A standing-room-only crowd evenly divided for and against a proposed liquor store at 43rd and Chestnut will have to wait a few more days for a decision. The Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA), which held a special hearing on the controversial proposal today, will make a decision in a private session likely within a week.
About 75 people attended the special hearing, including a large contingent of residents who attend the Masjid al-Jamia mosque at 43rd and Walnut and live near the proposed location. The liquor store would replace the Risque, an adult video store, and an adjacent check cashing place on the eastern end of a strip mall along Chestnut Street.
“We do not need another liquor store in our community,” said Larry Falcon, the pastor of Covenant Community Church and owner of the Toviah Thrift Shop near 42nd and Chestnut. “I’ve buried 18 kids in 11 years who were killed in drug or alcohol related homicides.”
Most of those opposed to the store were Muslim residents who said that the community organizations like the Spruce Hill Community Association, which approved the store in April, don’t represent their interests.
“You have to understand that the people who live near there see the world differently,” said a Muslim college student who asked not to be identified as the debate from the hearing spilled into the hallway.
Opponents of the store submitted a petition with some 600 signatures.
Proponents of the liquor store say it will serve an area that has no other liquor store following the closure of the one near 40th and Market. The proposal is for a store that would include increased square footage and a premium selection of products. A Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board official who testified at the hearing said that the proposed store would offer a “premium shopping experience.”
The location includes off-street parking and a loading area in the back of the store, both of which would ease traffic concerns, said property owner Ted Pagano. He said the University City District has also agreed to patrol the location to alleviate concerns about public safety.
Barry Grossbach, who represents the Spruce Hill Community Association (SHCA) on zoning issues, said the SHCA has included stipulations in its approval that would require measures to prevent increased traffic problems and crime near the store.
Grossbach also added that no particular groups should have control over any parts of the neighborhood.
“It’s a live and let live neighborhood,” he said. “We don’t want to start a neighborhood war over this.”
A decision on the store is expected to be issued within a week. Risque is currently on a month-to-month lease and the check cashing establishment’s lease expires in August.
June 6th, 2012 at 4:51 pm
There are Muslim residents that see the world just fine thank you and are in favor of this development and believe their Muslims brethren are overstepping on this one. May the ZVA agree.
June 6th, 2012 at 8:17 pm
Larry Falcon doesn’t speak for the whole community. A premium wine & spirits shop doesn’t kill people. People kill people. He also stated in the meeting that Penn is trying to put a liquor store in the poorest neighborhood. Umm, Larry, they tried to put it closer to campus 5 years ago, but you had a problem with that one as well. What this article fails to capture is that there are just as many, if not more, signatures on a petition in support of the wine store. It also fails to mention that the petition against the store had a fair number of people that did not live in the neighborhood. In the end, Barry Grossbach had the best comments…this is a live and let live neighborhood. Many in this neighborhood appreciate and respect the Mosque and those that worship there despite the traffic and parking issues it creates on a daily basis. We need to respect the diversity in this wonderful neighborhood and understand that with that diversity comes compromise.
June 6th, 2012 at 10:08 pm
Seriously? WHY are we trying to push a store into a neighborhood where it is not wanted? Is a premium wine store worth the strife it will cause between the two communities? For goodness’ sake, just go to the one on 49th and Baltimore or take a bus down to CC.
Or build one elsewhere.
June 7th, 2012 at 12:56 am
It happens like this every time.
1. Neighborhood is diverse — “a vibrant mosaic”
2. Rich, effete whites move in
3. Rich whites get bummed that the access to rich white luxury goods isn’t as easy as it was in _____
4. Rich whites remake the neighborhood after their “eclectic” preferences
5. Rich whites mourn the loss of said “vibrant mosaic” after everyone else gets fed up with their attitude and smugness and moves out
The loudest apologists for tolerance are usually the people who are most intolerant when it comes to minor issues.
June 7th, 2012 at 3:47 am
43rd and Chestnut is an ideal location for a liquor store. If not there, where?
