Re: [UC] 40th Street Inn : Huge Change demands public meetings and open disco...
In a message dated 11/11/2007 1:30:17 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 40th Street Inn : Huge Change demands public meetings and open discourse Liz others: I have it from a reliable source that the project developers will make a presentation at the SHCA annual (election) meeting, this Tuesday (the 13th). The meeting is scheduled for 7:30 at the Spruce Hill Christian School, 42nd Baltimore. This was apparently not mentioned in the announcement mailed to members. With respect to statements circulating about whether or not the developers discussed this project in public forums, here's what the same reliable source told me in connection with SHCA: The only meetings with [SHCA] on the hotel proposal were with the zoning committee, and those were part of meetings with many other items on the agenda and were mainly informational any zoning application was awaiting resolution of the project at the Historical Commission level, and [SHCA's Zoning Committee] deferred any further discussion of the proposal until that decision was made. I strongly urge everyone interested in this project -- for, against, neutral, or undecided -- to attend the SHCA meeting on Tuesday. Candidly (most people know I'm no fan of SHCA so my opinion here is admittedly jaded), I suspect that Tom Lussenhop plans to make a superficial presentation like he did at the most recent First Thursday meeting, glossing over the primary community objection to the project (the height of the proposed structure), and take few questions. But a big showing of concerned neighbors -- whether or not they belong to SHCA and/or live or work within the nominal boundaries of Spruce Hill -- will make it necessary to have a healthy open discussion at the risk of being vulnerable to criticism of public meeting claims when the issue comes to the Zoning Board of Adjustments in City Hall. Al Krigman ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [UC] Forward the next SHCA open and public forum
--- Anthony West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lussenhop's proposal envisages zero residents and, in fact, anybody who chose to reside in this building would have to be at once very wealthy and very stupid. Glenn, you are a noted millionaire University City real-estate investor, bankrolled by Penn from the git-go. But your own real-estate holdings are strictly resident-oriented, if I'm not mistaken; you have no background in hotel real estate, do you? This is not an industry you know anything about, then. In the 1st Thursday meeting we both attended, Lussenhop carefully detailed elaborate plans for hotel guests to have their vehicles liveried to remote locations on Penn lots, so that no parking would be needed at 40th Pine. What do you think of these plans? Surely you weren't trying to fool your neighbors into thinking these plans hadn't been carefully worked out and presented in public. In general, I don't believe petty squabbles between rival real-estate magnates like Tom and you should be given much space on UC-list. I'm sure he wants his millions; I'm sure you want yours. As a rule, I don't see Tom prying into your business on UC-list and I don't think you should be using our bandwidth to pry into his business either. Keep your mutual business to yourselves -- that would be better for the rest of us. -- Tony West I wasn't at the Penn first Thursday meeting, my lord! Are you trying to lie to our neighbors to attack my character as you have done so regularly for so many years? Where is the gang to back up your lies and straw man? I hope you didn't trade your kingdom for a horse! Ha,ha,ha. The uncensored list was so much better when you of the cheesehead gang weren't spewing this kind of crap here. I look forward to it after so many years but it is a big turn-off to others. When a mature adult wishes to engage in a discussion about the parking/taxi issue, and the plans for a nine space parking lot, and the absurd assurances about valet parking; I will engage them in civil discourse with honest and civil responses. But when you cheeseheads fling bullshit, I'll dump it right back on you so the peasants see their king covered in do-do. You cheesheads don't seem capable of civil discourse. You continue to rely on the pompous ass bullying as if it hasn't been exposed!!! I loved your brilliant analysis of UCHS avoiding the public forum business. I don't know anyone that can blow out such completely useless bullshit while using such a pompous tone. I'm impressed like everyone else, your lordship! Spew away, my king, spew away! The noted millionaire bank rolled by Penn, Glenn the wanker, liar. PS. Give my regards to committeeman7 and voteforandytoy. I'll tell friends from the FOCP that the pompous ass says greetings from sweetbarking [EMAIL PROTECTED]ha, ha, ha. I think out of gratitude, the community should ask Penn to demolish some of the nearby houses to put up a parking lot. It's not fair for the upscale residents of this 110 unit tower to fight over the nine planned parking spots. A parking tower from Pine to Baltimore would help the upscale tourists have convenient parking without being forced to turn the SUV's around. Penn is doing so much for us selfish consumers, I think that is the least we could offer. Glenn You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Forward the next SHCA open and public forum
