First-District Councilman Mark Squilla’s office has confirmed that enough opposition votes were verified to officially put the possibility of forming a Callowhill Reading Viaduct Neighborhood Improvement District to rest.
“It’s dead on arrival,” said Sean McMonagle, a legislative aide to Councilman Squilla. McMonagle formerly worked in the offices of Councilman Frank DiCicco, who originally sponsored the legislation creating the NID.
Residents of the Callowhill and Chinatown North neighborhoods who were hoping to create a Neighborhood Improvement District to help pay for blight removal, street lighting, and other improvements got the support of City Council in its last session of the year. More than half the property owners in the proposed district—bounded loosely by Broad, Spring Garden, Vine and 8th streets—had opposed creating the district, according to votes tallied by the offices of Councilman Frank DiCicco and the City Clerk. City Council unanimously voted to pass the legislation anyway.
Writing in The Inquirer last week, NID opponent John Chin said he felt that neighborhood residents opposed creation of the District partially because they were left out of the process. “Let's be clear: This fight was not about cleaner, safer streets,” Chin wrote. “The district was resoundingly rejected because the voters objected to the proposed taxation, as well as a politics-as-usual process that was lacking in transparency, clarity, and inclusion.”
According to McMonagle, 51.9 percent of property owners in the neighborhood voted to oppose the district. Opposition votes also represented 59.82 percent of total assessed property value in the area, McMonagle said. More than half on either of those metrics would have been enough to keep the bill from advancing in Council. McMonagle said he planned to meet with members of the NID in January to talk about other options.
Councilman DiCicco previously told PlanPhilly that the opposition votes still need to be verified, however. "I've never seen a petition not have some irregularities," DiCicco said. The next legal step is to see what signatures are valid. If enough signatures are discarded, he said, having the legislation in place means the NID becomes reality. If enough signatures are valid to oppose, "the NID dies," he said, noting that proponents could try again. As of Monday, the NID was dead, and its proponents were weighing their options.
Check out the 15:20 minute mark for the reading of the bill
Gayle Isa, founder and executive director of the Asian Arts Initiative (AAI) at 12th and Vine, said that a number of issues kept her organization and other property owners from supporting the NID. For one thing, many residents don’t want to see their taxes increased. If the NID were created, property owners would have to pay an extra tax for the services the District would provide. In addition, Isa said there is a “sense of factions” in the neighborhood, and some residents worried that the composition of the board for the proposed NID would not be diverse enough to represent the entire area. She said that a taxing authority that wouldn’t necessarily be responsive to all parts of the neighborhood would be problematic.
“There should be a way for this community to have better services,” Isa said, pointing out that she is in favor of “developing a mechanism” which would have the resources to clean up the neighborhood. But the NID, as proposed, was not that mechanism.
The NID had some support from the Nutter administration. In September, Deputy Mayor Alan Greenberger testified before City Council, saying that creation of a NID is “one element of an overall strategy to manage and plan for growth” in the neighborhood. Greenberger said the City’s support for the NID was contingent upon changes that would allow for consideration by every resident of the proposed district and removal of any references to the NID directing resources toward redeveloping the Reading Viaduct itself. The City insisted that the NID be used to perform street-level cleanup services.
John Struble, of the Callowhill Reading Viaduct Neighborhood Improvement District, said that the District’s steering committee had no immediate plans to move forward with creation of another such organization. He said the committee was planning to meet in the next few weeks. “It’s sort of disappointing, but that’s the way it goes sometimes,” said Struble.
The death of the NID legislation clouds the future of a proposed park on the Reading Viaduct modeled in part on the High Line in New York. An early version of the NID legislation proposed creating that park, though the provision was later removed, in part because it had no City Support. The out-of-use stretch of railroad sits about two stories above street level, and curves from Fairmount Ave. near 9th Street to Vine Street near 12th. Specific plans for a park on the viaduct were never settled on, but many community members continue to pursue the project.
