RE: [UC] UCD is innocent

[Glenn moyer]

Hi Andy,Sorry for the delay. I dont have much computer time in Spain.The inappropriate use of L  I departments is going on around the country. It is usually to circumvent the need for warrants, as was demonstrated in Phila. against some kids protesting police brutality.You probably dont remember that several years ago UCD bragged about using L I in the Phila. Business Journal. When other publications broke the news, it was reported that businesses on Baltimore Ave that did not accept UCD demands for upscale facades were getting harrassed with extraordinary violations. Then, UCD denied any involvement assuming that no one would discover the differing stories.We also know that UCD feeds addresses to the streets department for bogus trash tickets. (Ive gotten 19 over the years.) When confronted, Carlton Williams and UCD lie about a worst offenders list and claim their working relationship is just to make us cleaner and safer. I publicly reported my encounter with Dexter while surrounded by massive trash violations at 41st and Pine. There is no worst offenders list at UCD, only an enemies list. (Note: The UCD street staff does not know anything about a worst offenders list, like most city employees dont know about all the back room deals with Penn.)The community court continues to feed indentured servants to UCD after police sweeps in Clark Park. This was restarted immediately after UCD was caught violating federal law. (They dishonestly pinned the blame on John Fenton.)UCD does not have a bit of credibility and simply lies when it is caught doing backroom deals with city departments.The City: The city hired Penn Praxis to dishonestly defend Penns budget for the city last year. Taxpayers are currently paying Penn Praxis for a plan to privatize our parks city wide. They call these underutilized spaces. (Did you also notice that a 12% property tax has been attempted city wide. UCD and CCD wanted this done several years ago in our neighborhood and called it a BID. However, under the doctrine of crisis capitalism, the depression provided the opportunity for taking the BID city wide.)  I could site many more examples.I have no doubt that the vast majority of city employees do not know about these back room deals. But, we have patterns of abuse that can not be swept under the rug. Back room deals can not be proven immediately, but the patterns are obvious afterward. We know that Penn power brokers/ plutocrats have no credibility. We know that city departments cooperate with them and then lie about the inappropriate conduct. I believe you are sincere, and I also believe that LI is a tool of plutocracy operating in bad faith.Gotta go,Glenn   -Original Message-
From: Andy Frishkoff 
Sent: May 17, 2010 11:58 PM
To: anthony_w...@earthlink.net, univcity@list.purple.com
Subject: RE: [UC] UCD is innocent






Tony writes: "A well-organized educational advance tour suggests someone has been talking to LI about the needs of burgeoning, but inexperienced, neighborhood businesses. Who might that be?"Actually, that would be my colleagues and me in the Commerce Department working with LI to make code enforcementa more business-friendly process. We have encouraged more advance notice to businesses and outreach to community groups so that they can help the businesses understand what they need to do to comply with issues like signage codes. This is particularly important for business owners who speak English as a second language. I believe that the Welcoming Center has been providing support to many such business owners in West and Southwest Philadelphia, including some on Baltimore Avenue.

Andy 		 	   		  Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your inbox. See how.


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Please protest the proposed 9.9% Real estate Tax Increase

[Glenn moyer]

Liz,The depression gave the opportunity to take the BID city wide and make these mandatory assessments for everyone.Some points: Large corporations should pay taxes that Nutter pushed to reduce for years before becoming mayor. The tax burden now falls on local small businesses while large corporations pay almost nothing.Non profit corporations like Penn should pay for services in lieu of taxes. Example: Boston University gives 5 million each year to Boston. Tax abatements were originally designed to spur development in poor communities, not give windfall profits for a few developers. These did not cause development, that we knew was about to happen, and these give aways should end. These may have helped cause a bubble and glut of upscale luxury condos.The evil war on drugs must end in Philadelphia. The so called public safety department is an enormous waste since citizens are not protected from real criminals. The DA does not have resources to help real victims, while it cages the poor and minority victims of police abuse.The city officials dont serve the people, they serve fat cats. They must be forced on the real issues and dont care about the plight of ordinary citizens. Stressing the hardships on real people will fall on deaf ears!-Original Message-
From: "campio...@juno.com" 
Sent: May 18, 2010 6:33 AM
To: pf...@ccat.sas.upenn.edu, UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Please protest the proposed 9.9% Real estate Tax Increase

