disregarded.
Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to make it crystal-clear here that as far as the construction -- or the new construction of Fox Chase, it would have no bearing, then, on your museum or the library; is that true?
The only thing you're saying is just the area in the -- that's currently being used, I believe, as a driving range for golf; is that true?
Okay. So 163 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 you're saying it's more important to have somebody hit out a golf ball rather than expanding a tremendous and, I think, one of first-class institution that we have in this country.
Well, I think that's the indication that I get. I just wanted to be crystal-clear that that's what you're arguing about. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
All right. Any other questions or comments from the committee? (No further questions.)
Thank you very much, sir. Please identify yourself for the record.
I'm Paul Canty. I live in Northeast Philadelphia. I live within three or four blocks of the park. 164 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 I'm a Burholme resident. And I've gone up to the park as a kid and played over in the park, the sledding hill. I and my kids play baseball up there. My son uses the driving range; he belongs to the Cardinal Dougherty golf team, and the golf team uses the driving range at the park. And when my son was playing baseball, when he was a little bit younger, he was using the batting cages of the park. But what I came up here for is, I'm a lifelong member of the city. And according to this last election, it seems like all of the deals are over; in other words, everything was going to be on the up and up. And it seems like everybody running for office has a green plan running for the City -- I mean, there's a green plan going with the City now; you know, more park area and everybody's going to plant a tree, which is happening right now. And the greening of Philadelphia, and they're 165 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 talking about the waterfront and all. But now that everybody is back in office, it seems like the deal is on, and Burholme Park is going down the tubes, I mean, from being at this meeting for the last couple hours, and Fox Chase Cancer Center is going to get it, and they're going to put their industrial complex medical monstrosity right down the center of the park, 12 acres of park land. And the rest of 13 the park will basically be their 14 campus. 15 Let me see. Is this the right 16 way to celebrate the 103rd anniversary 17 of the park? And how could this happen 18 in Northeast Philadelphia? This is 19 Northeast Philadelphia's Belmont 20 Plateau, RFD Park, and Rittenhouse Square. In other words, how could this be taking off of us. During this last campaign, during which I got plenty of campaign literature from Mr. Kelly and 166 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 Mr. O'Neill, who don't live anywhere near the park, they didn't mention that they were going to give any park land away.
Well, good. I live there now. And the thing is, everybody that used to live in my neighborhood have moved out because of the way things are going with the City. And the thing is, if you take the park away, I mean, that is it. The thing is that people that use the park are not just from Burholme; they're from all over the City -- from Olney, from all over Kensington. When we were going around in the park, having people sign petitions, people were from all over the City, checking out the park. 167 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56
Excuse me. If this ordinance were approved, how much park land would remain?
How much park land? Well,let's say there's an average of, say, 60 acres to the park.
Right. And these guys are going to take right down the 13 middle. They're going to divide the 14 park, and basically the rest of the park 15 is going to be their campus. 16 The thing is, the City right 17 now has all of these brown fields all 18 throughout the City -- in Kensington, 19 North Philly, West Philly, along the 20 river; everything doesn't have to be right on their -- doesn't have to go into the park. When Dr. Young testified to the community, he was saying, "We don't want to build on our property too much 168 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 'cause it would mess up the esthetics," so he's worried about the esthetics on his own property but wants to take our park land, and he said it at a community meeting. So the thing is, we don't want any of the park to be destroyed. In other words, the City has all kinds of property. I work in Center City, I take the el to work every day. And as I'm on the el in Center City, there's all these vacant fields and this, that, and every other thing. And you mean to tell me instead of -- I mean, the way the park is now and the way the traffic is so bad now, you ought to go there around 4, 5 o'clock, 6 o'clock, it's like a moving parking lot. The thing is -- and they're going to talk about all of these thousands of more employees and tens of thousands of patients. Where is everybody going to go? If you wanted to do something 169 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 like this, it ought to be right off of 95, next to all of these abandoned buildings or just in straight-up open land that the City has, you know, right in the City north of the Tacony Palmyra Bridge or wherever you want to go. There's all kinds of land that the City has. I looked it up on the City website. There's about 30 acres in the City with acres or more that the 12 City can give to the cancer -- 13 In other words, I have nothing 14 against the Cancer Center, but they can 15 build on their own property; I just 16 don't want them expanding into the 17 park, that's all. 18 The City has land they can 19 give them; I have nothing against that. 20 If they want to give them a ten-year abatement for building there, that's fine. We just don't want them taking our park land. And let me see. Almost done. And, basically, all I have to say in 170 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 conclusion is, I don't want this. In other words, I don't think it should be voted on at the last second of the Street Administration. In other words, I think Mayor Nutter should have more to say on this -- I mean, have more input so we can work something out so the Fox Chase Cancer Center can expand on property the City can give them. They can take their tax abatement, whatever. I don't think there should be rush to judgment and to vote on this before the end of the year because I know that John Street's law firm represents the Cancer Center.
