[Stylo]

White Plains and Stamford have a good deal in common.

[DarkWolf]

Originally Posted by mkiv808

White Plains and Stamford have a good deal in common.

White Plains is more of a city , then Stamford which is still sprawly in my opinion.

[jjbradleynyc]

Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey

White Plains is more of a city , then Stamford which is still sprawly in my opinion.

Stamford is not "sprawly"--Stamford's city square mileage might be larger in terms of geography than White Plains. Stamford is the opposite of sprawl, in terms of the majority of its commercial development. High Ridge Road has a bit of sprawl, but show me a city that has less sprawl/leapfrog development than Stamford, and I'll show you a city that has a ton less people than Stamford.

For its size of about 122k, Stamford feels like--outside of downtown--a town of 40-50,000. It's very quiet and residential, and has little franchise, chain store, and sprawl development. As-a-matter-of-fact, most development is densely packed downtown in terms of its mall, Target, Burlington Coat Factory, etc.

White Plains is much more bustling than Stamford, but Stamford is catching up.

[MikefromCT]

Originally Posted by mkiv808

If you want to see what progress looks like, look at Manhattan. It seems like everything in CT cities takes decades to happen.

I don't wanna end up like Manhattan. I'd like to continue to have trees around me and not pay a fortune for a shoebox-sized apartment. Being in a densely populated suburb is pleasant. Being in a city with an average of 75,000 people per square mile is not.
Besides the only reason things got done in Manhattan is for years you had crooks like Robert Moses who, in typical big city fashion, bullied his way into getting things done, including some projects that really destroyed the quality of life there (can you say Cross Bronx Expressway?)

Don't get me wrong, I love NYC but after spending a weekend in Boston and seeing what they did with the waterfront - covering the highway so the rest of the city could be re-connected to downtown and making it a friendly, inviting place for everyone - I think thisis the way to go. Maybe THAT'S what Hartford needs - we need a big dig.

[Stylo]

Originally Posted by MikefromCT

I don't wanna end up like Manhattan. I'd like to continue to have trees around me and not pay a fortune for a shoebox-sized apartment. Being in a densely populated suburb is pleasant. Being in a city with an average of 75,000 people per square mile is not.
Besides the only reason things got done in Manhattan is for years you had crooks like Robert Moses who, in typical big city fashion, bullied his way into getting things done, including some projects that really destroyed the quality of life there (can you say Cross Bronx Expressway?)

Don't get me wrong, I love NYC but after spending a weekend in Boston and seeing what they did with the waterfront - covering the highway so the rest of the city could be re-connected to downtown and making it a friendly, inviting place for everyone - I think thisis the way to go. Maybe THAT'S what Hartford needs - we need a big dig.

Hartford becoming NYC (an impossibility) wasn't what I was getting it. It was the speed and planning of projects. PlaNYC is an impressive plan, and something scaled down with that kind of vision would benefit our cities. Unfortunately you have inept leadership in both Hartford and New Haven (especially New Haven).

CBE is not in Manhattan FYI. I do agree that the 50's-70's saw some awful civic planning in NYC.

The big dig was one of the most disastrous civic projects the nation has ever seen. Boston is a nice city though. New Haven wants to do something similar (but much smaller of an undertaking) with Route 34. Re-urbanization?

[DarkWolf]

Stamford isn't on the same Path as White Plains or even New Brunswick....look at it...Density of the core is what makes a city a city. A sloppy core like Stamford makes a city less of a city and more like a Suburban fake.... Wider Sidewalks , safer and more friendly environment for pedestrians also make a better a city what a city is. The Downtown Density should be even , (ikno New Brunswick looks sloppy but that's an older photo)


Stamford from the air (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tonyshi/5956767352/ - broken link) by Tony Shi. (http://www.flickr.com/people/tonyshi/ - broken link), on Flickr

Now look at White Plains...


HPN - White Plains looking a little brown (http://www.flickr.com/photos/terminalman/3967182534/ - broken link) by TerminalMan (http://www.flickr.com/people/terminalman/ - broken link), on Flickr

& New Brunswick...


From above: New Brunswick, New Jersey (http://www.flickr.com/photos/timothysschenck/138840190/ - broken link) by timothysschenck (http://www.flickr.com/people/timothysschenck/ - broken link), on Flickr

[mikelizard860]

Originally Posted by mkiv808

Hartford becoming NYC (an impossibility) wasn't what I was getting it. It was the speed and planning of projects. PlaNYC is an impressive plan, and something scaled down with that kind of vision would benefit our cities. Unfortunately you have inept leadership in both Hartford and New Haven (especially New Haven).

CBE is not in Manhattan FYI. I do agree that the 50's-70's saw some awful civic planning in NYC.

The big dig was one of the most disastrous civic projects the nation has ever seen. Boston is a nice city though. New Haven wants to do something similar (but much smaller of an undertaking) with Route 34. Re-urbanization?

The big dig was a disaster because of corruption and the cost/time it took to complete.

