PhillyBlog - Philadelphia  

Go Back   PhillyBlog - Philadelphia > Where We Are > Queen Village / Bella Vista / Hawthorne
Blogs Map Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read
Google
 
Web www.phillyblog.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #111 (permalink)  
Old 05-15-2008, 11:21 PM
alesis's Avatar
alesis alesis is offline
Cheesesteak GURU! Wiz with
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cantfeedumdontbreedum, PA
Posts: 7,860
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Villager View Post
What happened at this meeting? Don't tell me it's in session at this hour! Come on Alesis, you seem to have the ability to post from anywhere.
Went to go have dinner.

Shosh did really well. I've got to think for a bit about this horse sh&t before I say anything-but I did not appreciate the attitude of the councilman nor the queen village idiots who obviously want to be in control and protect themselves and no one else.

I am not joking-the backroom bullsh*t stunk so bad that at one point a guy said something like "if I have stucco and it needs replaced I'm screwed under the current law" to which a qvna board member said something like "oh comeon, you know I wouldn't do that to you", at which time the questioner said "oh yeah, and what if you're not on the board anymore? The law is still in effect". Several back and forths like this did nothing more than the fact that its a little boys' club playing secret handshake to feel like men with power.

And the one sniveling little idiot up with richard cole who kept yelling at people to shutup said it best when he said "some of us have been here for 30 years so we need protection"....yeah, the two people at the front of the room decided to play judge, jury, and executioner just to protect their interests.

Meanwhile, they kept trying to say "its ok, you can do things the law says you can't because you don't go zoning to put bars on windows". This is an idiotic position. The law plainly states that window bars are not allowed. They're saying you can do them as long as you don't go for a permit? It was complete bullsh&t where they were just saying anything in order to get their way.

Meanwhile, they are going to handle and tabulate the "votes" which is entirely an unconstitutional process.

As you can tell, I'm more than a little pissed.

I'm going to think for a bit.
__________________
Peter Cetera:
Sometimes I just forget
Say things I might regret
It breaks my heart to see you crying
Reply With Quote
  #112 (permalink)  
Old 05-16-2008, 07:27 AM
tommystar tommystar is offline
Pretzel Vendor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 86
Default

what a mess of a meeting.

i don't understand how people are being asked to vote on something in less than four weeks when they're not really sure vote they're voting for, or against.

and why can't i vote on a queen village issue in queen village? seems like the elderly, who most likely aren't web-savvy and haven't seen any of the plans, are being cut out of the process altogether.

the smugness from the front of the room was almost downright appalling. if they continue to stress how much they are a volunteer organization, and that is why they don't have their act together to where it should be, then why are they trying to put their hand in my pocket?

this all seems 5 years (at least) too late anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #113 (permalink)  
Old 05-16-2008, 08:44 AM
Shosh's Avatar
Shosh Shosh is offline
Cheesesteak GURU! Wiz with
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Queen Village
Posts: 2,424
Blog Entries: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by It'sJessMe View Post
If those are just the points you managed to jot off quickly after the meeting, I'd love to see the list you put together with some thought! Very compelling!

For those of us who couldn't be there tonight, can you re-post the addresses to send our own letters?
info@qvna.org

http://www.phila.gov/citycouncil/dicicco/feedback.html

BTW, despite being told that the NCD is a form of Neighborhood Improvement District, this simply cannot be the case. The NCD does not fit within the statutory definition of a NID, it is not run like an NID, and it does not meet the requirements of an NID. And if this is a first step to becoming a NID, we're screwed, because NIDs levy assessments and have pretty broad control over what goes on within their boundaries.
__________________
---Shosh
Reply With Quote
  #114 (permalink)  
Old 05-16-2008, 10:18 AM
Shosh's Avatar
Shosh Shosh is offline
Cheesesteak GURU! Wiz with
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Queen Village
Posts: 2,424
Blog Entries: 4
Default

BTW, for those who want to file a formal objection with City Council (per the Notice), I used the following format:

--------------------

OBJECTION TO BILL NO. 080080 -- QUEEN VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT

To: City Council
Re: Bill No. 080080
Date:

I, [name], own property located at [address], which property is within the boundaries of the proposed Queen Village Neighborhood Conservation District.

I hereby register my OBJECTION to the creation of the Queen Village Neighborhood Conservation District.

[signature]
[contact information]

----------------
The objection is to be filed with the Clerk of the City Council, City Hall, Room 402.
__________________
---Shosh
Reply With Quote
  #115 (permalink)  
Old 05-16-2008, 11:05 AM
Queen Villager Queen Villager is offline
Cheesesteak GURU! Wiz with
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,523
Default

Thanks Shosh!
Reply With Quote
  #116 (permalink)  
Old 05-16-2008, 02:13 PM
alesis's Avatar
alesis alesis is offline
Cheesesteak GURU! Wiz with
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cantfeedumdontbreedum, PA
Posts: 7,860
Default

According to the legislation, petitions with multiple signatures are also admissible.
__________________
Peter Cetera:
Sometimes I just forget
Say things I might regret
It breaks my heart to see you crying
Reply With Quote
  #117 (permalink)  
Old 05-16-2008, 03:15 PM
Tim K Tim K is offline
Cheesesteak GURU! Wiz with
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,489
Default

I was there as well and it was quite clearly a few residents trying to force their tastes on the neighborhood.