Dear Neighbors, Today, the Greater Philadelphia Board of Realtors sent all members a sample letter to City Council-members in protest of a proposed Real Estate Tax increase. I thought it might be helpful to extend this outreach to all homeowners. Here is a sample letter I prepared (adapted from the one sent by GPAR), along with the list of Council members. You may adapt it to better suit your voice, sign and send to every Council-member. Please send before Thursday at 10:00AM when Council reconvenes. Your opinion matters!  I’ll be at my local Polling Place all day Tuesday. I hope everyone votes thoughtfully. Best! Liz ***  Dear Council member,  I strongly oppose Bill No. 100284, which is designed to increase Annual Real Estate Taxes almost 10%. I understand that the administration is working with the Board of Revision of Taxes to correct years of mismanagement and current inaccurate assessments but placing the burden on Home Owners is not a smart or fair solution. As a homeowner, the proposed real estate tax increase will affect me directly, in my annual bill, and indirectly as sales and values plummet. This bill will likely encourage prospective Buyers to look outside the city.Transfer Tax income would be reduced and homes might remain vacant or neglected longer. My neighbors and I sense that many Philadelphians are struggling to keep up with mortgages, taxes, utilities and other expenses of living in the city.  A property tax increase would be disastrous for the residents who are already trying to persevere in this economic climate.  This proposed increase, which is intended to help close the city’s budgetary gap, is targeting one audience: the homeowner, the taxpayer, the VOTER!Philadelphia has one of the highest transfer taxes in the nation.Restrictions on lending continue to limit potential home-buyers.Foreclosure rates continue to grow.The cost of buying a home grows with added expenses.  Any increase in fees will likely further depress the real estate market.  Instead of drawing people into the city it will invite them to leave. If homeowners cannot afford to pay their current mortgages, how can they possibly afford to pay an increase in property tax? In the past year Philadelphians have taken on the burden of a 1% Sales Tax Increase. We have cut our household budgets, been forced to choose fewer activities, cheaper education and lost jobs /or taken drastic pay cuts.  Please do not raise taxes on already contributing citizens, especially during these tough economic times.  Sincerely,  ***  Most who are reading my note are probably in District 3, represented by:  Jannie L. Blackwell (D)  Room 408 City Hall, 19107  686-3418, 3419; fax: 686-1933  jannie.blackw...@phila.gov   At-Large City Councilmembers  William   K. Greenlee (D)  Room 580 City Hall, 19107  P: 215-686-3446, 3447 F: 215-686-1927 william.green...@phila.gov Bill   Green (D)  Room 599 City Hall, 19107  P: 215-686-3420, 3421  F: 215-686-1930 bill.gr...@phila.gov  W.   Wilson Goode, Jr. (D)  Room 316 City Hall, 19107  P:215-686-3414, 3415 F: 215-686-1928 wilson.go...@phila.gov  Blondell   Reynolds Brown (D)  Room 581 City Hall, 19107  P: 215-686-3438, 3439 F: 215-686-1926 blondell.reyonolds.br...@phila.gov  Jack   Kelly (R)  Room 594 City Hall, 19107  P: 215-686-3452, 3453 F: 215-686-1925 kelly-at-la...@phila.gov  Frank   Rizzo (R)  Room 582 City Hall, 19107  P: 215-686-3440, 3441 F: 215-686-1929 frank.ri...@phila.gov  James   F. Kenney (D)  Room 330 City Hall, 19107  

[UC] hey all you gentrified people: MOW YER STINKING LAWN

[Lewis Mellman]

I just received my $75. tall grass tax today.
Rest assured that I will be contesting this in a big way.
When will City Council pass a low tree branch tax?
It's totally unfair to abnormally heighted people like myself to have  
to stoop under all these low hanging branches or risk putting an eye  
out.