Some NIMBY’s oppose all development reflexively. Some people (hard core cracker baptists and muslims for example) oppose liquor.
Do & believe what you want. Just don’t force your opinions onto others who believe differently.
June 7th, 2012 at 7:24 am
“Just don’t force your opinions onto others who believe differently.”
This makes no sense–by this logic, people who want the liquor store are equally at fault for forcing it on those of our neighbors who don’t want it.
June 7th, 2012 at 8:01 am
Can someone explain how having a liquor store in this strip mall has any effect whatsoever on the neighborhood, besides being a business that will undoubtedly prosper? You don’t come out of a liquor store drunk. It’s not free alcohol, and it doesn’t serve minors.
June 7th, 2012 at 10:39 am
Sharia
June 7th, 2012 at 11:47 am
Dear Anonymous,
Rich whites don’t live in that neighborhood. Middle class, working class, college folks != Rich whites.
to quote you “5. Rich whites mourn the loss of said “vibrant mosaic” after everyone else gets fed up with their attitude and smugness and moves out”
The only person who is being smug here is you.
As for a liquor store going in, well, it might not be a popular move for some, but it beats a check cashing place and a porn shop. Additionally, with the closure of the one at 40th Street, a lot of the traffic has moved to the 49th and Baltimore location. The area could use another location. Perhaps the liquor store could also bring some much needed police presence into the neighborhood. Let’s not forget the jobs it would create as well.
June 7th, 2012 at 1:13 pm
Seriously Madame Znobia,
Save your $3.00 faux intellectualism for your tea-parties. We see right through you.
That being said, you could’ve made your point (which was actually valid) without sounding like a pompous wannabe philosopher.
June 7th, 2012 at 1:21 pm
@Madame Znobia: Your comment was deleted because we found it inappropriate for this site.
June 7th, 2012 at 1:32 pm
Dear readers: we welcome and encourage your comments, but please stay on the subject and be courteous in your comments because any inappropriate content such as spam, bad language or personal attacks will be removed.
June 7th, 2012 at 10:22 pm
@ella
“This makes no sense–by this logic, people who want the liquor store are equally at fault for forcing it on those of our neighbors who don’t want it.”
It makes perfect sense. I can guarantee that no one, Muslim or otherwise, will be forced to shop at the liquor store. Just like no one is forced to shop at any of the beer stores. If enough people utilize the store, it will succeed. If there is truly not enough community support, then it will go out of business.
June 7th, 2012 at 10:55 pm
I wish we had this much support for a Subway. Oh, we do.
June 8th, 2012 at 4:30 am
Ella, I assume the default state is freedom of the property owner and those who oppose something have the burden of proof to show substantial harm.
Not believing in alcohol consumption is no reason this project should be banned. This isn’t saudi arabia.
June 8th, 2012 at 12:26 pm
@ Happy Curmudgeon
If I had a dollar for everytime simply walking down the street I was forced beyond my will to walk in and purchase a sandwich (chain or otherwise) and a bottle of liquor by the mere presence of store. Of course consumers have no ability to decide whether to patronize a business or not, the unscrupulous business owners grab passersby and at gun point force them to consume, whether is liquor or $5 footlongs. Happens all the time.
Thats why its so important for self-appointed neighborhood watchdogs to take away their neighbors ability to decided for themselves. People can’t be trusted to decide for themselves. Of course.
June 8th, 2012 at 12:34 pm
Seriously? We are playing the gentrification card over a liquor store?
Masjid is a full block away-people won’t even see the place from there. I really can’t sympathize with their concerns about a new business in an established shopping center.
June 8th, 2012 at 9:22 pm
@Sean I don’t understand what you mean in your response to my joke but I figured it was just a matter of time before you showed up to defend the liberty and tell the zealots to obey the law of the zoning board.
Why is this decision taking so long and the Subway decision was so simple.
Just have them sign the papers in the dark like they did before. I mean, folks are done talking about it already, right?
When this is all said and done, I say we all meet up for a $5 footlong and a bottle of cheap booze and smoke the peace pipe around the Clark Park pianola. Who’s with me?
