[bstnguy]

There has been a lot of talk about Hartford's new Science Center (what happened there?) and Convention Center (big flop), but Hartford needs to fix one simple thing. Get people out of West Hartford and into Hartford. What Hartford needs is a shopping plaza like Providence Place in RI. Then add resturants and coffee shops. Then add residental units near all this. The goal for Hartford should be to put West Hartford out of business. The only reason why West Hartford is so nice is because they have artifically stoped the migration of Hartford's poorest. West Hartford did this my having one of the highest property taxes in the country. In closing...Hartford, build it and they will come.

[misueno]

bstnguy,
I'm going to have to both agree and disagree with your post. I've taken a temporary home in downtown Hartford with all the hopes and dreams of anyone from the area who wishes the brightest future for this city. And I love so many aspects of the area. I love the fact that Hartford is at it's best when you consider the sum of its parts. When you add in the ease with which you can go to West Hartford or Glastonbury or Manchester or Wethersfield or Granby. I love City Fish and Franklin Avenue with Mozzicatto's and D&D Market. I love the Bushnell and the Wadsworth Antheneum. I love the little Latino area that Park Street provides. I love the hopelessly amatuer kickoff to the holiday season at Constitution Plaza and the Veteran's Day parade (both homey and big city in the same breath). I love Bin 228 and Trumbell Kitchen and Feng and Koji and Spris.

But I have stood at the window in my apartment looking over the city for a reason to go out and walk around, and it's simply not there right now. Yes, retail is necessary to a vital downtown. Hartford, it's citizens, developers, adn politicians need to find incentives to draw business downtown. We need reasons to leave our apartments and walk around. We need reasons to draw people from the surrounding suburbs into town. But we don't need to view West Hartford as the enemy. There is plenty of consumer exhuberence to go around.

I believe firmly that part of the joy of the area is the easy accessibilty to surrounding areas. And there is plenty of retail that has not even found its way into Connecticut let alone the Hartford area. We just need leaders and community activists with a true vision for the liveable, sustainable, and interesting city that Hartford can become.

[Bob The Builder]

I am certainly no expert in Urban Renewal, but I have seen what happened in Bilbao Spain when Frank Ghery built the Guggenheim. But it has to be a real world class attraction. A half measure would just be a waste of money.

[skytrekker]

I do not agree with the idea that the Convention center has been a 'big flop'- what has ever given the OP that impression? Its thriving- attracting conventions and groups from all over the country and North America.

As for the science center-its going up- and will be completed late this summer- all one has to do is drive into Hartford from the east- or from the south and north and see this striking building.

The retail equation is still missing- but I remember doing business in Providence from 1996-1999 before Providence Place.
Hartford has made significant progress- more needs to be done- and in time it will. I being east of the river would visit Hartford instead before West Hartford.

As for restaurants, Hartford has many excellent places of high quality-from Italian and Mediterranean, American, Asian and more-

[JViello]

The biggest problem with our area is provincialism.

The fix?

Annexation and regionalism. This way the folks in Glastonbury and West Hartford have a stake AND say in what goes on in Hartford and resources are truely "shared".

[JiminCT]

Do you really think Eddie Perez gives a damn about anything but his pension? The guy has NO vision for the city. The only thing he has developed is a governing style that would make Vladimir Putin grin.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by JViello

The biggest problem with our area is provincialism.

The fix?

Annexation and regionalism. This way the folks in Glastonbury and West Hartford have a stake AND say in what goes on in Hartford and resources are truely "shared".

Yeah, lets change 375 years of self-rule because the City of Hartord can't get its act together. It won't happen. There is an old saying "The solution to pollution is dillution" which is not true and is not true in this case as well. JMHO

As for the Convention Center, it is doing very well according to an article in the Courant the other day. And the Science center is coming along as well. Keep in mind that major projects take time as does change. Hartford is getting there. It would be nice to get Front Street built though.

