Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I hear you. I think that like previous generations, we have to accept that towns like West Hartford and Fairfield are not going to be like we remember it.
My grandfather complained when the farms of Fairfield were subdivided for single family homes after World War II. My father bemoaned the building of condominiums in town in the 70’s and 80’s and now we complain about the increased density of the urbanization of these towns. It’s kind of like the Circle of Life and progress that we can’t stop. Jay
But why should we accept and embrace unwise, poor planning? If there's zero regard for traffic impacts, the toll this will take on public amenities and services, and no plan as to how this will be funded in the future, I'd say this is valid reason for concern and vocal criticism. And considering the growing opposition to projects like that massive Asylum Avenue proposal, it seems others share this view. Nobody is saying zero growth whatsoever, they just want growth that maintains the integrity of the existing town, one that doesn't deface its character. This can be done, and if WH planners were smart, they would follow this trajectory, as opposed to allowing a barrage of hulking, dull, nondescript, boxy buildings that make this town and really much of the state look like everywhere else in America. If CT really wants to pride itself on being superior to so much of the country as it often does (and by the way, it's not), I say aim higher. We can do better.
But why should we accept and embrace unwise, poor planning? If there's zero regard for traffic impacts, the toll this will take on public amenities and services, and no plan as to how this will be funded in the future, I'd say this is valid reason for concern and vocal criticism. And considering the growing opposition to projects like that massive Asylum Avenue proposal, it seems others share this view. Nobody is saying zero growth whatsoever, they just want growth that maintains the integrity of the existing town, one that doesn't deface its character. This can be done, and if WH planners were smart, they would follow this trajectory, as opposed to allowing a barrage of hulking, dull, nondescript, boxy buildings that make this town and really much of the state look like everywhere else in America. If CT really wants to pride itself on being superior to so much of the country as it often does (and by the way, it's not), I say aim higher. We can do better.
I really hear you there which is my argument over on the DesegregateCT thread. Poor planning is poor planning that we will be paying for for generations to come. Up until the enactment and subsequent Court Orders upholding and strengthening 8-30g, we were known for following good planning practices which were enforced by strong zoning laws.
Somewhere along the way strong zoning became bad and considered to be an excuse for NIMBY. It shouldn’t be. Good planning and strong zoning laws enforced locally to insure maintaining a community’s character and keeping it special. It doesn’t have to mean no growth but should not overwhelm the community either. Jay
But why should we accept and embrace unwise, poor planning? If there's zero regard for traffic impacts, the toll this will take on public amenities and services, and no plan as to how this will be funded in the future, I'd say this is valid reason for concern and vocal criticism. And considering the growing opposition to projects like that massive Asylum Avenue proposal, it seems others share this view. Nobody is saying zero growth whatsoever, they just want growth that maintains the integrity of the existing town, one that doesn't deface its character. This can be done, and if WH planners were smart, they would follow this trajectory, as opposed to allowing a barrage of hulking, dull, nondescript, boxy buildings that make this town and really much of the state look like everywhere else in America. If CT really wants to pride itself on being superior to so much of the country as it often does (and by the way, it's not), I say aim higher. We can do better.
Poor planning is single family homes and car centric development. That's costs way more than multi-family housing developments and brings in exponentially more tax revenue. Like I said before, young people want this. This will keep CT attractive, competitive, and urbane. A few mor eblocks of this in West Hartford will be great.
Although- they need to start preparing for better public transportation options down the line. Perhaps a light rail between West Hartford and Hartford. Once Hartford starts cleaning up, burying its highways and redeveloping... this area will take off. Smack ion the middle of the Financial Capitol of the World (NYC) and the Biotech/Pharma Capitol of the World (Boston). After living/working in both Boston and New York City, Hartford is an extremely desirable area. Its just waiting for its moment.
Poor planning is single family homes and car centric development. That's costs way more than multi-family housing developments and brings in exponentially more tax revenue. Like I said before, young people want this. This will keep CT attractive, competitive, and urbane. A few more blocks of this in West Hartford will be great.
