5/10/09
Maybe this isn't the best time to talk about privatizing government services.
It's been a long-standing conservative view that government at any level is wasteful, bloated and corrupt. Partly because that's often true, it helped lead to a lot of Republican electoral success. "Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem," or so said Ronald Reagan.
But the country got an eight-year look at what the privatization and outsourcing of core government functions did for us. Highlighted by the disgrace that was the response to Hurricane Katrina, where we sat back and watched a city drown, many decided we really do need government for some things.
Barack Obama was elected last year for any number of reasons. On that list was the repudiation of the anti-government mantra the country labored under for the past few decades. Voters knew he supported expanded governmental authority in areas like health care and the environment, and he won anyway.
He won big in Connecticut, and he won huge in Bridgeport. Now, that same public-vs.-private-sector debate may come here.
The discussion is around a thoroughly laudable move spearheaded by the Bridgeport Regional Business Council to improve financial accountability in the city school system. Regardless of its outcome, it's an unqualified good idea to get a clearer picture of where the millions of dollars spent on education in this city go, and how they can be better used.
In other systems where such an audit has been successful -- St. Louis, for example -- millions of dollars in savings was unearthed, and that money went back into the classroom, where it belongs. Better equipment, newer textbooks, help for teachers -- these are what people expect their tax money to go toward.
Some fixes are as easy as clearing up inefficiencies. But other proposals go to the heart of a controversial question about what exactly we expect from our city schools.
As outlined by Paul Timpanelli, the head of the BRBC who has for years worked doggedly on this project, some of the savings are likely to include moving jobs out of the school board's direct control and into the private sector. Crossing guards, cafeteria workers and anyone not directly involved in student instruction could, the thinking goes, come cheaper if they were not paid with public funds. The savings could total in the millions.
The question, then, is what are the core functions of a school system: We're asking whether jobs not directly related to teaching should be performed by for-profit businesses, which, whatever else they do, exist to make money, not to serve the public.
If profit is the underlying goal, people fear, sometimes other goals suffer. In this case, that could mean safety, or nutrition.
It wouldn't have to work that way, of course. Private operators are no more certain to do a bad job than public workers are guaranteed to have nothing but the best interests of the children at heart. It's all shades of gray. But given the country's experience with privatization's negative effects, it's no wonder some people are leery.
Then there's the matter of Bridgeport as compared with its neighbors. Maybe providing meals is not a core educational function in the suburbs. In the city, where 84 percent of students in the public system qualifies for free or reduced-price lunch programs (as of 2005), the calculus is different.
No one, of course, is favoring doing away with school lunch or crossing guards or anything else. And there's no question the audit is a good idea; taxpayers need to know where money is going.
But if some of the possible recommendations give people pause, they should. This is a conversation the city ought to have.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor at the Connecticut Post. He can be reached at 330-6233 or at hbailey@ctpost.com.
Showing posts with label urban planning. Show all posts
Showing posts with label urban planning. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
A step ahead at city schools
5/10/09
This is part of what it means to live in a poor city.
It's not just more crime, aging infrastructure and fewer opportunities. Living in a place like Bridgeport also means your kids are more likely to get sick.
A laudable program from the federal Environmental Protection Agency aims to improve that situation. It's a good idea and deserves support.
The problem in this case involves what are called "asthma triggers" in schools, which cause mold and other air-quality issues, which in turn account for many cases of childhood asthma. A leaky roof is a prime example -- rainwater soaks into the building rather than running off to the ground; the nooks and crannies the water seeps into provide a home for mold to build up, and those spores bring about asthma. That means clogged airways and difficulty breathing.
It's not that the suburbs are immune from such maladies. But in a city where schools are in use for 100 years or more, the chances of problems like this developing are many times higher. The numbers show Connecticut's largest cities, including Bridgeport, send more than three times the number of children to the hospital for asthma attacks as the rest of the state. That's a lot of lost instruction time, and one more reason why poor schools struggle with test scores compared to those in richer towns.
The EPA program looks to root out such asthma triggers before they do damage. And it has shown success elsewhere, with a 21.2 percent drop in asthma outbreaks in Hartford the year after the program started, and larger gains elsewhere. With more than 40 percent of cases centered in the state's five largest cities, it's clear where the most help is needed.
There's more to asthma than just leaky roofs. Studies have shown the closer a school sits to a major highway, with the accompanying heavy load of particulate matter in the air from all those vehicles passing through, the higher the asthma rate. In Bridgeport and places like it, schools historically aren't built all that often, and in some cases the buildings that were there before the interstates came through are still in use. In other towns, those facilities might have been replaced with something that's not a magnet for truck exhaust, and the sicknesses that can bring.
When broken down piece by piece, the challenges faced every day by students at struggling schools can seem overwhelming. But the only way to take them on is one at a time. Though it won't change the world, a program that could cut down on asthma attacks brought on by substandard facilities is worth supporting.
And we need many more like it.
This is part of what it means to live in a poor city.
It's not just more crime, aging infrastructure and fewer opportunities. Living in a place like Bridgeport also means your kids are more likely to get sick.
A laudable program from the federal Environmental Protection Agency aims to improve that situation. It's a good idea and deserves support.
The problem in this case involves what are called "asthma triggers" in schools, which cause mold and other air-quality issues, which in turn account for many cases of childhood asthma. A leaky roof is a prime example -- rainwater soaks into the building rather than running off to the ground; the nooks and crannies the water seeps into provide a home for mold to build up, and those spores bring about asthma. That means clogged airways and difficulty breathing.
It's not that the suburbs are immune from such maladies. But in a city where schools are in use for 100 years or more, the chances of problems like this developing are many times higher. The numbers show Connecticut's largest cities, including Bridgeport, send more than three times the number of children to the hospital for asthma attacks as the rest of the state. That's a lot of lost instruction time, and one more reason why poor schools struggle with test scores compared to those in richer towns.
The EPA program looks to root out such asthma triggers before they do damage. And it has shown success elsewhere, with a 21.2 percent drop in asthma outbreaks in Hartford the year after the program started, and larger gains elsewhere. With more than 40 percent of cases centered in the state's five largest cities, it's clear where the most help is needed.
There's more to asthma than just leaky roofs. Studies have shown the closer a school sits to a major highway, with the accompanying heavy load of particulate matter in the air from all those vehicles passing through, the higher the asthma rate. In Bridgeport and places like it, schools historically aren't built all that often, and in some cases the buildings that were there before the interstates came through are still in use. In other towns, those facilities might have been replaced with something that's not a magnet for truck exhaust, and the sicknesses that can bring.
