Re: [UC] hotel and office building on walnut
In a message dated 12/10/2010 11:22:34 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, anthony_w...@earthlink.net writes: I don't know ... this DP 'graf reads like a pretty straight account to me, except where they got the year wrong. But who's counting? Ummm, Tony: Do you really think the decision to relocate because nearby residents expressed concerns was a straight account of what the backers of this project forced the members of the community to spend (in dollars and time) and endure? That seems to be a lot like really believing that * Obama endorsed a two-year across-the-board extension of the so-called Bush tax cuts because Republicans expressed concerns about the economy, * The Magna Carta was signed because the barons expressed concerns about the king billeting soldiers in people's homes, * The historic district nomination for Spruce Hill got buried because local residents expressed concerns about such things as being unable to have ironworkers create fanciful security bars for their front windows * The ... well, you get the idea. C'mon. Always at your service and ready for a diatribe -- er, dialog. Al Krigman
Re: [UC] hotel and office building on walnut
All right. How about A few nearby residents and a large number of faraway ones expressed concerns, often heatedly. In the end, their concerns carried the day with the ZBA and the hotel project moved three blocks north, on another mixed-use corridor street? But I doubt the DP's readers are interested in reading a history of disputes among neighbors several years ago. It's a readership which largely turns over every 4 years, don't forget. They don't need to measure how concerned the townies were, back when. Surely for them, the focus is more on what's coming next. Not a bad focus for us, too. Let's talk 2011. -- Tony West On 12/11/2010 9:48 AM, krf...@aol.com wrote: Do you really think the decision to relocate because nearby residents expressed concerns was a straight account of what the backers of this project forced the members of the community to spend (in dollars and time) and endure? That seems to be a lot like really believing that * Obama endorsed a two-year across-the-board extension of the so-called Bush tax cuts because Republicans /expressed concerns/ about the economy, * The Magna Carta was signed because the barons /expressed concerns/ about the king billeting soldiers in people's homes, * The historic district nomination for Spruce Hill got buried because local residents /expressed concerns/ about such things as being unable to have ironworkers create fanciful security bars for their front windows * The ... well, you get the idea. C'mon. Always at your service and ready for a diatribe -- er, dialog. Al Krigman
Re: [UC] hotel and office building on walnut
In a message dated 12/11/2010 7:04:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, anthony_w...@earthlink.net writes: All right. How about A few nearby residents and a large number of faraway ones expressed concerns, often heatedly. In the end, their concerns carried the day with the ZBA and the hotel project moved three blocks north, on another mixed-use corridor street? But I doubt the DP's readers are interested in reading a history of disputes among neighbors several years ago. It's a readership which largely turns over every 4 years, don't forget. They don't need to measure how concerned the townies were, back when. Surely for them, the focus is more on what's coming next. No, not at all. They wrote In 2009, developers announced they planned to build the hotel at 40th and Pine streets. They changed locations after nearby residents expressed concerns that the building would harm the neighborhood’s identity. The project site was then moved to Walnut Street to fit in better with the road’s commercial aesthetic. The truth was that the University and their developer cohorts were dragged, kicking and screaming, from the deserted Penn-owned site at 40th Pine by members of the community -- after having engaged one of the city's top real estate attorneys, spending huge amounts of money, and lying through their teeth to get the zoning changed so they could build the hotel there. And, surely, one of the objectives of what's supposed to be a world class university should be to inculcate in its students sensibilities for justice, consideration of others which viewpoints that may differ from their own, and a realization that you can't have everything your way simply because you can outspend the people you either disagree with or don't care about. And, if you believe your own statement that the objections were mounted by A few nearby residents and a large number of faraway ones, you must not have been at any of the meetings or hearings. Sorry -- you're way off track on this. -- Alan Krigman KRF Management 215-349-6500, fax 215-349-6502 _www.krf.icodat.com_ (http://www.iconworldwide.com/krf)
Re: [UC] hotel and office building on walnut
I attended several community meetings and my description is precise. By law, zoning concerns are restricted to, what is it, people living or owning property within 1,000 ft of the property? Both you I fall outside this line. Most of the big mouths about the 40th Pine site were not neighbors as defined by law. (I can name half a dozen who were, and I tip my hat to them for winning their case.) As for your nonsense about my outspending you, I own one building in one city and one neighborhood -- right here -- my home -- which I am struggling to hang onto in the midst of a terrible recession. How many buildings do you own? How many cities do you own property in? I spent zip money on zip hotel wars, yes, I care zip as well. I can't afford to spend on stuff like real-estate lobbying about something 4 blocks away none of my business. How much did you spend, to move this hotel from Pine St. to Walnut St.? You wanted it, you bought it, for whatever reason. But you didn't do it in my name or in the name of our community. Nobody who cares for their community deliberately lobbies in favor of leaving a long-term, dilapidated, abandoned building on their block. I lived with that problem on my block for 10 years, was so glad when it was finally solved! But that's what you lobbied for, what you've achieved. Every time I walk past this crumbling monument to misguided radicalism at 40th Pine, I wonder how long it'll be until it burns. --Tony West On 12/11/2010 9:51 PM, krf...@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 12/11/2010 7:04:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, anthony_w...@earthlink.net writes: /All right. How about A few nearby residents and a large number of faraway ones expressed concerns, often heatedly. In the end, their concerns carried the day with the ZBA and the hotel project moved three blocks north, on another mixed-use corridor street?/ /But I doubt the DP's readers are interested in reading a history of disputes among neighbors several years ago. It's a readership which largely turns over every 4 years, don't forget. They don't need to measure how concerned the townies were, back when. Surely for them, the focus is more on what's coming next. / No, not at all. They wrote In 2009, developers announced they planned to build the hotel at 40th and Pine streets. They changed locations after nearby residents expressed concerns that the building would harm the neighborhood’s identity. The project site was then moved to Walnut Street to fit in better with the road’s commercial aesthetic. The truth was that the University and their developer cohorts were dragged, kicking and screaming, from the deserted Penn-owned site at 40th Pine by members of the community -- after having engaged one of the city's top real estate attorneys, spending huge amounts of money, and lying through their teeth to get the zoning changed so they could build the hotel there. And, surely, one of the objectives of what's supposed to be a world class university should be to inculcate in its students sensibilities for justice, consideration of others which viewpoints that may differ from their own, and a realization that you can't have everything your way simply because you can outspend the people you either disagree with or don't care about. And, if you believe your own statement that the objections were mounted by A few nearby residents and a large number of faraway ones, you must not have been at any of the meetings or hearings. Sorry -- you're way off track on this. -- Alan Krigman KRF Management 215-349-6500, fax 215-349-6502 www.krf.icodat.com http://www.iconworldwide.com/krf
