[UC] Fwd: [Ucneighbors] 1st Thursday update on the 40th St. hotel proposal: Lussenhop speaks

[Frank]

I think it's interesting that this wasn't posted to *this* list.

Begin forwarded message:


From: Anthony West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: November 1, 2007 10:44:14 PM EDT
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>
Subject: [Ucneighbors] 1st Thursday update on the 40th St. hotel  
proposal: Lussenhop speaks


Developer Tom Lussenhop made a presentation on his proposed extended- 
stay hotel at 40th & Pine Sts. at Penn Community Relations' "First  
Thursday" meeting today at the Walnut St. West Free Library. It  
clarified my understanding of the project.


He discussed the hotel-keeping product of an "extended-stay"  
facility. It's really halfway between a hotel and an apartment  
building. There are smart discounts for weeklong stays and even  
better ones for longer stays, so it is inherently more affordable  
than a comparable suite in a typical hotel. Every suite has a  
kitchen; at the same time, there is no hotel restaurant or internal  
entertainments. Residents would be people who need to live  
economically in this neighborhood for a short while. The hospital  
complex draws a number of such visitors, so Lussenhop and Penn real- 
estate maven Tony Sorrentino, who joined him, very much like how  
close 40th & Pine is to HUP and CHOP and Presby.


Guests would be expected to walk to the hospitals, or other campus  
destinations. They could walk to the FreshGrocer and also walk up  
40th St. for dining, shopping and entertainment. Its location  
between the 40 and 42 Bus Routes and four out of five Green Line  
Trolleys would propel them around the rest of the city. "Anybody who  
tries to drive from 40th & Pine to HUP will only do it once,"  
Lussenhop commented; valets would park guests' vehicles on a remote  
Penn lot.


The developer envisages 120-150 units. These visitors should provide  
a handsome boost to the 40th St. business community, he argued.


Lussenhop's design is an unquestionable plus for Spruce Hill's  
architectural heritage. The old Italianate mansion is now half- 
buried inside doughy functional expansions made in the '60s when it  
was turned into a nursing home. He would strip all that stuff off  
and restore the original exterior -- maybe not to Historical- 
Commission standards, but with the goal of showing off the original  
mansion. That mansion lies on the SW corner of 40th & Pine. The  
entryway would lie along Pine.


Immediately behind the mansion and connected to it would be a tall  
new building. It would stand between the old mansion and the row of  
apartments buildings on the 4000 block of Baltimore Ave. Lussenhop  
is proposing 10 stories, which would place it around the height of  
the Fairfax. It would be much skinnier, however.


Immediately across 40th is a chunk of vacant stores now owned by  
Michael Karp and used by him for storage space. The hotel might spur  
them to become retail spaces again.


Of the immediate neighborhood, 3900-4099 Baltimore and 4000-4099  
Pine, Lussenhop said, "There are about 120 parcels of real estate.  
About 115 of them are currently oriented toward student rental" by  
absentee owners. The vast majority of property owners in that area,  
he said, had been contacted and were supportive of the hotel project.


"I live two blocks away from this site, and it will be the main  
focus of my life for the next 10 years," Lussenhop said -- a vow of  
commitment to the neighborhood.


The project is far from finalized and this phase is right for  
community input, the presenters said. But they did want to get  
cracking on it and build it in 2008.


-- Tony West

___
ucneighbors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.asc.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/ucneighbors

[UC] Update on the 40th St. hotel proposal

[KAREN ALLEN]

__
From: Anthony West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: November 1, 2007 10:44:14 PM EDT
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Ucneighbors] 1st Thursday update on the 40th St. hotel proposal: 
Lussenhop speaks

Developer Tom Lussenhop made a presentation on his proposed extended-stay hotel 
at 40th & Pine Sts. at Penn Community Relations' 'First Thursday' meeting today 
at the Walnut St. West Free Library. ...Lussenhop's design is an unquestionable 
plus for Spruce Hill's architectural heritage.  
  Come on, Tony, you've got 
to be kidding!  UNQUESTIONABLE???  Are you saying, Tony, that we're not 
supposed to ask questions??? That we're supposed to simply accept on the word 
of someone who hopes to make a handsome profit at the expense of this 
neighborhood's historic character and quality of life, that this project will 
benefit anyone other than the developer and his benefactors?
I personally have a lot of questions:
 
How would this project 'save' that building?  It would only be 'saved' in the 
sense that it would remain standing, some of the original exterior 
characteristics would be rebuilt, and it would be put back in use. What would 
not be restored would be the fact that the building sat in the center of a 
large yard, set back from the sidewalks of 40th Street and of Pine Street.   
But most importantly, the original mansion would have a ten-story building 
built in what had been that yard.  THAT is certainly historically inaccurate. 
Furthermore, any historic character that is restored to the mansion would be 
totally marginalized by a modern ten story building looming over it.  As an 
example, look at the remaining buildings on the north side of the 3900 block of 
Walnut Street, and how tiny they look against the backdrop of the new dorm 
being built there.   I think it's interesting that the people who want to 
support this project conveniently ignore the HEIGHT of this building, and the 
impact that would have on entire the area surrounding that property. 'Saving' 
the archetectural heritage of that one building would come at the cost of 
destroying the scale and character of the rest of the blocks of 4000 Pine 
Street, 4000 Baltimore Avenue, the 400 blocks of South 40th and 41st Streets, 
and every other block within sight of that ten-story tower.   I'm going to 
break the 'unquestionable' rule set for this thread, and  ask the supporters of 
this project these questions:  -How do you defend erecting a modern ten 
story building in an area comprised of 1850's Italianate three story homes? 
  -How is supporting this project consistent with the drive a few years back to 
have this area designated as an historic district? -Does the current lack 
of an historic designation that would compel new buildings or building 
renovations to conform to certain standards become a reason to ignore those 
same standards?  Or to cite the lack of that designation as a reason for 
support?  -Shouldn't those who profess to support historic designation 
demand that developers voluntarily comply with those standards before throwing 
their support behind those developers' projects? Karen Allen