When broken down piece by piece, the challenges faced every day by students at struggling schools can seem overwhelming. But the only way to take them on is one at a time. Though it won't change the world, a program that could cut down on asthma attacks brought on by substandard facilities is worth supporting.
And we need many more like it.
The wrong choice for city commission
5/5/09
In depressingly typical Bridgeport fashion, an appointment that should have been a sure thing has gone sour. Mayor Bill Finch's choice to fill a vacancy on the Planning and Zoning Commission has city officials trading barbs and raising accusations of bad faith.
It was easy to see coming. Jose Tiago, owner of Tiago Construction on Seaview Avenue, has fought with zoning officials over his business, which authorities say was illegally established. Choosing him to help make decisions about other city residents and how they can use their land was bound to spark controversy.
Complicating matters further are allegations Tiago was less than forthcoming with the city's Ethics Commission, which in January approved the mayor's appointment. One commissioner later said he felt deceived because Tiago falsely told the panel his zoning issues had been resolved. Others say he may have misunderstood the question.
Ethics Commission hearings by law are held behind closed doors; there's no way to tell for certain what anyone said. It well could be a simple misunderstanding.
That's not the issue. A member of a city commission should be free of conflicts regarding the public's business. Fighting a years-long battle over what the city says was an illegal business does not clear that hurdle.
Tiago was issued a cease-and-desist order by the city several years ago for his failure to obtain a special permit or coastal site plan approval for a construction yard on the Seaview Avenue site, which borders the Yellow Mill Channel. In 2007, Tiago went before the PZC seeking to legalize the use of the property, but was denied.
It can be hard to find qualified, available people to serve on boards and commissions who don't present some sort of conflict. Realtors, builders, developers -- these are people who understand city planning, and would do well to serve on a panel like the PZC. Almost anyone who has done business in the area could potentially present a conflict, but that shouldn't preclude everyone with experience from public service.
This goes too far. Zoning rules exist for a reason, and someone who flagrantly flouted the rules over a period of years does not belong in a position to enforce those same rules, even if it does not legally disqualify him.
The city could have found someone with experience and a good working relationship with zoners. Instead, we get one more example of how progress in Bridgeport will always be a long, hard slog.
In depressingly typical Bridgeport fashion, an appointment that should have been a sure thing has gone sour. Mayor Bill Finch's choice to fill a vacancy on the Planning and Zoning Commission has city officials trading barbs and raising accusations of bad faith.
It was easy to see coming. Jose Tiago, owner of Tiago Construction on Seaview Avenue, has fought with zoning officials over his business, which authorities say was illegally established. Choosing him to help make decisions about other city residents and how they can use their land was bound to spark controversy.
Complicating matters further are allegations Tiago was less than forthcoming with the city's Ethics Commission, which in January approved the mayor's appointment. One commissioner later said he felt deceived because Tiago falsely told the panel his zoning issues had been resolved. Others say he may have misunderstood the question.
Ethics Commission hearings by law are held behind closed doors; there's no way to tell for certain what anyone said. It well could be a simple misunderstanding.
That's not the issue. A member of a city commission should be free of conflicts regarding the public's business. Fighting a years-long battle over what the city says was an illegal business does not clear that hurdle.
Tiago was issued a cease-and-desist order by the city several years ago for his failure to obtain a special permit or coastal site plan approval for a construction yard on the Seaview Avenue site, which borders the Yellow Mill Channel. In 2007, Tiago went before the PZC seeking to legalize the use of the property, but was denied.
It can be hard to find qualified, available people to serve on boards and commissions who don't present some sort of conflict. Realtors, builders, developers -- these are people who understand city planning, and would do well to serve on a panel like the PZC. Almost anyone who has done business in the area could potentially present a conflict, but that shouldn't preclude everyone with experience from public service.
This goes too far. Zoning rules exist for a reason, and someone who flagrantly flouted the rules over a period of years does not belong in a position to enforce those same rules, even if it does not legally disqualify him.
The city could have found someone with experience and a good working relationship with zoners. Instead, we get one more example of how progress in Bridgeport will always be a long, hard slog.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Let occupants stay on waterfront land
1/29/2009
Whatever the city of Bridgeport is going to accomplish on Steel Point, the all-but-abandoned spit of waterfront land east of the Pequonnock River that has forever been the target of large-scale development dreams, it won't happen soon. In the meantime, the city should let people who are putting the land to use go about their business.
For more than a century, the Pequonnock Yacht Club has made its home on Steel Point in Bridgeport. It has done nothing to deserve its unceremonious ouster, which was reiterated recently as the club approaches its planned exit date in November. Seeking only an extension of a few months to keep disruptions this year to a minimum, club officials say they were denied.
The city has given no indication as to why.
The problems concerning Steel Point development over the years are too numerous to mention, but high on the list is the fact that the city bulldozed scores of homes and businesses to clear a path for a project that has never been built. These homeowners and businesses paid taxes and helped make Bridgeport what it was, for good or for ill. Far from seeing the folly of such a course of action, though, the city wants only to continue on that course.
Here's a suggestion: Wait until something -- anything -- other than a fence is built on Steel Point before kicking anyone else out. The plans as they existed as recently as a few months ago are finished; nothing resembling them will ever be constructed. A replacement proposal is in limbo.
Until there is something concrete -- actual, physical concrete -- on the peninsula, the yacht club should be told it can stay in its current location if it needs the time. Bridgeport won't give up its Steel Point dreams, but it also won't make anyone else pay for decades of disastrous outcomes.
If nothing else, at least someone should get some use out of this land.
Whatever the city of Bridgeport is going to accomplish on Steel Point, the all-but-abandoned spit of waterfront land east of the Pequonnock River that has forever been the target of large-scale development dreams, it won't happen soon. In the meantime, the city should let people who are putting the land to use go about their business.
For more than a century, the Pequonnock Yacht Club has made its home on Steel Point in Bridgeport. It has done nothing to deserve its unceremonious ouster, which was reiterated recently as the club approaches its planned exit date in November. Seeking only an extension of a few months to keep disruptions this year to a minimum, club officials say they were denied.
The city has given no indication as to why.
The problems concerning Steel Point development over the years are too numerous to mention, but high on the list is the fact that the city bulldozed scores of homes and businesses to clear a path for a project that has never been built. These homeowners and businesses paid taxes and helped make Bridgeport what it was, for good or for ill. Far from seeing the folly of such a course of action, though, the city wants only to continue on that course.
