Jeff Abrahamson wrote:
Al Krigman told me that
the proponents at SHCA, UCHS, and the Historical Commission have
refused to participate.
All cat-calling aside, can anyone from SHCA or UCHS comment on this?
I'd like to think it's well-meaning error on Al's part. I'd find it
disturbing if
Richard Welter wrote:
I can say this, I was at the meeting on Tuesday night when Al proposed that
someone from SHCA come to the debate, and they refused, saying they found
the current process that the Historic Society used to be sufficient. They
claim no other venue is needed.
no other venue
Dear list,
let's review the process , this is from the UCHS site listed below.
Al's proposed meeting is redundant.
How is a Philadelphia Historic District created?
Working with local community and historic preservation groups, the
Historic Designation Committee of the Commission undertakes a
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 16:17:42 -0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Chris Hibbard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [UC] open community meeting
Cc:
Bcc:
X-Attachments:
In a message dated 3/17/02 2:54:41 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The Commission holds several sessions to
Dear Chris,
I disagree vehemently with your stance that the meeting promoted by Al
and others is redundant.
I love Historic property.
I want to see our neighborhood improved and (where appropriate) restored.
But,
IMPOSING an ideal /or
GIFTING Tax Credits to folks (like
This strikes me as odd to conclude that the existence of hearings
makes debates are redundant. Shall we not discuss it on this list and
choose not to talk about it with friends and neighbors just because
the hearings are designed to allow for feedback and information?
I'd say it's a sign of a
Dear applicant for Sun-Porch:
the current amount of Sun Porch homes the Historic Society
finds to be sufficient. We claim no other Sun-Porch is needed.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
