For at least a few decades, I’ve been hearing complaints about American city planning intentionally excluding people who choose to, or can do nothing but, walk. Making it mandatory to arrive via automobile, that’s what they’re complaining about.
The first I’d heard of this was a rich area in socal being completely inaccessible to the homeless because it was rimmed entirely by freeways. No way to leave or enter safely without a car and few groceries just outside. A local food desert. Or a food fort
With that said, half of MetLife’s exterior is walkable, according to some maps. A long walk around a freeway is part of it. I’m not a fan of an extra 10 minutes of walking with industrial scenery but it seems fine enough
That’s how you prevent people improvising their own way.
No, that’s how you completely destroy anyone’s ability to get anywhere…
Because no one would ever want to wait, so they’d constantly be widening every path.
Like, how often do you think an NFL game is even played at this one location?
And who’s paying for it?
Does the hotel have to pay for it? The stadium because that’s where people go?
The entire community they taxes even though they’d be the last ones to utilize a bridge that goes from a hotel to a stadium? They’ll already have to deal with the major road closure to build the sky bridge no local will ever use
Like, I understand the spirit of your point and that’s it’s coming from a good place, but you don’t understand any of what goes into just this one narrow aspect that slightly inconviences maybe a couple thousand out of town era 8 days out of the year.
OP got the picture from either hexbear or X…
It was obviously going to miss the point.
It’s not a law that you can’t walk from a hotel to a stadium, it’s a law that you can’t jaywalk…
https://www.legalfix.com/statutes/state-codes/new-jersey/title-39/section-39-4-34
Likely across a highway/interstate that drink people keep thinking they can cross.
The decision to build a stadium that is completely inaccessible without a vehicle, even if you are staying at a hotel next door, is the point.
Or build a whole fucking multi-lane highway there, but can’t be bothered to make it 6 feet wider so pedestrians and cyclists could use it, too.
For at least a few decades, I’ve been hearing complaints about American city planning intentionally excluding people who choose to, or can do nothing but, walk. Making it mandatory to arrive via automobile, that’s what they’re complaining about.
The first I’d heard of this was a rich area in socal being completely inaccessible to the homeless because it was rimmed entirely by freeways. No way to leave or enter safely without a car and few groceries just outside. A local food desert. Or a food fort
With that said, half of MetLife’s exterior is walkable, according to some maps. A long walk around a freeway is part of it. I’m not a fan of an extra 10 minutes of walking with industrial scenery but it seems fine enough
If there’s a clear need to cross, they should provide a way to cross. That’s how you prevent people improvising their own way.
No, that’s how you completely destroy anyone’s ability to get anywhere…
Because no one would ever want to wait, so they’d constantly be widening every path.
Like, how often do you think an NFL game is even played at this one location?
And who’s paying for it?
Does the hotel have to pay for it? The stadium because that’s where people go?
The entire community they taxes even though they’d be the last ones to utilize a bridge that goes from a hotel to a stadium? They’ll already have to deal with the major road closure to build the sky bridge no local will ever use
Like, I understand the spirit of your point and that’s it’s coming from a good place, but you don’t understand any of what goes into just this one narrow aspect that slightly inconviences maybe a couple thousand out of town era 8 days out of the year.
No, the thing I don’t understand is why they wouldn’t build any pedestrian or cycling infrastructure around stadiums and hotels in the first place.