Anthony West wrote:
Traffic is one consequence of scale. So when PCPC talked traffic, it was
dealing with one aspect of scale it deemed within its scope. Not to your
satisfaction, perhaps; still it did that job.
from the beginning, the pcpc DID consider the physical size
and scale of the hotel, and deemed it within its scope.
on april 15 the pcpc rejected the hotel based on its height,
and even after considering revisions to the hotel on april
25, pcpc admitted that 'it's still an 11-story building in
the middle of the street'
http://tinyurl.com/4jdug6
again, on may 20, the pcpc considred the hotel's height and
scale:
http://tinyurl.com/3p9h3v
> "[pcpc chairman] Altman's remarks responded directly to
> many of the concerns made by those opposed to the
> construction of the hotel at the 40th and Pine Street
> location. These included how the hotel's development
> would not only clash with the surrounding architecture of
> the West Philadelphia Streetcar Suburb and the Woodland
> Terrace's national historic designation where it is
> proposed to be built but also how its height of 115 ft.
> would loom over the other residences of 35 ft."
but on may 20, the pcpc tabled the question of the hotel
until a future meeting.
then, on september 16, the pcpc approved the hotel. how? by
approving a traffic study and telling neighbors that they
would 'get used to' the 'shock' of the hotel's size and scale.
that was the 'job' that pcpc couldn't do in may, but one
that it could do in september: by september, the question of
the hotel's size and scale had been reduced to one of
traffic, and penn's alan greenberger had been appointed head
of pcpc.
..................
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
----
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>.
