[UC] O the process. O the principles. O tempore, o mores

[Krfapt]

All that hoohah about 40th Street. First a steering committee. Then 
meetings up the gazoo. Then Omar Blaik (the master of speaking with a forked 
tongue) saying that Penn wanted only to have a seat at the table, not to control 
the process. Then a set of hi-falutin' community-driven principles. Then 
"Friends of 40th Street."
 
As if the buildings on the north east and west corners of 40th & 
Chestnut didn't put the lie to all this hoo-hah, we now have the following from 
today's DP.
 
(If Penn wants to use its economic clout to acquire properties and put it 
to use in its own self-interest, it's the University's right. The fact that the 
Community Relations people there are morally bankrupt is between them and what 
passes for their consciences. But, what really rankles me is the duplicitous way 
they say one thing and mean or do another. They must take the "community" for a 
pack of idiots. And, candidly, if we let it happen without exercising our 
collective clout, without letting Penn think it's got community support because 
Omar, Glenn Bryan, and that motley crew talk to people who suck up to Penn 
and make believe they've heard vox populi speak, maybe we are and 
maybe we're getting what we deserve.)
 

 
Al 
Krigman(Left of Ivan Groznyj)
 
===
 

Plans set for overhaul of Walnut block 
Officials to request bids from private developers for most 
of 3900 block 
By austin lavin
April 20, 2005
University 
officials said yesterday that they are beginning to look for bids for the 
demolition and redevelopment of the 3900 block of Walnut Street. 
The block currently consists of a number of storefronts and restaurants, many 
of which are on short leases or scheduled to be vacated. 
"At this point, we are soliciting bids to understand what ideas different 
developers have -- to get a better understanding of the possibilities of the 
private sector and shape our objectives," Senior Vice President of Facilities 
and Real Estate Services Omar Blaik said. 
The redevelopment is consistent with the University's master development 
plan. The plan calls for the demolition of much of the block and the creation of 
mixed-use development with student housing constructed on top of retail. 
Blaik said that with the planned departure in the fall of the CVS located at 
3915 Walnut St. and the expiration of lease agreements with the current tenants, 
the University is in a position to begin the process. The project will also 
include the space formerly occupied by the Cinemagic 3 theater. 
Officials will spend the summer evaluating proposals and expect to make an 
announcement in the fall. Construction should begin sometime next year. 
However, the University does not own the entire block and only plans on 
developing the area west of the Campus Copy Center, located at 3907 Walnut St., 
that extends to the space at 3927 Walnut formerly occupied by the Walnut Street 
West branch of the Philadelphia Free Library. 
"We don't see the need to take on the entire block," Blaik said. "The square 
footage we own allows us to do what we want to do." 
Blaik said that the development will probably consist of accommodations for 
250 to 300 people and 50,000 square feet of retail. The new development would 
likely be several stories tall, though it would depend on developers' plans. 
Four prospective developers are being asked to come up with a design within 
the mixed-use framework called for in the 2001 Campus Development Plan. 
"All of the proposals are coming in with housing and retail. The question is 
the contents of both, to what percent is it undergraduate housing and what 
percent is it smaller [retail] footprints or bigger [retail] footprints for 
different retail uses," Blaik said. 
The University would like to attract a large number of students who currently 
live west of 40th Street back toward campus with the additional housing. 
The announcement of redevelopment has created uncertainty for the current 
tenants on the block, which include the Philly Diner, College Pizza, Kinko's, 
the Last Word Bookshop, Power Yoga Works and the University Micro Center. 
"We are trying to relocate most of them ... but in the end we're not 100 
percent in control of that process," Blaik said, noting that the tenants have 
also been aware of this development for years. 
Bill Raup, the owner of Power Yoga Works at 3925 Walnut St., said that he has 
known about the plans for a while and that so far officials have been helpful. 
"They want to keep several of the locally owned businesses in the area, if we 
do in fact have to move," said Raup, who added that he would like to stay. 
"We love Penn, and they're happy with us. It is a good location and a good 
community," he said.

Re: [UC] O the process. O the principles. O tempore, o mores

[Matthew Snyder]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
> All that hoohah about 40th Street. First a steering committee. Then meetings
> up the gazoo. Then Omar Blaik (the master of speaking with a forked tongue)
> saying that Penn wanted only to have a seat at the table, not to control the
> process. Then a set of hi-falutin' community-driven principles. Then
> "Friends of 40th Street." 

