Opposing sides examine vending issues

How many vendors should be allowed on Walnut Street? Do vendors in front of the Penn Tower Hotel pose a safety hazard? Does the University's proposal contain loopholes that might give Penn an even greater ability to regulate vending on and around campus? These are some of the fundamental questions and issues that continue to divide vendor and consumer groups from the University as both sides prepare to sit down to create a unified proposal to regulate vending. The problems between the University and local vendors and consumers began last May, when Penn submitted its first proposal to regulate area vending to Philadelphia Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell. The fight intensified in late November when the University gave her an updated and more detailed proposal. Blackwell will present the legislation to the city council after the three groups finalize a single proposal. Council returns for its next legislative period January 27. University officials have sought to regulate vending on and around campus for several years, citing safety concerns and the vendors' negative effect on Penn's ability to lure attractive retailers to the area. On January 12, the Penn Consumers Alliance and University City Vendors Alliance sent Blackwell their revised versions of the University's November proposal. The revisions offered by each group seek to make the ordinance less restrictive. "The main area of contention is Walnut Street," University City Vendors Alliance spokesperson Scott Goldstein said. There are currently 21 vendors on Walnut Street, almost all of them in trucks, according to Jason Eisner, a member of PCA. The University's proposal bans most vending on Walnut Street. The PCA proposal, by contrast, restores some of the vending in this area, allowing seven trucks and two carts on the south side of Walnut in spots not outside retail storefronts. The UCVA proposal reduces the restrictions on Walnut Street even further. It bans vending only on the north side of Walnut between 34th and 36th streets and within 20 feet of the entrance to any retail establishment. Another issue is the proposed boundaries of the area regulated by the ordinance -- essentially, what is defined as "University City." Penn proposed regulating the area bounded on the north by Lancaster and Powelton avenues. The UCVA eliminates a two-block area bordering Filbert Street, one block north of Market Street, from area covered by the ordinance. The PCA revision, however, limits the area covered by the ordinance to that south of Filbert. "We feel that it's [Blackwell's] prerogative [to ban vending north of Filbert," Eisner said. "Neither our group nor Penn should be mucking around trying to make laws for areas that we have nothing to do with." In addition, the groups differ somewhat in defining the areas in which vendors pose safety risks. All three groups agree that vending should be prohibited in front of the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania at 34th and Spruce streets. As part of the University's proposal, however, vending is also banned in front of parts of the Penn Tower Hotel across the street. "Access to the hospital and other patient-care facilities, such as the Penn Tower, needs to remain open and unimpeded," said Jack Shannon, the University's top economic development official. The Penn Tower Hotel is operated by the University's Health System and contains hospital offices and facilities in addition to hotel rooms. The PCA plan, on the other hand, calls for six sidewalk vending locations in the area. The UCVA proposal also allows for vending in the locations near the Penn Tower Hotel. Another of PCA's main concerns is the number of "loopholes" present in the University's proposal. For instance, Penn's proposal apparently requires vendors to be at their locations during all hours of operation, discouraging them from going to the bathroom or getting supplies, Eisner said. Eisner also claimed the University proposal's restrictions may prevent the availability of the 100 vending spaces promised by Penn officials. Shannon could not be reached for comment on these allegations. "PCA's most important contribution may be to close these loopholes," Eisner said. "If the administration objects to our changes and fights to keep the loopholes open, we'll know they're planning to use the loopholes to eliminate vending through the back door." But Shannon said the proposal is sufficiently detailed. "In our minds, we believe the proposed ordinance is detailed enough to ensure that vending continues to be part of the University, but in a way that is better regulated and controlled," he said.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.