Where's my pruning saw?
-Lew


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] Possibly found kitty (48th Osage/Larchwood)

[Linda Lee]

Does anyone recognize this kitty, from near 48th  Osage/Larchwood? She is a grey, orange,  white calico. She's been hanging around for a couple of weeks and one of the tenants there has been feeding her. The tenant will be moving out this month. If you recognize this kitty, or if you can take over feeding her, or possibly offer a foster home, respond to the email below. Thanks.-linda-- Forwarded message --From:Solongo Batjargalsolong...@gmail.comDate: Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:22 AM

RE: [UC] UCD is innocent

[Lalevic, Darco]

Unfortunately Tony, whether true or not, most people assume that people and 
organizations which wield political power (Penn, UCD, local politicians, etc) 
are regularly influencing these organizations. And, of course there won't be 
any evidence, nor is Andy necessarily lying (I would assume he is not). It 
would be doubtful that UCD, Penn, or any organization would openly pressure, 
but rather individuals at high levels would let their preferences be known in 
private conversations. Can Andy absolutely state that no member of the UCD 
board ever influenced LI, in any way? I know for a fact that is not true as 
I've heard that directly from a board member.

Is it coincidence that any number of actions by LI, the PPD, Streets Dept or 
any other entity focuses efforts at a particular time and place? Maybe, but 
there have been plenty of incidents in the past to assume otherwise (for 
example the Streets departments redesign of the 38th/Baltimore/University 
Avenue intersection was at the time promoted by the City as an effort to 
improve traffic. It shortly became clear that it was in fact to build the new 
Vet building). There is plenty of anecdotal evidence and hearsay to assume that 
any LI efforts are being influenced by local power brokers - and therefore we 
can assume that it is the case as it is more likely than not. And that's not 
even with factual evidence such as Glenn points out with the Business Journal 
article or the use of UCD workers for political causes.

Of course, that is not necessarily a bad thing. Certainly LI has plenty of 
positives, as does the UCD. And I would argue that more often than not, the 
overall effect is positive. However, how many other neighborhoods in the city 
get tickets for high grass, trash outside when it isn't supposed to be, etc? It 
is illegal to selectively apply enforcement. And in this neighborhood it is 
clearly being done.

Darco

From: owner-univc...@list.purple.com [mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com] On 
Behalf Of Anthony West
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 10:06 PM
To: UnivCity listserv
Subject: Re: [UC] UCD is innocent

Wilma,

Andy Frishkoff, who speaks from a position of authority, has already explained 
why LI is coming. He says it has nothing to do with UCD. I am taking him at 
his word. You are not. You are calling him a liar.

What proof do you offer for your claim that Andy is lying, and that UCD is 
secretly behind increased LI inspections all across Philadelphia?

If you have no evidence, you should quit making such claims. They don't amount 
to anything.

In the meantime, I want you to prove LI did NOT come because of you! Face the 
challenge of proving a negative. If you can't cope with this challenge .. and 
it's completely unreasonable that anybody could ... then don't expect UCD or me 
to do better than you.

-- Tony West



On 5/17/2010 9:37 PM, Wilma de Soto wrote:
This is not a debate. I want YOU to prove that LI did NOT come, after all 
these many years, because of the UCD. No back and forth please. Since I did not 
make the assertion that it was business as usual, I have NO burden of proof 
whatsoever!  I MEAN it!

Re: [UC] UCD is innocent

[Anthony West]

Darco, do you envision a world in which no individuals at high levels 
can ever let their preferences be known in private conversations? 
Powerful people talk to other powerful people all the time, in every 
society humanity has devised. It is not presumptively evil or unfair for 
them to do so; even if it were, it is as impossible to remove this 
element from society as it is to remove oxygen from the atmosphere.


Picture yourself in the role of a City agency. Do you have a mission to 
listen to input from the various communities you serve, about their 
specific needs? Would you look like a jackass if you didn't? Would the 
same purists who hammer you for listening to a reputable agency from a 
particular community, NOT hammer you just as hard for refusing to 
listen, if it came to you with a concern? You're damned if you do, 
damned if you don't.


Equal enforcement sounds fine in theory. But every public agency also 
tries to fine-tune its responses with selective-enforcement strategies, 
when it identifies hot spots or unique local issues. Take a number and 
wait is a good model for delivery of many public services, but it 
cannot be the sole rule.


Statistical evidence (cf. that 4/28 Daily News article) is that all 
sorts of tickets are being handed out in all sorts of neighborhoods at 
an accelerated rate. There may be neighborhood biases in such a surge 
(+40,000 citywide). But no one has produced any evidence of this. And it 
is mathematically impossible for University City to account for it all 
-- much less UCD.