Although- they need to start preparing for better public transportation options down the line. Perhaps a light rail between West Hartford and Hartford. Once Hartford starts cleaning up, burying its highways and redeveloping... this area will take off. Smack ion the middle of the Financial Capitol of the World (NYC) and the Biotech/Pharma Capitol of the World (Boston). After living/working in both Boston and New York City, Hartford is an extremely desirable area. Its just waiting for its moment.
Presumably, you have not seen the traffic congestion at major town intersections. If you have, you might re-consider your position. They are over-developing numerous areas that are already crowded. If multifamily housing really brought in more tax revenue, West Hartford's mill rate would go down, and that's never gonna happen. Between a lack of commercial real estate (except, of course, for restaurants), poor residential planning and a generally fiscally liberal attitude among town council members, that "town" is not heading in the right direction. Take my word for it, I lived there for almost two decades, and I'm glad I got out when I did.
As far as light rail, everyone I've talked about this loves the idea, but it's never gonna happen. The state shot their wad when they built that silly busway, which nobody with a car will utilize. A few times I rode the bus line from my condo down Farmington Avenue to Union Station to take the train to New York or Philly. Much of the clientele was really unsavory, which is why I eventually stopping using it, so one can imagine that of Fasttrack will be the same. And I don't care that sounds classist. Everyone else feels the same way, they're just not voicing their opinion.
Noted the Fuller Brush factory conversion. I still have a Fuller Brush that my Mother gave me when I was a kid. Late 60's edition. Still holding up.
Part of the problem with some of the large projects that have been proposed in places like WH is the lack of suitable roads to handle the traffic. This is a problem all over New England when it comes to handling growth. Unlike the flat lands in middle America (think places like Indianapolis, Chicago, Columbus etc) which have ample room to put in expansive multi lane roads to handle large scale development, it is a big problem in New England due to the terrain, limited suitable land for such projects, and also the age of the cities and towns and how they were developed. The cost to develop and impact on the existing developments is cause for concern. It is easier to put in larger projects in the cities especially if they only need to raze a few vacant buildings to have suitable space for development. But in suburban areas you face a much bigger challenge in the form of established neighborhoods such as the one in WH on Asylum Ave. where you can't go in and bulldoze the surrounding buildings to create the space needed. And also replacement of infrastructure or building new water and presumably natural gas lines and likely electric also poses more challenges in this environment than in already densely developed areas where such infrastructure will usually be easier to install and may already be in place.
Presumably, you have not seen the traffic congestion at major town intersections. If you have, you might re-consider your position. They are over-developing numerous areas that are already crowded. If multifamily housing really brought in more tax revenue, West Hartford's mill rate would go down, and that's never gonna happen. Between a lack of commercial real estate (except, of course, for restaurants), poor residential planning and a generally fiscally liberal attitude among town council members, that "town" is not heading in the right direction. Take my word for it, I lived there for almost two decades, and I'm glad I got out when I did.
As far as light rail, everyone I've talked about this loves the idea, but it's never gonna happen. The state shot their wad when they built that silly busway, which nobody with a car will utilize. A few times I rode the bus line from my condo down Farmington Avenue to Union Station to take the train to New York or Philly. Much of the clientele was really unsavory, which is why I eventually stopping using it, so one can imagine that of Fasttrack will be the same. And I don't care that sounds classist. Everyone else feels the same way, they're just not voicing their opinion.
CTfastrak is not “silly” by any measure. It averages over 14,000 passengers on a weekday and 10,000 on Saturdays. That’s 14,000 less cars on I-84 heading into and out of Hartford or one lane of traffic in each direction. That’s nothing to laugh at or dismiss. It’s clearly doing what it was intended to do: offer commuters an alternative to driving into Hartford.
Furthermore it has been the catalyst for a lot of new high density development along the corridor in Hartford, West Hartford, Newington and New Britain. That’s also what it’s intention was.
