Dear hotel opponents, I’ve attended nearly all hearings for the Campus Inn studying the tactics of the developers and the commissions serving them. After reading extensively about zoning, the tactics going into the upcoming ZBA are apparent to me.
The developers are going to attempt to shift the burden of proof! Theoretically, Penn must now prove to ZBA that they should be granted several variances. The neighbors, who have attended PCPC and PHC hearings, remember that the developers have argued about hardships, but have not provided any actual evidence to back their case. (I don’t consider testimony from a few real estate cronies to be evidence). The help from the commissions to date has been to shield the development team from the burden of any proof. But theoretically, these commissions are simply advising. But the ZBA hearing will not be strictly a hearing de novo! The work of the PCPC/PHC commissions is considered legitimate and helpful, and that is the developer’s opening. Penn is going to walk in again without any evidence, and the representatives from PCPC and PHC will be present to claim that the hardships had, in fact, been previously proven before their staffs and commissions. While we expect that they will be finally required to prove their hardships, they are planning to claim that denial or further delay is unfair to them because they already have proven the hardships! This is why Penn has repeatedly requested continuances from ZBA until after th other commissions provided cover!!!! Please look at page 6 from the “minutes” from the PCPC on this link. These "minutes" are bogus but foreshadow the focus of the next portion of the rubber stamp process! http://www.philaplanning.org/pubinfo/minutes/9-16-08%20mins.pdf The synopsis indicates the “proof” which will be asserted at ZBA. 1 This is a transit oriented site. (Hospital families and not Penn families will fill it) 2 This is a commercial strip (The commercial strip ends at Locust. This is actually the gateway to a large residential district) 3 This is necessary to stop blight (The financial hardship, no possible alternative use, has been proven.) Neighbors, since the developers cannot possibly prove their positions that justify these exceptions, we should expect that some relief is planned. All of the data points to this transfer of the burden of proof, and the important cover provided by the previous commissions. With this one maneuver, they will excuse themselves from all burden of proof while insisting that opponents failed to prove otherwise in the previous lengthy, exhaustive process. That’s my assessment of what is planned for Jan. 8th. Glenn ---- 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>.
