By regulation, the decision is the Zoning Board's.
In practice, the Zoning Board is influenced by
1. Lobbyists
Including Landlord and Tenant and
Folks who might want to torpedo landlord or tenant
2. Immediate Neighbors
3. Broader community
4. Goals for the neighborhood and the municipality
In modern theory, it is the plan for the city that should 'Trump' 1 and 2
and possibly 3.
But in practice, the squeaky wheel or better attorney might affect
decisions, out of proportion to the merits of their demands.
In transparent situations the neighbors will understand the goals.
For example:
Why was the parcel in question zoned R-9?
And the neighbors could easily identify the players.
In this case:
Dan DeRitis does not (yet?) appear as an owner (in the easily accessed
Public Records).
And the neighbors would have more information on who is at fault for
conditions at the current Market Street location.
(Most readers on this list understand the norms for Residential leases,
and default to blaming the landlord for condition issues, BUT many
commercial leases place the burden of repair on the tenant.
And if such is the case under the current lease, than why should we trust
this tenant at a new location?)
But situations are not transparent.
Luckily, drastic changes, such as Zoning Changes, require player to
reveal a few 'cards'.
This permits neighbors to investigate, comment and negotiate toward
desired goals of a better community through foresight.
There will still be squeaky wheels.
There will always be opportunists.
Among the opportunities is a chance to PLAN the highest and best use of
properties.
I prefer the Liquor Store in its current Market, further from:
the Mosque and
the Penn Alexander School and
the grocery store (so there is less immediate visual temptation to buy
booze with the milk money).
In my perfect world the Market St. location would be renovated and
improved and a good use would be found for the Walnut Street property.
In the real world, a tenant that has a shabby history at one location is
not guaranteed to improve if given a better location.
The oversight and questions of concerned parties provide both challenge
and opportunity.
So, I am for permitting a change in use, as long as:
No better tenant, for Walnut, is being discouraged, and
No better resolution of the problems, on Market, is being ignored, and
The change does not just move the current problems South and West, and
No better location has been overlooked.
The questions asked by my fellow Realtor are a canard, designed to make
the process feel more personal than it is or should be.
The Landlord bought the property with eyes open and zoning revealed.
Landlord and proposed tenant (PA LCB?) took the gamble that they could
win a zoning change, and therefore should be prepared to satisfy
neighbors and the Zoning Board that the change makes sense.
We, as citizens, have every right to investigate changes in USE and
ZONING.
The Mosque, Ethnic groceries and Restaurant School are the closest
neighbors and should be listened to, with respect.
Decisions should be made that benefit the majority while breaking no laws
or regulations.
Best!
Liz
Elizabeth Campion Cell Phone: 215-880-2930
215-546-0550 Main, -546-9871 fax, Desk + VM: 215-790-5653
PRUDENTIAL, FOX & ROACH REALTORS, LLC
Please read Consumer Notice & enjoy "HOME PILOT" tools at
www.PruFoxRoach.com
On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 15:01:02 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Members of this list so often feel that they have a "right" to
> participate in
> decision making, no matter what the topic or who are the parties
> involved.
> Ray is assuming that "right" in his questions above, asking about
> "our"
> options.
>
> Folks, most of what goes on between a landlord and potential tenant
> is NOT
> public. If you are currently a tenant, would you like your next
> landlord to
> have to ask the listserv if s/he could rent to you? If you are a
> landlord,
> would you like the list to be able to nix your tenant selection?
>
> In this case, there is a zoning hearing because of the particular
> (and
> bizarre, given what exists on the lot) zoning classification -
> residential.
>
> So the only thing up for discussion is whether or not the zoning
> board will
> allow the PLCB to establish a store at 4237 Walnut St.
>
> NOT, where else could it go? NOT, could we find a better use for
> that
> space? NOT, why does the store want to, need to, or consider,
> moving?
>
> Private property rights, folks.
>
> Melani Lamond
> Landlord, property owner, and Realtor
----
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>.