Yeah, let's go back and review that "process":

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/local/40th/

Matthew Wolfe's comments, which I'm quoting below, in particular are
spot on, IMO:

  That being said, the written results of the process were
  worthless. The "principles" were so weak that there may
  as well be no principles. The process used to develop them,
  which seemed to be taking 80 or so seemingly random
  thoughts that came out of four meetings broken down into
  smaller discussion groups and condensing them into a
  manageable number of principles, was ridiculous. [...]

  The biggest problem with the principles is that they do not make
  clear that we need economic development that will be supportive
  of the institution of Motherhood. Somewhere they could have at
  least mentioned Apple Pie.

Is anyone from Penn Praxis reading this?  Does Penn Praxis still
exist?  Was this 40th street "process" considered a success?

--
Matthew Snyder
2007: "UCD *IS* University City to me!"


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

RE: [UC] O the process. O the principles. O tempore, o mores

[Jensen, Shannon]

There are a lot of problems with 40th St and the planning process, but I
see few problems with the 39th St development proposed in the article
forwarded.  Shouldn't the community want to get students out of their
once beautiful, now-subdivided homes... what exactly is it about the DP
article that incites anger?

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Snyder
> Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 12:27 PM
> To: univcity@list.purple.com
> Subject: Re: [UC] O the process. O the principles. O tempore, o mores
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > All that hoohah about 40th Street. First a steering committee. Then
> meetings
> > up the gazoo. Then Omar Blaik (the master of speaking with a forked
> tongue)
> > saying that Penn wanted only to have a seat at the table, not to
control
> the
> > process. Then a set of hi-falutin' community-driven principles. Then
> > "Friends of 40th Street."
> 
> Yeah, let's go back and review that "process":
> 
> http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/local/40th/
> 
> Matthew Wolfe's comments, which I'm quoting below, in particular are
> spot on, IMO:
> 
>   That being said, the written results of the process were
>   worthless. The "principles" were so weak that there may
>   as well be no principles. The process used to develop them,
>   which seemed to be taking 80 or so seemingly random
>   thoughts that came out of four meetings broken down into
>   smaller discussion groups and condensing them into a
>   manageable number of principles, was ridiculous. [...]
> 
>   The biggest problem with the principles is that they do not make
>   clear that we need economic development that will be supportive
>   of the institution of Motherhood. Somewhere they could have at
>   least mentioned Apple Pie.
> 
> Is anyone from Penn Praxis reading this?  Does Penn Praxis still
> exist?  Was this 40th street "process" considered a success?
> 
> --
> Matthew Snyder
> 2007: "UCD *IS* University City to me!"
> 
> 
> 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] O the process. O the principles. O tempore, o mores

[L a s e r B e a m ®]

Jensen, Shannon wrote:
There are a lot of problems with 40th St and the planning process, but I
see few problems with the 39th St development proposed in the article
forwarded.  Shouldn't the community want to get students out of their
once beautiful, now-subdivided homes... what exactly is it about the DP
article that incites anger?
well, one problem is that we had to read it in the dp to 
know about it.

another problem is you asking this list now what the 
community wants.

.
laserbeam®
[aka ray]









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

RE: [UC] O the process. O the principles. O tempore, o mores

[Jensen, Shannon]

In response to off–the list-serv
commentary and on-the-list-serv commentary:

 

In response to below:

 

Taco Bell
is going in at 34th and walnut, not 40th- get your facts
straight

 

By community, I mean the University city
community generally has been upset with penn in the past for encroaching west- I
assume having two blocks of frat parties is not ideal for those living at the
fringe of penn’s campus; thus i assume whoever is nonaffiliated with the
university would prefer those students be on campus rather than increasing west
of 40th st…student housing is desperately needed at penn
closer to campus

 

In response
to laserbeam: (well, one problem is that we
had to read it in the dp to know about it, another problem is you asking this
list now what the community wants.)

