Jump to content

The one thing


MadVlad

Recommended Posts

Ok, I'm going to pose this question, and please play along. If you could pick one thing, and only one thing, to change in Hartford, or the Hartford Metro, what would it be. I'm talking about the single most important thing, in your mind, that would change Hartford the most, in a positive way. I don't want lists, I just want one thing. Maybe when this is done, we can go through, see what the most people brought up, and try to work and get things done somehow one at a time.

So, being my idea, I'll break the ice. Until recently, I would have said downtown housing. However, things change, and I think the current most important thing that would change the area is jobs downtown. That means business retention and job creation. We need more business downtown. There was a reason they demolished a whole neighborhood for Constitution Plaza, Hartford was thriving business-wise. Well, we are now doing well residential-wise, so we need to bolster that with more business. Lower some tax rates, give a few incentives to get some more headquarters back here, maybe pop in a few new, state-of-the-art buildings for companies to drool over.

A state Government that will REDUCE TAXES. That is what I'd wish for. Why not make the state more business-friendly and create jobs for all of the citizens of Connecticut. Just look at the state of New Jersey and what the Dems did to the GARDEN STATE TAXPAYERS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I would like to see annaxtion of surrounding towns, preferably West Hartford or East Hartford. 17.3 sq miles of city proper just seems to be a little to small for a major city.

It won't ever happen. To many NUTMEGGERS like the local government. You'd have to give something to the resident of East Hartford to become part of Hartford. East Hartford doesn't want the higher property taxes or the crime. What would you give to either west Hartford or East Hartford to annex them? Nothing! If you annex West Hartford - home values would drop on Avon Mountain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How bout keep 91 above ground, on the East Hartford side-

This would also create the need for atleast 2 more bridges, which help the skyline in my opinion-- maybe make the charter oak wider, containing 91, or right along the charter oak, then along the riverfront somehow of east hartford, and back across the river after the park near the meadows...

All of this would weaken the need for 291 a little though

Boy, if that is what you guys want to do with the ANNEXATION of East Hartford -- to make it into I91, I know I would never support it - the annexation. Now, how would do plan on building the 'new I91'? Have you thought of what it would cost the TAXPAYERS?

Also, what woould you say to the farmers on the East Hartford - and South Windsor floodplains? That your land is better being UNDER a highway than being used to GROW FOOD? Ever thought of what the mixmaster (Route 2, I84 and Connecticut Blvd) would be if 91 was there? How about the businesses that are in the way? Going to tell them Bye?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It won't ever happen. To many NUTMEGGERS like the local government. You'd have to give something to the resident of East Hartford to become part of Hartford. East Hartford doesn't want the higher property taxes or the crime. What would you give to either west Hartford or East Hartford to annex them? Nothing! If you annex West Hartford - home values would drop on Avon Mountain.

Yeah I know annexation is almost a dead issue, but home values in West Hartford wouldn't neccesarily drop. Hartford's west end actually has some really beautiful homes, I'm sure their worth a good amount of money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, what woould you say to the farmers on the East Hartford - and South Windsor floodplains? That your land is better being UNDER a highway than being used to GROW FOOD? Ever thought of what the mixmaster (Route 2, I84 and Connecticut Blvd) would be if 91 was there? How about the businesses that are in the way? Going to tell them Bye?

How do you think every single highway was every built?!?!!?!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It won't ever happen. To many NUTMEGGERS like the local government. You'd have to give something to the resident of East Hartford to become part of Hartford. East Hartford doesn't want the higher property taxes or the crime. What would you give to either west Hartford or East Hartford to annex them? Nothing! If you annex West Hartford - home values would drop on Avon Mountain.

Jim, you apparently haven't been to East Hartford lately, it's no treat, trust me. What you're trying to tell is is that because East Hartford suddenly becomes part of Hartford proper that there will be more crime? How's that work? People just say "hey, that part over the river there is now part of our city, let's go cause more crime!". Please, give me a break...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim, you apparently haven't been to East Hartford lately, it's no treat, trust me. What you're trying to tell is is that because East Hartford suddenly becomes part of Hartford proper that there will be more crime? How's that work? People just say "hey, that part over the river there is now part of our city, let's go cause more crime!". Please, give me a break...