Re: [UC] Recidivism/probationers/Nutter

[Glenn]

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Youngphillypolitics.com has posted the legislation
> in its entirety.  There are
> some strings attached, of course.  But even if
> there's a little corruption or
> the program ends up needing a few tweaks, it still
> seems like a good incentive
> to hire ex-offenders, given that there's no
> incentive (that I know of)
> currently.
> 
>
http://youngphillypolitics.com/goode_introduces_nutter_prep_legislation
> 
> Andrew
> 


Andrew,

I feel a bit more positive.  The bill seems to be
trying to set this up for success.  Assessing
participants and networking CBH and other services and
agencies is very important.  

There are many details that the enabling bill,
understandably, does not address.  These are lofty
goals to coordinate.  Implementation of this system
will have many barriers just like the ex-offenders
have many potential life problems that will become
barriers to maintaining employment.  

It is very important that the correction agensies and
CBH staffs are properly trained and engaged with
making the program a success.  I'm a bit out of touch
and don't know how well these agencies are functioning
in general.  I would strongly recommend that they have
a portion of their staffs become specialists with the
program/networks, and not just give it out for the
entire staff to figure out.  When I was more involved,
the case loads were too high for meaningful engagement
and getting higher.

I would like to see this succeed.  In all my years
working in the area of behavioral health care
research; taking a comprehensive approach with this
population by integrating literacy and employment
services was my primary interest.  Funding was not a
priority for the research or making comprehensive
services widely available when I left the field.

The general population is not generally aware that not
only is the quality of life improved for families and
individuals but for society too, when the problems of
this population are addressed.  And the real cost of
not addressing the problems of disadvantaged citizens
is much higher than the cost of helping them.  

But it needs to be done correctly with a comprehensive
approach matching the agencies and services to the
individual needs of these ex-offenders with varying
severity of problems in different life areas.  To keep
the employers interested, proper screening, matching,
and follow-up services must be part of the program. 
Otherwise, the employers will drop out.

I will send a letter to Mr. Goode and Mr.Nutter and
give a copy to my ward leader.  There aren't many
people in Phila. with as much experience with this as
me.  I'll try to bring up very important issues to
make it a success and offer to help them before it
gets set up. I worked closely with researchers
developing the materials they will need. Some of my
old co-workers might be advising this project. The
goals are in the right direction.

Thanks for sharing the info,
Glenn









 





> 
> 
> Quoting Glenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
> > Hey Andrew,
> >
> > Yesterday
>  in the Inky was an interesting article about
> > the police commissioner, Sylvester Johnson.  He
> > believes the stop and frisk policy would be a
> > disaster.  His focus is how this will turn the
> clock
> > back on police/community relations and destroy,
> > perhaps in months, the gains which have taken
> years to
> > forge.  He cites the recent request for community
> > volunteers and getting 10,000 people to show up as
> > evidence of improving relations.
> >
> > I have not seen details of this $10,000 tax credit
> > first alluded to in the primaries.  In my
> experience,
> > this tax credit strategy sounds much better than
> it
> > turns out to be.
> >
> > Over a decade ago, I looked for employers for
> > individuals with chronic substance abuse disease. 
> I
> > think all those I worked with counted as
> ex-offenders
> > too.
> >
> > The employers weren't interested in the federal
> tax
> > breaks available.  As a large industrial
> janitorial
> > contractor explained to me, when the details come
> out:
> > there is so much work and little hope for actually
> > qualifying.
> >
> > This same employer was very interested in the
> program
> > I was offering to help bridge the gap to
> employment.
> > For 6 months, I maintained case management
> services
> > for the referrals with an up-front agreement for
> > three-way open communication to assist the
> individuals
> > maintain their jobs.  My referrals succeeded very
> well
> > but in almost all cases minor problems arose that
> > could have easily caused termination in those
> first
> > six months.
> >
> > Now does this reward only kick-in after the first
> six
> > months of employment?  That would suggest to me
> lots
> > of hoops for legitimate employers, lots of fraud,
> and
> > very little impact on maintaining employment or
> > reducing recidivism.
> >
> >  The intervention I worked on was a small pilot
> > project but was successful because it was a

[UC] 40th Street Hotel and "hardship"

[anm]

One aspect of this project that has only been alluded a couple of times is
"hardship."  Some commenters to the list have suggested that, since de-listing
of the historic property was denied, whatever else happens, the property will
be restored.  This is not necessarily the case.  According to the historical
commission ordinance, an owner may claim a financial "hardship" exemption.  An
evaluation of such an exemption, if I understand the ordinance correctly, would
not have to take into account the depth of the owner's pockets.  And if Penn
didn't know that the property was historically designated, that fact might work
in their favor if they sought a hardship exemption.  I have not heard anyone
suggest that the developers might seek to prove "hardship," but they *could* go
down that road, in which case all bets are off, and the entire building could be
demolished.