You are correct that a light rail is not likely, at least for the foreseeable future but it’s not because of CTfastrak. The idea of a busway west of Hartford was developed from a study CTDOT developed years ago. As part of that study a number of options for travel were investigated including adding lanes on key routes, a busway and light rail on Farmington Avenue. What it found was that light rail was not cost effective in reducing traffic congestion so it was eliminated from further consideration. It will be many years before it is again considered and even more, if ever, from it being cost effective. Jay
CTfastrak is not “silly” by any measure. It averages over 14,000 passengers on a weekday and 10,000 on Saturdays. That’s 14,000 less cars on I-84 heading into and out of Hartford or one lane of traffic in each direction. That’s nothing to laugh at or dismiss. It’s clearly doing what it was intended to do: offer commuters an alternative to driving into Hartford.
Furthermore it has been the catalyst for a lot of new high density development along the corridor in Hartford, West Hartford, Newington and New Britain. That’s also what it’s intention was.
You are correct that a light rail is not likely, at least for the foreseeable future but it’s not because of CTfastrak. The idea of a busway west of Hartford was developed from a study CTDOT developed years ago. As part of that study a number of options for travel were investigated including adding lanes on key routes, a busway and light rail on Farmington Avenue. What it found was that light rail was not cost effective in reducing traffic congestion so it was eliminated from further consideration. It will be many years before it is again considered and even more, if ever, from it being cost effective. Jay
Yes, light rail is not going to work from a financial standpoint. I was living in Cincinnati when they put in a 3 mile light rail line for half a billion bucks. What a mistake. Nobody rides it and they owe the Federal Government something like 150 million dollars in loan money. Taxes went up just because they had a desire named streetcar. That money would have been far better spent on improving their bus system. KC put in a light rail line and that one is doing far better from a ridership standpoint. Busses are much better than a fixed route and routes can change over time as population trends fluctuate.
CTfastrak is not “silly” by any measure. It averages over 14,000 passengers on a weekday and 10,000 on Saturdays. That’s 14,000 less cars on I-84 heading into and out of Hartford or one lane of traffic in each direction. That’s nothing to laugh at or dismiss. It’s clearly doing what it was intended to do: offer commuters an alternative to driving into Hartford.
Furthermore it has been the catalyst for a lot of new high density development along the corridor in Hartford, West Hartford, Newington and New Britain. That’s also what it’s intention was.
You are correct that a light rail is not likely, at least for the foreseeable future but it’s not because of CTfastrak. The idea of a busway west of Hartford was developed from a study CTDOT developed years ago. As part of that study a number of options for travel were investigated including adding lanes on key routes, a busway and light rail on Farmington Avenue. What it found was that light rail was not cost effective in reducing traffic congestion so it was eliminated from further consideration. It will be many years before it is again considered and even more, if ever, from it being cost effective. Jay
And yet, I-84 is more congested than ever. Yeah, traffic is so much better thanks to Fasttrack. Jay, let’s get real: the vast majority of people using it do not own a car. So it’s not 14,00 less cars on the road.
Future, if you think the idea of building these massive housing projects in small areas is the sort of development that’s practical and smart, it’s contradictory to what you said earlier about how it’s defacing the character of towns (which it is.) A few years from now, when this part of the state is more congested than Stamford, people will still be regarding this as “progress”, even as we keep regressing.
And yet, I-84 is more congested than ever. Yeah, traffic is so much better thanks to Fasttrack. Jay, let’s get real: the vast majority of people using it do not own a car. So it’s not 14,00 less cars on the road.
Future, if you think the idea of building these massive housing projects in small areas is the sort of development that’s practical and smart, it’s contradictory to what you said earlier about how it’s defacing the character of towns (which it is.) A few years from now, when this part of the state is more congested than Stamford, people will still be regarding this as “progress”, even as we keep regressing.
I’m done arguing about this.
I think you are the one who has to get real about this. If CTfastrak did not exist, that would definitely mean even more traffic on I-84 than there is today. That’s simple logic. You can argue how much of an increase there will be, but you can’t argue that there wouldn’t be an increase. And whether the riders drive or not means little to nothing. Some would surely be forced to drive if it did not exist.
You also can’t argue that CTfastrak has brought a lot of new development along the corridor. Whether it’s apartments in downtown New Britian or apartment buildings on New Park Avenue or the fabulously successful Parkville Market, the proof is there. And what even better is that the majority of them are less reliant on automobiles for their way to get around. That is good planning. Jay
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
