Philadelphia 2035 (Reading, Washington, Franklin Park: Mexican, acreage, real estate)

[MarketStEl]

Originally Posted by Pennsport

I understand the potential complications of building a stadium in Market East. However, this area of CC has been depressed and underused for literally decades. An arena would immediately rejuvenate the entire area - probably push the Loft District over the edge (this area has been doing "OK" for a long time, but can't ever seem to take it home); would infuse new life into Old City; would be a shot in the arm for Chinatown; would probably even extend commerce down to South St. It would be game changing for a historically under-utilized part of the core of the city. Regarding traffic, people would quickly figure it out. The last report I saw crunched data to see who was predominantly attending the games of each of our four major sports. Ironically, the Sixers (ironically bc basketball is widely considered an urban sport) have a huge attendance base from wealthy areas outside the city. If I lived in Wayne or Ardmore and found that to get in and out of the city for a game was routinely 3+ hours each way, I would quickly change my approach and just drive to the Ardmore Septa station and take the train in. People can, and will, adapt.

Actually, that Wayne resident would probably just drive (or walk — parts of Wayne close to the station are pretty walkable) to Wayne station, but no matter.

Also: Some of those who insist on driving would have many more reasons to stick around after the game while everyone else fights their way home down Center City's narrow streets. (In particular, 7th and 5th. 6th and 8th would be the jammed streets before the game, and don't forget that some of those who decided to work in the office that day will simply stick around downtown between work and the game.) The restaurants and bars would no doubt appreciate the extra business, and could sure use it now.

I wonder what the traffic is like in LA or KC or St. Louis, three cities where a greater share of residents drive into the city center if and when they go there, for events at their downtown arenas? (Both LA and St. Louis have rail transit lines serving their downtowns too; for purposes of this argument, KC's downtown streetcar doesn't count.) From what I've read, all three of the cities are pretty happy with their downtown arenas, even KC, the only one of the three without a major league hockey or basketball team (an article in The Star once called Garth Brooks the Sprint Center's anchor tenant).

[Hedonism]

The vast majority of adults from the suburbs don't want to take public transportation into the city for a sporting event.




South Philly is the perfect location.

[MarketStEl]

Originally Posted by Hedonism

The vast majority of adults from the suburbs don't want to take public transportation into the city for a sporting event.




South Philly is the perfect location.

I dunno. A sizable minority may, and that probably will do.

I'm pretty sure those aren't all Northeast Philadelphia residents I see on those packed Sports Express trains on the Broad Street line during Phillies games, especially the riders I've seen getting off at Walnut-Locust. (I guarantee you they're not all Center City residents. Many are heading for the PATCO station.)

Maybe the costs outweigh the benefits, but I'm among the minority here who's not convinced of that.

[Muinteoir]

Originally Posted by MarketStEl

I wonder what the traffic is like in LA or KC or St. Louis, three cities where a greater share of residents drive into the city center if and when they go there, for events at their downtown arenas? (Both LA and St. Louis have rail transit lines serving their downtowns too; for purposes of this argument, KC's downtown streetcar doesn't count.) From what I've read, all three of the cities are pretty happy with their downtown arenas, even KC, the only one of the three without a major league hockey or basketball team (an article in The Star once called Garth Brooks the Sprint Center's anchor tenant).

In LA, the majority of attractions really aren't downtown. They're scattered across the city and metro (obviously with a high number around Hollywood), making this a disparate comparison. In LA it truly helps vitalize their downtown. In Philadelphia, such a high percentage of our attractions lay within such a small area between Fairmount Ave and South St., that I think adding a sports arena would be overkill, and frankly, detract from the character of the historic and intellectual institutions that attract people to the area. While I agree Market East could use a little something, I don't think it's a sports stadium. If they really want to move, I agree Washington/Broad is a much more reasonable proposal.