Excuse me, Glenn, you are correct. You were at the October 1st Thursday meeting but not November's. My bad. So you really were unaware the issue of parking for the Lussenhop project had already been addressed in public. Now you know, however. -- Tony West I wasn't at the Penn first Thursday meeting, my lord! Are you trying to lie to our neighbors to attack my character as you have done so regularly for so many years? You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] Who can attend/vote at the SHCA meeting on Tuesday/Campus Inn presentation
Several people have asked me off-list whether they can participate in the SHCA meeting this Tuesday (Spruce Hill Christian School -- 42nd Baltimore -- 7:30 pm), if they're not an SHCA member. I don't recall SHCA ever turning anyone away who wasn't a paid-up member. So, presumably anybody can attend and hear presentations like that supposed to be given by Tom Lussenhop about the proposed 11-story hotel at 40th Pine/Baltimore. I don't know how open the chair (Cindy Roberts) will be to questions or statements raised by non-members, but she's unlikely to attempt to keep non-members from participating in open discussions. Non-members, of course, won't have the privilege of voting or of making motions. This may be important because it's an election meeting. And it also may be important because there may be some incentive to make and vote on motions with respect to SHCA's official position or instructions to its Zoning Committee with respect to the campus inn proposal. Traditionally, SHCA (and most other civic groups in this neighborhood) accept dues and register members at the door, so you can join when you get there. SHCA once had a brouhaha about denying a person a nomination for the Board of Directors based on that person's not being a member -- then refused to take the person's registration on the spot. So there's some question whether you can opt to shell out your $20 during the course of the meeting if you decide then you want to vote on something. If any of the above is in error, perhaps an SHCA officer (hello, any of you out there?) will correct me. Always at your service and ready for dialog. Al Krigman ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
[UC] lost dog, 45th and Locust
Lost sometime between 10pm Saturday night and 8am Sunday morning, 2 yr-old female, medium large, all white with some brown spots (particularly on ears), short hair, answers to Ali Wears purple collar, no tags. Reward offered! Please call 215-382-0970 or 215-435-6015. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] Parking plan at the proposed hotel
Dear list, The issue about the proposed parking plan at the proposed 115 unit Hilton was brought up by an individual on the list. Since this issue was brought up, I want you to get an accurate account based on what I know. There is no well thought out and secure plan as reported by the individual who attended the Penn First Thursday presentation. First to clarify, this Penn presentation is now a series of tightly controlled presentations without any time for discussion. These 8AM meetings, as Liz mentioned, do not meet the standards for open public meetings for attendance by the general community. The suggestion that this was some properly announced public presentation to the community about this Campus Inn plan is simply nonsense. Here is the proposed parking plan as I know it. A 9 space surface lot would be on the far west property line with entrance on Pine. The upscale hotel entrance would also be on Pine. An unsecured assertion is made that valet parking will drive these out of town guests vehicles to some remote unspecified parking lots. Of course, we have to trust the corporate developers, Penn, and Hilton not to abandon this at any time in the future they choose. These unspecified lots will also require a good bit of effort from that location, and there will be lines at peak times. Many of these guests are not going to use this valet service even if the valet service was continued. The closest available lots are not convenient at all to 40th and Pine. I have not heard any comment on the taxi situation at all. When these extended stay guests go around the city are they going to use the trolleys as suggested or taxis? The first exposure of this hotel plan in the Oct 10 UC Review had Mr. Lussenhop making a big point about the trolley lines. I simply don't believe that the assumptions about these Hilton guests taking our trolleys is believable. There will certainly be taxi stands but the developers aren't going to mention this to us until it is too late. This is not an issue for the PHC but I have heard no response at all about handeling taxis. But have these developers been forthcoming about a damn thing? So I agree with Liz, this will cause serious traffic and parking problems in that area; even if we could trust the developers! That area is not a good place for out of town drivers to be driving lost. In fact, as many of us discussed on the list, the situation (since the new Penn building occupied the end of Baltimore Ave. in front of the VA) is one of the most confusing and dangerous in the city. Hope that clears up the confusion about the earlier report about some well thought out believable plan presented publicly at the Penn 8 AM show for the anointed. (After the discussion at the Blackwell run meeting during the Fenton affair, the agenda of the Penn presentations is so tightly packed, no discussion is possible. I was not at this Nov. show but got a report that it was the same packed agenda as Oct. and Lussenhop's was an abbreviated presentation) Sincerely, Glenn __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Parking plan at the proposed hotel