Aside from the procedure of this being total BS, I object to many tenants of the bill itself.

First of all, most of it is irrelevant as zoning does or could dictate the same requirements. That said, the following provisions need to be removed in my opinion.

3 (b) The height restriction of 22 ft to the cornice line. I wouldn't mind this if there was an exception if a certain % of the houses on the block already exceeded that height.

4 (a) .1 - The requirement that a building with a frontage of more than 20ft have the facade broken into multiple planes and roofline variations. This is an attempt to dictate architectural design and is inappropriate.

4 (a) .3 - The banning of security grills. If a neighbor feels unsafe and deems them appropriate that should be their right.

4 (a) .10 (a-d) - Materials - This entire section should be stripped out of this bill. No one should have the right to dictate the materials that be used on private property. I don't like vinyl siding but if someone wants to use it so be it. Banning stucco, cement board, etc is an attempt to require all housing be brick. Trying to require the rear of someone's house match the front facade in certain cases is also ridiculous, as is dictating materials for the surface of a parking lot. Furthermore, it disgusted me that during their powerpoint slideshow they had the audacity to point out several houses and declare them "not appropriate for our neighborhood" simply because they did not like the architectural design or the modern materials used on the facades.

6 (a) .2 - Materials in commercial/industrial spaces - this bill requires that all industrial/commercial buildings use materials "consistent" with the nearby residential structures. ie - more brick. Commercial buildings need not, and probably should not be made to appear like a residential structure.

There are a number of other minor details that I object to, but these are the biggest. I really think that the materials restrictions must be removed.

Last edited by Tim K : 05-16-2008 at 03:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #118 (permalink)  
Old 05-16-2008, 03:21 PM
alesis's Avatar
alesis alesis is offline
Cheesesteak GURU! Wiz with
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cantfeedumdontbreedum, PA
Posts: 7,860
Default

My wife was still reeling from the fact that someone kept whispering "its a conservation district. How could people be against such a good thing like conservation?". F&ckin' spoonfed idiots. I now know how easily propaganda influences the masses.
__________________
Peter Cetera:
Sometimes I just forget
Say things I might regret
It breaks my heart to see you crying
Reply With Quote
  #119 (permalink)  
Old 05-16-2008, 03:37 PM
Queen Villager Queen Villager is offline
Cheesesteak GURU! Wiz with
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,523
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim K View Post
I was there as well and it was quite clearly a few residents trying to force their tastes on the neighborhood.

Aside from the procedure of this being total BS, I object to many tenants of the bill itself.

First of all, most of it is irrelevant as zoning does or could dictate the same requirements. That said, the following provisions need to be removed in my opinion.

3 (b) The height restriction of 22 ft to the cornice line. I wouldn't mind this if there was an exception if a certain % of the houses on the block already exceeded that height.

4 (a) .1 - The requirement that a building with a frontage of more than 20ft have the facade broken into multiple planes and roofline variations. This is an attempt to dictate architectural design and is inappropriate.

4 (a) .3 - The banning of security grills. If a neighbor feels unsafe and deems them appropriate that should be their right.

4 (a) .10 (a-d) - Materials - This entire section should be stripped out of this bill. No one should have the right to dictate the materials that be used on private property. I don't like vinyl siding but if someone wants to use it so be it. Banning stucco, cement board, etc is an attempt to require all housing be brick. Trying to require the rear of someone's house match the front facade in certain cases is also ridiculous, as is dictating materials for the surface of a parking lot. Furthermore, it disgusted me that during their powerpoint slideshow they had the audacity to point out several houses and declare them "not appropriate for our neighborhood" simply because they did not like the architectural design or the modern materials used on the facades.

6 (a) .2 - Materials in commercial/industrial spaces - this bill requires that all industrial/commercial buildings use materials "consistent" with the nearby residential structures. ie - more brick. Commercial buildings need not, and probably should not be made to appear like a residential structure.

There are a number of other minor details that I object to, but these are the biggest. I really think that the materials restrictions must be removed.
Sounds like someone wants to be the architect for the entire neighborhood. How could this proposal, whatever it is, get this far?
Reply With Quote
  #120 (permalink)  
Old 05-16-2008, 03:39 PM
Queen Villager Queen Villager is offline
Cheesesteak GURU! Wiz with
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,523
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alesis View Post
My wife was still reeling from the fact that someone kept whispering "its a conservation district. How could people be against such a good thing like conservation?". F&ckin' spoonfed idiots. I now know how easily propaganda influences the masses.
Too bad she didn't have a copy of "1984" on hand!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.