Great point. Those designing college campuses should be designing our public spaces.

You know, the more I look at the initial images, if it's not done properly it could turn out very hokey. I'd like to see us go with a more fluid approach, rather than jumping in head first. I like that designers are throwing out concepts like the theater and the ice skating rink, but the first step of actual construction should be simply making it a more desirable public space.

Grass, trees, things that don't cost a lot of money but make a world of difference. It's one of the five original public squares of Penn's original design, and just because it has a massive building on it doesn't mean it can't still successfully service the public.

You don't have to alter the current architecture of Dilworth Plaza to tear up some concrete and plant some trees and grass. Some public art or greenery could easily insulate a parkspace from the busy six lanes of traffic.

If smaller, initial improvements attract a crowd, down the road there'd be more of a demand for such activities as ice skating and public movies. For now, simply erasing the concrete jungle feel of it would be an affordable way to make it more appealing on a first-impression level to nearby conventioneers and tourists.

__________________
The idealistic are no longer concerned with influencing public opinion and creating a free world of responsible and ethical social choices, but rather imposing opinion through legislation, mandating these ethics, and outlawing choice in what the loudest sample finds offensive.

Ban the Bans. It's a slippery slope between Idealism and Fascism.

Not the college designing campuses, but the colleges turning out people with advanced degrees that understand the functions of planning, government and business, and the interplay between them.

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x-fkSYDtUY

"Censorship is free advertising by the government"--Federico Fellini

"Do you mind if I smoke while you eat?"

You'd think with Penn and Drexel there'd be a surplus of brilliant planners, architects, and civil engineers.

__________________
The idealistic are no longer concerned with influencing public opinion and creating a free world of responsible and ethical social choices, but rather imposing opinion through legislation, mandating these ethics, and outlawing choice in what the loudest sample finds offensive.

Ban the Bans. It's a slippery slope between Idealism and Fascism.

There are, but governments in the US (unlike in other parts of the world) are notorious for ignoring the sound advice provided by these. A good one has the ability to bring disparate players to the table and effecting better, more harmonious changes.

My $.02!

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x-fkSYDtUY

"Censorship is free advertising by the government"--Federico Fellini

"Do you mind if I smoke while you eat?"

You forgot Temple!

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x-fkSYDtUY

"Censorship is free advertising by the government"--Federico Fellini

"Do you mind if I smoke while you eat?"

Temple too...of course!

So essentially we have counsel members and neighborhood organizations playing the role of urban planner?

__________________
The idealistic are no longer concerned with influencing public opinion and creating a free world of responsible and ethical social choices, but rather imposing opinion through legislation, mandating these ethics, and outlawing choice in what the loudest sample finds offensive.

Ban the Bans. It's a slippery slope between Idealism and Fascism.

Urban, hospitality and tourism planners--most can't find their way out of a paper bag with both ends open.

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x-fkSYDtUY

"Censorship is free advertising by the government"--Federico Fellini

"Do you mind if I smoke while you eat?"

okay, just a failure mitigated by a fountain. I realize the idea must have been to provide an urban oasis and, in some ways, it does...just not for the people they originally thought of. a fountain in the city hall courtyard woudl be cool. the plan proposed isn't bad at all, actually. i do think capping the depressed areas is a good thing...fountain notwishstanding. As mentioned, I'd propose revamping the MSB plaza by capping the depressed (in more ways than one) entrance and adding a retail strip to start to bring life back to north broad st.
Still, I stand by my assessment. dilworth was a failure and we wouldn't be any worse off if it was never built. given that it was built, we should improve it.

__________________
"You down wit OPM?"
Fumo: "Yeah, you know me!"

Franklin Square - A great investment to reuse a squar with little modification.

Dillworth - A massive cost to change nothing. The reason it sucks IS THE TRANSIT users themselves.


The users themselves are only there for "transit" and the surrounding area isn't and will not ever be "good to hang out at"


As a transportation nexus...they are good at MOVING people.

not keeping them around.


Lights, some soap. A couple cafe's and trim the trees.


Spend your millions on maybe the dozen or so rotting commercial corridors in the city.

was my point.

__________________
"

I'm going to disagree. The reason it sucks, other than poor design, are the large numbers of homeless NOT the transit users. the transit is underground or across the street. Speaking of corridors, the most despicable condition around may be the sidewalks by the zoo. People drive in and park, the sidewalks between the lots look like a war zone. Still, dilworth is important. If out of towners see how the heart of the city is maintained, they can only imagine how the rest of it is maintained. Anyways, the city should consider selling off property to pay for these kinds of projects.

__________________
"You down wit OPM?"
Fumo: "Yeah, you know me!"