Here's a suggestion: Wait until something -- anything -- other than a fence is built on Steel Point before kicking anyone else out. The plans as they existed as recently as a few months ago are finished; nothing resembling them will ever be constructed. A replacement proposal is in limbo.
Until there is something concrete -- actual, physical concrete -- on the peninsula, the yacht club should be told it can stay in its current location if it needs the time. Bridgeport won't give up its Steel Point dreams, but it also won't make anyone else pay for decades of disastrous outcomes.
If nothing else, at least someone should get some use out of this land.
Steel Point news more of the same
1/23/2009
At Steel Point, the city of Bridgeport's longest-running disaster movie, the script has changed.
Again.
Tempting as it would be to write off this latest permutation as a consequence of a crashing economy, such a conclusion would ignore the last generation of city history. Through good times and bad, every boom and bust, Steel Point has remained constant -- an overgrown, uninhabited, decaying symbol of everything the city is and is not.
The latest news involves Manhattan's Midtown Equities, the primary developer since 2005, assuming a minority investment role as RCI Marine, of Miami, again takes over leadership. The plan remains, as ever, to convert the waterfront peninsula into a mixed community of boating slips, retail and housing.
Apparently, the splashy performance delivered by Midtown a few years back that said "The time is now" has been declared inoperative. It's no surprise, but it's no less embarrassing.
The new plan, such as it is, would begin with a full-service marina, adjacent stores and restaurants, and a wraparound boardwalk. Without question, the developer will come up with some beautiful artistic renderings of gleaming buildings and pristine throughways. If the city could make money off the mountain of depictions these past 25 years of projects that never were and never will be, there'd be no worries about any budget deficit.
At one time, the new neighborhood was to be based around thousands of homes, mostly of the luxurious variety. When the economy looked promising, observers worried about a lack of affordable housing, and the possibility of creating an insular, upscale community in the heart of a downtrodden city. In the most recent plan, housing of any kind has been put off indefinitely.
Local leaders say they're optimistic the scaled-down version can work. Though the chances of seeing any development there often seem further away than ever, the slow-and-steady route has found some success elsewhere in the city. Residents can only hope.
At Steel Point, the city of Bridgeport's longest-running disaster movie, the script has changed.
Again.
Tempting as it would be to write off this latest permutation as a consequence of a crashing economy, such a conclusion would ignore the last generation of city history. Through good times and bad, every boom and bust, Steel Point has remained constant -- an overgrown, uninhabited, decaying symbol of everything the city is and is not.
The latest news involves Manhattan's Midtown Equities, the primary developer since 2005, assuming a minority investment role as RCI Marine, of Miami, again takes over leadership. The plan remains, as ever, to convert the waterfront peninsula into a mixed community of boating slips, retail and housing.
Apparently, the splashy performance delivered by Midtown a few years back that said "The time is now" has been declared inoperative. It's no surprise, but it's no less embarrassing.
The new plan, such as it is, would begin with a full-service marina, adjacent stores and restaurants, and a wraparound boardwalk. Without question, the developer will come up with some beautiful artistic renderings of gleaming buildings and pristine throughways. If the city could make money off the mountain of depictions these past 25 years of projects that never were and never will be, there'd be no worries about any budget deficit.
At one time, the new neighborhood was to be based around thousands of homes, mostly of the luxurious variety. When the economy looked promising, observers worried about a lack of affordable housing, and the possibility of creating an insular, upscale community in the heart of a downtrodden city. In the most recent plan, housing of any kind has been put off indefinitely.
Local leaders say they're optimistic the scaled-down version can work. Though the chances of seeing any development there often seem further away than ever, the slow-and-steady route has found some success elsewhere in the city. Residents can only hope.
Disappointment at engine plant again
1/04/09
Of all the local development projects to fall apart alongside the national economy in the past year, perhaps the most disappointing has been the plans for the former Stratford Army Engine Plant. Just when it looked like the project had momentum and a real shot at moving forward, the ground fell out from under it -- again.
Now, another deadline has passed with nothing to show. The 78-acre site on a prime piece of riverfront property remains as it has been for years now -- decrepit, nearly vacant and devoid of promise.
When the U.S. Army took back control of the site from Stratford officials after more than a decade of inaction, the assumption was that the full force of the Pentagon's clout would get a project going in short order. And that's the way it seemed to be going, as plans quickly coalesced for a massive film production and entertainment complex, taking advantage of a surge in state movie-making brought on by favorable tax deals worked out in Hartford.
But that's as far as the plan has progressed. The completion of "Hollywood East," as the complex was to be known, seems further away than ever.
Officials say there is still time to get a deal in place by the middle of the month, but the recent history is not promising. Amid an acrimonious fallout, the project's former backers have watched one deadline after another pass without making any progress.
This is a piece of land considered key to Stratford's economic future. Adjacent to Sikorsky Memorial Airport and situated near the mouth of the Housatonic River, the location has been touted as the future home of great things almost since the day the engine plant closed more than a decade ago. Local officials have been reluctant, for example, to place the town's animal shelter in the neighborhood on the belief that the economic viability of the town could one day be centered in the area.
Maybe that will still happen, but nothing is certain. Even without the public falling-out amongst the development team chosen for the site, the dismal economy could have put a halt to the plans on its own. There simply isn't much market for this kind of mega-project these days, as neighboring Bridgeport can attest. The market may turn around and the plan could again become viable, but no one knows when that is likely to happen.
For now, Stratford is stuck with something it never wanted to see -- its own version of Bridgeport's Steel Point .
Of all the local development projects to fall apart alongside the national economy in the past year, perhaps the most disappointing has been the plans for the former Stratford Army Engine Plant. Just when it looked like the project had momentum and a real shot at moving forward, the ground fell out from under it -- again.
Now, another deadline has passed with nothing to show. The 78-acre site on a prime piece of riverfront property remains as it has been for years now -- decrepit, nearly vacant and devoid of promise.
When the U.S. Army took back control of the site from Stratford officials after more than a decade of inaction, the assumption was that the full force of the Pentagon's clout would get a project going in short order. And that's the way it seemed to be going, as plans quickly coalesced for a massive film production and entertainment complex, taking advantage of a surge in state movie-making brought on by favorable tax deals worked out in Hartford.
But that's as far as the plan has progressed. The completion of "Hollywood East," as the complex was to be known, seems further away than ever.
Officials say there is still time to get a deal in place by the middle of the month, but the recent history is not promising. Amid an acrimonious fallout, the project's former backers have watched one deadline after another pass without making any progress.
