Hartford Negativity

[redbaron]

One thing to keep in mind is that in many other cities nationwide, "Hartford" would include West Hartford, East Hartford, Wetherfield, etc. and no one has a problem living in those towns. The footprint of Hartford is so small, it is entirely urbanized. You could still live in "St Louis" while residing 1/2 hour from downtown so in that sense, Hartford gets a bad rap.

[Whaler0718]

Agreed.

I think people get really short-sighted. Cheap land, cheap labor, cheap parking in the suburbs. Leave all the problems behind in Hartford.

Great idea. Enjoy your tax bill.

I for one would rather pay more for something in order to support somebody's fair wage than to pay less for it, see him suffer and turn to drugs and/or violence, and then get to pay the tax bill both to support him and to pay for the ills of drugs and violence.

The whole point of government is to help remedy market failure, but when you couple market failure and government failure, oh man, does it ever suck.

Invest in Hartford--a rising tide helps all boats. Tycoon is right. The vast majority of Hartford's citizens are good, hard working people.

That is one of the problems, all of the suburbs of Hartford could pretty much careless what happens in the city, because they are not "Hartford". I think the fact Connecticut (one of two states) that has no form of county government hurts Hartford in that respect. Group all of Hartford County together and it's a pretty thriving region. Maybe if some of those services that county governments provide Hartford wouldn't be in the situation it is now. If there was a county government controlling the schools, roads, planning, we wouldn't have the Bucklands and West Farms or Day Hill Roads. We'd probably have a pretty good mass transit system and really thriving small town centers.

[HartfordTycoon]

Education reform is one of the keys for not only Hartford's but the nation's survival. I feel it is a losing battle to try to turn entire populations of poor kids from undereducated families into first generation scholars. There's not a great tradition of education in many of these families due to many historical factors. However this tradition is pretty vital in successfully completing a college tract K-12 education and college degree program. So, I would suggest a more focused approach even though I know many in the community will find it hard to swollow at first. This approach would involve greaty expanding vocational education, apprenticeship programs with the various trades, and entreprenuership development. This will allow those who mainly contribute to the wayward population to contribute more constructively while also improving their quality of life in the long run. It would also allow for College prep curriculums to be more focused and intensive since the kids who are there all intend to go to college. This would go a long way in my opinion to get those who prefer to work with their hands working and those who prefer to work with their minds learning. Not implying there would be no 1st generation scholars, under this set up there could conceivably be more since kids will be where they fit in academically. Just my 2 cents on education and society.....

[Whaler0718]

HartfordTycoon has hit on the value of Hartford's middle class, and I think this article makes a really good point that it is risky business to try to pin urban renewal entirely on arts and entertainment.

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article...ils.php?id=7072

I've also been reading about the back-lash to the smart growth strategy of Portland, Or and similar issues in places like Charlotte. Might be interesting to get a discussion going about some of those articles. I don't have time to post them now, but I will tomorrow.

[HartfordTycoon]

HartfordTycoon has hit on the value of Hartford's middle class, and I think this article makes a really good point that it is risky business to try to pin urban renewal entirely on arts and entertainment.

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article...ils.php?id=7072

I've also been reading about the back-lash to the smart growth strategy of Portland, Or and similar issues in places like Charlotte. Might be interesting to get a discussion going about some of those articles. I don't have time to post them now, but I will tomorrow.

[jcrc]

I don't think I can agree with the article. Sure if you take the peak of the dot com period then measure the decline, those cities mentioned will come out worse than the national average. However if you look at where they were prior to the PC age and where they are now, those cities with high tech sector are not likely to be below national average. So instead of looking at "San Francisco has lost roughly 10 per cent of its jobs and 4 per cent of its residents since 1999." A fairer presentation will be look at San Francisco from the beginning of PC age, or from 1980 to today. I am too lazy to look it up, but I am going to guess it does not support the article's point of view. What the author does not understand is high growth sector goes through boom and bust, but in the long run its increase is going to be greater than the average. At any rate cool city strategy is not just about having whole bunch of programmers, and cool city strategy is not about ignoring basic services such as school and infrastructures. It is about having an amenity-rich environment so that people with spending power want to live or visit the community.

