Re: [UC] Historic Commission Rules Against Concept of Hotel Project,
I completely agree. Besides, building a 10-story hotel around the mansion is destroying it anyway, in my opinion. Also, there has been some discussion about the type of hotel this is supposed to be. I remember someone saying it would be good for long- term guests because the hotel would have suites with kitchens. This would make it attractive to visitors who are in town because a family member is hospitalized, for instance. In my experience that's not a boutique hotel. A boutique is more about luxury and personal services like an Ian Schrager designer hotel. Exactly what kind of hotel is this supposed to be? Frank “When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross.” --Sinclair Lewis On Oct 24, 2007, at 01:07 AM, KAREN ALLEN wrote: No one building so important that it's worth destroying the rest of the neighborhood to do it. So, Melani, I'll put the questions to you: would you want Penn and Lussenhop building a 10 story hotel in the 1000 block of South Farragut Street? How do you justify destroying the streetscape of an entire area in order to save one property?
Re: [UC] Historic Commission Rules Against Concept of Hotel Project,
According to Lussenhop, the term boutique was invented by the reporter who wrote the UCReview article. I searched Hilton + boutique in Google, and while a couple of places do come up, it doesn't appear to be an actual category of hotel in the Hilton line. I think extended stay is the industry term. At the meeting, Lussenhop mentioned 6-8 day stays as the norm for this category. Andrew Quoting Frank [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I completely agree. Besides, building a 10-story hotel around the mansion is destroying it anyway, in my opinion. Also, there has been some discussion about the type of hotel this is supposed to be. I remember someone saying it would be good for long- term guests because the hotel would have suites with kitchens. This would make it attractive to visitors who are in town because a family member is hospitalized, for instance. In my experience that's not a boutique hotel. A boutique is more about luxury and personal services like an Ian Schrager designer hotel. Exactly what kind of hotel is this supposed to be? Frank When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. --Sinclair Lewis On Oct 24, 2007, at 01:07 AM, KAREN ALLEN wrote: No one building so important that it's worth destroying the rest of the neighborhood to do it. So, Melani, I'll put the questions to you: would you want Penn and Lussenhop building a 10 story hotel in the 1000 block of South Farragut Street? How do you justify destroying the streetscape of an entire area in order to save one property? 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.
Re: [UC] Historic Commission Rules Against Concept of Hotel Project, as now shown
Hi Andrew, While our memories are fresh, could you confirm another point until we get transcripts. When the architect for the project was speaking, he stated something like; earlier this summer, we presented this to the Spruce Hill Civic Association zoning committee at two open and public forums. Can you remember those words about two open and public forums? It wasn't Mr. Lussenhop or the main attorney, it was the architect going over the picture charts. Thanks. Sorry to hear you couldn't video the proceedings. The committee was recording, and I heard them state that minutes are produced. Glenn --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Andrew, can you recall better, did anyone said they thought the HOTEL would be a great benefit to the community?) I'd have to look at a transcript (or have some video!) to be sure, but I do think the two committee-people who voted to approve felt that it was the restoration of the mansion that would be the benefit to the community. They all kept returning to that point, that restoring the building would be great. I think the differences among them were whether so large a building was an appropriate trade-off to get the historically listed property restored. I think the question of whether it's a hotel or a ten-story bowling alley falls mostly outside the reach of this particular committee. I believe one or two of them may have said as much. Andrew 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.
Re: [UC] Historic Commission Rules Against Concept of Hotel Project, as now shown
Yes, I don't remember who mentioned them or what the exact words were, but someone did. Andrew Quoting Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi Andrew, While our memories are fresh, could you confirm another point until we get transcripts. When the architect for the project was speaking, he stated something like; earlier this summer, we presented this to the Spruce Hill Civic Association zoning committee at two open and public forums. Can you remember those words about two open and public forums? It wasn't Mr. Lussenhop or the main attorney, it was the architect going over the picture charts. Thanks. Sorry to hear you couldn't video the proceedings. The committee was recording, and I heard them state that minutes are produced. Glenn --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Andrew, can you recall better, did anyone said they thought the HOTEL would be a great benefit to the community?) I'd have to look at a transcript (or have some video!) to be sure, but I do think the two committee-people who voted to approve felt that it was the restoration of the mansion that would be the benefit to the community. They all kept returning to that point, that restoring the building would be great. I think the differences among them were whether so large a building was an appropriate trade-off to get the historically listed property restored. I think the question of whether it's a hotel or a ten-story bowling alley falls mostly outside the reach of this particular committee. I believe one or two of them may have said as much. Andrew 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. 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.
