207 replies to this topic

[damus]

MadVlad, on Jun 30 2006, 08:58 PM, said:

Once we have a nice little Commuter run through the I-91 corridor, do you guys think that would finally merge the Hartford/Springfield areas in the eyes of the Government (or whoever does those statistics), or is it not even possible?

It should be possible. Does Springfield want to be in the same metro or are they hung up on their individuality? Baltimore and Washington, Dallas and Fort Worth, Saint Paul and Minneapolis all share metros. It would absolutely make sense to me if these cities were lumped together into one metro. Moreso New Haven mostly due to the shared media market.  

The commuter rail is definately a step in the right direction.

[SOCOM]

The gov't uses commuting patterns in order to merge metro's, so yeah, a commuter rail line would certainly help get us closer to the 15% threshold.  I believe right now about 8% of people living in Springfield's metro commute to Hartford for work.

[MadVlad]

I think 15% could be easily attainable, especially with an easy to use Commuter line....

[drc72]

damus, on Jun 30 2006, 07:47 PM, said:

It should be possible. Does Springfield want to be in the same metro or are they hung up on their individuality? Baltimore and Washington, Dallas and Fort Worth, Saint Paul and Minneapolis all share metros. It would absolutely make sense to me if these cities were lumped together into one metro. Moreso New Haven mostly due to the shared media market.  

The commuter rail is definately a step in the right direction.

I think it would be in Springfield's best interest to be in the Hartford metro area.

[robm324]

It would be in Springfield's best interest to become a Hartford metro, but really there is no interest in Springfield for that to happen.  Its pretty bull-headed, but its just the way it is.  

Having said that, I think a commuter line will definitely help increase the percentage commuting.  Western Mass, while not incredibly cheaper, it is a little cheaper to find housing than it is in the immediate greater Hartford area.  I think that will attract some people to live in Springfield and make a 30 minute commute down to Hartford.

Edited by robm324, 02 July 2006 - 04:56 AM.

[HartfordTycoon]

Interestingly enough here is a series of articles from today's Courant about this topic.

Hartford-Springfield

Making the most of the Springfield Connection

Springfield needs a real growth strategy

Edited by HartfordTycoon, 02 July 2006 - 08:09 AM.

[drc72]

HartfordTycoon, on Jul 2 2006, 08:08 AM, said:

Interestingly enough here is a series of articles from today's Courant about this topic.

Hartford-Springfield

Making the most of the Springfield Connection

Springfield needs a real growth strategy

Very interesting articles. Sounds like the State of Mass is not really interested in revitalizing it's smaller cities. Why bother when you got Boston

[damus]

drc72, on Jul 2 2006, 11:20 AM, said:

Very interesting articles. Sounds like the State of Mass is not really interested in revitalizing it's smaller cities. Why bother when you got Boston

Too bad New England is so provincial. If Hartford and Sprinfield were in the same state, there would be no discussion of this right now. I wonder how long Baltimore and Washington have been considered one metro.

[ctman987]

drc72, on Jul 2 2006, 11:20 AM, said:

Very interesting articles. Sounds like the State of Mass is not really interested in revitalizing it's smaller cities. Why bother when you got Boston

Boston will continue to thrive with or without public investments such as a new convention center so why not spend money on the mid sized cities in the state such as Springfield and Worcester. Worcester is seeing development (the town center, a renovated DCU center, Hilton Garden Inn, new courthouse, etc) but will still need to come a long way (for example the city needs residents downtown). Springfield now needs to get to start getting funding from the state to jumpstart some private investments.

[drc72]

ctman987, on Jul 2 2006, 04:42 PM, said:

Boston will continue to thrive with or without public investments such as a new convention center so why not spend money on the mid sized cities in the state such as Springfield and Worcester. Worcester is seeing development (the town center, a renovated DCU center, Hilton Garden Inn, new courthouse, etc) but will still need to come a long way (for example the city needs residents downtown). Springfield now needs to get to start getting funding from the state to jumpstart some private investments.

The State is leaving Springfeild behind.

[ctman987]

It definitly is leaving Springfield behind. The economic hub of MA is Boston and state goverment is based in Boston which is a long way from Springfield and the entire Pioneer Valley...at least Worcester can reak the benefits from the fact that its close to Boston

[MadVlad]

HartfordTycoon, on Jul 2 2006, 10:08 AM, said:

Interestingly enough here is a series of articles from today's Courant about this topic.