John Street is associated with the Fox Chase Cancer Center. And if you pass this, he's going to sign this in two seconds flat. And the thing is, all I'm saying is, the thing is let Mayor 171 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 Nutter have negotiations on this and take care of this.
As a point of order: The Mayor is not affiliated in any way with our law firm; I just want to put that on the record. I was reluctant to do that because by rebutting that one bold misinformed statement, I didn't want to suggest that I agreed with any of the other fallacious and irresponsible statements. Thank you.
In conclusion, the people of City Council should do the right thing. Let Mayor Nutter discuss this with City Council in the next -- in '08.
Thank you. Just a moment, please. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown. Just a moment, sir. Please --
I would not want you to leave here with 172 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 you believing we have not heard your concerns. You've raised a couple that are a trigger for me. Did you have the opportunity to hear the testimony of our Fairmount Park Commissioner, wherein he spoke to the enormous amount of work that's been done over the past months, Mr. Focht? Did you have an opportunity to hear his testimony?
Yeah, I did. Wasn't he talking about giving 39 acres of the park away?
I don't remember the details, but reviewing his testimony will clarify and clear up a number of concerns you've raised. The second is Charles Denny, 173 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 who's our acting Chief Traffic Engineer, spoke around how a number of the traffic-related issues have been resolved, again, as a result of many weeks of work. Did you hear the testimony?
Yes, I did, but the things is, the people in Cheltenham who live right across the street Burholme Park on Cottman Avenue -- in other words, according to him, they're going to take away the parking, and the people in Cheltenham and the city commissioners in Cheltenham say no, that's not going away right now; they're all against it. In other words, they want to make on the Philadelphia side just two lanes of traffic going west, but on the Cheltenham, it's only one lane of traffic going east, and they want to keep it the way it is. The city commissioners in Cheltenham don't want to change it.
174 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 Does the park continue over across Cheltenham Avenue?
So then that answers the question ultimately.
I would encourage you, if you would, to please pick up the testimony of Mr. Denny because I believe it fairly addressed your issues raised around parking and traffic.
Well, if you went to the park, say, right about now, the thing is, you would be one moving parking lot going five miles an hour.
Thank you very much. 175 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 Any other questions for this witness from members of the committee? (No further questions.) MR. McPHERSON: Our next panel consists of Mary Tracy, Doris Simon, Jean Gavin. (Witnesses come forward.)