Re: [UC] Historic Commission Rules Against Concept of Hotel Project, as now shown
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to note for the list, as I did at the meeting, that 4000 Pine is one of only a few buildings in UC which are designated by the Philadelphia Historical Commission. Apparently it was individually designated in the 1970s. *_If not for the designation, there would have been no hearing before the Historical Commission at all about a reuse of the Italianate building. The developers could have gotten a demolition permit and torn it down_*! Then they could have gone straight to the Zoning Board with a proposal for a new hotel on the site, stating that the lot had previously contained only a decrepit and deteriorated nursing home in an old house surrounded by stucco one-story additions and blacktop. Are you CERTAIN that you don't want to revisit the idea of a local historic district to make sure 4000 Pine's neighboring buildings remain there? I think these comments miss the point that karen and others have been making repeatedly. this isn't about historic districts or historic designation, it's about appropriateness and compatibility. even if there wasn't an historically designated building on that site, the size, scale, use, and character of the proposed 10-story boutique hotel at the corner of 40th and pine would still be unacceptable and incompatible with a residential neighborhood. it's a question of zoning. it just so happens that this particular project involved an historically designated building as well. that is why there was to be hearings at BOTH the historic commission and the zoning board. al made the point earlier: questions of new buildings/new usage take into account existing streetscapes and use, they consider the existing 'fabric' particular to a location in the neighborhood. while you may see historic districts as a way to enforce a certain kind of fabric for all who live within its boundaries, caring about the fabric does not necessitate creating an historic district. I think readers understand this distinction, and don't need to be asked if they're sure they don't want to revisit the question of historic districts. .. 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 __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ 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.
Re: [UC] Historic Commission Rules Against Concept of Hotel Project, as now shown
In a message dated 10/23/07 6:04:09 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Did they happen to say exactly *how* the community would benefit? On Oct 23, 2007, at 05:41 PM, KAREN ALLEN wrote: The two members who voted in favor of the project stated that the proposed hotel would be a great benefit to the community. Today's meeting was the Architectural Committee of the City's Historical Commission. For 4000 Pine St., the developers were asking the Committee to support the concept of the hotel project - and then, later, work with the developers to work out the details. For this short-term stay hotel, the developers were not at the detail stage, and were willing to listen to all feedback from the Committee. The Committee voted 4-2 against supporting the concept as is, primarily because of the size and shape of the new addition. Now the developers will go off and work on redesigns that might be more acceptable. I don't recall the 2 committee members in favor of the project saying anything remotely like Karen has written above. Various members remarked favorably about the removal of the 1960s additions which surround and obscure the Italianate building now. They were definitely in favor of the restoration of that building and said so repeatedly. That may be what Karen meant to convey in her report. (Andrew, can you recall better, did anyone said they thought the HOTEL would be a great benefit to the community?) I'd like to note for the list, as I did at the meeting, that 4000 Pine is one of only a few buildings in UC which are designated by the Philadelphia Historical Commission. Apparently it was individually designated in the 1970s. If not for the designation, there would have been no hearing before the Historical Commission at all about a reuse of the Italianate building. The developers could have gotten a demolition permit and torn it down! Then they could have gone straight to the Zoning Board with a proposal for a new hotel on the site, stating that the lot had previously contained only a decrepit and deteriorated nursing home in an old house surrounded by stucco one-story additions and blacktop. Opponents would have still been able to have their say about a new use at the Zoning Board hearing, but the c.1854 building could have already been gone. Plus, the Zoning Board is not as sensitive to the impact on neighboring properties - the Historical Commission is the better place to argue, as folks did today, that they felt that the height and materials would be out of place along the historic Pine Street streetscape. Some years ago at the start of the HD debate in UC, folks were asking why we needed a local district to protect our houses. I remember writing at the time that it might seem far fetched, but what was already happening in Ocean City, NJ was that the 1920s Craftsman houses with duplex zoning were being torn down and replaced by larger two-unit McCondos. I think my observation was met at the time with a lot of rolling eyes and that won't happen here! Folks, it could and can. Big-time landlords own almost all of the buildings surrounding 4000 Pine. I walked down the block this morning and looked at those lovely historic buildings, and ironically, every one of them EXCEPT 4000 Pine could be torn down!They are not protected! The developers could decide to build new on the sites, and neither the Historical Commission nor we neighborhood residents would have a say. Are you CERTAIN that you don't want to revisit the idea of a local historic district to make sure 4000 Pine's neighboring buildings remain there? Looking at this project from a practical perspective, I asked Mr. Lussenhop for a tour of the historic part of the building. He took me inside early this morning. Wrapped behind the confusing Pine Street front addition, there still exists an entry area, a grand staircase, a high-ceilinged room with a fireplace, and some lovely old doorways. Some of the original windows remain, too. Other than that, there's really nothing left of the Victorian interior. And, as Lussenhop pointed out, with the 1960s additions wrapped on the outside, they don't know what's left of parts of the exterior walls, either. Only a project on a large scale, done by experienced professionals, will have the financial wherewithal to restore this sadly damaged place. It's beyond the scope of what Chris O'Donnell is doing at 41st Pine, or what I did and so many of you did and/or are doing on our own houses. My experience in the BB business as the developer of the Gables BB, and currently the owner of the Carriage House BB next door to my own house on 46th St., tells me that there is a continuing need for spaces for short-term stays in the neighborhood. The current BBs and hotels don't have cooking laundry facilities for their guests, who are expected to only stay a couple of days. My Carriage
Re: [UC] Historic Commission Rules Against Concept of Hotel Project, as now shown
(Andrew, can you recall better, did anyone said they thought the HOTEL would be a great benefit to the community?) I'd have to look at a transcript (or have some video!) to be sure, but I do think the two committee-people who voted to approve felt that it was the restoration of the mansion that would be the benefit to the community. They all kept returning to that point, that restoring the building would be great. I think the differences among them were whether so large a building was an appropriate trade-off to get the historically listed property restored. I think the question of whether it's a hotel or a ten-story bowling alley falls mostly outside the reach of this particular committee. I believe one or two of them may have said as much. Andrew 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.