A 1st Thursday meeting is neither properly announced nor improperly announced. It's simply one source of information on this porject, which I shared with the list. 1st Thursday is a good forum for learning details of a presentation. Proper announcements would follow the procedures of ZBA and HC in their own meetings. I never said these plans were well thought out and secure; that is Glenn's frothy coloration. It clearly is a plan that has been worked out to some degree of clarity. Critics of this proposal must acquaint themselves with these plans before they launch into the business of finding fault with them. Without a doubt, any guest staying at that hotel would soon discover they can't count on finding an on-street parking space within three blocks of the hotel; that's the current situation. So they would be forced to contemplate other solutions than simply driving around. Whether those solutions would work well enough for community traffic flow, I cannot say. I'd want to hear from a traffic engineer. -- Tony West Dear list, The issue about the proposed parking plan at the proposed 115 unit Hilton was brought up by an individual on the list. Since this issue was brought up, I want you to get an accurate account based on what I know. There is no well thought out and secure plan as reported by the individual who attended the Penn First Thursday presentation. First to clarify, this Penn presentation is now a series of tightly controlled presentations without any time for discussion. These 8AM meetings, as Liz mentioned, do not meet the standards for open public meetings for attendance by the general community. The suggestion that this was some properly announced public presentation to the community about this Campus Inn plan is simply nonsense. Here is the proposed parking plan as I know it. A 9 space surface lot would be on the far west property line with entrance on Pine. The upscale hotel entrance would also be on Pine. An unsecured assertion is made that valet parking will drive these out of town guests vehicles to some remote unspecified parking lots. Of course, we have to trust the corporate developers, Penn, and Hilton not to abandon this at any time in the future they choose. These unspecified lots will also require a good bit of effort from that location, and there will be lines at peak times. Many of these guests are not going to use this valet service even if the valet service was continued. The closest available lots are not convenient at all to 40th and Pine. I have not heard any comment on the taxi situation at all. When these extended stay guests go around the city are they going to use the trolleys as suggested or taxis? The first exposure of this hotel plan in the Oct 10 UC Review had Mr. Lussenhop making a big point about the trolley lines. I simply don't believe that the assumptions about these Hilton guests taking our trolleys is believable. There will certainly be taxi stands but the developers aren't going to mention this to us until it is too late. This is not an issue for the PHC but I have heard no response at all about handeling taxis. But have these developers been forthcoming about a damn thing? So I agree with Liz, this will cause serious traffic and parking problems in that area; even if we could trust the developers! That area is not a good place for out of town drivers to be driving lost. In fact, as many of us discussed on the list, the situation (since the new Penn building occupied the end of Baltimore Ave. in front of the VA) is one of the most confusing and dangerous in the city. Hope that clears up the confusion about the earlier report about some well thought out believable plan presented publicly at the Penn 8 AM show for the anointed. (After the discussion at the Blackwell run meeting during the Fenton affair, the agenda of the Penn presentations is so tightly packed, no discussion is possible. I was not at this Nov. show but got a report that it was the same packed agenda as Oct. and Lussenhop's was an abbreviated presentation) Sincerely, Glenn __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Same old, same old [was: Re: [UC] Parking plan at the proposed hotel]
In a message dated 11/11/07 8:23:35 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Critics of this proposal must acquaint themselves with these plans before they launch into the business of finding fault with them. Oh, Tony, what a novel idea! Has this ever happened, in the history of listserv crankiness? For those who say they didn't have the opportunity to learn more, look at what happened when Tom Lussenhop offered to explain his plans to Karen Allen over a cup of coffee! She wrote: I told him no, and to never write to me again. For the record, I don't drink coffee, I don't like him, and I definitely don't discuss community business in back rooms. What will that response teach developers about the usefulness of offering to give out the details of their plans? And, what happens when people with one opinion try earnestly to engage in a listserv conversation with people of a different opinion? When Karen complained that no one was willing to respond to the questions she'd raised, I offered to enter into a