Quote:
Originally Posted by shivtim
This just isn't true. The dome continues to host a number of very high profile events. The SEC championship, Chick-Fil-A bowl and Chick-Fil-A kickoff games every year, and the NCAA Final Four next year (already hosted twice in the past decade), just for example.
We will eventually need a replacement stadium, and I'm fine with some hotel/motel tax being spent on it, but now is not the time. Maybe 10-15 years from now. There are just WAY better things the city could do right now with $300 million, even when limited to things that directly impact tourists. Improved sidewalks and streetscapes, expand the Ambassador program, fund MARTA renovations, expand the streetcar out to the Beltline, improve police/security, deal with the Ptree/Pine shelter problem, fund more events in Centennial Park, better signs and wayfinding, better crosswalk infrastructure, tourism advertising and promotion, etc etc etc
I also have zero faith in a new stadium being "integrated" into the surrounding neighborhoods. Football stadiums are too large for that to occur. I can't think of any NFL stadium in the entire county that is well integrated into an urban environment. They all are either suburban or surrounded by parking lots or park space. The concept only really works with smaller (baseball, basketball, hockey) stadiums. If even NYC, DC, Boston, etc can't have an urban NFL stadium, I don't think Atlanta can pull it off. Just look at the Falcon's own estimates for how many parking spaces will be needed for the new stadium.
And as for the economic benefit, check out the peer-reviewed literature. Most of it says that taxpayer subsidized stadiums either have no effect or a negative effect on the local economy.
|
Amen. There is very little proof that stadiums provide a net positive financial/economic benefit to their host cities. College football programs are one thing, and while many derail college athletic program spending (especially as it pertains to football), there is a reason such top universities as Stanford, USC, Duke, Vanderbilt, Michigan, and others have hefty programs. People don't move to cities for football teams/stadiums, but people do base college choice decisions on a scale of "college life" vs academics.
I commend Blank for putting up hundreds of millions of dollars of his own to do this, it is certainly a lot more than Bernie has thrown at any individual project, but Bernie has thrown more money at education/universities and healthcare and the beloved Aquarium, which is probably a larger quality of life attraction in Atlanta than the football stadium. Blank does have the Alfred Blank Foundation and I would definitely not be one to complain or nitpick where he has put his own fortune in our community, though I am opposed to taxpayer subsidies for a new stadium *right now*.
Where it hasn't been proven that stadiums have a positive impact on their communities, it HAS been proven time and time again that there is a tangible net positive economic and intangible impact that comes with better public transit such as streetcars and light rail (fixed rail). Add to that our generally poor infrastructure in the city, from our roads to our bike lanes, which are pathetic, to the lack of any timing of lights for vehicles and the lack of any useful pedestrian crosswalk signals (even on the stopped side of a one-way they don't automatically signal to walk unless the button is pressed).
I could go on about the countless better ways to spend taxpayer money, but I'll stop. If I lived anywhere near the proposed stadium "on the wrong side" per se, I would be livid. No matter what they say, any new football stadium will be just as divisive as the current stadium. Such is the nature of football stadiums ANYWHERE.
And let's face it, Superbowls are generally found in retrospect to be big time financial losses to cities that host them and most demonstrate no net positive economic impact. There have been a few superbowls of late that have reversed the trend, I believe Indy being one of them. It worked for Indy for several reasons, but it probably won't work for Atlanta, nor does Atlanta need a superbowl for that exposure (we already have). For events such as those, Atlanta tends to overspend and there is nothing to gain from them that the city doesn't already have.
Ok rant over.
Prev
Linear Mode