This is a piece of land considered key to Stratford's economic future. Adjacent to Sikorsky Memorial Airport and situated near the mouth of the Housatonic River, the location has been touted as the future home of great things almost since the day the engine plant closed more than a decade ago. Local officials have been reluctant, for example, to place the town's animal shelter in the neighborhood on the belief that the economic viability of the town could one day be centered in the area.
Maybe that will still happen, but nothing is certain. Even without the public falling-out amongst the development team chosen for the site, the dismal economy could have put a halt to the plans on its own. There simply isn't much market for this kind of mega-project these days, as neighboring Bridgeport can attest. The market may turn around and the plan could again become viable, but no one knows when that is likely to happen.
For now, Stratford is stuck with something it never wanted to see -- its own version of Bridgeport's Steel Point .
Bridgeport again on the losing end
1/18/09
What is left to say about another letdown in Bridgeport? A developer comes to town promising big things; city leaders envision a long-awaited turnaround. Instead, there's nothing but a dusty, empty lot. Same old story.
This time it was a celebrated visit from NBA Hall of Famer Magic Johnson that set the process in motion. Since his playing days ended, Johnson and his development company, Canyon Johnson Urban Funds, have delivered multimillion-dollar projects in the kind of inner-city neighborhoods other businesses wouldn't touch.
So when he came to Bridgeport and toured a development site in 2007 with then-Mayor John M. Fabrizi, the excitement was palpable. On a lot used for parking adjacent to the stadium and arena at Harbor Yard, the investment team talked about a massive complex involving homes, retail and entertainment. Visions of Bridgeport's rebirth as a consumer destination, as well as millions of dollars annually in tax payments, ran rampant.
Then, for a long time, came silence. While the developers and investors tried to attract retail tenants and get the project on solid footing, the national economy collapsed underneath them. What had looked so promising quickly turned into a debacle.
So no one was all that surprised recently when word came out the project was dead. The dreams of a hotel, movie theater, townhouses and retail were out the window. Along with the continuing inaction at the former Remington Shaver factory and Steel Point , Bridgeport is 0-for-3 on large-scale developments.
City officials have more immediate concerns, of course, like closing a budget deficit before the fiscal year ends. But there's no point minimizing this loss. Donald Eversley, the city's economic development director, said the Canyon Johnson proposal "was never a project as far as we were concerned." That comes as news to everyone paying attention the last few years.
The development focus returns, then, to smaller-scale deals, like the continuing rehabilitation of downtown office buildings into apartments and the growing chain of new restaurants on Fairfield Avenue. If there's a positive spin on the economic calamity, it's that these projects continue, albeit slowly, even through the slowdown.
If Bridgeport is ever to become self-sufficient again, it likely won't be on the strength of one or two mega-projects. Slow and steady is about the best city residents can hope for these days.
What is left to say about another letdown in Bridgeport? A developer comes to town promising big things; city leaders envision a long-awaited turnaround. Instead, there's nothing but a dusty, empty lot. Same old story.
This time it was a celebrated visit from NBA Hall of Famer Magic Johnson that set the process in motion. Since his playing days ended, Johnson and his development company, Canyon Johnson Urban Funds, have delivered multimillion-dollar projects in the kind of inner-city neighborhoods other businesses wouldn't touch.
So when he came to Bridgeport and toured a development site in 2007 with then-Mayor John M. Fabrizi, the excitement was palpable. On a lot used for parking adjacent to the stadium and arena at Harbor Yard, the investment team talked about a massive complex involving homes, retail and entertainment. Visions of Bridgeport's rebirth as a consumer destination, as well as millions of dollars annually in tax payments, ran rampant.
Then, for a long time, came silence. While the developers and investors tried to attract retail tenants and get the project on solid footing, the national economy collapsed underneath them. What had looked so promising quickly turned into a debacle.
So no one was all that surprised recently when word came out the project was dead. The dreams of a hotel, movie theater, townhouses and retail were out the window. Along with the continuing inaction at the former Remington Shaver factory and Steel Point , Bridgeport is 0-for-3 on large-scale developments.
City officials have more immediate concerns, of course, like closing a budget deficit before the fiscal year ends. But there's no point minimizing this loss. Donald Eversley, the city's economic development director, said the Canyon Johnson proposal "was never a project as far as we were concerned." That comes as news to everyone paying attention the last few years.
The development focus returns, then, to smaller-scale deals, like the continuing rehabilitation of downtown office buildings into apartments and the growing chain of new restaurants on Fairfield Avenue. If there's a positive spin on the economic calamity, it's that these projects continue, albeit slowly, even through the slowdown.
If Bridgeport is ever to become self-sufficient again, it likely won't be on the strength of one or two mega-projects. Slow and steady is about the best city residents can hope for these days.
Sewer system at center of debate
12/21/08
Bridgeport Mayor Bill Finch took office about a year ago with no way to know about the fiscal time bomb about to go off in his city. Years of easy credit and questionable mortgages were just beginning to yield the mountain of foreclosures that has hurt the entire country, and devastated places like Bridgeport.
As part of his election campaign, Finch promised a return to budgetary honesty. The recent past, he charged, had been rife with one-time budget items filling the gaps. It wasn't, he said, the right way to plan for the future. He was right then, and today, even as the budget situation deteriorates, he's still right.
That's why he's on dangerous ground with a plan to allow connection to the city sewer system by a development in Monroe. Under the terms of a proposed deal, the campus of a new Jewish Home for the Elderly on Main Street in Monroe would hook into the Bridgeport sewage system, already shared by Trumbull. There's nothing wrong with the idea, but Bridgeport must make sure it doesn't get fleeced in the process.
Finch is reportedly negotiating a one-time payment to the city in the $2 million range to compensate for use of the city's sewage system and treatment plants. That's money the city could desperately use as it tries to cover a $20 million budget gap, but it does not take into account the long-term outlook.
A smaller, regular payment makes more sense. Just as budgeting one-time payments for land sales does not make for sound accounting, this deal would do nothing for the city in future years, when the need could be just as great. The city could be in effect giving away its services for the foreseeable future.
A deal must also be contingent on a clear understanding of the scope of development. If Bridgeport decides its system can handle the Jewish Home, that should not be a green light for further development in Monroe to hook into the sewer lines without increased compensation.
The other issue, which the city denies is a problem, is capacity. There is no question that separating stormwater from regular sewer lines is in Bridgeport's long-term interest, and though it's not an issue likely to win many votes, it's the type of infrastructure upgrade the city needs to become and stay competitive.
It is worrying, though, to see questions arise about limited capacity, even if this project doesn't pose a problem. What will happen if development finally happens at the end of Main Street, at the former Pequonnock Apartments site and, most of all, Steel Point? Those and other projects represent quite a few new toilets flushing into the system. The city must make sure it has an adequate answer to that question.
