Yes, that's what co-location is: Somebody else pays you for physical access to your site for long-term deployment of equipment. So the "physical access" requirement isn't exactly some sort of "evil scheme" netflix invented to screw over Comcast.
This part is nonsensical:
Everything from physical access requirements to the ol' "By the way we may host other, non-Netflix content on these things in the future, and we'll charge people for the privilege, but you'll still have to treat it as Netflix data and not expect any money for carrying it on your network".
1) They already charge people to access their service now, and in a way that apparently harms Comcast/ISPs in general, so we have zero difference from the status quo--the ISPs already have accepted this as "normal" and I don't see how they can ever change that without essentially erasing the entire Internet and starting over.
2) If Netflix hosts other people's data on those systems... so what? It's to Comcast's benefit--the more content that users stream that way (as opposed to over their expensive peering links) the happier their customers will be.
3) Comcast already gets money to carry all of this data--they get it from their subscribers. They're caterwauling for a double-dip opportunity--the right to bill not just for bandwidth to users, but for the same bandwidth again to companies providing content.