Andrew
www.malcolmxpark.org
---
Here's the relevant text (and it's source:
http://www.phila.gov/historical/pdf/ordinance/ordinance.pdf)

(f) In any instance where there is a claim that a building, structure, site or
object cannot be used for any purpose for which it is or may be reasonably
adapted, or where a permit application for alteration, or demolition is based,
in whole or in part, on financial hardship, the owner shall submit, by
affidavit, the following information to the Commission:
(.1) amount paid for the property, date of purchase, and party from whom
purchased, including a description of the relationship, whether business or
familial, if any, between the owner and the person from whom the property was
purchased;
(.2) assessed value of the land and improvements thereon according to the most
recent assessment;
(.3) financial information for the previous two (2) years which shall include,
as a minimum, annual gross income from the property, itemized operating and
maintenance expenses, real estate taxes, annual debt service, annual cash flow,
the amount of depreciation taken for federal income tax purposes, and other
federal income tax deductions produced;
(.4) all appraisals obtained by the owner in connection with his purchase or
financing of the property, or during his ownership of the property;
(.5) all listings of the property for sale or rent, price asked, and offers
received, if any;
(.6) any consideration by the owner as to profitable, adaptive uses for the
property;
(.7) the Commission may further require the owner to conduct, at the owner's
expense, evaluations or studies, as are reasonably necessary in the opinion of
the Commission, to determine whether the building, structure, site or object
has or may have alternate uses consistent with preservation.
---

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Fwd: [Ucneighbors] 1st Thursday update on the 40th St. hotel proposa...

[Krfapt]

 
In a message dated 11/2/2007 10:08:02 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

I think  it's interesting that this wasn't posted to *this*  list.


Yes... because both Lussenhop and Tony glossed over the part that a number  
of people on this list find objectionable -- and that the Historical  
Commission's Architectural Committee and the Preservation Alliance also didn't  
like. 
Namely a grossly out-of-proportion 10-story building overshadowing both  the 
property in question and the houses on Baltimore Avenue.
 
Candidly, the design -- amounting to a 10-story wall halfway between Pine  
and Baltimore, extending west from 40th street -- is an affront even to us  
Philistines.
 
 
 
Al  Krigman
Left of Mies van der Rohe but right of Eero  Saarinen



** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Re: [UC] 40th Street Hotel and "hardship"

[MLamond]

Hi, Liz, your points are interesting, but I'm not sure they relate to this 
transaction - though we're all just speculating.

1.   Zoning information is different from inclusion on the local historic 
register.   The City's zoning maps don't show historic register information.   
And I've never seen it come up on the "L&I Cert" required for settlements, 
which 
comes from the city's Dept. of Licenses & Inspections - the department 
responsible for zoning information.   

2.   And as title clerk Suzanne Brady of SearchTec Abstract confirmed last 
week, local historic designation doesn't come up on title searches, either.

3.   As for the Seller Disclosure required by PA law, it is NOT required on 
commercial properties.   This building, with its last use as a personal care 
home, was most likely sold as a commercial property - so the safeguard of 
information from a Seller Disclosure would have been lacking here.

4.   Also, my impression is that the current owners don't think the folks who 
sold to them realized that the building was on the local historic register, 
so the failure to disclose may not have been intentional.

Clearly, we have all just learned that we should check the local register for 
EVERY real estate transaction we handle in the future, but I'm not sure that 
the buyers of 400 S. 40th St. missed something that would have been obvious to 
any of us before we learned this lesson!

- Melani Lamond


In a message dated 11/2/07 2:00:06 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 

> As points of information:
>       
> Real Estate Sale contracts for Pennsylvania properties must contain
> ZONING information.
> (The only exception is a "Single Family Residence".)
> Zoning codes are public records, and while the Codes may seem complicated
> or obscure, it remains the Buyer's obligation of "Due Diligence" to be
> fully aware of Height, Setback, Use and other restrictions under each
> Zoning definition.
> 
> 
> Most Real Estate transactions are subject to delivery of a written
> "Seller Disclosure" form to Buyer..
> Seller Disclosures must reveal the presence of any Historic Designation
> and location within any Historic District.
> In instances (Foreclosures, Estate Sales, etc.) where SD is not required,
> the Buyer should be notified, in a writing, signed by Buyer and Seller.
> And in those cases, the Buyer and Buyer Agent should be professional
> enough to do proper Due Diligence.
> 
> Best!
> 





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


**
 See what's new 
at http://www.aol.com

Re: [UC] 40th Street Hotel and "hardship"

[Elizabeth F Campion]

As points of information:
   
Real Estate Sale contracts for Pennsylvania properties must contain
ZONING information.
(The only exception is a "Single Family Residence".)
Zoning codes are public records, and while the Codes may seem complicated
or obscure, it remains the Buyer's obligation of "Due Diligence" to be
fully aware of Height, Setback, Use and other restrictions under each
Zoning definition.


Most Real Estate transactions are subject to delivery of a written
"Seller Disclosure" form to Buyer..
Seller Disclosures must reveal the presence of any Historic Designation
and location within any Historic District.
In instances (Foreclosures, Estate Sales, etc.) where SD is not required,
the Buyer should be notified, in a writing, signed by Buyer and Seller.
And in those cases, the Buyer and Buyer Agent should be professional
enough to do proper Due Diligence.