I don't believe UCD never called LI about anything. The question at 
hand is whether the City came up with its own strategy for restaurant 
code enforcement with or without any input or contact from local people 
or groups; more importantly, it is whether the policy that results is 
good. Andy's explanation of this policy sounds good to me. Does it sound 
bad to anybody else? If so, what's wrong with it?


Bear in mind that code enforcers of all sorts are often mandated to 
respond to anonymous over-the-transom complaints. People who work in the 
restaurant and tavern trade have long assumed that if LI or the State 
Police come down on them, they were dimed on by a competitor. In the 
long run, this paranoid explanation is more persuasive than the paranoid 
explanation that these agencies act on behalf of local power brokers 
... more often than not. I can always be persuaded that either 
explanation was right in any given case; but I always need evidence. 
Unsubstantiated blood-pumping rhetoric about powerful conspiracies 
doesn't do it for me.


-- Tony West



On 5/18/2010 5:23 PM, Lalevic, Darco wrote:


Unfortunately Tony, whether true or not, most people assume that 
people and organizations which wield political power (Penn, UCD, local 
politicians, etc) are regularly influencing these organizations. And, 
of course there won't be any evidence, nor is Andy necessarily lying 
(I would assume he is not). It would be doubtful that UCD, Penn, or 
any organization would openly pressure, but rather individuals at high 
levels would let their preferences be known in private conversations. 
Can Andy absolutely state that no member of the UCD board ever 
influenced LI, in any way? I know for a fact that is not true as I've 
heard that directly from a board member.


Is it coincidence that any number of actions by LI, the PPD, Streets 
Dept or any other entity focuses efforts at a particular time and 
place? Maybe, but there have been plenty of incidents in the past to 
assume otherwise (for example the Streets departments redesign of the 
38^th /Baltimore/University Avenue intersection was at the time 
promoted by the City as an effort to improve traffic. It shortly 
became clear that it was in fact to build the new Vet building). There 
is plenty of anecdotal evidence and hearsay to assume that any LI 
efforts are being influenced by local power brokers -- and therefore 
we can assume that it is the case as it is more likely than not. And 
that's not even with factual evidence such as Glenn points out with 
the Business Journal article or the use of UCD workers for political 
causes.


Of course, that is not necessarily a bad thing. Certainly LI has 
plenty of positives, as does the UCD. And I would argue that more 
often than not, the overall effect is positive. However, how many 
other neighborhoods in the city get tickets for high grass, trash 
outside when it isn't supposed to be, etc? It is illegal to 
selectively apply enforcement. And in this neighborhood it is clearly 
being done.


Darco

RE: [UC] UCD is innocent

[Karen Allen]

RE:  (for example the Streets departments redesign of the 
38th/Baltimore/University Avenue intersection was at the time promoted by the 
City as an effort to improve traffic. It shortly became clear that it was in 
fact to build the new Vet building).

 

That's absolutely true: Penn sent a representative to a Cedar Park Neighbors 
board meeting in 2005 or '06 (somewhere in there) and the woman told us that 
Penn was going to trade the island where a gas station had been (closer to 
the VA hospital, where Baltimore and Woodland branched) to the City in exchange 
for closing the roadbed of Baltimore Avenue where it intersected 38th St, 
directly alongside the Vet School. She said they were doing it to  reconfigure 
the intersection to improve traffic flow. Nothing was ever said about wanting 
the roadway of Baltimore Avenue to build a building;  I only learned that well 
after the fact, and not from anyone connected with Penn.  


 


From: lale...@wharton.upenn.edu
To: univcity@list.purple.com
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 17:23:57 -0400
Subject: RE: [UC] UCD is innocent





Unfortunately Tony, whether true or not, most people assume that people and 
organizations which wield political power (Penn, UCD, local politicians, etc) 
are regularly influencing these organizations. And, of course there won’t be 
any evidence, nor is Andy necessarily lying (I would assume he is not). It 
would be doubtful that UCD, Penn, or any organization would openly pressure, 
but rather individuals at high levels would let their preferences be known in 
private conversations. Can Andy absolutely state that no member of the UCD 
board ever influenced LI, in any way? I know for a fact that is not true as 
I’ve heard that directly from a board member.
 