....as if East Hartford doesn't already have it's fair share of crime and blight. Let's get real. Only good things would come to East Hartford if they merged with Hartford. More political clout for a larger Hartford, Representation at Hartford City Hall as opposed to East Hartford Town Hall, possibly more state investment, and not being simply a suburb, but rather Hartford's East Side. If I lived there I would vote for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I know annexation is almost a dead issue, but home values in West Hartford wouldn't neccesarily drop. Hartford's west end actually has some really beautiful homes, I'm sure their worth a good amount of money.

drc72:

You're correct. The west End of Hartford has some nice homes. I wasn't trying to say anything bad about Hartford, but some of us don't say we live in (for me, for instance) East Hartford, but either Sunset Ridge, Mayberry, Timber Trail, Silver Lane, etc. A friend of mine who lived in West Hartford, says he lives in Elmwood.

What I'm saying is that even the 'towns' are too big.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you think every single highway was every built?!?!!?!?

Yes, I know how every single highway was built. They took people homes and businesses. Still tell me how'd you'd link the new I-91? Without distroying 1) The CBD of East Hartford, 2) the eastern side of the Connecticut River - and GREAT RIVER PARK or 3) with the least amount of land damage -- and at the lowest cost to TAXPAYERS!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim, you apparently haven't been to East Hartford lately, it's no treat, trust me. What you're trying to tell is is that because East Hartford suddenly becomes part of Hartford proper that there will be more crime? How's that work? People just say "hey, that part over the river there is now part of our city, let's go cause more crime!". Please, give me a break...

MadVlad:

I left East Hartford 2 years ago. Matter of fact I moved from my house I grew up in (since 1964). East Hartford is a safe city (In a 1970s book, published I think in 1975 or 1976, it was the 20th safest city of 50,000 or more.) East Hartford is still moderatly safe. That doesn't have ANYTHING to do with why I think it would be a bad idea, but Hartford crime rate will make East Hartford's insurance rates for business higher and with a bigger government the taxes will be increased.

Another thing about annexing:

1) If you are going to merge police departments (lets say West & East Hartford do get Annexed) who would be the chief? The Hartford cheif? And what about senoirity of the police?

2) The town council -- East Hartford has 9 council members (I believe Hartford and West Hartford has 9 also!), so will the council be made up of 27 members? If not, how would you do it so all citizens will be REPRESENTED!

3) The school board -- again -- how would you set it up? What about senority for the teachers? Will it be neighborhood schools? (It would have 6 high schools --- HPHS, Buckley, Weaver, Hall, Conard and EHHS, but how would it be?)

4) the business climate? Again it can't be a big government because businesses can leave. How would you service them?

Just my thoughts...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....as if East Hartford doesn't already have it's fair share of crime and blight. Let's get real. Only good things would come to East Hartford if they merged with Hartford. More political clout for a larger Hartford, Representation at Hartford City Hall as opposed to East Hartford Town Hall, possibly more state investment, and not being simply a suburb, but rather Hartford's East Side. If I lived there I would vote for that.

Tycoon:

Read my last post! How would you create a new city council? Property tax rates and the fire and police departments. If you give the chief to someone from Hartford for instance you might get the union for the other upset.

I'm keeping an open mind -- eventhough here I'm trying to incorperate a city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I know how every single highway was built. They took people homes and businesses. Still tell me how'd you'd link the new I-91? Without distroying 1) The CBD of East Hartford, 2) the eastern side of the Connecticut River - and GREAT RIVER PARK or 3) with the least amount of land damage -- and at the lowest cost to TAXPAYERS!!

highways are relocated all the time at a cost to the taxpayers... what they could get in return is generally greater than what they have to pay. not everything is like boston where it cost them more than they're getting (and still costing them in both money and lives).

look at providence and 195 for example. they took land for that, but it's freeing up even more land than it took.

the real estate on the river in east hartford would not be as sought after as the real estate along the river in hartford (if it existed).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

highways are relocated all the time at a cost to the taxpayers... what they could get in return is generally greater than what they have to pay. not everything is like boston where it cost them more than they're getting (and still costing them in both money and lives).

look at providence and 195 for example. they took land for that, but it's freeing up even more land than it took.

the real estate on the river in east hartford would not be as sought after as the real estate along the river in hartford (if it existed).