Best!
Liz

On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:14:51 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> One aspect of this project that has only been alluded a couple of 
> times is
> "hardship."  Some commenters to the list have suggested that, since 
> de-listing
> of the historic property was denied, whatever else happens, the 
> property will
> be restored.  This is not necessarily the case.  According to the 
> historical
> commission ordinance, an owner may claim a financial "hardship" 
> exemption.  An
> evaluation of such an exemption, if I understand the ordinance 
> correctly, would
> not have to take into account the depth of the owner's pockets.  And 
> if Penn
> didn't know that the property was historically designated, that fact 
> might work
> in their favor if they sought a hardship exemption.  I have not 
> heard anyone
> suggest that the developers might seek to prove "hardship," but they 
> *could* go
> down that road, in which case all bets are off, and the entire 
> building could be
> demolished.
> 
> Andrew
> www.malcolmxpark.org
> ---
> Here's the relevant text (and it's source:
> http://www.phila.gov/historical/pdf/ordinance/ordinance.pdf)
> 
> (f) In any instance where there is a claim that a building, 
> structure, site or
> object cannot be used for any purpose for which it is or may be 
> reasonably
> adapted, or where a permit application for alteration, or demolition 
> is based,
> in whole or in part, on financial hardship, the owner shall submit, 
> by
> affidavit, the following information to the Commission:
> (.1) amount paid for the property, date of purchase, and party from 
> whom
> purchased, including a description of the relationship, whether 
> business or
> familial, if any, between the owner and the person from whom the 
> property was
> purchased;
> (.2) assessed value of the land and improvements thereon according 
> to the most
> recent assessment;
> (.3) financial information for the previous two (2) years which 
> shall include,
> as a minimum, annual gross income from the property, itemized 
> operating and
> maintenance expenses, real estate taxes, annual debt service, annual 
> cash flow,
> the amount of depreciation taken for federal income tax purposes, 
> and other
> federal income tax deductions produced;
> (.4) all appraisals obtained by the owner in connection with his 
> purchase or
> financing of the property, or during his ownership of the property;
> (.5) all listings of the property for sale or rent, price asked, and 
> offers
> received, if any;
> (.6) any consideration by the owner as to profitable, adaptive uses 
> for the
> property;
> (.7) the Commission may further require the owner to conduct, at the 
> owner's
> expense, evaluations or studies, as are reasonably necessary in the 
> opinion of
> the Commission, to determine whether the building, structure, site 
> or object
> has or may have alternate uses consistent with preservation.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Fwd: [UC] Fwd: [Ucneighbors] 1st Thursday update on the 40th St. hotel proposal: Lussenhop speaks

[Frank]

Begin forwarded message:


From: Anthony West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: November 2, 2007 2:29:40 PM EDT
To: Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [UC] Fwd: [Ucneighbors] 1st Thursday update on the 40th  
St. hotel proposal: Lussenhop speaks


Frank,

It is impossible for me, and for several other UC-list subscribers,  
to post on UC-list anymore. That fact has been well publicized. So I  
posted my report on the only truly public discussion list in the  
neighborhood, UCNeighbors. I'm glad you circulated it to UC-list.  
I'd appreciate your posting this response as well.


-- Tony West



Frank wrote:

I think it's interesting that this wasn't posted to *this* list.

Begin forwarded message:

*From: *Anthony West <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >

*Date: *November 1, 2007 10:44:14 PM EDT
*To: *"[EMAIL PROTECTED] " <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
*Subject: **[Ucneighbors] 1st Thursday update on the 40th St.  
hotel proposal: Lussenhop speaks*


Developer Tom Lussenhop made a presentation on his proposed  
extended-stay hotel at 40th & Pine Sts. at Penn Community  
Relations' "First Thursday" meeting today at the Walnut St. West  
Free Library. It clarified my understanding of the project.


He discussed the hotel-keeping product of an "extended-stay"  
facility. It's really halfway between a hotel and an apartment  
building. There are smart discounts for weeklong stays and even  
better ones for longer stays, so it is inherently more affordable  
than a comparable suite in a typical hotel. Every suite has a  
kitchen; at the same time, there is no hotel restaurant or  
internal entertainments. Residents would be people who need to  
live economically in this neighborhood for a short while. The  
hospital complex draws a number of such visitors, so Lussenhop and  
Penn real-estate maven Tony Sorrentino, who joined him, very much  
like how close 40th & Pine is to HUP and CHOP and Presby.


Guests would be expected to walk to the hospitals, or other campus  
destinations. They could walk to the FreshGrocer and also walk up  
40th St. for dining, shopping and entertainment. Its location  
between the 40 and 42 Bus Routes and four out of five Green Line  
Trolleys would propel them around the rest of the city. "Anybody  
who tries to drive from 40th & Pine to HUP will only do it once,"  
Lussenhop commented; valets would park guests' vehicles on a  
remote Penn lot.


The developer envisages 120-150 units. These visitors should  
provide a handsome boost to the 40th St. business community, he  
argued.


Lussenhop's design is an unquestionable plus for Spruce Hill's  
architectural heritage. The old Italianate mansion is now half- 
buried inside doughy functional expansions made in the '60s when  
it was turned into a nursing home. He would strip all that stuff  
off and restore the original exterior -- maybe not to Historical- 
Commission standards, but with the goal of showing off the  
original mansion. That mansion lies on the SW corner of 40th &  
Pine. The entryway would lie along Pine.