Bridgeport Mayor Bill Finch took office about a year ago with no way to know about the fiscal time bomb about to go off in his city. Years of easy credit and questionable mortgages were just beginning to yield the mountain of foreclosures that has hurt the entire country, and devastated places like Bridgeport.
As part of his election campaign, Finch promised a return to budgetary honesty. The recent past, he charged, had been rife with one-time budget items filling the gaps. It wasn't, he said, the right way to plan for the future. He was right then, and today, even as the budget situation deteriorates, he's still right.
That's why he's on dangerous ground with a plan to allow connection to the city sewer system by a development in Monroe. Under the terms of a proposed deal, the campus of a new Jewish Home for the Elderly on Main Street in Monroe would hook into the Bridgeport sewage system, already shared by Trumbull. There's nothing wrong with the idea, but Bridgeport must make sure it doesn't get fleeced in the process.
Finch is reportedly negotiating a one-time payment to the city in the $2 million range to compensate for use of the city's sewage system and treatment plants. That's money the city could desperately use as it tries to cover a $20 million budget gap, but it does not take into account the long-term outlook.
A smaller, regular payment makes more sense. Just as budgeting one-time payments for land sales does not make for sound accounting, this deal would do nothing for the city in future years, when the need could be just as great. The city could be in effect giving away its services for the foreseeable future.
A deal must also be contingent on a clear understanding of the scope of development. If Bridgeport decides its system can handle the Jewish Home, that should not be a green light for further development in Monroe to hook into the sewer lines without increased compensation.
The other issue, which the city denies is a problem, is capacity. There is no question that separating stormwater from regular sewer lines is in Bridgeport's long-term interest, and though it's not an issue likely to win many votes, it's the type of infrastructure upgrade the city needs to become and stay competitive.
It is worrying, though, to see questions arise about limited capacity, even if this project doesn't pose a problem. What will happen if development finally happens at the end of Main Street, at the former Pequonnock Apartments site and, most of all, Steel Point? Those and other projects represent quite a few new toilets flushing into the system. The city must make sure it has an adequate answer to that question.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
City's chances come and go quickly
1/11/09
It's hard to avoid the feeling Bridgeport missed its chance. The window of opportunity was narrow, but it was real. For a few months there, with the economy chugging along and housing prices soaring, and the demand for luxury accommodations spiraling upward, the city had a chance to fill a void in the local market.
The rest of Fairfield County had outpriced the population. Bridgeport, it was thought, could become the home for people who needed to live in the area but had to forget about anything between here and New York. And maybe the city could snag some of that luxury overflow, as well.
Projects that had hung around the back burner suddenly attracted attention from big-name developers. Fallow land was slated for condominium towers, brownfields were to be cleaned and marinas prepared to take root in the Sound.
The scene today looks a bit different. Barely a peep has been heard about the various mega-projects around town, and the smaller-scale deals have nearly ground to a halt, as well. A nationwide housing collapse will do that.
The first real sign of trouble came in what was shaping up to be the first new housing construction downtown in decades. The corner of Fairfield Avenue at Lafayette Circle not too long ago was nothing but grass, but on the site sprang the makings of an 84-unit condo complex, to be built, its backers said, without using any public money. This was Bridgeport coming into its own.
It hasn't worked out that way. Despite a deal last April where the City Council granted the right to sell the condos at a lower rate to entice buyers, the building has for months sat half-finished. There's been no sign of construction restarting, and it's safe to say the active winter weather is not helping matters.
It's not that there hasn't been progress downtown -- the stretch of Fairfield Avenue next to the condo construction has refashioned itself as a destination for new restaurants, and work continues on a number of vacant buildings undergoing a retrofit for housing.
But there, too, the reality is a long way from the promise. The Citytrust building is occupied, but the retail and restaurants slated for the ground floor have not panned out. Work continues at other buildings, slowly -- even the boarded-up disaster at 333 State St., at the corner of Lafayette Boulevard, has seen some activity in recent weeks.
But it's the large-scale projects that look to be on life support, or worse. At last report, the condominium towers and marina to be built at the end of Main Street, next to Seaside Park, were stalled by a dispute over oyster beds in the Sound. In the interim, with the economy falling apart, the market for high-end housing in a neighborhood of decrepit buildings and a total lack of services has not grown.
Then there is the site that brought former NBA star turned high-powered developer Magic Johnson to the city. Next to the Harbor Yard complex, the lot was going to feature movie theaters, an 11-story hotel, thousands of square feet of retail and dozens of residences. For a time, a top concern was that the complex would turn inward, away from the city streets, and do little to help the surrounding neighborhood draw foot traffic. Today, it appears not much of anything will happen there.
Finally, of course, is Steel Point. A few decades ago, a long-gone city administration bulldozed a neighborhood, including dozens of houses and tax-paying businesses. In their place, the city has been granted some awfully attractive artist renderings of what the Bridgeport skyline could look like in some alternate universe.
It's not the fault of city leaders the housing market died, and priorities have taken a drastic turn. Now City Hall is trying to close a budget deficit before the end of the fiscal year, with no one talking much about what the revenue stream will look like the following year, or the year after that. It won't be pretty.
For a city that has suffered a generations-long run of bad luck, it's hard to think the opportunity to turn things around hasn't come and gone. The next time the stars align could be far in the future.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor at the Connecticut Post. He can be reached at 203-330-6233 or at hbailey@ctpost.com.
It's hard to avoid the feeling Bridgeport missed its chance. The window of opportunity was narrow, but it was real. For a few months there, with the economy chugging along and housing prices soaring, and the demand for luxury accommodations spiraling upward, the city had a chance to fill a void in the local market.
The rest of Fairfield County had outpriced the population. Bridgeport, it was thought, could become the home for people who needed to live in the area but had to forget about anything between here and New York. And maybe the city could snag some of that luxury overflow, as well.
Projects that had hung around the back burner suddenly attracted attention from big-name developers. Fallow land was slated for condominium towers, brownfields were to be cleaned and marinas prepared to take root in the Sound.
The scene today looks a bit different. Barely a peep has been heard about the various mega-projects around town, and the smaller-scale deals have nearly ground to a halt, as well. A nationwide housing collapse will do that.
The first real sign of trouble came in what was shaping up to be the first new housing construction downtown in decades. The corner of Fairfield Avenue at Lafayette Circle not too long ago was nothing but grass, but on the site sprang the makings of an 84-unit condo complex, to be built, its backers said, without using any public money. This was Bridgeport coming into its own.