RE: [UC] Historic Commission Rules Against Concept of Hotel Project,
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 19:46:53 -0400Subject: Re: [UC] Historic Commission Rules Against Concept of Hotel Project, as now shownI don't recall the 2 committee members in favor of the project saying anything remotely like Karen has written above. Various members remarked favorably about the removal of the 1960s additions which surround and obscure the Italianate building now. They were definitely in favor of the restoration of that building and said so repeatedly. That may be what Karen meant to convey in her report. If you dispute my recollection, fine. But please don't tell people what I MEANT to say. I already said what I MEANT to say. ... So does the idea that this property would become a showplace, with staff not only to watch over their own guests, but also to take care of the long-neglected corner of 40th Pine. I thought that was the reason we needed UCD? I'll also note that each of the UC folks who spoke against the project owns and renovates his/her own properties without having to consult with the rest of us or the Historical Commission - and I don't have to consult with the HC either. That's correct. I spoke against the project today. And I did renovate a property in 2003-2004 at 23rd and Fitzwater for which Melani was my buyer's agent, so that's how she knows that. And as I discussed with Melani at the time, I selected that building in large part to rescue its many original 19th Century features, because I knew that otherwise some other rehabber would have come along and gutted it. And no, I didn't have to consult with the Historical Commission for that project because I never attempted or even imagined erecting a 10 story building over, around, or through a block of two story homes. Because I had sufficient common sense not to buy a property that required putting 115 units in a one-unit space in order to make it financially feasible. And because I would never dream of ruining everyone else's quality of life just to satisfy my own bottom line. I would never disrespect my neighbors that way. Also, I don't recall any of the UC opponents saying even one kind word about the developers' plan to save the Italianate building on the site. MY testimony was that a ten story hotel was out of character, out of scale and would have a devestating effect on the REST of the neighborhood. That building would be visible from all over and would damage the fabric of the REST of the neighborhood. What good is it to save 400 South 40th Street, and in the process destroy 4000 Pine Street, or 400 South 41st Street, and on and on? I take particular pride in the fact that none other than John Gallery, Executive Director of the Preservation Alliance, and the dean of the local preservation community, confirmed every point that I made. He urged the committee to analyze the proposal in light of three criteria: would the hotel proposal be compatible in size, in scale, and in character with both the original mansion and the neighborhood, and concluded that the hotel would not meet any of the three criteria. Is he wrong, too? Are the four committee members wrong? Their testimony was all go build it somewhere else, or don't build it. They didn't address what would happen to the Italianate building if the developers were to go away.Penn owns that building. Where are they planning on going? So now Penn, with all of its BILLIONS in fundraising prowess and endowment funds, bought a building but cannot restore it without having to destroy everyone else's quality of life to do it? Penn couldn't restore that building as an upscale guest house for its visiting dignataries, akin to the home that Amy Gutman occupies on Walnut? The reallity is that Penn's attempt to put a hotel, which incidentally could be converted into a dorm later on down the road, didn't fly, so now they will have to go to Plan B. And as I recall, no one suggested that the world as we know it would have ended if another group of developers couldn't ram an unpopular project down the community's throat: remember the 4508 Chestnut Street homeless shelter? How did that one turn out? MY interest was in saving the neighborhood from irresponsible development that would cause people like Lussenhop to put up 10 story buildings wherever he could squeeze them. MY interest was in preventing Penn or Penn surrogates from buying properties, then claiming that the ONLY way to save them is by doing things that causes everyone else to suffer. No one building so important that it's worth destroying the rest of the neighborhood to do it. So, Melani, I'll put the questions to you: would you want Penn and Lussenhop building a 10 story hotel in the 1000 block of South Farragut Street? How do you justify destroying the streetscape of an entire area in order to save one property?
