Quote:
Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown
If I didn't know the title on this blog, I would assume the Philadelphia sub-forum was populated by car-dependent suburbanites with hard ons for Skyscrapers with no actual interest in how the most vibrant cities actual function.
Making the case that 8th & Market couldn't handle 19K people steps from a subway, a regional rail system, a trolley, 2 highways, and hundreds of blocks of a street grid that emanate out from the facility but yet somehow a facility on Packer Avenue a mile plus from a single subway could is the literal definition of stupidity.
It's exhausting.
The Barclays Center has proven that on top of transit is exactly where you want your arena to be.
|
I just want skyscrapers (or mid-rises) full of people, offices, and hotels to go at 8th and Market and these other development sites we're discussing. And I also want more parking lots and garages near these sites to be developed into residential, office, commercial, hotels... I don't want the parking lots or garages to be preserved because they have another big source of revenue (games and concerts) on top of the commuters and conventioneers.
There weren't many parking garages or lots near the Barclays Center site before it was built and land prices were high (I think this is right?) so there was probably little reason for developers to demolish existing buildings to build garages. Plus, the transit mode share in NYC is light years better than ours. I don't think it is dumb commentary to question where sports fans and concertgoers are going to park (because a lot of them will, especially until SEPTA gets their head out of their asses and starts dramatically improving off-peak regional rail headways).
Anyway, my real question regarding the Barclays Center and other in-city arenas is whether, assuming the arena wasn't built and the same general development trends, would the neighborhood have been better off than it would without the arena? I realize others laud the knock-on effects of building an arena and how they "seamlessly" fit into the neighborhood surroundings, but I'm still wedded to the idea that the answer to that counterfactual question I posed is yes, those neighborhoods would have developed into better neighborhoods without the arena, especially on those dead off-nights. (I realize that the Barclays Center was part of a railyard mega-development, but that just adds to my point that it isn't such a great comparison to 8th and Market.)