discussion, cautioning that ...if you truly want to hear another viewpoint, I'll be happy to share mine. This isn't personal - it's only in response to your request for other points of view. In my reply to her points, writing about the community association zoning process which Karen and I both understand pretty well since we sit on a zoning committee, I wrote ...community zoning committees generally respect the wishes of the nearby neighbors when taking positions on new developmentAt some point, to have the local community association impose its will on a site, in absence of complaint from the neighbors, would seem inappropriate. To have you and me, as busybodies from the next neighborhood over, impose our will on the project seems even more problematic. Which Karen spun, a few days later, to read ... I knew I'd be attacked for not living in Spruce Hill, like Melani Lamond's attack in her recent email calling me a busybody from the next neighborhood over. Listserv writers tend to have already formed their opinions when they hear WHO is involved in a plan. As I wrote earlier, I don't think their support or opposition has much to do with the merits of the proposal; it has more to do with the identity of the players. That's too bad. We'd work better for the good of the neighborhood if we could work for the greater good, rather than fight because we aren't the best of friends. - Melani Lamond Melani Lamond, Associate Broker Urban Bye, Realtor 3529 Lancaster Ave. Philadelphia, PA 19104 cell phone 215-356-7266 office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113 office fax 215-222-1101 ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [UC] Parking plan at the proposed hotel
Really? Details or an overview? It doesn't sound like the presentation was very detailed to me. Frankus Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible. On Nov 11, 2007, at 08:21 PM, Anthony West wrote: 1st Thursday is a good forum for learning details of a presentation You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: Same old, same old [was: Re: [UC] Parking plan at the proposed hotel]
It would be even more novel if the developer were as upfront and honest in public as he wants people to think he is in one-on-one conversation. If he were, we would all *know* about his plans already and not have to guess. I could be wrong. Maybe *all* developers prefer to meet everyone in the neighborhood separately over coffee instead of making their plans more traditionally public. I doubt it, though. I don't know the developer and have only formed an opinion about him from his behavior around this project which is far from stellar. If I don't want an 11-story hotel 1/2 block from me it has nothing to do with my personal feelings about a developer, trust me. Frankus Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible. On Nov 11, 2007, at 09:14 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 11/11/07 8:23:35 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Critics of this proposal must acquaint themselves with these plans before they launch into the business of finding fault with them. Oh, Tony, what a novel idea! Has this ever happened, in the history of listserv crankiness? For those who say they didn't have the opportunity to learn more, look at what happened when Tom Lussenhop offered to explain his plans to Karen Allen over a cup of coffee! She wrote: I told him no, and to never write to me again. For the record, I don't drink coffee, I don't like him, and I definitely don't discuss community business in back rooms. What will that response teach developers about the usefulness of offering to give out the details of their plans? And, what happens when people with one opinion try earnestly to engage in a listserv conversation with people of a different opinion? When Karen complained that no one was willing to respond to the questions she'd raised, I offered to enter into a discussion, cautioning that ...if you truly want to hear another viewpoint, I'll be happy to share mine. This isn't personal - it's only in response to your request for other points of view. In my reply to her points, writing about the community association zoning process which Karen and I both understand pretty well since we sit on a zoning committee, I wrote ...community zoning committees generally respect the wishes of the nearby neighbors when taking positions on new developmentAt some point, to have the local community association impose its will on a site, in absence of complaint from the neighbors, would seem inappropriate. To have you and me, as busybodies from the next neighborhood over, impose our will on the project seems even more problematic. Which Karen spun, a few days later, to read ... I knew I'd be attacked for not living in Spruce Hill, like Melani Lamond's attack in her recent email calling me a busybody from the next neighborhood over. Listserv writers tend to have already formed their opinions when they hear WHO is involved in a plan. As I wrote earlier, I don't think their support or opposition has much to do with the merits of the proposal; it has more to do with the identity of the players. That's too bad. We'd work better for the good of the neighborhood if we could work for the greater good, rather than fight because we aren't the best of friends. - Melani Lamond Melani Lamond, Associate Broker Urban Bye, Realtor 3529 Lancaster Ave. Philadelphia, PA 19104 cell phone 215-356-7266 office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113 office fax 215-222-1101 ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
