Dan and Barry,

Thank you for posting the explanation. 

 Barry,

I am extremely troubled by aspects of your explanation.  I will be in touch 
with the Board and will address the problems in a civil tone.  No need for 
tranquilizers.

"I ask that everyone now consider where we are, for that is more important at 
the moment then how we got here."

No, you are quite incorrect.  The path from where we came from is very 
important!  


"Additionally, the architect for the project, Sam Olshen, assumed when he 
appeared twice before the zoning committee that the meetings were open and 
public.  They were open and public, but they were not advertised in public 
print."

This is complete nonsense, Barry.  You were present when the comments were 
recorded as official testimony  and said nothing. But Barry, Mr Olshen heard my 
testimony that his claims were false. 

The false claims were repeated again Nov. 9th by the same Mr Olshen!   Mr. 
Olshen again heard my contradictory testimony and again ignored it.  You passed 
on your opportunity to correct the architects misinformation the first time.  
Apparently, you failed to inform Mr. Olshen that he needed to make a retraction 
November 9th rather than repeat false testimony as truth.

Additionally, Mr Lussenhop monitors the listserv where I published a report of 
the Olshen comments immediately after the Architectural hearing.  My report was 
confirmed by another neighbor publicly and I sent a request for an explanation 
to the SHCA web address copied to the public list and got no response.  All of 
this was done prior to Nov. 9th!

Barry the truth is that the developers have given false information to the PHC 
repeatedly  Here is where we are today.  The development team must withdraw its 
application from the PHC and acknowledge that it willfully provided false 
information to gain approval while ignoring enormous feedback that its 
statements were false.

Now, as to the committee, your explanation confirms that the developers 
attempted the earlier de-listing attempt by asserting that the building was 
dilapidated, without even notifying the committee or the SHCA association!! 

"A recent discovery had revealed that the mansion on the site was listed on the 
local historic register, and the committee encouraged the developer to find a 
way to incorporate the original portion of the mansion into any plans."  

Barry this is completely not true.  The PHC recorded a hearing June 10th with a 
presentation from the developer.  In complete secrecy, the developers tried to 
clear a path for demolition.  Since July, the developers, not the community, 
knew that they would be forced to incorporate the mansion after the secret 
de-listing attempt failed.  The developers comments, now, about "first and 
foremost" (from DP) restoring the mansion are so obviously disingenuous that 
they deserve a flat out rejection!  

This misleading or false misinformation is obviously intentional and consistent!

The developers have shown contempt not only for our entire community but to 
your SHCA members by that secret attempt to de-list the mansion.  Your duty is 
to the members of SHCA and more generally to the residents of the Spruce Hill 
community.

You have now revealed and confirmed enough about this project to warrant a flat 
out rejection to this development team.  Please consider these comments dashed 
off in haste.

Together, we must draft a letter to the PHC and report the false testimony.  We 
must also draft a letter to the University of Pennsylvania that the residents 
of Spruce Hill expect future developers of the site to conduct themselves 
responsibly and to provide honest and accurate information.

Barry, the SHCA leadership needs to decide if its loyalties and 
responsibilities are indeed to your members and this community.

Thanks again for your late explanation.  I look forward to working with SHCA to 
correct the problems caused in the past.  That is where we are today.

Sincerely,
Glenn Moyer

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Dan Morton 
  To: [email protected] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 3:30 PM
  Subject: [UC] Regarding the proposed hotel project


  This letter is being posted in anticipation of the Feb. 13 meeting about the 
proposed hotel project at 40th and Pine Sts. It is being submitted on behalf of 
Barry Grossbach, the Spruce Hill Zoning Committee chairman.

   

   

   

   Questions have been raised about what meetings have taken place before the 
Spruce Hill Zoning Committee regarding the proposed hotel project at 40th and 
Pine Streets.  Here are the facts:  Tom Lussenhop asked to speak with the 
committee about a concept for a proposed project on the abandoned nursing home 
site.  He was added to our meeting agenda on August 1, 2007, and neighbors 
immediately adjacent to the site were informed and invited to attend.  This was 
simply a preliminary discussion to consider the viability of a hotel project at 
that location.  A recent discovery had revealed that the mansion on the site 
was listed on the local historic register, and the committee encouraged the 
developer to find a way to incorporate the original portion of the mansion into 
any plans.  

   

  Tom Lussenhop and his architect asked to appear before the committee in 
September to share some conceptual drawings.  Our September 26th meeting placed 
them last on a crowded agenda.  Based on that meeting, the committee gave some 
limited feedback (concern about the height and about parking), but decided to 
suspend any further consideration of the project pending the outcome of 
discussions before the Historical Commission.  That was the last time that the 
zoning committee of Spruce Hill discussed this project.

   

  I asked that the hotel proposal be put on the agenda for the annual meeting 
in November in order to have a broader forum for information and discussion.  A 
mailing about the meeting went to all Spruce Hill members, but without any 
attached agenda.  The omission was Spruce Hill's, not the developers.  
Additionally, the architect for the project, Sam Olshen, assumed when he 
appeared twice before the zoning committee that the meetings were open and 
public.  They were open and public, but they were not advertised in public 
print.

   

   The bottom line-no one was operating deceptively or in bad faith.  Any 
mistakes or omissions were made unintentionally. Members of the Spruce Hill 
Zoning Committee last saw the hotel proposal at the November annual meeting 
(those who were able to attend), and have not discussed the project at any 
subsequent zoning meetings.  The meeting on Feb.13th will enable all interested 
parties to see the current state of the proposal and to ask questions and offer 
comments for the committee's consideration.  This, for the zoning committee, is 
an interim step in the process.  Some project opponents have secured legal 
counsel and are in discussions with attorneys for the applicants, and the 
committee will reserve any judgment until we see what, if any, points of 
agreement are reached.  In the meantime we will continue to take the pulse of 
the  immediate neighbors and the surrounding communities as the discussions 
move forward.

   

  So, here is where we are:  The Spruce Hill Zoning Committee will continue to 
seek feedback on this project.  We will do our best to address concerns on all 
sides.  We will not preempt ongoing discussions between the parties, but will 
await the outcome to see what, if anything the parties can resolve.  Whatever 
decision we as a zoning committee ultimately reach will be brought to the full 
board of Spruce Hill for ratification.  Whatever the board decides will then 
become the official position of Spruce Hill for presentation to the city's 
Zoning Board of Adjustment.  I ask that everyone now consider where we are, for 
that is more important at the moment then how we got here.  The important point 
is what we do with what we have learned.  A healthy discussion and debate can 
enrich a community as long as it is civil in tone and respectful of differences 
of opinion.  I'm confident that our community is up to the task.

   

  Barry Grossbach, Chair

  Spruce Hill Zoning Committee

   

   

   



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.4/1276 - Release Date: 2/13/2008 
9:41 AM

Reply via email to