Immediately behind the mansion and connected to it would be a tall  
new building. It would stand between the old mansion and the row  
of apartments buildings on the 4000 block of Baltimore Ave.  
Lussenhop is proposing 10 stories, which would place it around the  
height of the Fairfax. It would be much skinnier, however.


Immediately across 40th is a chunk of vacant stores now owned by  
Michael Karp and used by him for storage space. The hotel might  
spur them to become retail spaces again.


Of the immediate neighborhood, 3900-4099 Baltimore and 4000-4099  
Pine, Lussenhop said, "There are about 120 parcels of real estate.  
About 115 of them are currently oriented toward student rental" by  
absentee owners. The vast majority of property owners in that  
area, he said, had been contacted and were supportive of the hotel  
project.


"I live two blocks away from this site, and it will be the main  
focus of my life for the next 10 years," Lussenhop said -- a vow  
of commitment to the neighborhood.


The project is far from finalized and this phase is right for  
community input, the presenters said. But they did want to get  
cracking on it and build it in 2008.


-- Tony West

___
ucneighbors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

http://lists.asc.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/ucneighbors

RE: [UC] Update on the 40th St. hotel proposal

[KAREN ALLEN]

I can always tell when I ask good questions because they get ignored.  
 
Those of you who support this proposal:  let's have a real dialogue; answer 
these questions (and asking me "why do you hate America" doesn't count as an 
answer).
 
Karen Allen

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [UC] Update on the 40th St. hotel 
proposalDate: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:39:26 -0400





   -How do you defend erecting a modern ten story building in an area comprised 
of 1850's era Italianate three story homes?   -How is supporting this 
project consistent with the drive a few years back to have this area designated 
as an historic district? -Does the current lack of an historic designation 
that would compel new buildings or building renovations to conform to certain 
standards become a reason to ignore those same standards?  Or to cite the lack 
of that designation as a reason for support?  -Shouldn't those who profess 
to support historic designation demand that developers voluntarily comply with 
those standards before throwing their support behind those developers' 
projects? Karen Allen

Re: [UC] Fwd: [Ucneighbors] 1st Thursday update on the 40th St. hotel proposal: Lussenhop speaks

[Wilma de Soto]

OR you might ask one of us to place your post on the UCListserv.

As your neighbors, we would do it.  We have and will again.

Regards,

Wilma


On 11/2/07 3:25 PM, "Frank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:OR

> 
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
>> From: Anthony West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: November 2, 2007 2:29:40 PM EDT
>> To: Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Subject: Re: [UC] Fwd: [Ucneighbors] 1st Thursday update on the 40th St.
>> hotel proposal: Lussenhop speaks
>> 
>>  
>> Frank,
>> 
>> It is impossible for me, and for several other UC-list subscribers, to post
>> on UC-list anymore. That fact has been well publicized. So I posted my report
>> on the only truly public discussion list in the neighborhood, UCNeighbors.
>> I'm glad you circulated it to UC-list. I'd appreciate your posting this
>> response as well.
>> 
>> -- Tony West
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Frank wrote:
>>> I think it's interesting that this wasn't posted to *this* list.
>>> 
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> 
 *From: *Anthony West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 >
 *Date: *November 1, 2007 10:44:14 PM EDT
 *To: *"[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 >
 *Subject: **[Ucneighbors] 1st Thursday update on the 40th St. hotel
 proposal: Lussenhop speaks*
 
 Developer Tom Lussenhop made a presentation on his proposed extended-stay
 hotel at 40th & Pine Sts. at Penn Community Relations' "First Thursday"
 meeting today at the Walnut St. West Free Library. It clarified my
 understanding of the project.
 
 He discussed the hotel-keeping product of an "extended-stay" facility. It's
 really halfway between a hotel and an apartment building. There are smart
 discounts for weeklong stays and even better ones for longer stays, so it
 is inherently more affordable than a comparable suite in a typical hotel.
 Every suite has a kitchen; at the same time, there is no hotel restaurant
 or internal entertainments. Residents would be people who need to live
 economically in this neighborhood for a short while. The hospital complex
 draws a number of such visitors, so Lussenhop and Penn real-estate maven
 Tony Sorrentino, who joined him, very much like how close 40th & Pine is to
 HUP and CHOP and Presby.
 
 Guests would be expected to walk to the hospitals, or other campus
 destinations. They could walk to the FreshGrocer and also walk up 40th St.
 for dining, shopping and entertainment. Its location between the 40 and 42
 Bus Routes and four out of five Green Line Trolleys would propel them
 around the rest of the city. "Anybody who tries to drive from 40th & Pine
 to HUP will only do it once," Lussenhop commented; valets would park
 guests' vehicles on a remote Penn lot.
 
 The developer envisages 120-150 units. These visitors should provide a
 handsome boost to the 40th St. business community, he argued.
 
 Lussenhop's design is an unquestionable plus for Spruce Hill's
 architectural heritage. The old Italianate mansion is now half-buried
 inside doughy functional expansions made in the '60s when it was turned
 into a nursing home. He would strip all that stuff off and restore the
 original exterior -- maybe not to Historical-Commission standards, but with
 the goal of showing off the original mansion. That mansion lies on the SW
 corner of 40th & Pine. The entryway would lie along Pine.
 