Re: [UC] Parking plan at the proposed hotel
I didn't quote you every word of a10-mn presentation because you didn't pay me to take such notes for you. It sounded detailed enough to my ears for a first go-around. I suspect more details are to be found in somebody's paperwork; I truly do not think business persons are able to raise the money needed for investments on this scale without actually studying the issue. You seldom see UC-list's chattering class actually running numbers on someone else's project. At a second look, one might ask for a fuller presentation on some of these points, if one cared enough or if it was one's business to make decisions about them. -- Tony West Frank wrote: Really? Details or an overview? It doesn't sound like the presentation was very detailed to me. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Parking plan at the proposed hotel
You seldom see UC-list's chattering class actually running numbers on someone else's project. I see. Citizens who are concerned about their neighborhood are now reduced to ³the chattering class.² Kimm On 11/11/07 10:29 PM, Anthony West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didn't quote you every word of a10-mn presentation because you didn't pay me to take such notes for you. It sounded detailed enough to my ears for a first go-around. I suspect more details are to be found in somebody's paperwork; I truly do not think business persons are able to raise the money needed for investments on this scale without actually studying the issue. You seldom see UC-list's chattering class actually running numbers on someone else's project. At a second look, one might ask for a fuller presentation on some of these points, if one cared enough or if it was one's business to make decisions about them. -- Tony West Frank wrote: Really? Details or an overview? It doesn't sound like the presentation was very detailed to me. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] Fallacious argumentation and gang strategy
Dear list, Here we go again. The barking cheese gang is coming back to intimidate community discussions to serve their masters. Lets consider the last posts of Lamond and West. Theyre barking loud and clear that the non-plutocrats should shut up for various reasons. Were not traffic engineers so we should shut up. Karen is a busybody from the next neighborhood, when she is questioning issues and offering opinions, but Melanis collusion in these backroom dealings while constantly resorting to the ad hominem argument is just fine Hey Mel, I live in Spruce Hill so you should get your busy body out of my neighborhoods business or are you just being a hypocrite? But look at the point the barking cheese gang always makes in all posts. Those whom ask questions about the cronies of their gangs should shut up simply because their character is so defective and they're stupid and silly. With pomposity, Lamond and West say we little people should fight through secrecy, outright lies, etc. We need to discover the secret plans of powerful corporate agendas yet when one of us common citizens tries to do it and share with the other common citizens, we get this gang harassment by a pack of assholes. And these same assholes claim that using Penn resources to set up a censored list was caused by the incivility of others instead of for the purpose of creating a safe environment for astroturfing! The posts from these clowns to intimidate and silence discussions have been the biggest cause of incivility weve seen on this list. If someone tells the jackals after repeated harassment, to go stick their noses in some corporate butt; theyre not the cause of the incivility. Again this pathetic mean-spirited gang intimidation is intended to shut up the real community activists, who genuinely attempt to serve their community honestly and with compassion for their neighbors, while intimidating the rest of you. Yes, they will treat you like West and Melani are treating Karen and I if you dare to question their authority as corporate ass kissers. In my opinion, this gang really believes they are superior to the rest of us since they have been chosen for corporate ass kissing. Certainly, no one can look at the series of posts from West and Melani and think these two ever try to engage in civil discourse. 1.Distract from the issue with whatever mean strategies they get addicted too. 2.Demand that questions are silenced by attacking questioners character. 3.Intimidate the majority of common citizens from joining in the discussion by sending the message that ganging up is what all outsiders and little people will face. Look at this asinine ideology West and Lamond are so pompously asserting to shut us up. Their corporate friends have no rules when it comes to little people. But we cannot even ask questions while their cronies lie and hide their domineering agendas and plans. We catch them trying to jam this hotel through, which by the way, is exactly what the Penn gang is trying to do, and Lamond and West assert community citizens are in the wrong for not studying secret fucking plans!. Penn is already insisting that this hotel must be done fast because of a tight schedule. Penn owned the building for 3 fucking years but we citizens lose our rights to a fair process because of their tight schedule. Lamond and West