Also, according to the article, non-hip normal people prefer the suburbs and the moment they can afford it they move to the burbs, then it would seem to me the more a city invest in "schools for families, transport that works, jobs for the middle and the aspiring working classes" the more it will see its middle class residents moving away. There is a flaw in its logic there.

[JayHass]

That is one of the problems, all of the suburbs of Hartford could pretty much careless what happens in the city, because they are not "Hartford". I think the fact Connecticut (one of two states) that has no form of county government hurts Hartford in that respect. Group all of Hartford County together and it's a pretty thriving region. Maybe if some of those services that county governments provide Hartford wouldn't be in the situation it is now. If there was a county government controlling the schools, roads, planning, we wouldn't have the Bucklands and West Farms or Day Hill Roads. We'd probably have a pretty good mass transit system and really thriving small town centers.

[HartfordTycoon]

I disagree with first part of your post. I care greatly about Hartford as do many people I know that live outside of the city borders. We are not stupid and understand that if the hub breaks down, the spokes and wheel goes with it.

I agree with the statement that it's a thriving region as a whole.

I disagree that government control is the answer. Good Lord as if we don't have enough of that in this state. Our budget has DOUBLED since the early 90's and taxes have increased to the point average working families are leaving in droves...but that's another thread.

If the government can't get a retail project on Front street right, what makes you think they will be efficient in other areas? Time after time after time government has been shown to be overprices and inefficient. In fact I'd go so far to say it's government that has caused this problem, lack of it in some areas and too much of it in others.

And what's wrong with "The bucklands"? I'd say it's a very sucessful development in the suburbs of Hartford. What wrong with that? They have been so efficient in their use of space it's silly. It's a tidy area with lots of retailers packed into one area. The "Bucklands" didn't cause the demise of DT Hartford, they grew out of the demand of the people. Think about it.

[Whaler0718]

I don't think I can agree with the article. Sure if you take the peak of the dot com period then measure the decline, those cities mentioned will come out worse than the national average. However if you look at where they were prior to the PC age and where they are now, those cities with high tech sector are not likely to be below national average. So instead of looking at "San Francisco has lost roughly 10 per cent of its jobs and 4 per cent of its residents since 1999." A fairer presentation will be look at San Francisco from the beginning of PC age, or from 1980 to today. I am too lazy to look it up, but I am going to guess it does not support the article's point of view. What the author does not understand is high growth sector goes through boom and bust, but in the long run its increase is going to be greater than the average. At any rate cool city strategy is not just about having whole bunch of programmers, and cool city strategy is not about ignoring basic services such as school and infrastructures. It is about having an amenity-rich environment so that people with spending power want to live or visit the community.

Also, according to the article, non-hip normal people prefer the suburbs and the moment they can afford it they move to the burbs, then it would seem to me the more a city invest in "schools for families, transport that works, jobs for the middle and the aspiring working classes" the more it will see its middle class residents moving away. There is a flaw in its logic there.

[Recchia]

And what's wrong with "The bucklands"? I'd say it's a very sucessful development in the suburbs of Hartford. What wrong with that? They have been so efficient in their use of space it's silly. It's a tidy area with lots of retailers packed into one area. The "Bucklands" didn't cause the demise of DT Hartford, they grew out of the demand of the people. Think about it.

[Whaler0718]

I disagree with first part of your post. I care greatly about Hartford as do many people I know that live outside of the city borders. We are not stupid and understand that if the hub breaks down, the spokes and wheel goes with it.

I agree with the statement that it's a thriving region as a whole.

I disagree that government control is the answer. Good Lord as if we don't have enough of that in this state. Our budget has DOUBLED since the early 90's and taxes have increased to the point average working families are leaving in droves...but that's another thread.