[Duderino]

Originally Posted by Hedonism

The vast majority of adults from the suburbs don't want to take public transportation into the city for a sporting event.

The vast majority of adults from the suburbs are sheltered and have very delicate sensibilities.

[ilovephilly79]

Originally Posted by Duderino

The vast majority of adults from the suburbs are sheltered and have very delicate sensibilities.

You can insult them all you want but they have their preferences just like you have yours. I personally would never think to drive into the city for a large event. I take the train whenever I go into Center City because I don't particularly care for driving.

For any of the others who are suggesting that people will learn and adapt, that's pretty silly. If people were willing to learn and adapt we wouldn't have backups on I-95 and 76 every single day. People in America like to drive. Pretending otherwise is stupid.

[Duderino]

Originally Posted by ilovephilly79

You can insult them all you want but they have their preferences just like you have yours. I personally would never think to drive into the city for a large event. I take the train whenever I go into Center City because I don't particularly care for driving.

For any of the others who are suggesting that people will learn and adapt, that's pretty silly. If people were willing to learn and adapt we wouldn't have backups on I-95 and 76 every single day. People in America like to drive. Pretending otherwise is stupid.

I was being a bit sarcastic, I admit. But as someone who grew up in the Philadelphia exurbs, there's honestly a lot of truth to it.

You're not wrong that Americans, generally speaking, are emotionally attached to their cars. But I do think there's a "fear of the unknown" with so many folks. So many just don't even try to do something different because it's out of their comfort zone, or they heard some PT horror story years ago from a friend or on the news.

And yes, public transit is not perfect by any stretch. But in many cases, especially as roadway congestion is on an upward trajectory again, the convenience is hard to argue against.

[Hedonism]

Originally Posted by Duderino

I was being a bit sarcastic, I admit. But as someone who grew up in the Philadelphia exurbs, there's honestly a lot of truth to it.

You're not wrong that Americans, generally speaking, are emotionally attached to their cars. But I do think there's a "fear of the unknown" with so many folks. So many just don't even try to do something different because it's out of their comfort zone, or they heard some PT horror story years ago from a friend or on the news.

And yes, public transit is not perfect by any stretch. But in many cases, especially as roadway congestion is on an upward trajectory again, the convenience is hard to argue against.

People like to be comfortable??

[Muinteoir]

Originally Posted by Duderino

I was being a bit sarcastic, I admit. But as someone who grew up in the Philadelphia exurbs, there's honestly a lot of truth to it.

You're not wrong that Americans, generally speaking, are emotionally attached to their cars. But I do think there's a "fear of the unknown" with so many folks. So many just don't even try to do something different because it's out of their comfort zone, or they heard some PT horror story years ago from a friend or on the news.

And yes, public transit is not perfect by any stretch. But in many cases, especially as roadway congestion is on an upward trajectory again, the convenience is hard to argue against.

It gave me a chuckle.

And yes, the American ethos, with its attachment to a lifestyle sold to us about a century ago, needs to let it go. I'm not suggesting we give up our roadways entirely, but the amount of times I hear, "but the cars!!!" on this forum is really disappointing.

I think the Broad/Washington spot would be a pretty good spot for people to access via transit without clogging up Center City. Of course people could take BSL down if necessary, but it's just over a mile walk from Suburban Station, with plenty to do along the way.

[MarketStEl]

Originally Posted by Muinteoir

It gave me a chuckle.

And yes, the American ethos, with its attachment to a lifestyle sold to us about a century ago, needs to let it go. I'm not suggesting we give up our roadways entirely, but the amount of times I hear, "but the cars!!!" on this forum is really disappointing.

The Cars Want the Streets Back, But the Cities Could Do Better Without Them | Next City

I devoted an entire "The Mobile City" column last month to evidence that not planning for cars actually made city districts stronger, and that the changes prompted by the pandemic have proven popular with city and metro residents.

Gen-Z, btw, seems to be driving less than its predecessors.