 

I am not asking what the community wants, I am just sick of people
attacking things without actually discussing the things being attacked (ie all
of the talk of reparations and the inane bill concerning profiting from
slavery)- you say this article is an example of so many horrible, evil things
without actually saying what any of those horrible things are… as for
reading it in the DP- I think the community should be consulted as to what
actually goes there but the process is far from that- the truth of the matter
is you have little sway in them redoing that half block (penn owns it and every
person who walks past there could tell you it should be redone to better suit
the mostly student population around it) so why should you be consulted? 
Would you expect to not have it redeveloped?  The need is clear, how that
need is filled should be a consultative process, but again- we are right now
far from that point.

 

 

 

 









From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005
5:31 PM
To: Jensen, Shannon
Subject: Re: [UC] O the process. O
the principles. O tempore, o mores



 





In a message dated 4/20/2005 5:17:54 P.M.
Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:





Shouldn't the community want to get
students out of their
once beautiful, now-subdivided homes... what exactly is it about the DP
article that incites anger?







What do you think "the
community" comprises, anyway? In the Spruce Hill section, alone, the
population is about 16,000, of whom a mere 14% are owner-occupants ...
mostly in apartments in buildings that are good examples of "period
architecture" but not what many people would call beautiful. At least, not
many people who didn't overpay to buy into a neighborhood that's viable only
because of the stability of the rental population during years of "white
flight," then want in a self-congratulatory way to think they made a
sophisticated choice. Turns out, it was sophisticated -- but not because they
bought a circa 1900 house built for what we'd now call "blue collar
workers;" rather because they bought into a neighborhood whose diversity
is highly multidimensional and not a gentrified enclave on the fringe of an academic
ghetto.





 





The "anger" has to do with a
few people in the Penn Administration who believe they know what's best for
everybody else and have the financial clout to implement their self-anointed
vision.





 





Couple this with the announcements about
fast food franchises being the preferred tenants at 40th & Walnut, rather
than entrepreneurial endeavors or food outlets that serve fare that might just
be good (or at least not harmful) to people. I shudder to think that one of
there great research universities of the world is turning out graduates who
think dining is Taco Bell et al.





 





Al Krigman

Re: [UC] O the process. O the principles. O tempore, o mores

[Mark Krull]

Oh the humanity
Sorry could not resisit
-Mark

-Original Message-
From: L a s e r B e a m ® <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Apr 20, 2005 5:32 PM
To: univcity@list.purple.com
Subject: Re: [UC] O the process. O the principles. O tempore, o mores

Jensen, Shannon wrote:
> There are a lot of problems with 40th St and the planning process, but I
> see few problems with the 39th St development proposed in the article
> forwarded.  Shouldn't the community want to get students out of their
> once beautiful, now-subdivided homes... what exactly is it about the DP
> article that incites anger?

well, one problem is that we had to read it in the dp to 
know about it.

another problem is you asking this list now what the 
community wants.


.
laserbeam®
[aka ray]


















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] O the process. O the principles. O tempore, o mores

[L a s e r B e a m ®]

Jensen, Shannon wrote:
In response to laserbeam: (well, one problem is that we had to read it
in the dp to know about it, another problem is you asking this list now
what the community wants.) 

I am not asking what the community wants, I am just sick of people
attacking things without actually discussing the things being attacked
(ie all of the talk of reparations and the inane bill concerning
profiting from slavery)- you say this article is an example of so many
horrible, evil things without actually saying what any of those horrible
things are... as for reading it in the DP- I think the community should
be consulted as to what actually goes there but the process is far from
that- the truth of the matter is you have little sway in them redoing
that half block (penn owns it and every person who walks past there
could tell you it should be redone to better suit the mostly student
population around it) so why should you be consulted?  Would you expect
to not have it redeveloped?  The need is clear, how that need is filled
should be a consultative process, but again- we are right now far from
that point.

see, right there above, where you say that the community 
should be consulted? but that the truth of the matter is 
that we have little sway? and then you call that a 
'process'? that's a problem.

neither you nor I are in a position to ask now what the 
community should want in terms of who's living in their 
homes. that question's already been decided by penn's 2001 
campus development master plan. and neither you nor I are in 
a position to question (or applaud, for that matter) any 
outcomes for the 40th street area development until we've 
read about it in the dp. and neither you nor I designed or 
led the 'process' of 'civic governance' that penn put in 
place in 2004 to 'have dialog' about any of this.

but, aside from all that, I have to confess, I think the 
biggest problem in all this is deciding whether or not the 
taco bell down at 3401 walnut will be really REALLY mexican.

