You're arguing about nothing here, Frank. Re-read the second line of my email, which says, <<I've not heard of anyone objecting to the mosque being heard - but how is a decision made afterwards?>> Hey, it's a really nice afternoon! Enjoy it! Melani -------------------------- In a message dated 3/19/2007 4:15:08 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Melani,
I said "Every affected party should be heard whether their objections are religion-based or not." Are you saying they *don't* deserve to be heard? There are many churches in Philadelphia who create parking problems during services. Have you ever tried to find a parking spot in Rittenhouse on a Sunday? I'm the last person to defend a church but they *are* a neighbor. Frank On Mar 19, 2007, at 08:56 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Frank, your point does sound simple and fair at first glance, but things are rarely this simple. I've not heard of anyone objecting to the mosque being heard - but how is a decision made afterwards? First, as Vincent's earlier question pointed out, when the mosque moved in, they didn't have to go through this process - so, no "affected parties" had the opportunity to be heard. Second, the mosque has turned out to be a somewhat challenging neighbor, based on parking issues. On Fridays when their members come from "far and near," as their spokesman says, there are cars everywhere and people crossing the street everywhere. Here is a quote from a letter written about this situation: <<There is a large safety hazard on Fridays after services at the mosque that needs to be addressed separately. Walnut St. is particularly congested at that time of day and that location is made very unsafe by many double parked cars and worse, many members who cross the street not at the light but near the end of the block. Several times members have stood in the road blocking traffic so members may cross at that location. >> Mosque attendees have regularly parked in the Rite Aid's lot without permission. When the landlords attempted to prevent this, they were shouted at and called names, which included disparaging comments about another religious group (of which they did not happen to be members, but which they did not take as an insult though the shouters had meant it that way). The parking problems and "bad blood" over them seem to make the situation a little more complex. Further, there is that mosque spokesman's quote about members coming from "far and near." This echoes back to last summer's controversy at 50th & Baltimore, when non-local church members there wanted to stop the opening of a brew pub, despite the fact that the neighbors who resided in close proximity to the location wanted it there. The question then, which seems to be repeated now, was, how can a decision be made, given these two opposing ideologies? Should the ZBA decision favor the folks who come only to worship, or the folks who live in the location every day and would patronize the business? At 50th & Baltimore, the ZBA eventually allowed the brew pub. So, the question of residents vs. "far and near" worshipers also makes the situation more complex. -Melani Lamond -------------------------------- On Mar 18, 2007, at 09:04 PM, SKnight wrote: Would someone please explain to me why the new State Store location is a problem if there is already a beer distributor right across the street from this mosque? Is the mosque worried about having more than one retail outlet for alcohol so closeby? What is the reasoning against locating the store in that lot if there is a beer distributor already there? Sande Knight ---------------------------- In a message dated 3/18/07 9:53:06 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes: Was the beer distributor already there when the mosque moved in? Frank --------------------------- On Mar 18, 2007, at 09:56 PM,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: In a message dated 3/18/07 9:53:06 PM,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes: Was the beer distributor already there when the mosque moved in? Frank YES, the beer distributor, UC Beverages, was already there, and so was a bar - then, Walsh's Tavern; now, Pasqually's Pizza & Beer. Also, the Restaurant School with its bar & liquor license was already across the street, just up from the Rite Aid. This is a commercial corridor, not a religious corridor. - Melani Lamond ------------------------------------- In a message dated 3/18/07 11:44:54 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes: My point is that they had no control over what was already there but they *can* state their position at future zoning board hearings. If you had included the message I was responding to, I think that would be clear. As I said before, I don't care if the liquor store stays where it is, moves, or closes completely. What I do have an opinion about is this: Every affected party should be heard whether their objections are religion-based or not. Frank -------------------------- 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 2005 recipient of the Greater Philadelphia Association of Realtors awards: - Diamond award for over $8 million in sales, and ALL SIX of the West Philadelphia awards: - Top Lister - Top Seller - Top Overall Combined Volume - Top Listing Units by Area - Top Selling Units by Area - Top Overall Combined Units by Area ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
