For those interested in maintaining Victorian history, http://mountmoriahcemetery.org could use your support. You could contact Anna Verna ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ), Mayor Street ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) and other representatives (info available on the above website) and tell them you are appalled by the conditions at Mount Moriah Cemetery.
Unfortunately for the cemetery and the people interested in preserving it, it is in a poor neighborhood that has been all but forgotten in this city. Both the cemetery and the neighborhood could use more help. More than UC. More than $200,000 homes need. More. Help. On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >In a message dated 4/2/04 10:14:20 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > ><< [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > >>What do you mean by "recent"? In 1981, I was the assistant manager of the > > > >>Dorchester Condominiums on Rittenhouse Square. The condo rules & regs > >didn't > > > >>allow ANY decoration outside the condo owners' front doors, in the halls (no > > > >>wreaths, nameplates, door mats, baskets, door knockers, etc.). The condo > > > >>association debated a long time before finally allowing mezuzahs, for > >religious > > > >>reasons - tiny and discreet as they are! The association was also very > >particular > > > >>about the mailbox area, though it was located behind a wall in an obscure > > > >>corner of the lobby. The head of the condo association once stopped me on > >the > > > >>street a few blocks away from the building, when I wasn't working, and > >ordered me > > > >>to go to the lobby and take down a note that someone had put up on a > >mailbox. > > > >> Oh, and there was one owner who had difficulty walking and wanted to get a > > > >>motorized wheel chair. He had to ask the council for permission to ride it > >in > > > >>the lobby, and they took months to make their decision on that, too. That > > > >>condo council was very dictatorial, 23 years ago - and the wealthy center > >city > > > >>residents who lived there accepted it. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >Which makes me wonder _why_ you're so in favor of putting Spruce Hill > > > >under the Historic District. Given the potential for abuse, the > > > >arbitrary nature of the decisions, the lack of a proper appeals process, > > > >the suspension of our property rights, and the secretive nature of the > > > >advocates throughout this whole process, I'm surprised you don't see a > > > >parallel with the Dorchester's petty dictators. > > > >---- >> > > > >Actually, Brian, I'm pointing out that the wealthy center city residents > >seemed to feel that there was value to be had by keeping things looking as they > >were originally intended to look, so they were willing to put up with the > >downside of a bit more regulation. And that's the way I feel about local historic > >districts. The advantages of preserving our irreplaceable Victorian history - > >of keeping the chestnut windows, the lovely old slate, the quirky porch > >spindles and everything else that makes our unusually intact neighborhood remarkable > >for us every day - outweigh the disadvantages, which are encountered only > >occasionally, when one needs to make a repair. It's as simple as that. > > > >Melani Lamond > > > >---- > >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>. > > Thanks, John Ellingsworth http://ellingsworth.org/john/ AIM: jellings28 ---- 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>.