Is it coincidence that any number of actions by LI, the PPD, Streets Dept or 
any other entity focuses efforts at a particular time and place? Maybe, but 
there have been plenty of incidents in the past to assume otherwise (for 
example the Streets departments redesign of the 38th/Baltimore/University 
Avenue intersection was at the time promoted by the City as an effort to 
improve traffic. It shortly became clear that it was in fact to build the new 
Vet building). There is plenty of anecdotal evidence and hearsay to assume that 
any LI efforts are being influenced by local power brokers – and therefore we 
can assume that it is the case as it is more likely than not. And that’s not 
even with factual evidence such as Glenn points out with the Business Journal 
article or the use of UCD workers for political causes.
 
Of course, that is not necessarily a bad thing. Certainly LI has plenty of 
positives, as does the UCD. And I would argue that more often than not, the 
overall effect is positive. However, how many other neighborhoods in the city 
get tickets for high grass, trash outside when it isn’t supposed to be, etc? It 
is illegal to selectively apply enforcement. And in this neighborhood it is 
clearly being done.
 
Darco
 


From: owner-univc...@list.purple.com [mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com] On 
Behalf Of Anthony West
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 10:06 PM
To: UnivCity listserv
Subject: Re: [UC] UCD is innocent
 
Wilma,

Andy Frishkoff, who speaks from a position of authority, has already explained 
why LI is coming. He says it has nothing to do with UCD. I am taking him at 
his word. You are not. You are calling him a liar.

What proof do you offer for your claim that Andy is lying, and that UCD is 
secretly behind increased LI inspections all across Philadelphia?

If you have no evidence, you should quit making such claims. They don't amount 
to anything.

In the meantime, I want you to prove LI did NOT come because of you! Face the 
challenge of proving a negative. If you can't cope with this challenge .. and 
it's completely unreasonable that anybody could ... then don't expect UCD or me 
to do better than you.

-- Tony West



On 5/17/2010 9:37 PM, Wilma de Soto wrote: 
This is not a debate. I want YOU to prove that LI did NOT come, after all 
these many years, because of the UCD. No back and forth please. Since I did not 
make the assertion that it was business as usual, I have NO burden of proof 
whatsoever!  I MEAN it!
  

Re: [UC] UCD is innocent

[Brian Siano]

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Karen Allen kallena...@msn.com wrote:


 That's absolutely true: Penn sent a representative to a Cedar Park
 Neighbors board meeting in 2005 or '06 (somewhere in there) and the woman
 told us that Penn was going to trade the island where a gas station had
 been (closer to the VA hospital, where Baltimore and Woodland branched) to
 the City in exchange for closing the roadbed of Baltimore Avenue where it
 intersected 38th St, directly alongside the Vet School. She said they were
 doing it to  reconfigure the intersection to improve traffic flow. Nothing
 was ever said about wanting the roadway of Baltimore Avenue to build a
 building;  I only learned that well after the fact, and not from anyone
 connected with Penn.


Strictly speaking, the roadbed doesn't have a building on it. It's a
pedestrian sidewalk between the old and new Vet buildings.

But I simply cannot believe that Karen's reporting this accurately. What did
she think-- that the project was _just_ a road reconfiguration? Didn't
people see the announcements, the artists' conceptions, the maps, the
website? I sure did. It was _always_ to accommodate a new Vet building.
Artists' conceptions were always part of the presentations. Every
presentation I saw, every web site, every announcement, said that a new Vet
building was going up. This bit about 'they told us it was for traffic flow
is hard to believe.

What is Karen saying-- that they kept a _whole building project_ as a
_secret_?

Re: [UC] UCD is innocent

[Anthony West]

Utterly believable.

-- Tony West


On 5/18/2010 7:53 PM, Karen Allen wrote:
**That's absolutely true: Penn sent a representative to a Cedar Park 
Neighbors board meeting in 2005 or '06 (somewhere in there) and the 
woman told us that Penn was going to trade the island where a gas 
station had been (closer to the VA hospital, where Baltimore and 
Woodland branched) to the City in exchange for closing the roadbed of 
Baltimore Avenue where it intersected 38th St, directly alongside the 
Vet School. She said they were doing it to  reconfigure the 
intersection to improve traffic flow. Nothing was ever said about 
wanting the roadway of Baltimore Avenue to build a building;  I only 
learned that well after the fact, and not from anyone connected with 
Penn. 