It hasn't worked out that way. Despite a deal last April where the City Council granted the right to sell the condos at a lower rate to entice buyers, the building has for months sat half-finished. There's been no sign of construction restarting, and it's safe to say the active winter weather is not helping matters.
It's not that there hasn't been progress downtown -- the stretch of Fairfield Avenue next to the condo construction has refashioned itself as a destination for new restaurants, and work continues on a number of vacant buildings undergoing a retrofit for housing.
But there, too, the reality is a long way from the promise. The Citytrust building is occupied, but the retail and restaurants slated for the ground floor have not panned out. Work continues at other buildings, slowly -- even the boarded-up disaster at 333 State St., at the corner of Lafayette Boulevard, has seen some activity in recent weeks.
But it's the large-scale projects that look to be on life support, or worse. At last report, the condominium towers and marina to be built at the end of Main Street, next to Seaside Park, were stalled by a dispute over oyster beds in the Sound. In the interim, with the economy falling apart, the market for high-end housing in a neighborhood of decrepit buildings and a total lack of services has not grown.
Then there is the site that brought former NBA star turned high-powered developer Magic Johnson to the city. Next to the Harbor Yard complex, the lot was going to feature movie theaters, an 11-story hotel, thousands of square feet of retail and dozens of residences. For a time, a top concern was that the complex would turn inward, away from the city streets, and do little to help the surrounding neighborhood draw foot traffic. Today, it appears not much of anything will happen there.
Finally, of course, is Steel Point. A few decades ago, a long-gone city administration bulldozed a neighborhood, including dozens of houses and tax-paying businesses. In their place, the city has been granted some awfully attractive artist renderings of what the Bridgeport skyline could look like in some alternate universe.
It's not the fault of city leaders the housing market died, and priorities have taken a drastic turn. Now City Hall is trying to close a budget deficit before the end of the fiscal year, with no one talking much about what the revenue stream will look like the following year, or the year after that. It won't be pretty.
For a city that has suffered a generations-long run of bad luck, it's hard to think the opportunity to turn things around hasn't come and gone. The next time the stars align could be far in the future.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor at the Connecticut Post. He can be reached at 203-330-6233 or at hbailey@ctpost.com.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Bridgeport must weather economic storm
9/14/08
Bridgeport can't be blamed for this one.
Bridgeport can't be blamed for this one.
The momentum behind most of the major development projects in town has stalled. Steel Point is in limbo, downtown construction is at a crawl and there's little to report from the other large-scale projects around the city. But there's probably nothing that could have done differently.
The slowdown is hurting development across the country. But because Bridgeport is a poor city that is banking on big-ticket projects to bring it back to life, it stands to suffer more than its share. And with little to fall back on, the situation looks more dire here than it would in a relatively well-off place.
For instance, New York. The country's largest city has been building like crazy for more than a decade, and has enough built-in wealth to weather some difficulties. It would take a lot more than a mere slowdown to knock New York off its current heights; it's one of the benefits of being the financial and cultural capital of the universe. And there are millions of new people projected to move in over the next few decades.
But at a basic level, New York is facing the same problems as Bridgeport. Most of its high-profile mega-projects, financed publicly, privately or in combination, in the past year have been either scrapped or drastically scaled back. Costs are shooting up, and demand for housing and retail is cratering.
For instance, the Fulton Street Transit Center in Lower Manhattan, which was supposed to be a
Then there's the plan to build a new Penn Station on the West Side. That project kept growing in scale and dollars, eventually including a number of high rises alongside a rebuilt Madison Square Garden. It collapsed under its own weight, and now there's little hope of rescuing the underground train station in the near future.
The World Trade Center site is a story unto itself, and faces challenges that dwarf any other development. But it, too, has been hamstrung by the bad economy. There's little sense in putting up all that office space if there won't be people or businesses to put in it.
There's a definition of a recession the economy hasn't met -- unless the nation experiences negative economic growth for two straight quarters, we're apparently not in a recession. Why that's supposed to matter to anyone is another question.
People judge the economy by what they're dealing with, not by what the aggregate numbers tell them. People are struggling, and businesses are struggling right along with them.
Cities, likewise, don't judge the economy on what national numbers tell them. There's too much at stake. But neither can they sit back and wait for the problems to work themselves through.
That's why it's encouraging to see that, despite the problems, Steel Point and the other big developments are still breathing. If they can survive this lull, which is no sure thing, the city could be in good shape to capitalize on the inevitable recovery.
It had better hope so. If the recovery takes too long to arrive, there's no real backup plan.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor at the Connecticut Post. He can be reached at 203-330-6233 or via e-mail at hbailey@ctpost.com.
Stadiums a losing bet for development
9/20/08
This is a scenario Bridgeport knows something about.
This is a scenario Bridgeport knows something about.
A sports stadium earns favorable tax agreements on the promise of economic growth. In the end, the stadium benefits the few while the many foot the bill.
It's not the Arena at Harbor Yard, it's the boondoggle in the Bronx. The new Yankee Stadium, a report shows, is costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars and offering almost nothing in return.
A report from a New York City Council member concluded that the city and state invested as much as $850 million in cash and tax breaks in the new stadium, while the economic benefit will go mainly to the team's ownership, which is already doing just fine. In addition, the stadium's construction resulted in the loss of acres of parkland used by some of the city's poorest residents.
The team and the city dispute the findings, but the results by now are clear -- stadium construction is about the biggest farce going when it comes to spurring economic development.
Put it this way: The Yankees are the most successful team in U.S. sports history. Their stadium sits in a neighborhood, the South Bronx, that for decades was synonymous with urban blight. If that much success did that little for the local area, no one should expect better results elsewhere, including Bridgeport.
Stadiums bring a minimal level of new employment and, considering they are unused for much more time than they are in use, can in fact be a blight in their own regard. When there's no game, there are no people.
Bridgeport has learned this; Harbor Yard did not spark a development revolution. New York should have known it, as well.
Make commitment to regionalization
9/19/08
It's the curse of Connecticut. With 169 towns and cities vying for their own slice of the pie, neighboring communities have little incentive to work together.
It's the curse of Connecticut. With 169 towns and cities vying for their own slice of the pie, neighboring communities have little incentive to work together.
For well-off towns, that's no problem. But the cities that have lost business and industry over the decades have little recourse. It's one of the main reasons our state looks the way it does, with rich towns surrounding poor cities, and little done to bridge the gap.
