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 B&B business as the developer of the Gables B&B, and currently the owner of the Carriage House B&B 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 B&Bs and hotels don't have cooking & laundry facilities for their guests, who are expected to only stay a couple of days. My Carriage House is deluged with calls, and we can only accommodate one guest situation at a time. Support folks come when a family member must stay at or near one of the local hospitals for a long treatment; for a wedding; as family visiting a mom-to-be at the arrival of a new baby; for short-term work situations like visiting professors; to attend conferences; as old friends who now live in different places but meet up again in Philadelphia for some nostalgic event, like the Army Navy game - we've had so many visitors for different reasons. So I think the short term hotel concept is a good one. 4000 Pine St. has been an eyesore and a problem for as many years as I can remember noticing it, and I've been in UC for 36 years. Driving down 40th St. today, one sees the rather garish Allegro Pizza and Copa 2 just south of Spruce, then some rental properties - both converted houses and apartment buildings - around Pine, plus this former personal care home on the south side of 40th and the vacant storefronts on the north side of 40th just before Baltimore. The short block between Pine & Baltimore is not pretty or friendly, and d oesn't feel particularly safe. I'm also concerned that there is so much focus turning to the "Postal Lands" as THE place to be in the future, that our neighborhood may suffer somewhat if we don't continue to address our neglected spots and make UC even more appealing. The idea of a bright new restaurant next to Baltimore Ave. as part of this project sounds great to me. 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. So I find myself in favor of the project. The hotel addition will be set back from Pine Street. The developers' architects will have to work with the Historical Commission for a look (height, mass, materials, setbacks, colors, etc.) which the HC finds compatible with the surroundings (note: the US Dept. of the Interior design standards don't like imitation old; they don't let developers build 1854-style stucco Italianates). There will be a restaurant, including patio seating, facing 40th St., lots of landscaping, and brick sidewalks. For all of those reasons, I spoke in favor of the project at today's hearing. 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. If we wanted to build a 10-story hotel, we'd have to go to the Zoning Board - but not the Historical Commission. 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. 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. Disclaimer: I am not involved in any way in this project. I have never worked as a Realtor for the University of Pennsylvania or for Tom Lussenhop. And I am only a member, but not on the board, of the University City Historical Society. My opinion here is strictly my own! - Melani Lamond 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