Re: [UC] UCD is innocent

[Anthony West]

Also a sound account.

But the most important discussion of neighborhood development, of 
course, is always whether the development is good for the neighborhood 
or not. Correct?


I gassed up and repaired my vehicle at that garage many a time. But it 
posed a pollution problem due to an elderly leaking tank, I heard. It 
takes big bucks to fix a brownfield problem like this. Fortunately, Penn 
has big bucks. So an elderly gas station was replaced with a shining new 
vet-school facility. The vet school has always been an asset to UC; now 
it's even more of an asset.


Where's the problem, neighbors and neighborettes? Why are we now whining 
about a neighborhood improvement that has no apparent downside?


I suppose Penn could have led with its Dark Side. It could have said: 
We plan to build a Big Building that will Forever Change the Essential 
Character of the ordinary West Philadelphia neighbors who live a 
peaceful life at 39th  Baltimore, entirely unaffected by the large 
university that just happens to be next door, that they all hate, 
because all good progressives hate universities, just like the GOP does.


But it didn't. Instead, it simply got the building built, bypassing our 
neighborhood's pseudo-radical nonsense by any means necessary. How else 
could it accomplish anything?


Dialog is, by definition, a two-way street. If UC leftists wish to be 
accepted as equal, rational partners in community planning for this 
off-campus neighborhood, they need to quit foaming at the mouth every 
time a university tries to solve a festering real-estate sore for us, as 
it did at the 38th  Woodland gas station and again at the 40th  Pine 
nursing home.


-- Tony West



On 5/18/2010 8:21 PM, Brian Siano wrote:
But I simply cannot believe that Karen's reporting this accurately. 
What did she think-- that the project was _just_ a road 
reconfiguration? Didn't people see the announcements, the artists' 
conceptions, the maps, the website? I sure did. It was _always_ to 
accommodate a new Vet building. Artists' conceptions were always part 
of the presentations. Every presentation I saw, every web site, every 
announcement, said that a new Vet building was going up. This bit 
about 'they told us it was for traffic flow is hard to believe.


What is Karen saying-- that they kept a _whole building project_ as a 
_secret_?

[UCNeighbors] Re: [UC] UCD is innocent

[Frank Carroll]

Actually the downside is that they created one of the worst intersections in 
the city.

Frank

On May 18, 2010, at 08:53 PM, Anthony West wrote:

 Also a sound account.
 
 But the most important discussion of neighborhood development, of course, is 
 always whether the development is good for the neighborhood or not. Correct?
 
 I gassed up and repaired my vehicle at that garage many a time. But it posed 
 a pollution problem due to an elderly leaking tank, I heard. It takes big 
 bucks to fix a brownfield problem like this. Fortunately, Penn has big bucks. 
 So an elderly gas station was replaced with a shining new vet-school 
 facility. The vet school has always been an asset to UC; now it's even more 
 of an asset.
 
 Where's the problem, neighbors and neighborettes? Why are we now whining 
 about a neighborhood improvement that has no apparent downside?
 
 I suppose Penn could have led with its Dark Side. It could have said: We 
 plan to build a Big Building that will Forever Change the Essential Character 
 of the ordinary West Philadelphia neighbors who live a peaceful life at 39th 
  Baltimore, entirely unaffected by the large university that just happens to 
 be next door, that they all hate, because all good progressives hate 
 universities, just like the GOP does.
 
 But it didn't. Instead, it simply got the building built, bypassing our 
 neighborhood's pseudo-radical nonsense by any means necessary. How else could 
 it accomplish anything?
 
 Dialog is, by definition, a two-way street. If UC leftists wish to be 
 accepted as equal, rational partners in community planning for this 
 off-campus neighborhood, they need to quit foaming at the mouth every time a 
 university tries to solve a festering real-estate sore for us, as it did at 
 the 38th  Woodland gas station and again at the 40th  Pine nursing home.
 