June 9th, 2012 at 6:54 am
@Happy Curmudgeon, things are more complicated with booze. For one, I may attract some squirrels while I am eating a footlong, but with booze, I may end up in jail.
June 11th, 2012 at 10:58 am
People want a liquor store here to keep the bums away from Baltimore ave. And so do I.
June 11th, 2012 at 12:31 pm
So wait, they are against a liquor store in the strip but a muslim run head shop is ok? You have to go into the halal market to get them to open the shop for you. How is that ok but booze is not?
June 11th, 2012 at 12:52 pm
Ben:
Alcohol is explicitly prohibited under Islam. There is no specific prohibition against what the head shop sells.
June 11th, 2012 at 1:01 pm
Right,but drug use is also prohibited. They are supporting the use of certain illicit herbs by having the shop and also indirectly approving of it. I know their products are stated for tobacco but come on. We all know what happens with their products. I have never seen anyone smoking pipe tobacco from a 4 foot waterpipe or a gas mask.
June 11th, 2012 at 1:07 pm
Oh geez, get a clue. Pot is haram in Islam just the same as alcohol and for the same reason (causes intoxication). Doesn’t stop idiots from blazing the whole month of Ramadan though.
June 11th, 2012 at 2:48 pm
thats true. this is stupid. muslim head shop with no opponents. whole argument is discredited right there.
June 11th, 2012 at 2:50 pm
I think people want a liquor store there to shorten the lines on Baltimore Ave. because West Philly has one of the highest population to number of state stores in all Pennsylvania.
Everybody knows the sure fire solution to something a minority of users develop an addiction to is to make the non-addicted wait in really long lines.
June 11th, 2012 at 3:55 pm
I don’t understand the issue. We aren’t a Mulism nation, so shouldn’t they learn that they must cohabitate with non-believers and that their stores will be next to other stores they may not agree with?
If that’s all you need to prevent a store from opening, the people on Baltimore ave should have said they’re Jewish and don’t want a non-Kosher store to open where the Subway is going to be
😐
June 11th, 2012 at 4:32 pm
Subway is not Kosher, seriously? There are Subways in Israel!
June 11th, 2012 at 4:55 pm
Subway, per se, is not un-Kosher, but, of course, Subways that are open on the Sabbath, and subways that serve things such as cheese and meat together, aren’t Kosher.
More importantly, the analogy doesn’t hold. The Muslims who are protesting the liquor store are not protesting a non-Halal sandwich shop.
Whether you agree with their position or not, I think it’s a bit disingenuous to pretend that alcohol is not an exceptional case (whether it should be or not). All one has to do is think about the many alcohol laws in this state; say, for example, that liquor is sold in state-owned stores and not at Walmart.
In other words, quit being ignorant bigots by intimating that the Muslim community is being somehow particularly irrational in their views over alcohol. It’s fine to disagree with them (and with PA alcohol laws), but they’re not much different than anybody else.
Moreover, the fact that we don’t live in a “Muslim nation” doesn’t mean that they can’t have any say in zoning issues–zoning rules seem to be in place precisely in order that local communities can decide what they want in their community. There’s nothing undemocratic about that (or theocratic), precisely the opposite.
June 11th, 2012 at 6:04 pm
I’m not being a bigot. The store it was replacing was a XXX video store. I didn’t know that communities can decide what they do and don’t want there, when the decision is actually split between mulsims and people in the neighborhood that aren’t muslim. Why does one group have a greater pull than others?
June 11th, 2012 at 7:33 pm
Actually, zoning laws exist so that local communities DON’T get to decide what they want in their community. It’s not up to a cabal of Muslim residents to say that a liquor store shouldn’t go in the neighborhood, any more than it is up to a cabal of nosey citizens to decide whether a Subway ought to be allowed to open on Baltimore Ave.
Now, as seems to be the case here, things like liquor stores need special zoning approval, so community sentiment ought to count for something. But if the reason for your opposition is “It offends my religion,” then you don’t have a valid reason that a zoning board in the United States of America, where we supposedly don’t allow the use of religion as a basis for state action, which includes legislating and zoning, according to the First Amendment.