are espousing the views of colonialist war lords and plutocrats. These arent the principals of citizens in representative democracies. The processes they espouse were considered un-American at one time So Im certainly not afraid to challenge Lamond or West in a civil debate about issues. But it seems they are either too fucking stupid or too addicted to their mean spirited bullying to be capable of civil discourse about issues. Any opinions? Are Lamond and West too stupid or too addicted to gang style bullying to engage in civil discourse? You will get a UCD door prize for the correct answer. Unwilling to ignore the return of barking cheese tactics, Glenn In a message dated 7/27/07 6:49:04 PM, kcassidy at asc.upenn.edu writes: the cool thing about this software is that i can pre-ban glenn! This will be heaven. But, I hope he doesn't know where you live. Melani __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Parking plan at the proposed hotel
I care about the neighborhood and the project too, Kimm. I try to think honestly about the numbers before issuing pronouncements about them. I accept I will never get a deep look into these numbers, but most questions about a business plan -- including stuff as basic as Will it work well for neighbors? do come down to numbers, at least in part. It's not enough to say, for instance, Oh, Lussenhop's numbers can't be right; we must say, See here are our numbers, which are better than Lussenhop's. I'm more interested in fact-gathering than in judgement right now. - Tony West You seldom see UC-list's chattering class actually running numbers on someone else's project. I see. Citizens who are concerned about their neighborhood are now reduced to “the chattering class.” Kimm On 11/11/07 10:29 PM, Anthony West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didn't quote you every word of a10-mn presentation because you didn't pay me to take such notes for you. It sounded detailed enough to my ears for a first go-around. I suspect more details are to be found in somebody's paperwork; I truly do not think business persons are able to raise the money needed for investments on this scale without actually studying the issue. You seldom see UC-list's chattering class actually running numbers on someone else's project. At a second look, one might ask for a fuller presentation on some of these points, if one cared enough or if it was one's business to make decisions about them. -- Tony West Frank wrote: Really? Details or an overview? It doesn't sound like the presentation was very detailed to me. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Parking plan at the proposed hotel
Glenn didn't hear this because he didn't attend the November 1st Thursday, so he knows less than those who did (who are under no obligation to perform for him, either). Lussenhop said the estimated average stay for an extended-stay hotel (what we're actually talking about, not an upscale hotel) is about one week. If there are 95-105 units, he estimated there'd be perhaps a dozen turnovers a day. That's one of the major costly features of a normal hotel that extended-stay hotels don't need to pay for. If this number is true, then I have no problem imagining, let's say, 24 new cab trips on the 300 block of South 40th St. during any one week. Also, I don't think Lussenhop said anything about a Hilton affiliation of his project. I think this is something Glenn just made up all by himself. -- Tony West Glenn wrote: I have not heard any comment on the taxi situation at all. When these extended stay guests go around the city are they going to use the trolleys as suggested or taxis? The first exposure of this hotel plan in the Oct 10 UC Review had Mr. Lussenhop making a big point about the trolley lines. I simply don't believe that the assumptions about these Hilton guests taking our trolleys is believable. There will certainly be taxi stands but the developers aren't going to mention this to us until it is too late. This is not an issue for the PHC but I have heard no response at all about handeling taxis. But have these developers been forthcoming about a damn thing? You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] two-story commercial developments
A dozen blocks west of the proposed hotel at 40th and Pine, there's a new development that has a neighborhood excited and pretty much unified. The 52nd street business association and newly-formed cultural affairs office Arts West have just opened new facilities at 623 S. 52nd St. The corridor has been marked by internecine squabbles and a couple of false starts in recent years, but this new iteration seems to have some real momentum. Membership in the association is on the rise, and several new businesses have proven to be enthusiastic contributors to the corridor. If you haven't been up to 52nd in awhile, you should make a point of doing so. Justin's Snacker Corner, Cedar Supermarket, 52nd Street Flavors (now serving coffee!), Off The Chain thrift store, Liz and Daughter Hair Forum, Urban Unity...the list of new businesses is growing almost weekly. And there are some nice new touches. Planters freshly adorned with flowers, new awnings, freshly painted facades and street trees are really livening things up. Anyway, it's not my best work, but here are some video highlights from the Grand Opening: http://malcolmxpark.org/?p=565 That's malcolmxpark.org, West Philadelphia's most midwestern blog... Andrew You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] 40th St. Inn : Parking and other problems of radically increased density