If the government can't get a retail project on Front street right, what makes you think they will be efficient in other areas? Time after time after time government has been shown to be overprices and inefficient. In fact I'd go so far to say it's government that has caused this problem, lack of it in some areas and too much of it in others.

And what's wrong with "The bucklands"? I'd say it's a very sucessful development in the suburbs of Hartford. What wrong with that? They have been so efficient in their use of space it's silly. It's a tidy area with lots of retailers packed into one area. The "Bucklands" didn't cause the demise of DT Hartford, they grew out of the demand of the people. Think about it.

[blink55184]

Whaler- I used to have some anti-sprawl ideas that it seems you are trying to convey.

Then I read "Sprawl, A Compact History" by Robert Bruegmann

Changed alot of my views, you should give it a read, its very interesting and at any library

[Bill Mocarsky]

And what's wrong with "The bucklands"? I'd say it's a very sucessful development in the suburbs of Hartford. What wrong with that? They have been so efficient in their use of space it's silly. It's a tidy area with lots of retailers packed into one area. The "Bucklands" didn't cause the demise of DT Hartford, they grew out of the demand of the people. Think about it.

[blink55184]

I've never been to this area but I've seen it on satellite images. I think the reason some would say it is a bad development is because it is 100% auto-oriented. I would assume that many Hartford residents, just like many residents of mid-sized cities do not have access to an automobile(or would like to not have access to one, in order to save money). How does this development cater to them at all? maybe a bus or two runs out to the site, but the area's isolation and lack of walkability makes it harder to be served by anything other than a private car. Sure it's efficient for cars but not for other forms of transportation.

[JayHass]

Of course its automobile oriented, what in our country these days isnt?! Even inner cities are littered with parking lots and parking garages.

Even our fast food/drivethrus are catered to the automobile, thats just part of american culture in our day and age.

There are sidewalks everywhere in buckland, although not many people opt to use them.

CT Transit from Hartford and Manchester and other towns serves Buckland with routes L, L1, B1, B2, B3, X, X1, Z3, the BKM Buckland Flyer, and some others I'm sure

[blink55184]

Evergreen is an interesting outdoor atmosphere with a lot of sidewalk traffic-

I think itll get real interesting when the luxury condos are built behind it.

The town of S.Windsor already knocked it down once, I cant remember if it was zoning or what,

but the developer is persistant and close to getting approved.

That is why Highland Park Market moved into evergreen in the first place.

That location is struggling bad by the way

[Whaler0718]

I agree, and in fact find more people from Hartford shopping at Buckland than not. Go to the mall on a Saturday night if you don't beleive me. lol

As for the area being a waste of space, not "green" or underutilized, not pedestrian friendly etc etc...I don't know it works for me. I like it. I shop there all the time as do thousands of people. It's a suburban shopping center - not an inner city center. I like West Hartford too and go there often for the restaurants, I can't remember the last time I bought something from West Hartford. Just being realistic.

You are not going to fit the big box stores into a walk around area like West Hartford. You tell my significant other that she is going to lose her Target and then get out of the way.

Oh, and Evergreen Walk is all outdoor. You guys should go there sometime and actually see it.

As for it being "ugly" around there. I dunno, I consider burnt out crack houses ugly...not nicely landscaped shopping centers. But that's just me.

Traffic is not that bad IMO. I never really have any problems...sometimes I can get crowded but certainly tollerable. You guys can't make an inner city arguement for a suburban shopping center, nor can you blame the burbs for Hartfords lack of developement in that area. Government control is not the answer.

[HartfordTycoon]

I agree, and in fact find more people from Hartford shopping at Buckland than not. Go to the mall on a Saturday night if you don't beleive me. lol

As for the area being a waste of space, not "green" or underutilized, not pedestrian friendly etc etc...I don't know it works for me. I like it. I shop there all the time as do thousands of people. It's a suburban shopping center - not an inner city center. I like West Hartford too and go there often for the restaurants, I can't remember the last time I bought something from West Hartford. Just being realistic.

You are not going to fit the big box stores into a walk around area like West Hartford. You tell my significant other that she is going to lose her Target and then get out of the way.