Every so often a plan comes along to change that. The hope of regionalization is that towns with money to spare would realize it's in their interest to see their neighbors succeed, as well. Fairfield, for example, does quite well for itself, while next-door Bridgeport has trouble paying its bills.
But it's not just for the cities. A recent proposal calls for a study to determine how Monroe, Trumbull and Easton might benefit from forming a regional emergency dispatch center. It makes good sense - the three towns currently handle emergency dispatching separately, but sometimes share resources, like traffic accident investigation units, canine units and crisis negotiators.
This kind of thinking on a wider basis could lead to real cost-saving opportunities around the state. If local officials can move past their typically insular views, there are some interesting options out there.
But it is the cities that have the most to gain. It's long been posited that if Bridgeport could annex the towns on its borders, the standard of
That's not going to happen, but there are steps to be taken. Bridgeport Mayor Bill Finch has long championed these efforts, and at a forum sponsored by the regional business council, other local leaders pledged support, as well.
For starters, the local communities could look to regionalize the water pollution control apparatus. It's a burden on Bridgeport, and one that could and should be shared with neighbors.
There will always be thorny issues like neighborhood schools that will stymie progress, but they shouldn't be allowed to halt the entire endeavor. Last week's meeting should be a starting point, and local leaders should commit in writing to workable regionalization plans.
Slowly, the suburbs are realizing that the health of the cities affects everyone. The sooner steps can be taken to improve that health, the better for everyone.
Monday, August 18, 2008
Time to get cities back on national agenda
6/1/08
The presidential primaries have dragged on, but it’s hard to figure how all this is a bad thing. It’s been years since anyone cared who won such votes in places like Oregon or South Dakota. The more involved, the better.
And anything is better than leaving party nominations up to a pair of unrepresentative states that nonetheless have a huge say in who gets the final nod. New Hampshire and Iowa have few people, little diversity and no cities. They have no business setting the primary agenda.
That part of the quadrennial schedule is long past, but it’s worth thinking about the next time. Many observers consider it a good thing to have a relatively small, low-population bellwether get things going — it gives voters a chance to get to know the candidates in somewhat intimate settings for months before the vote.
Those are valid points; there should be a starting spot where voters can find out all they can about their choices. But it shouldn’t be Iowa or New Hampshire.
It should be Connecticut.
It makes too much sense to ever happen, but this state is the best suited in the nation for the role.
The presidential primaries have dragged on, but it’s hard to figure how all this is a bad thing. It’s been years since anyone cared who won such votes in places like Oregon or South Dakota. The more involved, the better.
And anything is better than leaving party nominations up to a pair of unrepresentative states that nonetheless have a huge say in who gets the final nod. New Hampshire and Iowa have few people, little diversity and no cities. They have no business setting the primary agenda.
That part of the quadrennial schedule is long past, but it’s worth thinking about the next time. Many observers consider it a good thing to have a relatively small, low-population bellwether get things going — it gives voters a chance to get to know the candidates in somewhat intimate settings for months before the vote.
Those are valid points; there should be a starting spot where voters can find out all they can about their choices. But it shouldn’t be Iowa or New Hampshire.
It should be Connecticut.
It makes too much sense to ever happen, but this state is the best suited in the nation for the role.
- It’s small. The third-smallest, in fact, meaning it’s easy to get across in half a day or less. Candidates could hit every corner twice over and give all 3 million or so of us a chance to hear them out.
- It’s (somewhat) representative. State demographics rank much closer to national averages than either Iowa or New Hampshire. Using 2006 numbers, look at the states’ white, black and Hispanic populations in comparison:
US CT IO NH
%w 80.1 84.6 94.6 95.8
%b 12.8 10.2 2.5 1.1
%H 14.8 11.2 3.8 2.3
Connecticut isn’t the most diverse place on the planet, but we’ve got those two beat. - A lot of people live here. Our population isn’t huge by national standards, but we’re No. 4 in density. Since most people in this country live in cities or suburbs, Connecticut is representative of most people’s situations.
- We also have small towns. Litchfield County and, especially, the eastern half of the state are still mostly rural, and there are working farms dotting the countryside. Like the rest of the country, farming isn’t what it once was, but we still have them.
- Income disparity — the nation has it; we’ve got it more. Rich people are legion in towns closest to New York, but the cities are bastions of poverty. Closing this gap should be among presidential candidates’ top priorities.
- Finally, we have cities. Not booming metropolises, certainly, but New Haven, Hartford, Stamford and, of course, Bridgeport are big enough, and with enough problems, to finally get urban issues part of the national discussion. Instead of spending months on ethanol, which everyone knows is a sham, candidates could compare policies on smart growth, congestion, mass transit, urban poverty, etc. These are issues that affect vastly more Americans than the typical farmers’ problems that dominate Iowa.
As it is now, cities are basically absent from the national political debate. Even though most Americans live in or close to one, the problems of urban life don’t make the agenda. Maybe changing the nominating process could fix that.
There’s no chance our state will topple the traditional starter states, and, it’s true, Rhode Island or Delaware would work about as well. But something ought to change. Though we didn’t see it this year, with Iowa and New Hampshire producing different results for both parties, too often those states set the table for everyone else.
Imagine candidates swinging through the Naugatuck Valley towns, stumping in Bridgeport, stopping off at Jones Family Farms. The site of closed factories in the background would dominate the nightly news for months.
It beats an Iowa cornfield.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor of the Connecticut Post. You can reach him at 203-330-6233 or by e-mail at hbailey@ctpost.com.
Society held hostage by cars, roads
5/1/08
First, we need to redesign and rebuild every town in the U.S. The rest should be no problem.
That’s about the state of our plans for dealing with global warming in this country. If this is as serious a problem as we’ve been told, and all signs indicate that it is, we’re going to have to do a lot better on solutions.
The crux of the problem is that this country, outside a few metropolitan centers, is built around the automobile. There has never been a shortage of wide open spaces for branching out, and we’ve taken full advantage. Now, we’re stuck.
For a variety of reasons, basing our lives around cars doesn’t look to be viable in the long term. Like most everything else we need, cars depend on oil — of the cheap and unlimited variety.
Not only are we liable to run out of it (which is a separate issue), but we’re realizing the long-term problems that come from burning it.
Global-warming deniers are still out there, but for the most part not taken seriously. It’s pretty commonly understood by now that continuing to rely on gasoline-powered personal vehicles to get everywhere is impractical. Carbon emissions over the decades have contributed to climate change, with rising ocean levels and weather disasters in the forecast.
The trouble is that (almost) our entire built environment is based around that car-only model.