In my experience: 1. The housing gap is not of a need for hotel space or one week stays, it is for housing for: ESL students, other International Scholars, Laboratory and Medical researchers, Touring Theaters (Cast and Crew), advance Business or Construction teams, People (and their families) involved in complex, medical procedures (transplants, etc.) The most common time need appeared to be around 4-6 weeks 2. Guests-Residents are not house bound. They will probably leave their rooms for work and again for recreation. They will use a variety of transportation methods including: Walking Private vehicles Free Penn Bus Escort Service SEPTA Taxis Airport Shuttles I like the idea of increased and improved public transportation. More and better Cabs, Car Shares and Public Transportation could ease traffic while increasing urban vitality. If there are 9 off street spaces and most are dedicated for passenger pickup, deliveries, cab stands, valet services, etc. it should be made very clear to the community. Further, the off-site valet option needs to be clear, financially sustainable and guaranteed. 3. About 70% of my tenant-guests want to bring a car. My assurance that in most cases, cars in urban settings create more problems than they solve, kept the number of cars to under 40%. If the same numbers hold true, the proposed Inn will need to accommodate 35-75 guest cars, plus the cars of those employees who drive to work. I would like to see some clear, believable, guaranteed plan for parking before I'd vote to approve a zoning change. 4. It takes a lot of supplies to run 100 units of housing. One example: Laundry - if done on site, the amount of soap and bleach needed is huge, off site, linen needs to be moved in and out Where will the loading take place? How will it look? 5. 100 units will generate a lot of trash. Which neighbors will bear the brunt of the noise, smell and view of dumpsters and compactors? 6. My tenant neighbors are still my NEIGHBORS. Justifying this location because 95% of the neighboring properties are tenant occupied seems shortsighted and divisive. I am reminded that Cynthia Preston, volunteer extraordinary with Town Watch, the Police Substation, and many activities over many years helping MANY neighborhood children is 'just a tenant', she is not part of the debate, but an example that contradicts what seems to be a pervasive prejudice on this list. There may be higher turnover rate among tenants, but this neighborhood has a very low vacancy rate. I imagine that something unpleasant to the 2007 tenant might also feel unpleasant to a different 2008 tenant (or home owner). Taking it a step further, creating traffic, parking, or other density problems may even discourage further conversion of tenant properties to owner occupied homes. Those who despise tenants, should recognize this consequence. Frank has outed himself as a nearby tenant neighbor. I value Frank's contributions to this list and our neighborhood. My Penn student daughter is someone else's tenant on the 3900 block of Baltimore. I want to know if this development, improves neighborhood conditions for her and others like her. She, and her peers, deliver a lot of money and talent to the neighborhood. They are more than just 'nuisances'. I am also aware of several nearby homeowners. The O'Donnell's are not just competitors, they are my niece and nephew and parents of my great nieces and nephews. I am proud of their successes, and delighted they were able and willing to buy the property at 4100 Pine. I think their choice, to use it as a family compound is respectful of the neighborhood and that their voices (and objections) should be respected by the neighborhood. I would like to hear how other homeowners feel about the plan. 7. One on one meetings strike me as not sustainable for the developer. Public meetings are key to public understanding and decision making. Karen should be applauded, not chided, for recognizing the slippery slope of ego gratification, bribery (or threat) and self delusion that comes with access to 'back rooms' and 'corridors of power'. Seems I've offered 7 cents tonight. All the best! Liz You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Parking plan at the proposed hotel
Anthony West wrote: Also, I don't think Lussenhop said anything about a Hilton affiliation of his project. I think this is something Glenn just made up all by himself. glenn did't invent the hilton affiliation. the original 10/10 uc review article about this proposed hotel stated: Lussenhop, in partnership with Campus Apartments, plans to lease the property from Penn and build a Hilton franchise 10-story boutique hotel on the lot adjacent to the original building. http://tinyurl.com/yq4pdk but I don't think this kind of nitpicking is useful -- esp. compared to the more important things we need to be discussing about this proposed hotel. let's all agree to be as demanding and rigorous with penn, lussenhop, uchs, shca as we are with each other. .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam®] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. It is very clear on this listserve who these people are. Ray has admitted being connected to this forger. -- Tony West Ray's falsehoods are more sophisticated, more believable -- Tony West You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
