August 7, 2008

Dear Editor:

Re: “Letters: AN EXPERT TELLS HOW HE RATED CASINO SITES Daily News Letters 8/4/08 (archived)

What Mr. Furhman fails to mention both in his letter and his “expert” analysis of the casino sites is the thousands of homes and families in the vicinity of the sites he so glibly rates a number from 5 to 10.

I am not and have never been in real estate but I have been living in the area that will be impacted by the potential Sugarhouse development for nearly 10 years. I have been opposed to and working to re-site Sugarhouse from the day the license was awarding.

It would seem that Mr. Furhman evaluates sites like someone who has never lived in a neighborhood effected by a massive development or talked to anyone that has lived in such a neighborhood. His criteria are strictly functional: size of the plot, cost to develop and access to public transit and convention visitors.

What about the neighbors that have made their lives and their homes there? Are they to just pick up and leave because real estate experts deem the vicinity of their homes “convenient to conventioneers?”

The argument goes double for the Spectrum site by the way: have you ever talked to anyone in proximity to the Spectrum or the stadiums? It’s a constant fight to manage traffic and spill-over from events. Add to that a 3+ million square foot facility with multiple 24 liquor licenses and 3000 slot machines? Are you kidding?

I would respectfully suggest that Mr. Fuhrman’s letter be considered what it is: an incomplete analysis that doesn’t consider perhaps the most important issue in the Philadelphia Casino issue: the neighborhoods and way of life that will be forever damaged if a casino is built on the central Delaware waterfront.

Morgan Jones
Fishtown