Hartford-Springfield

Making the most of the Springfield Connection

Springfield needs a real growth strategy

I'm ahead of my time, what can I say.....  

[drc72]

ctman987, on Jul 2 2006, 07:11 PM, said:

It definitly is leaving Springfield behind. The economic hub of MA is Boston and state goverment is based in Boston which is a long way from Springfield and the entire Pioneer Valley...at least Worcester can reak the benefits from the fact that its close to Boston

Yep, even though CT has it's main eye on Hartford, it still looks after the other cities as well. Bridgeport and New Haven in peticuliar.

[Cotuit]

The Commonwealth has been working furiously to bail out Springfield. If they cannot get their own house in order I hardly see why the rest of the Commonwealth should have to fund them.

[damus]

Cotuit, on Jul 4 2006, 09:18 PM, said:

The Commonwealth has been working furiously to bail out Springfield. If they cannot get their own house in order I hardly see why the rest of the Commonwealth should have to fund them.

Their portion of the line would only be $30 million. Wouldn't this commuter line make Springfield a more attractive place to do business, with direct access to Hartford and more importantly Bradley? How much does it cost to operate and maintain a commuter line?

[Cotuit]

damus, on Jul 4 2006, 09:26 PM, said:

Their portion of the line would only be $30 million. Wouldn't this commuter line make Springfield a more attractive place to do business, with direct access to Hartford and more importantly Bradley? How much does it cost to operate and maintain a commuter line?

I think the Commonwealth will fund the rail project, but the notion that the Commonwealth has abandoned Springfield isn't exactly fair. It's true that Boston gets a lot of the state's money, but it's also true that Boston makes a lot of the state's money. If the people of Springfield would elect some city leaders who could stay out of jail for a term or two, it would help the Commonwealth think it was worth working to fix the city. The alternative is a complete state take-over which is not good from a budget standpoint, nor from the standpoint of the fact that it removes a layer of democracy. But as I said, the people of Springfield haven't exactly shown they've been able to make good choices with that level of democracy.

[HartfordTycoon]

Cotuit, on Jul 4 2006, 09:40 PM, said:

I think the Commonwealth will fund the rail project, but the notion that the Commonwealth has abandoned Springfield isn't exactly fair. It's true that Boston gets a lot of the state's money, but it's also true that Boston makes a lot of the state's money. If the people of Springfield would elect some city leaders who could stay out of jail for a term or two, it would help the Commonwealth think it was worth working to fix the city. The alternative is a complete state take-over which is not good from a budget standpoint, nor from the standpoint of the fact that it removes a layer of democracy. But as I said, the people of Springfield haven't exactly shown they've been able to make good choices with that level of democracy.

Well to be fair to the citizens, I am sure the field of candidates is pretty small generally speaking. Most qualified canditates in W. Mass, probably don't want the headache of trying to fix Springfield. I think they need someone fairly young and optimistic for mayor.

[robm324]

^^That sort of hits the nail on the head for Springfield's political problems...everyone has an opinion for a way to fix the problems, no one really willing or competent enough to do anything about it....Right now the city is in the beginning stages of actually going in the right direction....and State control board that is overseeing the city finances has definitely helped....

I think the Mass. government will back the rail line.  It seems to me that while both Hartford and Springfield will gain from the commutter line going in, Springfield stands to see the most gain out of this.

[uconn99]

This commuter line needs to spur through BDL. There are already tracks in place near BDL, however I don't know where they lead to. Having a commuter line run through BDL would make it a easier alternative for Fairfield country residents not having to go into NYC. At least run a bus from the Windsor Locks station to the terminal if a rail spur can't be done.

[GHartford]

uconn99, on Jul 5 2006, 03:00 AM, said:

This commuter line needs to spur through BDL. There are already tracks in place near BDL, however I don't know where they lead to. Having a commuter line run through BDL would make it a easier alternative for Fairfield country residents not having to go into NYC. At least run a bus from the Windsor Locks station to the terminal if a rail spur can't be done.

I think a shuttle bus from the WL rail stop to Bradley is in the current plan. A rail spur would be better. Perhaps down the line....