Jamie Moffett, a filmmaker working on a documentary about linear parks across the world, said the failure of the NID would be disappointing for some in the neighborhood, but would not have an adverse effect on efforts to create a park on the viaduct. “I can’t imagine it’s a dealbreaker,” Moffett said.
Contact the reporter at jaredbrey@gmail.com
Comments
Why don't they choose different boundaries and re-propose the NID? Broad and Vine seem like fairly final boundaries, but 8th St and Spring Garden seem arbitrary... Why not Broad and Vine to Spring Garden and 2nd Steet? You add in that area that seems to be left out, re-propose the district and put it to another vote. Improvement Districts have been the largest force behind Philadelphia's rebound during the last 15-20 years. Center City District, Old City District, and University City District, South Street Headhouse District, (and others) have done more to improve this city in the last 15-20 years than anything the city has done or private enterprise. Perhaps more importantly, the work of improvement districts and development corporations leveraged the private investment necessary to pull our city out of its doldrum. But if history is any guide, we can't rest now, to continue to flourish we need to expand the boundaries of the areas receiving investment in essential services like street cleaning, tree planting, and grafiti removal. Neighborhoods thrive when they are safe, clean, and attractive, those are the types of neighborhoods were people want to live and work and seek entertainment. Sadly, there are many parts of our beloved city that aren't, safe, clean, or attractive. A NID or BID would've helped the areas north of Vine immensely, within the current boundaries it has been rejected, so put if forward again.
Philadelphia's singular world-class asset is a whole much greater than the sum of its parts. The 9th Street and City Branches of the former Philadelphia & Reading Railroad join to create a 3 mile long corridor that passes not only through Eraserhood, but skirts renown museums, combines with hundreds of miles of established trails, the largest city-owned park system in the world and narrates the place with much of the greatest industrial capacity the world has ever seen. www, viaductgreene.org for the whole story.
Mr. DiCicco's inference that the petitions submitted are fradulent is insulting! The Chief Clerk of City Council declared them to be legitamate as does the BRT, but because DiCicco cannot graciously accept defeat (see John Kasich's comments in Ohio after trying to union bust!)!
Now the question to ask is how much money will this cost the City and how much time will be was wasted?
Chinatown needs it's own redevolment district. It's like one big fish smelling garbage dump with trash bags lining race street.
Gross.
Demolition of the existing rail trestles will be expensive.
A park is desirable - especially one that constitutes a greenway between Northern Liberties and Market East / Chinatown.
The existing Reading Viaduct is a monstrous physical barrier separating the neighborhood and stifling redevelopment.
The City has very little money for such an ambitious undertaking.
The neighborhood could use some dedicated cleanup efforts.
The formation of a neighborhood CDC that represents the entire population effectively is key to moving forward.
All of these statements are patently true. None of them are mutually exclusive. The adoption of an NID is not critical to any of them either. I am personally relieved that the system of checks and balances worked properly in this instance. (My own opinions about how sad it is Philly continues to attempt to emulate NYC, regardless of appropriateness, I will keep to myself for now.)
Way to keep the area looking like sh*t. I suggest when you find trash on the street that you place it in front of Mr. Browndeis building so he can dispose of it since he fought so hard against cleaning the neighborhood up.
Martin:
It seems when one can't win an arguement, they simply spew out venom. You should take the time to research the issue before making any public comments. I suggest you start by reading the Historical Society of PA's "Philadelphia's Chinatown: An Overview". You obviously are not aware that the Chinatown community has conducted several annual volunteer clean ups, particularly by the youth. A pilot clean up program has been started. Three adults have been hired to conduct daily cleaning. They are being paid by voluntary donations. There is an on-going program to educate the people to do what is right. Also, an effort is being made to install cameras at strategic locations to catch violators dumping trash. Some have already been installed. The question that remains is enforcement and punishment without being heavy handed.
I hope you will keep an open mind.
Why do you have to make this personal, hundreds of people do not want this! Grow up!
And hundreds of people do.
But they didn't win, we did!
Finally, it's DEAD!
Its not. The DEADBEATS need to GET OUT.
We are property owners who already pay enough in property taxes and we are not getting out!