Jump to content

H.B. Davis Building


mikel

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 106
  • Created
  • Last Reply

While it is a very tough decision to make, I believe the city has made the right decision. There is no guarantee that the developer will ever build anything. As someone pointed out, look at what happened with the Rennaissance Place lot.

What the city should do is set some conditions like:

-The lot would have to be paved and lit if ground is not broken within 1 year. Its not paved now, so no big deal... if however, the developer really wants to keep it a lot, make him at least make it an attractive one.

_Maybe void the sale if ground is not broken within 1 year, then the property goes back to the city.

This would keep the developer honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While it is a very tough decision to make, I believe the city has made the right decision. There is no guarantee that the developer will ever build anything. As someone pointed out, look at what happened with the Rennaissance Place lot.

What the city should do is set some conditions like:

-The lot would have to be paved and lit if ground is not broken within 1 year. Its not paved now, so no big deal... if however, the developer really wants to keep it a lot, make him at least make it an attractive one.

_Maybe void the sale if ground is not broken within 1 year, then the property goes back to the city.

This would keep the developer honest.

You would think the city would have simple rules like that? Maybe they do but the article fails to mention it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the missaplication of zoning and building code laws at its worst. A developer wants to do what nobody else has done and develop on the other side of 84 and the specs of a temporary parking lot stop him? The really needs to be a development agency to help overcome ridiculous nonsense like this. Isn't that what the CCEDA was supposed to do?

And this is a good reason why Hartford has a hard time getting projects off the ground. The city is to stubborn when it comes to regulations. Oh well at least we will get more parking once it is knocked down. :dontknow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While it is a very tough decision to make, I believe the city has made the right decision. There is no guarantee that the developer will ever build anything. As someone pointed out, look at what happened with the Rennaissance Place lot.

What the city should do is set some conditions like:

-The lot would have to be paved and lit if ground is not broken within 1 year. Its not paved now, so no big deal... if however, the developer really wants to keep it a lot, make him at least make it an attractive one.

_Maybe void the sale if ground is not broken within 1 year, then the property goes back to the city.

This would keep the developer honest.

Wasn't there an enforceable agreement between the city and the owner of the Main Street Asylum Street parking lot that he has to build something there within a certain time period? And wasn't the original agreement to get rid of the farmers market was to have a park until he develop the site? I mean park and parking ain't exactly the same thing even if you have the best lawyer money can buy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't there an enforceable agreement between the city and the owner of the Main Street Asylum Street parking lot that he has to build something there within a certain time period? And wasn't the original agreement to get rid of the farmers market was to have a park until he develop the site? I mean park and parking ain't exactly the same thing even if you have the best lawyer money can buy.
They lie , the devil is a LIAR!!! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: I Think???
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm...

The HBDavis building needs to be torn down!! I'd love to see some condos on that block! Condos for middle income people with an indoor pool, playground and a sercurity gate. It would be a way to start revitalizing the area.

JimS

I think Hartford is being stupid they don't built buildings like this no more :shok::angry::angry:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hartford was stupid to let it rot so bad, but now it's too late for that building. It's gone beyond repair. Let it go! It's needs to go.

Good Point!!!! The building is not svalagable and should be knocked down. Hopefully the land will get development soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

I'll believe it when I don't see it.

I think I am going to have to agree.

I have high hopes, but I have a hadt time accepting it untill it happens.

then I do a little dance.

The only downside is that there is no development planned there, and the destroyed building will lower the tax assessment of the lot lowering city rolls.

but I suppose in this case it works out because it is surely a bad look for the city and I think it encourages a little sketchier activity than just an empty parking lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The building will come down, I'm sure the recent removal of all scrap metal this year will affect the structure's integrity to the point it must come down. However, I don't think the intersection will be improved by this. An abandoned building will be replaced with a massively embarrassing sea of parking. Don't expect any development for a very long time, with I-84 and the ridiculous park nobody ever enters they built over it blocking it from any foot traffic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The building will come down, I'm sure the recent removal of all scrap metal this year will affect the structure's integrity to the point it must come down. However, I don't think the intersection will be improved by this. An abandoned building will be replaced with a massively embarrassing sea of parking. Don't expect any development for a very long time, with I-84 and the ridiculous park nobody ever enters they built over it blocking it from any foot traffic.

I have to agree. All we will get out of this is more parking north of 84.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Butt Ugly building gives the city a war torn feel. A parking lot looks better than downtown Beruit.

Beirut doesn't look half bad. It certainly gives the feel of a place far more urban and active than Hartford:

From 'El Camino SS' on SkyscraperCity:

2609401774_b1ef7e5f5d_b.jpg

More cranes than Hartford:

skyline2finale.jpg

Nicer waterfront:

2890709510076049015zjiznyphnx8.jpg

Urbanity-wise, surface parking is really no better than an unsalvageable building. Much of Chicago's South Side was gutted for these sorts of "improvements." Can't say it would look worse had they just left the abandoned buildings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be nice to see it go, but I hope the parcel will get developed sometime in the near future. Who knows maybe there are plans in the works????

Don't several people on this board despise this guy? Sounds like he makes a little sense, provided he's not totally BS'ing...

http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/editor...0,3717467.story

Is City Serious About Development?

September 24, 2008

Instead of criticizing our group's development progress as inadequate [editorial, Sept. 18, "Down With Butt Ugly"], The Courant should question whether city government is encouraging investment in and development of Hartford's assets. Ironically, as our group works with the city to carefully abate issues at 1161 Main St. (which we rescued from delinquent tax rolls), filing permits triggered the negative editorial. This city (and its newspaper) should encourage viable developments like those our group has advanced. Our $2 million investment turned 87-101 Spring St. from rundown tenement to attractive apartment complex. Our $3 million investment transformed the seedy old Ramada into the polished, 100-room Holiday Inn Express. At the new Homewood Suites, our $5 million of private equity revived a historic landmark, created jobs and increased vibrant hotel space. Yet The Courant couldn't be bothered to cover the opening, and harps even now about how long renovations spanned. Its Sept. 18 editorial even implied our group is to blame for Capitol West's languishing. That's amazing, because we do not own the building! Our proposal to the city of Hartford to purchase an adjacent property and develop 1161 Main St. has gone unanswered for months

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There may be a little BS in there, but I think it is more likely that he is appropriately frustrated with the paper and the city.

the facts are in his editorial. all of those things are true as far as I can tell. and the courant definately tried to smear his company for no good reason. Maybe the courant should do a better job supporting guys like this as he suggests by covering the grand opening with some photos etc.

if you think about how much positive press the Soverign bank renovation got its pretty amazing.

you would be frustrated if an equally historic, but much larger project got almost no press. Sure it took forever, but but it was a positive step for the city. a much larger positive step I might add than a bank branch and office.

Also it was the city that killed his condo plans, and Abe Giles, so that to me is his real issue and he wants to seperate himself from that problem while making his point that he has wanted to do something with this land and has had nothing but problems in trying to get it done.

Maybe we should bring back those articles about his proposed condos development.

a project that I very much supported, and could not believe fell apart the way it did.

Who Knows what will come of all of this, but I do at least understand his frustration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

Well, this may be a mixed blessing, and I'll explain why.

Butt Ugly

The part I'm concerned with is this comment: "McGovern said the city is envisioning the site as a bridge between downtown and the gateway to the North End, rather than an extension of downtown." Downtown already has a limited footprint, let's not limit it any further than we have to. I smell another one or two story development here, something that belongs in Glastonbury, not at the heels of downtown...

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.