Quote:
Originally Posted by PhillyDreamsReturns
Respectfully, I don’t understand how people complain about neglected buildings being torn down for new construction. Nobody, including those saddened to see these rowhomes go, are putting in money to revitalize them. Why complain that someone ELSE isn’t fitting the bill? If I’m misinterpreting you Vince then I’m sure you’ll put me in my place, but I see this pov often in other media and am confused by it.
|
The City requires the property owner to pay for and maintain the public sidewalk in front of their house, you know the public good and all that. If you don't, the City can give you all sorts of tickets, and/or do the work and then bill you. How much different is maintaining the front, the public face so to speak, of your house? The City already has laws covering doors and windows. Likewise if you have a front yard, you have to keep it neat and tidy.
I think your notion that 'we the citizens' can't express an opinion about something that effects the public good, as defined by the public through the City Council, unless that citizen steps forward and puts hard cash down to back up their opinion, to be flat out wrong.
In the case of the row that's owned by the hospital, they are actively avoiding taking care of the properties, and have been for years, demolition by neglect. If they had requested a demo permit when they first bought the properties they would have been challenged, so they are backdooring the whole process, and have the money to play the waiting game. So, that's ok with you but being part of a public interest/public pressure group isn't, unless that group wants to bankroll their opinions?