Ms. Tracy, I believe you were called first, so please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon, President Verna and honorable members of City Council. My name is Mary Tracy, and I'm the Executive Director of SCRUB, the public's voice for public space. And that's one reason why I'm here today, to testify, because as SCRUB, we have been involved with this community who are most concerned about losing their public space. And also, as President of the Fairmount Park Commission's Advisory Council, I was 176 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 actively involved with this from the very beginning, having attended all of the hearings in Fox Chase and Burholme, and even when the commissioners came to the neighborhood to hear the voices of the people. And I find -- I mean, I think it would be really wonderful if this committee could actually relocate up to Burholme to have these hearings, and you would have a, you know, I think a -- a better representation from the people who live there. In fact, I'd ask your permission to hand up some testimony 'cause several people who were here all afternoon had to leave. And if you know the community of Burholme at all, many are retired and have jobs that they really can't be here during the day; they can't afford to lose that time. So one neighbor -- and also, many of the people in Burholme Park 177 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 have become members of SCRUB as well, so I'm really here on their behalf as well. But if I can hand up some of the letters and the testimony to go on the record, I'd be most grateful. Thank you. I think we've heard a lot already about the will and the donated land and how lucky we are in Philadelphia to have civic-mined philanthropists leave their land and their assets of art and buildings and sculpture. It has enriched our city immeasurably and actually has enabled us to prosper as a cultural place for people to live and visit. And I think that Robert Ryerss has been an especially generous donor in giving his farm and his mansion to the citizens of Philadelphia to be used forever. And I think in turning this land over for private use -- not for a public use, but private use -- 178 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 Philadelphia is entering into a new realm and one that I think that will put them as a subject of great criticism on a national basis. Because park land for over a hundred years in Pennsylvania, park land is protected. Once land is dedicated as public land, it belongs to the public. And you can't -- a municipality just can't give it away or even lease it is for use other than the public use. Now, the -- there's been reference to the golf course. And, of course, no one could compare the importance of the work that Fox Chase does to a golf course. And yet, according to the law, a golf course is an allowable use because it is a public use, even if they have to pay, because it's -- it's a recreational use, and that's what parks are. You can fish, you can run, you can jog. And I think in a lot of the 179 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 descriptions, the focus in being on the mansion -- I mean, it's a wonderful mansion, and I really would encourage you all to go there; it has wonderful Asian artifacts there and is a very quirky kind of a museum and really lovely. But a park is more than a ball field and more than a building, and this particular park is really a gem in Philadelphia. There are paths for walking, there are benches where church groups come in in the summer and have lunch and just picnic. Families come there, children play, and senior citizens just come to enjoy communing with nature. And that is the essence of a park. And that will be destroyed forever if this Council allows the park to be turned over for private use.
And the courts have said that no matter what the benefits is -- I mean, there are institutions throughout 180 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 this city that all do good work, and they all would look at this land and say, Wouldn't we love to put a building here? But the law is so clear on this. The law is saying that once dedicated to public space, it must remain part of the public realm. And in addition to it being dedicated as a public space, you have the other huge piece, which is that Robert Ryerss donated it to the citizens of Philadelphia to be used forever. So we have Judge Herron, who has already made one comment on this, when he -- when this whole idea was -- you know, when the Fairmount Park Commission first approved this and it went before Judge Herron, he said, We'll wait and see what City Council say, but know this: It doesn't matter what the Fairmount Park Commission, it doesn't matter what City Council does; what matters is this court. And this 181 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 is a will, and it's the job of our lawmakers and our judicial system to protect the wills of those who have died. And by agreeing to this lease today, you are opening up the City to a very expensive round of legal battles. Just look at what happened -- and is still going on with the museum, but the museum could at least -- the Barnes Museum could at least say that it's still going to the public use. The buildings that are going up on this acreage are privately held, owned, and used, no longer access to the public. So I would ask you to strongly consider tabling this until you can look at it more thoroughly. Thank you.
We thank you for your testimony, Miss Mary Tracy, and members of this body would like to pose questions; 182 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56 first, my colleague Councilman Jim Kenney.
Thank you very much. We had a lot discussion recently about wills. Should the Stephen Girard will have not been broken?
Well, I think with the Stephen Girard will, there was a special reason why that could be built, because there was really discrimination at the time of that will. There were children --
Well, there has to be very good reasons to break a will. And there's already a hundred years of court law saying that letting somebody build on it is not one of them. So I am just saying, you know, there's some flexibility there, but I'm not sure that this would make -- 183 11/26/07 RULES/PARKS and REC - BILLS 070955, 56
Okay, but the Stephen Girard will should have been broken; do you agree?
The steven Girard will -- the will is there, he's still educating children; it's just that he's educating children of all colors.
I understand, but that's not what the will said. The will said "white boys."
But the will is still basically doing what he wanted to do, and that's educating. It's not changed, it's not a hospital now.