Finally, Providence is doing well because it has been discovered by Bostonites looking to escape that city's high cost of living. The mall got rammed through at a significant cost and at the expense of suburban shopping centers. Maybe that is good, but the glory days of enclosed malls appears to be over and the trend in retail today is outdoor mixed use walkable village settings (Blue Back Square). Jay

[JViello]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Yeah, lets change 375 years of self-rule because the City of Hartord can't get its act together. It won't happen. There is an old saying "The solution to pollution is dillution" which is not true and is not true in this case as well. JMHO

Perhaps you are misunderstanding me.

If you, in Glastonbury were able to vote for things pertaining to Hartford, and if the city's economic viatality directly affected your pocket as it does currently in Glastonbury things WOULD change dramatically. With the business leaders etc in Avon, Glastonbury, Windsor, Manchester, Weathersfield etc all having say in city government it would change a lot.

We would also save a PILE of money on redundant services. How many fire Chief salaries/pensions are we supporting in the Metro vs a regionalized single point? Same for town managers, school officials, police etc.

300 years ago, what happened in Hartford did not have the affect on the surrounding towns as it once did. We live in a different world today.

Having lived in other metro's in the country that have city and county governments and much larger city boundaries I can tell you, it works.

But I do understand that it will never happen as the people from the surrounding areas would never let it "dumb them down". Therefore Hartford, West Hartford and Glastonbury will continue to "compete" against one another and the divide between the "haves" and "have nots" will widen and the middle class will continue to be pushed out.

Hartford is not Boston - there is no way it can survive in it's current borders as a thriving metro IMHO without some form of regionalization like other medium sized cities in other areas in the country.

I'd be curious to see why you think regionalization is a bad thing.

[jad2000]

Originally Posted by JViello

Perhaps you are misunderstanding me.

If you, in Glastonbury were able to vote for things pertaining to Hartford, and if the city's economic viatality directly affected your pocket as it does currently in Glastonbury things WOULD change dramatically. With the business leaders etc in Avon, Glastonbury, Windsor, Manchester, Weathersfield etc all having say in city government it would change a lot.

We would also save a PILE of money on redundant services. How many fire Chief salaries/pensions are we supporting in the Metro vs a regionalized single point? Same for town managers, school officials, police etc.

300 years ago, what happened in Hartford did not have the affect on the surrounding towns as it once did. We live in a different world today.

Having lived in other metro's in the country that have city and county governments and much larger city boundaries I can tell you, it works.

But I do understand that it will never happen as the people from the surrounding areas would never let it "dumb them down". Therefore Hartford, West Hartford and Glastonbury will continue to "compete" against one another and the divide between the "haves" and "have nots" will widen and the middle class will continue to be pushed out.

Hartford is not Boston - there is no way it can survive in it's current borders as a thriving metro IMHO without some form of regionalization like other medium sized cities in other areas in the country.

I'd be curious to see why you think regionalization is a bad thing.

Having also lived in an area where different municipalities share services, it doesn't fit Connecticut. The schools in those areas are larger therefore the student teacher ratio is higher, which brings down test scores and the overall performance. I, to a degree, also feel it does the same to other services. Ambulance and fire services aren't as prompt and efficient and police tend to have a field day with people who drive five over the limit - it's like they have no boundaries.

I've always thought that the attractiveness of Connecticut was the 'town meeting' style. It's more personal.

Sure, it would change Hartford, but imagine how it would change Glastonbury, Orange or Middlebury if residents of Hartford, New Haven and Waterbury were given a say what goes on in their small towns. I don't think it would be good.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by JViello

I'd be curious to see why you think regionalization is a bad thing.

Why would it be good? I do not think any large "regionalized" city in this country is really better than we have in Connecticut. Right now if I have an issue I can easily contact my town's staff and receive a response to my concern. In a large regionalized city, I can not imagine getting the City Manager to call me back ever.

It is also a matter of accountability. Large regional governments can hide behind their largeness. No one has to answer for their actions or inactions. Do you actually think we would have as good quality of education throughout the region as is offered in towns like Glastonbury, West Hartford or Avon? I strongly doubt it. Bigger is NOT better. Maybe it will cost less, but then again, you get what you pay for. JMHO Jay