The real estate on the river in East Hartford would not be as sough after as the real estate in Hartford? Sorry but I have to disagree. Waterfront property is in demand! If I decide to build a 25 store condo complex complete with a marina, I would build it where land would be cheaper --- if demand of East Hartford waterfront is not as in demand as Hartford, I would get the land cheaper, which means I can build the condo and sell the condos for less.

Of course, I think the demand is going north in North Meadows (in Hartford) and on East Hartford's north of Connecticut Boulevard. Goodwin College will be on Riverfrond Drive area if I'm not mistaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I categorically disagree that towns are too big. Because people feel the need to say they live in Elmwood because West Hartford is a big town is not a valid reason. I think there would be a greater good if municipalities were larger. All of the problems you suggest are not unsolvable, given the right amount of motivation. Yes there would be some downsizing, but there is an unreasonable amount of reproduction of services that does not exist in municipalities around the country that are larger. I think that overall a larger more powerful capital city would be better for all the citizens of West Hartford, East Hartford, and Hartford.

Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I categorically disagree that towns are too big. Because people feel the need to say they live in Elmwood because West Hartford is a big town is not a valid reason. I think there would be a greater good if municipalities were larger. All of the problems you suggest are not unsolvable, given the right amount of motivation. Yes there would be some downsizing, but there is an unreasonable amount of reproduction of services that does not exist in municipalities around the country that are larger. I think that overall a larger more powerful capital city would be better for all the citizens of West Hartford, East Hartford, and Hartford.

Just my opinion.

I agree. Merging WH, EH, and Hartford together would definitely make a stronger capitol city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All these questions seem like small potatos compared to ther positives of the cities merging. Seniority of the police and teachers? There are much greater issues than merging the seniority lists. It's seemless, I work for AT&T and it's a non issue. Guy A was hired prior to guy B, he's higher in seniority. The city council would obviously have to be restructured, but again, I don't see that as being an issue. Someone doesn't need to live in your neighborhood to adequitely represent you. After the City Council/mayor/upper echelon of City Hall gets under way, then they decide who will be the overall chief of Police/Fire, just like in a a regular city. Jim, you like to pump up business, well, treat this like a Business merger. One CEO gets a lower title than the other, it's just the way it works. And, just like other business', if the guy that doesn't get the job doesn't like it, he can try and ply his trade elsewhere, isn't that the conservative, pro-business way you endorse? C'mon man, you aren't shattering the plan here, everything you brought up could be worked around with minimal issues.

And btw, I can't imagine East Hartford having any sort of enviable insurance rates. Will they go a little higher, maybe, will Hartford's go down too, probably. I'd rather have the cog of the wheel healthier with minimal deterioration of the spokes.

And your point about the High Schools.... there isn't a point. What does it matter if there are 6 in the new enlarged city? Keep the districts the same, no muss, no fuss, who cares. And just to remind you, this is 30 years past 1976, East Hartford, as you should know, is a shell of the city it was then...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, how would do plan on building the 'new I91'? Have you thought of what it would cost the TAXPAYERS?

There are billions of our tax dollars allocated for projects such as these. If Hartford doesn't feel it is worthy to compete for some of the money, it will simply be spent elsewhere.

I say burry them both. You could begin to burry I-91 after the Charter Oak exit and bring it back up around the Meadows area North of downtown. You could still use all the exisiting exits on 91 and the interchange with 84 would be underground.

On the 84 side, you could start to bury it right after you get over the river from East Hartford. You would have to have it be above ground I would think until about the current location of the tunnel since 91 would also be underground.

84 could come back up to the surface after Capitol ave.

If I-84 was to be rerouted from the center of Hartford, where will it go?