[missionhill]

Easy to take pot shots at the Big Dig. As someone else here pointed out, Robert Moses could push things through because, in his day, no environmental reviews, no public process-- what the experts decided to do got done. Another example--can you imagine building something like Massachusetts' Quabbin Reservoir today? It could never be done. At the same time Boston undertook and completed the Big Dig, NYC tried building its "Westway"-- a huge highway-real estate development scheme. Couldn't get it done with all the public opposition working its way through the environmental review process. Now NY has Route 9A along the west side of Manhattan and an increasingly nice linear park along the waterfront west of the road. Not a bad deal in the end but way less ambitious than Westway or the Big Dig.

Big Dig gets bad press because mistakes were made but it was an incredibly difficult, audacious project and it got built! Can you really call it a disaster? As much as any place, Boston is a difficult city to build in--lots of process, lots of objections. I think it's a miracle--a huge public project that actually got built in these times of NIMBY and environmental impact review. It functions; it relieves a good deal of the highway congestion it was designed to relieve, and as Mike writes, the space vacated by the old elevated highway reconnects the city with its beautiful waterfront. Yes it cost a lot more money than originally expected but do you imagine the initial estimates could have been cooked a bit to make the project more palatable? If the feds had picked up 80% or more of the cost--as all interstate highway projects did from the inception of the system--the cost overruns would have been little noticed. But with the state having to cover more like 50% or whatever it finally came to, the Pike and other highways showing their deferred maintenance as a result, the costs are more objectionable. Would you say better not to have done it at all? I don't think so. Boston had a chance to fix a mistake made back in the '50s, when the planners could do what they wanted. It was expensive, complicated, full of challenges, lots of critics. But they did it and the city is much the better for having done it.

[Stylo]

Originally Posted by missionhill

Easy to take pot shots at the Big Dig. As someone else here pointed out, Robert Moses could push things through because, in his day, no environmental reviews, no public process-- what the experts decided to do got done. Another example--can you imagine building something like Massachusetts' Quabbin Reservoir today? It could never be done. At the same time Boston undertook and completed the Big Dig, NYC tried building its "Westway"-- a huge highway-real estate development scheme. Couldn't get it done with all the public opposition working its way through the environmental review process. Now NY has Route 9A along the west side of Manhattan and an increasingly nice linear park along the waterfront west of the road. Not a bad deal in the end but way less ambitious than Westway or the Big Dig.

Big Dig gets bad press because mistakes were made but it was an incredibly difficult, audacious project and it got built! Can you really call it a disaster? As much as any place, Boston is a difficult city to build in--lots of process, lots of objections. I think it's a miracle--a huge public project that actually got built in these times of NIMBY and environmental impact review. It functions; it relieves a good deal of the highway congestion it was designed to relieve, and as Mike writes, the space vacated by the old elevated highway reconnects the city with its beautiful waterfront. Yes it cost a lot more money than originally expected but do you imagine the initial estimates could have been cooked a bit to make the project more palatable? If the feds had picked up 80% or more of the cost--as all interstate highway projects did from the inception of the system--the cost overruns would have been little noticed. But with the state having to cover more like 50% or whatever it finally came to, the Pike and other highways showing their deferred maintenance as a result, the costs are more objectionable. Would you say better not to have done it at all? I don't think so. Boston had a chance to fix a mistake made back in the '50s, when the planners could do what they wanted. It was expensive, complicated, full of challenges, lots of critics. But they did it and the city is much the better for having done it.

The outcome wasn't bad, the project was. Of course it had a lot of nice benefits at a very big cost.

The Big Dig was the most expensive highway project in the U.S. and was plagued by escalating costs, scheduling overruns, leaks, design flaws, charges of poor execution and use of substandard materials, criminal arrests, and even four deaths. The project was scheduled to be completed in 1998[5]at an estimated cost of $2.8 billion (in 1982 dollars, US$6.0 billion adjusted for inflation as of 2006). The project was not completed, however, until December of 2007, at a cost of over $14.6 billion ($8.08 billion in 1982 dollars) as of 2006. The Boston Globe estimated that the project will ultimately cost $22 billion, including interest, and that it will not be paid off until 2038.

Big Dig - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[MikefromCT]

Originally Posted by missionhill

Boston had a chance to fix a mistake made back in the '50s, when the planners could do what they wanted. It was expensive, complicated, full of challenges, lots of critics. But they did it and the city is much the better for having done it.

And I'm hoping that Hartford has a chance to repair the damages made as a result of their narrow, near-sighted planning decisions - specifically in regards to I-84, which KILLED Hartford. Yes, I know, I know, can you imagine having to get through the city without it? Actually, yes. I do. Traffic on it is so bad I often take side streets and pick up the highway on the eastern edge of downtown. Originally 84 was supposed to provide exit ramps to where the old GFox building used to be, which it did, at the expense of gutting a neighborhood and isolating the north end from downtown. The highway's impact can be seen if one goes on Main Street north of downtown and along Albany Avenue. This area used to be a place for people and businesses. Now it's a place for cars, and it's an eyesore (to say the least.)