 Immediately behind the mansion and connected to it would be a tall new
 building. It would stand between the old mansion and the row of apartments
 buildings on the 4000 block of Baltimore Ave. Lussenhop is proposing 10
 stories, which would place it around the height of the Fairfax. It would be
 much skinnier, however.
 
 Immediately across 40th is a chunk of vacant stores now owned by Michael
 Karp and used by him for storage space. The hotel might spur them to become
 retail spaces again.
 
 Of the immediate neighborhood, 3900-4099 Baltimore and 4000-4099 Pine,
 Lussenhop said, "There are about 120 parcels of real estate. About 115 of
 them are currently oriented toward student rental" by absentee owners. The
 vast majority of property owners in that area, he said, had been contacted
 and were supportive of the hotel project.
 
 "I live two blocks away from this site, and it will be the main focus of my
 life for the next 10 years," Lussenhop said -- a vow of commitment to the
 neighborhood.
 
 The project is far from finalized and this phase is right for community
 input, the presenters said. But they did want to get cracking on it and
 build it in 2008.
 
 -- Tony West
 
 ___
 ucneighbors mailing list
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 http://lists.asc.upenn.edu/mai

Re: [UC] Fwd: [Ucneighbors] 1st Thursday update on the 40th St. hotel proposal: Lussenhop speaks

[Frank]

I love this part:

On Nov 2, 2007, at 04:47 PM, Anthony West wrote:

So I posted my report on the only truly public discussion list in  
the neighborhood, UCNeighbors.



Frankus
Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible.

Re: [UC] Update on the 40th St. hotel proposal

[MLamond]

 
 
In a message dated 11/2/2007 1:07:31 P.M. Pacific Daylight  Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

I can always tell when I ask good questions because they  get ignored.  

Those of you who support this proposal:   let's have a real dialogue; answer 
these questions (and asking me "why do you  hate America" doesn't count as an 
answer).

Karen  Allen



Hi, Karen, these  are good questions. I don't know about anyone else, but my 
hesitation to  reply is to avoid being overly argumentative.  I've spoken too 
often  already, just to try to dispel inaccurate statements.  But if you truly 
 want to hear another viewpoint, I'll be happy to share mine.  This isn't  
personal - it's only in response to your request for other points of  view.


-How do you defend erecting a modern ten story building in an area  comprised 
of 1850's Italianate three story homes?   




"Italianate homes"?  The area is mixed.  On  the S side of the 4000 block of 
Pine, there are 1850s Italianates  converted to apartments, plus the subject 
property at 400 S.  40th, converted long ago to a personal care home and long  
wrapped in a cinder block shell.  Across Pine St. and also on the N side  of 
Baltimore, there are late Victorian houses, now almost  all apartments.  Across 
40th St. from the subject property, there  are townhouses and an apartment 
building.  Nearly all are tenant occupied  properties.  Slightly south of the 
subject property, across 40th St., is  the empty commercial space, part of it 
still with a sign showing that it was  once a travel agency, with several 
floors 
above which may or may not be  occupied.  Just across Baltimore Ave., a half 
block from the subject  property, is the modern trolley portal.  In the other 
direction, one  short block north of the subject property, there's the modern 
one-story  Allegro Pizza on the east side of 40th, and the much-altered 
building housing  Copabanana on the west side.  From the corner of 40th & Pine, 
one 
can  see two of the Penn high rises to the NE.  That's a more thorough  
description of the surroundings, and I'd urge anybody interested in this  
discussion 
to take a walk over there and view it for yourselves.  
 
"Modern"?  As has been written earlier, the  Secretary of the Interior's 
Standards don't allow a developer to build  "faux-old."  The new addition is 
not 
allowed to look old.  The  Historical Commission would guide the developer to 
make the new  part "sympathetic" - in materials as well as height.  When I  
spoke at the hearing, I urged the HC committee to work to make it more  
"sympathetic."
 
How does one "defend"?  Also as was written  earlier, community zoning 
committees generally respect the wishes of the  nearby neighbors when taking 
positions on new development.  So the local  community group's zoning committee 
would 
check first with those closest  by, to see if they object.  I am not privy to 
their deliberations, so I  don't know where they are in that process, but I 
do know that no owner  occupant or landlord neighbor from any of the locations 
I described  above showed up at the HC hearing last week to complain.  At some 
 point, to have  the local community association impose its will  on a site, 
in absence of complaint from the neighbors, would seem  inappropriate.  To 
have you and me, as busybodies from the next  neighborhood over, impose our 
will 
on the project seems even more  problematic.  I'm only piping up about this 
project because I  want to see the Italiante building get unwrapped and 
renovated!
  
-How is supporting this project consistent with the drive a few  years back 
to have this area designated as an historic  district?

One might reverse that and ask, "how is opposing this project consistent  
with the drive a few years back to stop this area from being designated as an  
historic district?"  To some extent, I think folks in UC tend to support  or 
oppose change based on the identity of the entity proposing the change,  rather 
than on the merit of the proposal.  I think there may be some of  that 
happening here, and I think it's unfortunate.  As I wrote, I  support 
preserving and 
restoring the building - and if this project will  allow for that, I think the 
project has merit and should be considered.   