Here's a farfetched idea:

When traveling on I-84 east, the road starts to veer north soon after crossing from West Hartford into Hartford. The hill that Trinity College sits on is directly to the east.

I have imagined the highway heading directly towards Trinity. It would "cut" through the hill and emerge east of the college. Just past Bulkely High School near Warwarme Avenue the Hartford skyline looms across Colts Park as the expressway aligns with the Charter Oak Bridge. A couple of blocks on each side of Trinity would probably need to be razed. But that is nothing compared to what was destroyed for the zig-zag path that it follows now. I didn't do any measuring, but this route would actually shorten the path of I-84.

The Bulkely bridge could then be restored as a landscaped (Connecticut) boulevard linking Main Street in Hartford to Main Street in East Hartford.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are billions of our tax dollars allocated for projects such as these. If Hartford doesn't feel it is worthy to compete for some of the money, it will simply be spent elsewhere.

If I-84 was to be rerouted from the center of Hartford, where will it go?

Here's a farfetched idea:

When traveling on I-84 east, the road starts to veer north soon after crossing from West Hartford into Hartford. The hill that Trinity College sits on is directly to the east.

I have imagined the highway heading directly towards Trinity. It would "cut" through the hill and emerge east of the college. Just past Bulkely High School near Warwarme Avenue the Hartford skyline looms across Colts Park as the expressway aligns with the Charter Oak Bridge. A couple of blocks on each side of Trinity would probably need to be razed. But that is nothing compared to what was destroyed for the zig-zag path that it follows now. I didn't do any measuring, but this route would actually shorten the path of I-84.

The Bulkely bridge could then be restored as a landscaped (Connecticut) boulevard linking Main Street in Hartford to Main Street in East Hartford.

That sound pretty good, I admit being a little leary of razing any more of Hartford's architecture though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

drc72:

Still how would you combine the council? 9 member council?18? 27? You still didn't answer my questions!!

new elections, or you do the seniority thing... but new elections would probably be the best... and the council would obviously end up bigger than what the individual ones are now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

new elections, or you do the seniority thing... but new elections would probably be the best... and the council would obviously end up bigger than what the individual ones are now.

The council would become larger and it would make sense to create council districts as currently all of the councils are at large in their respective municipalities. It really wouldn't be a big deal. The people with the most to fear are the ones who currently run Hartford in my opinion. Maybe that's why the city never even acts like they are interested in annexation.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All these questions seem like small potatos compared to ther positives of the cities merging. Seniority of the police and teachers? There are much greater issues than merging the seniority lists. It's seemless, I work for AT&T and it's a non issue. Guy A was hired prior to guy B, he's higher in seniority. The city council would obviously have to be restructured, but again, I don't see that as being an issue. Someone doesn't need to live in your neighborhood to adequitely represent you. After the City Council/mayor/upper echelon of City Hall gets under way, then they decide who will be the overall chief of Police/Fire, just like in a a regular city. Jim, you like to pump up business, well, treat this like a Business merger. One CEO gets a lower title than the other, it's just the way it works. And, just like other business', if the guy that doesn't get the job doesn't like it, he can try and ply his trade elsewhere, isn't that the conservative, pro-business way you endorse? C'mon man, you aren't shattering the plan here, everything you brought up could be worked around with minimal issues.

And btw, I can't imagine East Hartford having any sort of enviable insurance rates. Will they go a little higher, maybe, will Hartford's go down too, probably. I'd rather have the cog of the wheel healthier with minimal deterioration of the spokes.

And your point about the High Schools.... there isn't a point. What does it matter if there are 6 in the new enlarged city? Keep the districts the same, no muss, no fuss, who cares. And just to remind you, this is 30 years past 1976, East Hartford, as you should know, is a shell of the city it was then...

MadVlad:

I do agree with you -- East Hartford is not the same city as it was in 1976 (Another exhibit of a one party rule and what ANY PARTY in power can do.) However, a government is not a BUSINESS... stockholders can vote for a merger, will the voters of the city have the choice? Again, lets say the council is 18 people what will the districts be? Southeast East Hartford (the most Republican part of East Hartford) should not be lumped in with Southwest East Hartford -- where most of the minority live. Not being racists but it is true. Southeastern East Hartford has more in common with Manchester and Glastonbury then downtown East Hartford.)