 -- Tony West
 
 
 
 On 5/18/2010 8:21 PM, Brian Siano wrote:
 
 But I simply cannot believe that Karen's reporting this accurately. What did 
 she think-- that the project was _just_ a road reconfiguration? Didn't 
 people see the announcements, the artists' conceptions, the maps, the 
 website? I sure did. It was _always_ to accommodate a new Vet building. 
 Artists' conceptions were always part of the presentations. Every 
 presentation I saw, every web site, every announcement, said that a new Vet 
 building was going up. This bit about 'they told us it was for traffic flow 
 is hard to believe.
 
 What is Karen saying-- that they kept a _whole building project_ as a 
 _secret_? 
 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the UCNeighbors group.
To post to this group, send email to u...@ucneighbors.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
ucneighbors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/ucneighbors?hl=en


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] UCD is innocent

[Frank Carroll]

Actually the downside is that they created one of the worst intersections in 
the city.

Frank

PS. Sorry. I'm a little scattered tonight.

On May 18, 2010, at 08:53 PM, Anthony West wrote:

 Also a sound account.
 
 But the most important discussion of neighborhood development, of course, is 
 always whether the development is good for the neighborhood or not. Correct?
 
 I gassed up and repaired my vehicle at that garage many a time. But it posed 
 a pollution problem due to an elderly leaking tank, I heard. It takes big 
 bucks to fix a brownfield problem like this. Fortunately, Penn has big bucks. 
 So an elderly gas station was replaced with a shining new vet-school 
 facility. The vet school has always been an asset to UC; now it's even more 
 of an asset.
 
 Where's the problem, neighbors and neighborettes? Why are we now whining 
 about a neighborhood improvement that has no apparent downside?
 
 I suppose Penn could have led with its Dark Side. It could have said: We 
 plan to build a Big Building that will Forever Change the Essential Character 
 of the ordinary West Philadelphia neighbors who live a peaceful life at 39th 
  Baltimore, entirely unaffected by the large university that just happens to 
 be next door, that they all hate, because all good progressives hate 
 universities, just like the GOP does.
 
 But it didn't. Instead, it simply got the building built, bypassing our 
 neighborhood's pseudo-radical nonsense by any means necessary. How else could 
 it accomplish anything?
 
 Dialog is, by definition, a two-way street. If UC leftists wish to be 
 accepted as equal, rational partners in community planning for this 
 off-campus neighborhood, they need to quit foaming at the mouth every time a 
 university tries to solve a festering real-estate sore for us, as it did at 
 the 38th  Woodland gas station and again at the 40th  Pine nursing home.
 
 -- Tony West
 
 
 
 On 5/18/2010 8:21 PM, Brian Siano wrote:
 
 But I simply cannot believe that Karen's reporting this accurately. What did 
 she think-- that the project was _just_ a road reconfiguration? Didn't 
 people see the announcements, the artists' conceptions, the maps, the 
 website? I sure did. It was _always_ to accommodate a new Vet building. 
 Artists' conceptions were always part of the presentations. Every 
 presentation I saw, every web site, every announcement, said that a new Vet 
 building was going up. This bit about 'they told us it was for traffic flow 
 is hard to believe.
 
 What is Karen saying-- that they kept a _whole building project_ as a 
 _secret_? 
 


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] hey all you gentrified people: MOW YER STINKING LAWN

[Kimm Tynan]

Holy s***.  I think the last time I got one it was $25.  Well, certainly
increases the incentive to go fight it.  Good luck.
Kimm


On 5/18/10 11:55 AM, Lewis Mellman lewismell...@mac.com wrote:

 I just received my $75. tall grass tax today.
 Rest assured that I will be contesting this in a big way.
 When will City Council pass a low tree branch tax?
 It's totally unfair to abnormally heighted people like myself to have
 to stoop under all these low hanging branches or risk putting an eye
 out.
 Where's my pruning saw?
 -Lew
 
 
 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] UCD is innocent

[Lalevic, Darco]

I can speak from my own experience, that when construction of that intersection 
began, I assumed it was for a Penn project, however I could find no reference 
to a Penn project, the Streets department outright denied it, and there was no 
mention whatsoever of the project in any major Penn publication that I could 
find. Only months into it was it reported that Penn planned to build a building 
there. And hey, I think it was a great decision - even if I hate that 
intersection even more now and feel it's worse that it was before.
And yes Tony, you point out it is a two way street, and a big part of Penn's 
planning often seems to revolve around avoiding a neighborhood uprising. It's 
always a balance, and some people accept the trade-offs as worth it, and others 
do not.