If it were financially feasible to remove the cinder block additions,  
restore the exterior, porch, original drive and gardens, and operate it as a  
5- or 
6-room B&B, I'd prefer that!  But I don't see financial  feasibility in a use 
with so little income, or in a use as a single family  home again.  That's 
what I said at the HC hearing.  I think we need  to be practical if we want 
this 
corner to be beautiful and in use.  It  will be far better than it's been 
since the 1960s, almost 50 years ago,  if developed basically as currently 
proposed.

-Does the current lack of an  historic designation that would compel new 
buildings or building renovations  to conform to certain standards become a 
r

Re: [UC] Fwd: [Ucneighbors] 1st Thursday update on the 40th St. hotel proposal: Lussenhop speaks

[Wilma de Soto]

¡E-a Rayo!


On 11/2/07 7:03 PM, "Frank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I love this part:
> 
> On Nov 2, 2007, at 04:47 PM, Anthony West wrote:
> 
>> So I posted my report on the only truly public discussion list in the
>> neighborhood, UCNeighbors.
> 
> 
> Frankus
> Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible.
> 
> 

[UC] Farmer's Market will be open Wednesday before Thanksgiving

[Brian Siano]

Katy Wich of the Food Trust has asked me to notify everyone about a major 
schedule change for this coming Thanksgiving.

Hi Brian,
 I was wondering if you would be able to send this PDF out on a few
list-serves (not sure what format works best - I have it in Word as
well).
 We are going to open the Clark Park Farmers' Market the day before
Thanksgiving, 10 am to 4 pm.  It is the first year that we are doing 
this and we hope for a busy day.

 Can you think of any other list-serves that you think we should try to
post this information on??
 Thanks for your help and have a great day!
Cheers,
Katy Wich
Project Coordinator
The Food Trust

The information is available as a PDF at 
http://www.clarkpark.info/FarmMarkTgv2007.pdf




You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

RE: [UC] Update on the 40th St. hotel proposal

[KAREN ALLEN]

My responses are in bold after the text I'm responding to. 


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 19:01:38 -0400Subject: Re: [UC] Update 
on the 40th St. hotel proposalTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; univcity@list.purple.com




-How do you defend erecting a modern ten story building in an area 
comprised of 1850's Italianate three story homes?  

 
"Italianate homes"?  The area is mixed.  On the S side of the 4000 block of 
Pine, there are 1850s Italianates converted to apartments, plus the subject 
property at 400 S. 40th, converted long ago to a personal care home and long 
wrapped in a cinder block shell.  Across Pine St. and also on the N side of 
Baltimore, there are late Victorian houses, now almost all apartments.  Across 
40th St. from the subject property, there are townhouses and an apartment 
building.  Nearly all are tenant occupied properties.  
 
 
 
What is the relevance that you, Lussenhop and other supporters make of the fact 
that these are tenant-occupied properties? This has been constantly trotted out 
with a figurative wave of the hand and a tone that suggests "Forget it, don't 
worry about it; it's just a bunch of tenants in there".   The implication seems 
to be that owners can throw anything into an area if tenants are the majority 
of the occupants.  Don't tenants deserve a decent quality of life too? 
 
Slightly south of the subject property, across 40th St., is the empty 
commercial space, part of it still with a sign showing that it was once a 
travel agency, with several floors above which may or may not be occupied.  
Just across Baltimore Ave., a half block from the subject property, is the 
modern trolley portal.  In the other direction, one short block north of the 
subject property, there's the modern one-story Allegro Pizza on the east side 
of 40th, and the much-altered building housing Copabanana on the west side.  
From the corner of 40th & Pine, one can see two of the Penn high rises to the 
NE.  That's a more thorough description of the surroundings, and I'd urge 
anybody interested in this discussion to take a walk over there and view it for 
yourselves.  
 
You've addressed every point in my question EXCEPT the part about the 10 story 
building being put there. Granting that the area is as you describe, how does a 
ten story building fit in that area?  
 
 
... but I do know that no owner occupant or landlord neighbor from any of the 
locations I described above showed up at the HC hearing last week to complain.
  
As I understand it, a majority of the owners are absentee landlords.  If they 
do not have to live near the proposal, why shouldn't they approve the plan?
 
Chris O'Donnell appeared in opposition. He owns property one block away.  
Doesn't his opinion count?
 
At some point, to have  the local community association impose its will on a 
site, in absence of complaint from the neighbors, would seem inappropriate.  To 
have you and me, as busybodies from the next neighborhood over, impose our will 
on the project seems even more problematic.  I'm only piping up about this 
project because I want to see the Italiante building get unwrapped and 
renovated!
 
So basically what you're saying in code is "why don't you shut up and mind your 
own business; YOU don't live in that neighborhood".  And you're also saying 
that  YOU  voicing YOUR opinion is valid and ME voicing MY opinion is not. 
Well,  I'm only piping up about this project because I don't want to see a ten 
story building forever  destroy the skyline in that area, and set the stage for 
the same thing happening in the entire neighborhood.
 
   There is a "busybody" organization in the neighborhood called the University 
City Historical Society.  I am a member busybody of UCHS. And to borrow your 
habit of outing other people in your posts, so are you.  The UCHS claims to 
represent ALL of University City, from Powelton to Cedar Park, in historical 
preservation matters.  UCHS does not limit its membership to people living in 
any specific community  in UC.  
 
In short, the  University City Historical Society TRANSCENDS  community 
association boundaries.  In doing that, UCHS HAS CREATED  A PRECEDENT that 
ANYONE who lives in UC and is concerned about historic preservation issues has 
the RIGHT to speak on those issues. 
 
