In a message dated 2/11/2009 8:24:30 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [email protected] writes:
This is the very type of thing I warned against my editorial letter in the Review back in October, 2007: bad precedent. Once one 10 story building can be built, there is no credible justification to stop another, and another, and yet another. And I agree with you that it seems that the developer was waiting for the Campus Inn to be resolved so that whatever it is that he has planned could ride in on those coattails, and any resistance could be swatted away by pointing to that precedent. No, wait! Hold the phone! I have it on the highest authority -- an unbiased local Realtor with nothing to gain by sucking up to Penn or anyone else associated with the Campus Inn -- that these two things have absitively no relationship to one another. Penn has been in the business of buying up land surrounding its campus ever since it moved to West Philadelphia from 9th and Chestnut in 1873, so I tend to think that they've gotten to be pretty good at it by now. More than this, the Uniform Commercial Code of the United States actually holds professionals in a given field legally responsible for the consequences of their business decisions. Not that many of us think that Anne Papageorge, Ed Datz, Esaul Sanchez, John McGarry, Tony Sorrentino, or any of that crew have demonstrated "professionalism" in any connotative sense... but this is what they're being paid for. Remember, you first read it here on the popu-list Alan Krigman **************The year's hottest artists on the red carpet at the Grammy Awards. AOL Music takes you there. (http://music.aol.com/grammys?ncid=emlcntusmusi00000002)
