Hartford CT

IMG_3227.jpeg


Parcel B
1773104067393.png
 
MrDee12345 said:
Kinda, but it also benefits from the location as well. CT cities are a bit Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. Cities like Stamford and Norwalk are thriving. Bridgeport and New Haven are up and coming and Hartford and Waterbury are just plain depressing.
Click to expand...
I don’t think Hartford is “depressing” nor do I think New Haven is “up and coming” but that’s just the experience I have in both places. They both have very solid identities.
Is it possible that you just find them as such and your experience in them is a bit limited?
 
bdurden said:
I don’t think Hartford is “depressing” nor do I think New Haven is “up and coming” but that’s just the experience I have in both places. They both have very solid identities.
Is it possible that you just find them as such and your experience in them is a bit limited?
Click to expand...
I graduated from college near New Haven in 2000 and during the the time I was there I saw a significant improvement in NH. Hartford was always kind of bland and boring, but it also had some dangerous neighborhoods. I also have a lot of family in friends in CT so I do go from time to time when I'm back in the States

I was actually in that area a couple years ago and I saw mostly the same thing. NH was pretty good, Stamford was becoming less sterile and Hartford was still "meh."
 
Wouldnt it save a lot of money and make the project a lot more viable if they just removed the i91 part completely and renamed the route 2 part as i91. It seems redundant to have 2 full north south highways right next to each other. Itd be much easier to build the highway on junk land in east hartford vs building that anyways plus a whole other tunnel north south through downtown 3000ft away.

1787008994958.jpeg

hartford400plan-771x516.jpg


Wouldnt something like this be a million times easier to build and save a shit ton of money?
IMG_6298.jpeg
 
Last edited:
I don't know what you mean. 91 really can't go east of the river. You'd have to blow-up/rebuild the Charter Oak Bridge to increase its capacity if it's going to be carrying all of I-91/CT 15/US 5 at once, and the interchange with east-west CT 2 has truly nasty ramp geometry while being plunked on top of wetlands right next to the mouth of a tributary river. There's not a lot of give to fashion something that won't be a massive flow kink. 91 is the less-objectionable of the 2 highways anyway because it doesn't separate neighborhoods. The multi-decade Riverfront Recapture planning effort has already made the waterfront more accessible than it's been in generations, so that's not as much of a festering sore as the 84 (and 84/91 interchange) scar. Yeah, it would be nicer if the river could be accessed perfectly from all corners of the street grid, but it's not inconvenient enough right now to require another megaproject. Just getting 84 re-routed to the Meadows so the Bulkeley Bridge is part of the street grid again will do plenty to tie the river back to Downtown.


And it's not just cost that's keeping this project on-ice. It's the analysis paralysis. Decades upon decades of talking about it and fighting about it has meant nothing has ever gotten done except more talking about it and fighting about it. Even while the Aetna Viaduct is in a constant state of money-draining construction. Hartford right now is last-minute Take 327 of the Mass Pike Allston 'throat' inanity on steroids. The state has even taken down the whole website devoted to it because nothing whatsoever has been accomplished in the last 11 years to advance it one iota. So no, proposing a wildly new unmodeled alignment is not going to magically unstick the project. It's just going to create scores more of the endless, aimless debate that has tanked any progress so far.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top