Still, I would like to see an annexation if it would help East Hartford, also. I would love to see the Ed King Museum of Tobacco and Aerospace get a new museum -- instead of being on the second floor of the Raymond Library.

Remember MadVlad, if you are working for Guy A and Guy B took the job , the people under Guy A might not listen to Guy B. Human nature!!

I doubt you'll se an annexation, because of the MAJOR issues facing the state -- and annexation of towns would not be talked about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are billions of our tax dollars allocated for projects such as these. If Hartford doesn't feel it is worthy to compete for some of the money, it will simply be spent elsewhere.

If I-84 was to be rerouted from the center of Hartford, where will it go?

Here's a farfetched idea:

When traveling on I-84 east, the road starts to veer north soon after crossing from West Hartford into Hartford. The hill that Trinity College sits on is directly to the east.

I have imagined the highway heading directly towards Trinity. It would "cut" through the hill and emerge east of the college. Just past Bulkely High School near Warwarme Avenue the Hartford skyline looms across Colts Park as the expressway aligns with the Charter Oak Bridge. A couple of blocks on each side of Trinity would probably need to be razed. But that is nothing compared to what was destroyed for the zig-zag path that it follows now. I didn't do any measuring, but this route would actually shorten the path of I-84.

The Bulkely bridge could then be restored as a landscaped (Connecticut) boulevard linking Main Street in Hartford to Main Street in East Hartford.

Ok.. but where would it connect on the eastern part of 84? I think it would be connect to Charter Oak Bridge to connect to 84 right?

new elections, or you do the seniority thing... but new elections would probably be the best... and the council would obviously end up bigger than what the individual ones are now.

Ok that would be fine! west Hartford -- of the 3 is the most Republican of them. City Manager or a mayor?

The council would become larger and it would make sense to create council districts as currently all of the councils are at large in their respective municipalities. It really wouldn't be a big deal. The people with the most to fear are the ones who currently run Hartford in my opinion. Maybe that's why the city never even acts like they are interested in annexation.......

Tycoon:

Is robert Painter still on Hartford's council?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok.. but where would it connect on the eastern part of 84? I think it would be connect to Charter Oak Bridge to connect to 84 right?

Ok that would be fine! west Hartford -- of the 3 is the most Republican of them. City Manager or a mayor?

Tycoon:

Is robert Painter still on Hartford's council?

Yes, he's the minority leader and a great guy. My mom knows him very well and we actually supported him in the election, even though he's from across the isle. I vote for the person and what they stand for individually. I am not a blind partisan, I just had to throw that in. Sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MadVlad:

I do agree with you -- East Hartford is not the same city as it was in 1976 (Another exhibit of a one party rule and what ANY PARTY in power can do.) However, a government is not a BUSINESS... stockholders can vote for a merger, will the voters of the city have the choice? Again, lets say the council is 18 people what will the districts be? Southeast East Hartford (the most Republican part of East Hartford) should not be lumped in with Southwest East Hartford -- where most of the minority live. Not being racists but it is true. Southeastern East Hartford has more in common with Manchester and Glastonbury then downtown East Hartford.)

Still, I would like to see an annexation if it would help East Hartford, also. I would love to see the Ed King Museum of Tobacco and Aerospace get a new museum -- instead of being on the second floor of the Raymond Library.

Remember MadVlad, if you are working for Guy A and Guy B took the job , the people under Guy A might not listen to Guy B. Human nature!!

I doubt you'll se an annexation, because of the MAJOR issues facing the state -- and annexation of towns would not be talked about.

No offense Jim, but you really are bringing up moot points. I don't think it would be an issue to draw up some council lines that are fair to everyone. And I really don't see the point you're making about Guy A's people not working for Guy B. It's a fact of life, people change positions, new bosses replace old bosses. I don't think it's human nature for someone to automatically not want to work for someone. But I do agree, there is little chance we'll ever see any of this happen, but the point is we're all being speculative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.