Darco


From: owner-univc...@list.purple.com [owner-univc...@list.purple.com] On Behalf 
Of Anthony West [anthony_w...@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 8:53 PM
To: UnivCity Listserv
Subject: Re: [UC] UCD is innocent

Also a sound account.

But the most important discussion of neighborhood development, of course, is 
always whether the development is good for the neighborhood or not. Correct?

I gassed up and repaired my vehicle at that garage many a time. But it posed a 
pollution problem due to an elderly leaking tank, I heard. It takes big bucks 
to fix a brownfield problem like this. Fortunately, Penn has big bucks. So an 
elderly gas station was replaced with a shining new vet-school facility. The 
vet school has always been an asset to UC; now it's even more of an asset.

Where's the problem, neighbors and neighborettes? Why are we now whining about 
a neighborhood improvement that has no apparent downside?

I suppose Penn could have led with its Dark Side. It could have said: We plan 
to build a Big Building that will Forever Change the Essential Character of the 
ordinary West Philadelphia neighbors who live a peaceful life at 39th  
Baltimore, entirely unaffected by the large university that just happens to be 
next door, that they all hate, because all good progressives hate universities, 
just like the GOP does.

But it didn't. Instead, it simply got the building built, bypassing our 
neighborhood's pseudo-radical nonsense by any means necessary. How else could 
it accomplish anything?

Dialog is, by definition, a two-way street. If UC leftists wish to be accepted 
as equal, rational partners in community planning for this off-campus 
neighborhood, they need to quit foaming at the mouth every time a university 
tries to solve a festering real-estate sore for us, as it did at the 38th  
Woodland gas station and again at the 40th  Pine nursing home.

-- Tony West



On 5/18/2010 8:21 PM, Brian Siano wrote:
But I simply cannot believe that Karen's reporting this accurately. What did 
she think-- that the project was _just_ a road reconfiguration? Didn't people 
see the announcements, the artists' conceptions, the maps, the website? I sure 
did. It was _always_ to accommodate a new Vet building. Artists' conceptions 
were always part of the presentations. Every presentation I saw, every web 
site, every announcement, said that a new Vet building was going up. This bit 
about 'they told us it was for traffic flow is hard to believe.

What is Karen saying-- that they kept a _whole building project_ as a _secret_?


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] UCD is innocent

[Karen Allen]

I don't care whether you believe me or not; the presentation I attended did not 
make any mention of a building.
 


Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 20:21:10 -0400
Subject: Re: [UC] UCD is innocent
From: briansi...@gmail.com
CC: univcity@list.purple.com




On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Karen Allen kallena...@msn.com wrote:



That's absolutely true: Penn sent a representative to a Cedar Park Neighbors 
board meeting in 2005 or '06 (somewhere in there) and the woman told us that 
Penn was going to trade the island where a gas station had been (closer to 
the VA hospital, where Baltimore and Woodland branched) to the City in exchange 
for closing the roadbed of Baltimore Avenue where it intersected 38th St, 
directly alongside the Vet School. She said they were doing it to  reconfigure 
the intersection to improve traffic flow. Nothing was ever said about wanting 
the roadway of Baltimore Avenue to build a building;  I only learned that well 
after the fact, and not from anyone connected with Penn.  


Strictly speaking, the roadbed doesn't have a building on it. It's a pedestrian 
sidewalk between the old and new Vet buildings. 


But I simply cannot believe that Karen's reporting this accurately. What did 
she think-- that the project was _just_ a road reconfiguration? Didn't people 
see the announcements, the artists' conceptions, the maps, the website? I sure 
did. It was _always_ to accommodate a new Vet building. Artists' conceptions 
were always part of the presentations. Every presentation I saw, every web 
site, every announcement, said that a new Vet building was going up. This bit 
about 'they told us it was for traffic flow is hard to believe.



What is Karen saying-- that they kept a _whole building project_ as a _secret_?