This has nothing to do with Islam in particular, and everything to do with the idea that someone else’s religion oughtn’t be the basis for determining whether a certain business should be allowed to operate in a given location. Just as with Subway – if a business doesn’t belong in a certain place, then the lack of patronage will force it out. That’s the American way – not giving in to pressure from whoever can shout the loudest about what should and shouldn’t be in the neighborhood.
June 11th, 2012 at 8:11 pm
Thank you, Keith, that’s what I was wondering!
June 11th, 2012 at 9:35 pm
Just to be clear…. none of the people opposed to the store testified at the meeting that their opposition was based on religious reasons. The reasons given were: increased crime, increased traffic, concerns about delivery trucks, loitering etc. Pretty much exactly the same reasons given by those opposed to the Subway on Baltimore Ave. I was at both hearings. I think people know you just can’t stand up and say we don’t want liquor stores because we are religiously opposed, much like people know you can’t stand up at a zoning meeting and say you don’t want a Subway because you don’t like chain restaurants.
June 11th, 2012 at 11:05 pm
Man, some people just can’t get over the Subway story.
June 12th, 2012 at 5:59 am
That’s odd, because the article above and the one before that gives a totally different view on the reasons they don’t want the store there.
June 12th, 2012 at 11:03 am
@Mike – those are the reasons people always use for opposing things in the neighborhood, but those reasons make no sense when you are talking about real estate already built that already serves a commercial purpose. If we’re talking about a variance to convert residential property to commercial, or a building permit to erect new commercial property, than increased traffic and deliveries are a legitimate reason to oppose the project. Likewise, if it was a bar opening up, crime/noise/loitering become legitimate concerns. But a liquor store doesn’t strike me as the kind of business where any of those concerns are legitimate.
I’d be interested to know if anyone presented actual evidence of increased disruption/crime/loitering coming with the opening of a new state store, versus other types of businesses. If not, I don’t think a zoning board should take into account what sound to me like proxy arguments from residents who realize that religion isn’t a reason they can offer to keep the store out of the neighborhood. Especially since, according to this article, the concerns raised seem to have been addressed by the SHCA, as well as by the nature of the property itself in that it has off-street parking and its own loading area.
June 12th, 2012 at 11:10 am
@keith and shazoooo! Yeah, I’m not saying these are valid reasons in either case. And you’re right, evidence (studies or statistics) were asked for by the ZBA on increased crime etc at other stores and not provided. Of course increased traffic etc. are often proxy issues for the real concerns (religion/no chains). I just wanted to make sure people didn’t get the impression that Muslim residents were shaking their fists at the ZBA and saying they didn’t want this simply because of religion. It was more nuanced than that.
June 12th, 2012 at 4:52 pm
“Rich whites get bummed that the access to rich white luxury goods isn’t as easy as it was in”
It’s not that big a deal to us. Frankly, us richers don’t care about where the liquor store is, because our servants do our shopping for us, obvs.
And we’re not all effete. Some of us still have plenty of energy and dynamism to throw around.
Also, us rich white people tend to be bigots, unlike anyone else in West Philly.
Yep, if there was no rich white folks in West Philly I bet the place would be pretty grand. So much more diverse if we could just get rid of the people we didn’t like, amIrite?
June 12th, 2012 at 6:19 pm
lol!
I’m neither rich nor white maybe I can have your servant pick up some stuff for me too, @Peter?
June 13th, 2012 at 9:12 am
hahahah…thanks for that Peter.
June 14th, 2012 at 4:03 am
The liquor store at 41st and Market was, what, 3 to 4 blocks farther away than this proposed location? Isn’t Masjid also right across the street from University City Beverage and Pasquales (which now has probably the best six pack selection in the neighborhood)? Doesn’t the proposed location currently hold a porn shop? Isn’t UCD planning to increase security on that intersection? I think when you answer all these questions, you get a pretty good sense of why this store should go in there.