.
laserbeam®
[aka ray]
will this post die if it eats that burrito?





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

Re: [UC] O the process. O the principles. O tempore, o mores

[L a s e r B e a m ®]

Matthew Snyder wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

All that hoohah about 40th Street. First a steering committee. Then meetings
up the gazoo. Then Omar Blaik (the master of speaking with a forked tongue)
saying that Penn wanted only to have a seat at the table, not to control the
process. Then a set of hi-falutin' community-driven principles. Then
"Friends of 40th Street." 

Yeah, let's go back and review that "process":
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/local/40th/
Matthew Wolfe's comments, which I'm quoting below, in particular are
spot on, IMO:
  That being said, the written results of the process were
  worthless. The "principles" were so weak that there may
  as well be no principles. The process used to develop them,
  which seemed to be taking 80 or so seemingly random
  thoughts that came out of four meetings broken down into
  smaller discussion groups and condensing them into a
  manageable number of principles, was ridiculous. [...]
  The biggest problem with the principles is that they do not make
  clear that we need economic development that will be supportive
  of the institution of Motherhood. Somewhere they could have at
  least mentioned Apple Pie.
Is anyone from Penn Praxis reading this?  Does Penn Praxis still
exist?  Was this 40th street "process" considered a success?
--
Matthew Snyder
2007: "UCD *IS* University City to me!"

hahaha. remember that dp article back in june 2004? about 
the 'process'?

  Facilitating dialogue with the West Philadelphia community
  has been "a process guided through the University," Bryan
  said.
  "The University needed to develop a process that would
  include the community," he added.
  The formal charge of the Friends of 40th Street is to
  advocate for principles developed through the community
  forum process.
  Sokoloff said that Friends has been authorized as an
  "advisory and advocacy group." It seeks to "advocate for
  the evolution of 40th Street as it relates to the
  principles developed by the community."
  . . .
  Many of the group's members seemed to agree when Bob
  Christian, Vice President of the University City Business
  Association, referred to Penn as "the major presence and
  determining factor" in the 40th Street development plans.
  This prompted some community leaders to articulate their
  concern that voices other than Penn's may be excluded.
  Steinberg allayed this concern by emphasizing that the
  development of 40th Street is "not a single vision."
  "The folks at Penn have said that Penn wants to be one
  voice among many at the table," Sokoloff said.
  Sokoloff added that the structure of the group would be
  based on "distributed leadership."

full article here:
http://www.dailypennsylvanian.com/vnews/display.v/ART/40c7fc954adf4?in_archive=1
.
laserbeam®
[aka ray]






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

Re: [UC] O the process. O the principles. O tempore, o mores

[Krfapt]

In a message dated 4/21/2005 12:57:03 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think 
  the biggest problem in all this is deciding whether or not the taco 
  bell down at 3401 walnut will be really REALLY 
mexican.

Laserbeam's usually sharp focus seems to have gotten a bit blurred. He's 
assuming a homogeniety to Mexican Cuisine that is worthy of debate on this list 
as a topic unto itself. Now I don't know much about Mexican Cuisine other than a 
little about what you can get [sic] in Tijuana. But wouldn't someone in, 
say, Irkutsk, discussing food that was really REALLY American have a problem if 
he or she was thinking about a place that served grits for breakfast as opposed 
to one that featured Froot Loops, pancakes, or steak-and-eggs? Yet we 
of University City's most enlightened classes know that all three are 
really REALLY American. And, what if those grits were actually Cream of Wheat 
instead of hominy because wheat is available to the restaurant chain at a low 
price and corn is expensive?
 
Wouldn't it stand to reason that a restaurant that served Pan de Pascua 
might be as authentically Mexican as one that featured Cosas Pequenas 
Dulces?
 
Always at 
your service and ready for a dialog,Al 
Krigman

Re: [UC] O the process. O the principles. O tempore, o mores

[L a s e r B e a m ®]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think the
biggest problem in all this is deciding whether or not the
taco bell down at 3401 walnut will be really REALLY mexican.
Laserbeam's usually sharp focus seems to have gotten a bit blurred. He's 
assuming a homogeniety to Mexican Cuisine that is worthy of debate on 
this list as a topic unto itself.

grrr...  DROP THE CHALUPA, AL, AND NOBODY WILL GET HURT!
.
laserbeam®
[aka ray]

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