If I don't have a right to speak on this issue because I don't live in Spruce 
Hill, then UCHS has no business involving itself in similar issues, and should 
disband.   
 
You can't have it  have it both ways.
 
 
 -How is supporting this project consistent with the drive a few years back 
to have this area designated as an historic district?

One might reverse that and ask, "how is opposing this project consistent with 
the drive a few years back to stop this area from being designated as an 
historic district?"  To some extent, I think folks in UC tend to support or 
oppose change based on the identity of the entity proposing the change, rather 
than on the merit of the p

Re: [UC] Update on the 40th St. hotel proposal

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

Melani Lamond wrote:

To some extent, I think folks in UC tend to
support or oppose change based on the identity of the
entity proposing the change, rather than on the merit of
the proposal.  I think there may be some of that
happening here, and I think it's unfortunate.  As I
wrote, I support preserving and restoring the building -
and if this project will allow for that, I think the
project has merit and should be considered.



KAREN ALLEN wrote:

I agree that people use identity as the basis of support,
but that bias runs in favor of Penn and its surrogates.
Imagine the outrage if some Average Joe (or Josephine)
tried to enclose a porch or brick up a window, or use
those dreaded Home Depot spindles.  Only the one building
would be affected.  Here, Penn and its surrogate wants to
build a ten story building to tower over everything
around it, while being totally out of character with
other buildings, and those same critics see nothing wrong
with that.

If it were financially feasible to remove the cinder
block additions, restore the exterior, porch, original
drive and gardens, and operate it as a 5- or 6-room B&B,
I'd prefer that!  But I don't see financial feasibility
in a use with so little income, or in a use as a single
family home again.  That's what I said at the HC hearing.
I think we need to be practical if we want this corner to
be beautiful and in use.  It will be far better than it's
been since the 1960s, almost 50 years ago, if developed
basically as currently proposed.

I made the suggestion that Penn seek out dedicated
funding from donors to restore the building for Penn use,
but that doesn't fit with their agenda for the building,
so it's not "feasible".





I think what's happening here isn't people 'taking sides', 
but rather people not hearing what's actually being said.


I don't think I've heard anyone objecting to ANY development 
of that corner lot. I think what we've heard is objections 
to the KIND of development, the size and scale of it, and 
its impact on the neighborhood, and the precedent it sets.


surely there are solutions for that corner that respect the 
character of the neighborhood and honor the aesthetics of 
the existing mansion, solutions that uchs have worked so 
hard in the past to procure, solutions that shca's zoning 
committee have so publicly pledged to seek. and surely uchs 
and shca could foster dialog or conversation about possible 
solutions here, rather than maintain a position that 
tacitlly favors the identity of the project's backers over 
the neighbors they claim to serve and represent.



examples of some of these solutions are staring us right in 
the face. for example, this week's uc review reported on 
another building being built on 40th street (4001 chestnut), 
right across from the 9-story hub. it's to be 5 stories, 
mixed use, built on top of an existing structure, and it's 
adjacent to 3 well preserved period houses along the north 
side of chestnut. that proposal isn't being contested; it's 
in keeping with scale and character of the area.


(http://tinyurl.com/33oxoj)

also, this week's dp reported on one of the old houses on 
4000 pine -- the old mansion that was once the provost's 
house -- now owned/rehabbed by lubovitch house, and backed 
by perelman $$. this, too, is not being contested, it's an 
example of 'neighborhood friendly' development, keeping 
things in scale/character with the neighborhood (and, btw, 
providing us with an example of how penn can pay for 
million-dollar white elephants: with donors endowing or 
sponsoring a programmatic use for the space).


(http://tinyurl.com/3bpyr6)



questioning the 40th and pine project is not about being 
against any change, but about seeing that it's done right.


if penn saddled lussenhop with this project and told him to 
put a 10-story hotel on 40th and pine, that's too bad, but 
the fact remains that some of his friendly neighbors (and 
the hc's architectural committee) are telling him he's 
trying to squeeze a round peg in a square hole, when there 
are other round holes available, other square pegs.


why doesn't uchs or shca propose a public meeting with the 
developer to discuss alternatives, solutions? that way they 
could be true friends and facilitators for the neighbors, 
rather than silent players in a contest between developers, 
neighbors, and city agencies. there's a real opportunity 
here for a win/win, a model for future proposals.




..
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

Re: [UC] Update on the 40th St. hotel proposal

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

Melani Lamond wrote:


To some extent, I think folks in UC tend to
support or oppose change based on the identity of the
entity proposing the change, rather than on the merit of
the proposal.  I think there may be some of that
happening here, and I think it's unfortunate.  As I
wrote, I support preserving and restoring the building -
and if this project will allow for that, I think the
project has merit and should be considered.




KAREN ALLEN wrote:


I agree that people use identity as the basis of support,
but that bias runs in favor of Penn and its surrogates.
Imagine the outrage if some Average Joe (or Josephine)
tried to enclose a porch or brick up a window, or use
those dreaded Home Depot spindles.  Only the one building
would be affected.  Here, Penn and its surrogate wants to
build a ten story building to tower over everything
around it, while being totally out of character with
other buildings, and those same critics see nothing wrong
with that.





sorry, I misattributed quotes in my previous post. the above 
is what I meant to quote. (my mail reader at home isn't set 
up to distinguish between plain and bold text)





..
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
.