Thanks for that info. I'm trying to put together a time line about what has been discovered about this "Campus Inn" project.
I was confused by Ms. Stewart's letter. I didn't understand if the 500 UCHS members had been informed about the existance of the project before the July 13th hearing to get the historic property de-listed. The letter seemed concerned that UCHS member Lamond's complete support of the project wasn't covered in Andrew's rather good objective report in the previous UC Review. I thought that the 500 UCHS members would want to have been informed before an attempt to de-list the property was turned down July 13th. I didn't understand from the letter whether it was 499 for de-listing against you or what really occurred back in June and July. Can someone involved before the news was revealed in the paper offer some clarification? Were other members unaware of UCHS proceedings like you, Karen? I'm a Spruce Hill resident and I didn't know that there had been " 2 open and public forums" being conducted about this project by SHCA. I am still unable to find out the dates from the SHCA open and public forums. Thanks again for helping with the timeline. --- KAREN ALLEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, Glenn, > Glad you asked about whether any of the 500 UCHS > members attended a meeting on the Campus Inn" > project (I only learned the name at yesterday's > Historical Commission hearing). > > As one of the five hundred plus members of UCHS (I > only learned THAT by reading Belynda Stewart's > letter in the UC Review) I can only say that I did > not attend any such meeting. I only learned about it > in the October 10th UC Review. When I voiced my > opinion about it in the October 17th UC Review, > based on what little I could glean from the article, > I was told, in effect, that I should mind my own > effing business. So I'm just as confused as you are! > Karen > > > Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 05:18:15 -0800> From: > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [UC] uchs > shoots itself> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [email protected]> > > In fact, we are still > reviewing the> > project and> > > do not have enough > information to make a fully> > informed> > > > decision on its feasibility.> > Did any of the 500 > UCHS members attend any in the> series of Spruce > Hill Civic Association, open, public> forums about > this project? Your thoughts? > > I feel so stupid > because I live in Spruce Hill and had> not heard > about the project until the UC Review> printed a > news report on Oct 10. I completely missed> these > extensive public discussions which gave the> > neighborhood feedback to Penn over the summer. > > Luckily, the Penn architect told the PH > commissioners> that another open community meeting > is scheduled by> the community next week!!!!!! I'll > forward the> announcement after I see the UC > Review.> > When Lindsay Johnston of Common Ground, > our Melani,> Mike hardy, and Dan Deritis showed up > yesterday to> confirm this massive grass roots > support from the> BID/UCD committees, I felt really > stupid.> > There I was sitting at the PHC hearings > finding out> from Penn about this massive community > engagement and> support which has been occurring in > my own community! > > I haven't been contacted from > SHCA or any members from> the list in response to my > question about the date and> location of the > previous 2 open public forums. But> Penn has now > twice testified to this city commission> about this > massive community engagement and support. > > Could > someone give any report at all about these SHCA> > open public forums? How many people attended? Were> > there any objections to the 11-story "Campus Inn" > at> all? Thanks. > > Mike Hardy didn't give any > details about the forums> when he testified > yesterday after the Penn assertions> had been made. > And Barry Grossbach (whose involvement> with these > forums was mentioned yesterday) didn't give> any > information at the Oct. Architectual meeting. > > At > first I thought Barry would jump up and deny these> > claims about support and open public forums as > nothing> more than Penn astroturfing, but to my > amazement, he> didn't speak at all. I felt so > uninformed and stupid.> > Does anyone know about any > of these open public forum> announcements that > happened any where in Spruce Hill> over any > communication medium? Thanks for any help.> > I'll > get the Review and post the announcement about> the > forum the community scheduled for next week. > > Someone will need to send a message to the 500 > members> of UCHS too.> > Glenn> Spruce Hill citizen, > West Philadelphia> > > > > > > > --- > UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > wrote:> > > from this week's uc review, a letter > which damages> > uchs, > > written by the current > president of uchs:> > > > http://tinyurl.com/ytlh6f> > > > > > > > RE: 40th and Pine project> > > > > > As > current President of the University City> > > Historical> > > Society, I think that it is > necessary to clarify> > some of> > > the information > imparted in the article Citys> > > Architectural > Review 40th and Pine Hilton. While> > the> > > > article appears simply to state the facts, there> > > is some> > > misinformation as well as key > omissions, which> > distort> > > the facts as well > as the tone of the meeting held> > October> > > 23. > I did attend the meeting and have direct> > > knowledge of> > > what transpired.> > > > > > First, > while Karen Allen is one of five hundred> > plus> > > > members of UCHS, she is not a board member, nor > is> > she a> > > spokesperson for our group. Second, > while the> > writer has> > > noted various opinions, > he neglected to relate the> > > opinion given by > another UCHS member, who has been> > both a> > > > Board member and a past president of our> > > organization, as> > > well as a very successful UC > realtor. Her opinion> > was> > > definitely in favor > of the project, which includes> > the> > > full > restoration of the historically registered> > Sloan> > > > mansion.> > > > > > At this time, the Board of > University City> > Historical> > > Society has NOT > decided either for or against the> > > project. What > we have agreed on is that we would> > like to> > > > see the restoration of the mansion, which is now a> > > near> > > "ruin." In fact, we are still reviewing > the> > project and> > > do not have enough > information to make a fully> > informed> > > > decision on its feasibility. If, and when, the> > > Board of> > > University City Historical Society > does make a> > > determination on this project, we > will relay that> > > information publicly through > our appointed and> > authorized> > > spokesperson.> > > > > > > Thank you.> > > > > > Belynda P. Steward > President, University City> > Historical> > > > Society> > > > > > > > > > the 10/10/2007 uc review > article was the first time> > the > > public knew > about lussenhop's attempt to have the> > mansion > > > delisted from the register of historic places> > > earlier this > > summer:> > > > > "I wanted to get > it de-listed to have greater> > > choices," > explained Lussenhop of his motion to> > rescind> > > > designation. "But once I realized the sentiment> > > of> > > the [philadelphia] historical committee and> > > neighborhood, I said> > > fine..."> > > > > > now > the president of uchs is making it evident that,> > > far > > from trying to save the mansion from ruin, > uchs did> > nothing > > to prevent lussenhop's > earlier attempt to delist the> > > > mansion, and > uchs did nothing to inform the> > community or its > > > 'five hundred plus' members about lussenhop's> > > attempt.> > > > why does uchs even exist? whose > interests does uchs> > serve? > > when? I think the > president of uchs makes that> > clear, now.> > > > > great letter, belynda!> > > > > > > ..................> > UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN> > [aka > laserbeam®]> > [aka ray]> > SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR > RATES.> > "It is very clear on this listserve who> > > these people are. Ray has admitted being> > > connected to this forger." -- Tony West> > "Ray's > falsehoods are more sophisticated,> > more > believable" -- Tony West> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----> > 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>.> > > > > > __________________________________________________> > Do You Yahoo!?> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the > best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > ----> 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>. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ---- 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>.