Oh, and Evergreen Walk is all outdoor. You guys should go there sometime and actually see it.

As for it being "ugly" around there. I dunno, I consider burnt out crack houses ugly...not nicely landscaped shopping centers. But that's just me.

Traffic is not that bad IMO. I never really have any problems...sometimes I can get crowded but certainly tollerable. You guys can't make an inner city arguement for a suburban shopping center, nor can you blame the burbs for Hartfords lack of developement in that area. Government control is not the answer.

[blink55184]

And I've seen Evergreen Walk. I like that it's outdoors. And it would work perfectly at Front Street.

[doz180]

There is a Target in downtown Brooklyn so you can put big box retail in the heart of an urban setting. Downtown Hartford used to be the main shopping destination for the region.

If you want to imply that Hartford is full of

[ctman987]

First there is smart growth in greater Hartford outside of the city limits and that smart growth does not include Buckland or Evergreen Walk for that matter.

Glastonbury was home to the nations first lifestyle center "Somerset Square" Somerset Square does not include residential but it does include a shopping area with outward facing retail and limited parking. There is also lots of office space surrounding the shops and employees at such companies like Bank of America which has offices there can walk over to Talbots to shop or Max Amore for dinner. Towards the center of Glastonbury along Main Street (near Hebron Avenue) there is a walkable downtown area with shops, restaurants, the library, etc. There is a CVS there and CVS sent in 14 differant applications and designs till the town found one it liked. There is an independant hardware store along Main Street. Just around the corner on Hebron Avenue "Eric Towne Square" is under construction and this project is being built tightly between exisitng shops and offices. This mixued use project will also include underground parking...yes in the suburbs. The town has shown it can support Greater Hartford's second Whole Foods...and this will open in an existing mall...that is close in downtown Glastonbury.

Over in West Hartford, one cannot overlook the accomplishments of West Hartford Center with its shops, restaurants, offices, library and town hall. Adjacent is Blue Back Square...which everyone has mixed feelings on but noone can argue that this project is being tightly built into an area that already had something built on it with smart growth measures to encourage walking. There will also be residential here which is key.

Projects like The Shoppes at Evergreen Walk and the Shops at Farmington Valley claim to be lifestyle centers...and they are in a way. But they lack multiple mixed uses. There are shops at Evergreen Walk and some office space but people still drive their to shop then leave after and cant really walk around the area because it is full of traffic. True mixed use projects like these should include office space, retail space, residential space...and even if this is all built here it will be hard to undo the high traffic volume surrounding it all which discourages walking.

I ran across a project in Kansas City called Zona Rosa which actually includes retail in the form of a lifestyle center, along with dining establishments, office space, residential units, and events (events that draw people together in a common area). There is also metered parking, surface lot parking and garage parking which means if you want to park close you have to pay ..meaning the meters are on the streets (this would never happen at Evergreen Walk)

Web Site: http://www.zonarosa.com/

And now on HARTFORD:

I personally love Hartford and yes am one of those so called Hartford Cheerleaders. I am in college in NYC but still cannot turn my back on Hartford even though I am in the greatest city on earth. My family was a Hartford family...my grandparents came to Hartford from Italy and bought apartment buildings in the north end, downtown and west end before finally moving to Wethersfield in their old age. My mom, aunt and uncle grew up in the city, went to school their (Trinity, UHART, etc), worked there for summer jobs (G Fox, Sage Allen, etc) and then formed lives of their own in the Hartford area. At one point in their life their lives revolved around Hartford. One of my aunts worked for Travelers before moving to California with her family (although she has now returned and works for MetLife), my uncle works for Loctite (Henkel) which has moved to Rocky Hill and my aunt works for Bank of America and used to work downtown but now works in Farmington. Much of my families life doesnt involve Hartford anymore...and yes this bothers me a lot.

