Zoning board meeting (at which the dog park poop development will be discussed) is starting soon. I probably won't livetweet it, but I might offer some commentary afterwards
lol, the advocate for a different project is complaining about NIMBYs who tried to block a project on this "historic" empty unused lot full of trash because (from his understanding) they just didn't want anything built at all
Another property is being discussed. The discussion is being monopolized by people complaining about verbal abuse on a Zoom call. This seems like an unwise use of city time.
They're rearranging the remainder of the docket to do the dog park poop building later, anticipating that it might take a while and they might as well cover the rest of the properties first. Fair, but frustrating
Someone in the chat is suspicious about the docket being rearranged.
Dog park poop building is up. Zoning chair points out that there are 9 submitted letters in opposition but 8 in (conditional!) support. This is much better than I expected
Neighborhood has demanded a community benefits agreement pertaining to keeping the "affordable" units in the complex affordable for longer. Most of the support letters are conditioned upon this. This seems good.
Cedar Park Neighbors favors it. There are 8 other RCOs on it. My guess is most of them oppose it (including Southwest District Services, the coordinating RCO).

One of those RCOs is, of course, West Philly United Neighbors, whom I'm sure you've all heard of by now.
Lawyer for the developer is thanking some nearby neighbors who negotiated with him from the earliest stages and demanded concessions. This is certainly much better than outright opposition.
One change was moving green space from an internal courtyard to 48th Street. Building got a little smaller over time, but that's to be expected.
There used to be much more housing on this corner.
Eight letters of support, though! So it seems like the negotiations made a difference for some people.
Oh, Christ. They're gonna have to break at 1:00 and come back to this... God knows when
Consultant pointing out that most construction in this neighborhood happened in the '20s. (That's the 1920s.) Jamie Gauthier's study shows the median building here was built prior to 1940. Do the NIMBYs just think we should never build anything new at all???
Land planner trying to drive home, as did the architect earlier, that this used to be multifamily.
Chairman says "we get it, it used to be multifamily".

Lawyer arguing that affordability is contingent on higher density (hence the zoning variances needed). RTA-1 zoning would not provide affordable units.
Land planner points out that by-right twin homes would not be affordable and would actually be worse for the neighborhood. Many are saying this.
Andrew Goodman, representative for @CouncilmemberJG, up now, ceding time for public comment...
They'll have to break soon and resume in a few weeks. Possibly there has been intentional delaying. If so, that's shady. But public comment would have been monopolized by "Protect Squirrel Hill" people arguing on behalf of landlords, which is also shady...
Projection is to resume June 2 at 2PM. It will likely be last on the docket. LOL

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with uphold shi zhiyong thought 🐿️

uphold shi zhiyong thought 🐿️ Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @koaleszenz

6 Apr
My favorite genre of tweet on here is "Bay Area tech worker complaining about how much he fucking hates being a Bay Area tech worker"
How can I tell he's a tech worker LARPing as a Southern gentleman, you ask? He has a Substack. Enough said
Western trad LARPers railing against consumerism while falling for... consumerism? A tale as old as time
Read 6 tweets
31 Mar
Voter suppression denialists literally do not understand basic economics. The simple fact is that the individual benefit to voting is minuscule: one vote is almost never pivotal in an election. This means that even a small cost can be a deterrent to voting.
Now suppose the cost is not "small" but involves many hours spent in line. Now suppose, further, that the cost is augmented by needing to take a day or two off work to go dick around with bureaucracy and get a voter ID. Staying home on election day starts to look a lot easier!
This isn't some piece of libcuck SJW wokescold commie leftard propaganda or whatever. Here's Richard Posner, one of the most widely cited conservative jurists, noticing this exact problem.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!