I do though bring them downtown to eat at the tons of great restaurants in the city (from Francesco's in the south end to Braza in the west end to all the ones downtown). I also bring them downtown for events such as New Years Eve, 4th of July, St Pattys Parade, etc. When they come they always reminsice of all the good memories they had...such as cashing checks at the former society for savings which is now Joe Blacks. They want the best for Hartford but do not bend over backwards like I do for the city...because they have actually seen it change from good to bad and now slowly heading back to good.

There is new hope though in my family. On my dads side of the family I have an aunt who used to work at Yale in New Haven for years before getting a job last year at the CT Childrens Medical Center. She makes the daily commute up to the capital city from the New Haven area and at first was a little aprehensive about the change (her car was broken into during her first month). But now a year later she loves her job, the people at CCMC and the city of Hartford. She has made great people and been to all those galas, events, etc throughout the city that are hosted by the middle and upper class who are still involved in their city.

I personally want the best for Hartford and thats that

[Recchia]

Big boxes don't have to be 100% automobile-oriented. They can be built to cater better to pedestrians and buses:

[Whaler0718]

ctman987,

Nice post. I appreciate your perspective. I think a lot of people are nostalgic about the city, but they had to make wise choices, personally, and that involved moving out. I also appreciate what you note about the thriving town centers surrounding Hartford, and I totally agree and support that. A lot of research on "new suburbia" or the "new urban" (whatever you want to call it) emphasizes population clusters within a given region. You can achieve pretty good density in places like Glastonbury and West Hartford, promote neighborhoods, and walking, and tie those centers with others and, ultimately, with a hub (Hartford). I agree with Tycoon that thriving suburbs are, in general, good for Hartford, but I think it's important to define and channel that success.

On a side note, I enjoyed your aunt's story about her initial misgivings about Hartford, in part due to her car having been broken into. Within my first three months here, I had my car radio stolen ... and they did $800 of damage to the door by popping the lock. (The radio was worth about $125). Anyway, I got a removable face-plate after that, and continued to park my car in the same spot on the street for another two years without incident. I now have off street parking (and a new car ... fingers crossed!)

But it's true that a lot of people would have bolted. I'm a little stubborn and thick-skinned. My attitude, generally is, I want to live here and some drug-addict who needs a fix isn't going to push me out. For about three weeks after the radio was stolen, I pretty much woke up ever two hours to look out the window--I'm not sure what I would've done had I seen somebody breaking into my car, nothing or something stupid are the two things that come to mind. I have a colleague who lives on Columbia Street. She's even thicker-skinned and more stubborn; her car is broken into with some degree of regularity, but she loves her home and her neighbors. I appreciate the fact that not everybody is willing to deal with those risks, and I don't view it as a necessary byproduct of urban living. But for me, the positives of living in Hartford have far outweighed the negatives.

[JayHass]

Well we just have a difference of opinion. I think the Buckland area is hideous, congested, and impossible to navigate. And there are plenty of Targets in city centers, like Stamford and White Plains, NY. The burnt out crack houses are ugly because they're burnt-out crack houses--but they were once beautiful homes and could be again. Even the best looking big-box store is ugly... a burnt-out crack-big box store would be uglier than a burnt-out crack house any day.

And I've seen Evergreen Walk. I like that it's outdoors. And it would work perfectly at Front Street.

And yes, the American way is the automobile. And we're fat, lazy and fighting a war in Iraq because of it.

I am trying to impose my will on an unaccepting population. I admit that. As I see it, however, there has been a huge market failure. Sure, you like Buckland, but you like Buckland because the alternative is burnt-out crack houses (this is an exaggeratino by the way). If the government encouraged urban renewal, however, I'm confident you'd prefer the result. It's the prisoner's dilemma. We can't all guarantee everybody else will cooperate (i.e., buy into Hartford, develop Hartford, etc.) so nobody takes the plunge.

[MadVlad]

The suburbs are biting the hand that feeds them. They all try to skim off the top and get a piece of the pie while tightening the noose around their own necks. The sooner they capitulate and stop trying to syphon off business and retail from Hartford, the better for them, us and everyone....