If you live in the suburbs, think about how many places you can practically go without a car. Then think about where the closest mass transit system stops. And think about whether you have any idea where it goes or on what schedule it runs.
Changing this situation seems to top the list of most global-warming policy proposals. Adding density, encouraging mixed uses (housing, retail, entertainment all together), and rewarding brownfield development (on the site of contaminated former factories) are touted as solutions for cutting down on the necessity of driving.
They’re all good ideas. And it’s true, many people are finding city life more attractive these days, with downtown revivals across the country, from Portland, Me., to Portland, Ore.
The problem is the pace. With the amount of time and energy it takes to make even one small move — getting approval to build apartments in a former bank, for instance — the idea that we can make enough necessary changes fast enough to make a difference seems dubious, at best.
We’re looking at:
Also, the rising price of gas is having an impact. Across the country, ridership on mass transit is up significantly, and the prospect of $50 fill-ups for the foreseeable future means that will continue. Whether that will lead to the billions of dollars in upfront costs that new transit systems require is another story, but it’s progress that can’t be ignored.
But consider the obstacles, besides those listed above. On the Post Road through Milford and Orange, it’s not even practical to walk between neighboring shopping plazas. Dense housing developments face months or years of regulatory hurdles and neighborhood protests, while single-family standalones sail through unquestioned. The mere mention of more money for bicycle paths is enough to get free-marketers in a snit.
It’s not hopeless, but it’s past time to pick up the pace. In Connecticut, with 169 individual fiefdoms each vying for their own slice of the pie, that could be a stretch.
Or we could be like Lex Luthor and start buying up future oceanfront property in Nevada.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor of the Connecticut Post. You can reach him at 203-330-6233 or by e-mail at hbailey@ctpost.com.
First, we need to redesign and rebuild every town in the U.S. The rest should be no problem.
That’s about the state of our plans for dealing with global warming in this country. If this is as serious a problem as we’ve been told, and all signs indicate that it is, we’re going to have to do a lot better on solutions.
The crux of the problem is that this country, outside a few metropolitan centers, is built around the automobile. There has never been a shortage of wide open spaces for branching out, and we’ve taken full advantage. Now, we’re stuck.
For a variety of reasons, basing our lives around cars doesn’t look to be viable in the long term. Like most everything else we need, cars depend on oil — of the cheap and unlimited variety.
Not only are we liable to run out of it (which is a separate issue), but we’re realizing the long-term problems that come from burning it.
Global-warming deniers are still out there, but for the most part not taken seriously. It’s pretty commonly understood by now that continuing to rely on gasoline-powered personal vehicles to get everywhere is impractical. Carbon emissions over the decades have contributed to climate change, with rising ocean levels and weather disasters in the forecast.
The trouble is that (almost) our entire built environment is based around that car-only model.
If you live in the suburbs, think about how many places you can practically go without a car. Then think about where the closest mass transit system stops. And think about whether you have any idea where it goes or on what schedule it runs.
Changing this situation seems to top the list of most global-warming policy proposals. Adding density, encouraging mixed uses (housing, retail, entertainment all together), and rewarding brownfield development (on the site of contaminated former factories) are touted as solutions for cutting down on the necessity of driving.
They’re all good ideas. And it’s true, many people are finding city life more attractive these days, with downtown revivals across the country, from Portland, Me., to Portland, Ore.
The problem is the pace. With the amount of time and energy it takes to make even one small move — getting approval to build apartments in a former bank, for instance — the idea that we can make enough necessary changes fast enough to make a difference seems dubious, at best.
We’re looking at:
- convincing enough people that a car-free lifestyle is right for them;
- changing regulations, zoning and otherwise, in towns and cities across the country allowing for dense, rather than sprawling, developments;
- allowing for thousands of miles of mass transit lines of one form or another to be built between places currently served only by roads; and
- doing all this before we either run out of gas or pass the global-warming tipping point, whenever that is.
Also, the rising price of gas is having an impact. Across the country, ridership on mass transit is up significantly, and the prospect of $50 fill-ups for the foreseeable future means that will continue. Whether that will lead to the billions of dollars in upfront costs that new transit systems require is another story, but it’s progress that can’t be ignored.
But consider the obstacles, besides those listed above. On the Post Road through Milford and Orange, it’s not even practical to walk between neighboring shopping plazas. Dense housing developments face months or years of regulatory hurdles and neighborhood protests, while single-family standalones sail through unquestioned. The mere mention of more money for bicycle paths is enough to get free-marketers in a snit.
It’s not hopeless, but it’s past time to pick up the pace. In Connecticut, with 169 individual fiefdoms each vying for their own slice of the pie, that could be a stretch.
Or we could be like Lex Luthor and start buying up future oceanfront property in Nevada.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor of the Connecticut Post. You can reach him at 203-330-6233 or by e-mail at hbailey@ctpost.com.
Warning signs blinking brightly downtown
2/17/08
Surely no one thinks this is an isolated incident.
There was a collective gulp last week among believers in the future of downtown Bridgeport on the news that one of the area’s signature projects might be in trouble.
Developer Phillip Kuchma, whose Bijou Square has been moving along nicely for months, is looking for help from the City Council to complete his $24 million, 84-unit structure on Fairfield Avenue. The project’s main lender has apparently grown skittish, and wants tax help from the city before any more money is committed.
It’s possible, of course, that this is a short-term problem that can be solved with a little nudge from the city. But when it comes to downtown redevelopment, everyone has learned to be wary.
There are many promising projects in the planning stages — from the Magic Johnson site to Steel Point and the condominiums near Seaside Park — but those exist only on drawing boards. The Kuchma site was making real headway, with tangible progress. A hiccup there catches everyone’s attention.
After pledging all along to build the complex without state or city assistance, Kuchma now says lenders won’t provide the necessary money to complete the development unless sale prices are mitigated by a tax break.
He’s probably right. Why wouldn’t lenders be thinking twice about this sort of thing?
The underlying problem is that so much of the city’s growth is planned around the housing market, which is going through its worst stretch in years. Foreclosures are everywhere, and the near future promises a glut of available units. What looked like promising developments a year or two ago suddenly look dicey, at best.
It’s unfortunate that the city, cash-strapped itself, will likely have to step in and rescue this project, but it can hardly be called surprising. There’s a reason why there has been no new downtown construction in decades. For all the happy talk of a better Bridgeport around the corner, there is so much up in the air that even boosters are uneasy.
A variety of plans call for hundreds of new condominiums and rentals throughout downtown in coming years. But the problem, as anyone who’s seen the news in the past six months knows, is no one is buying anything. To think that people will buck that trend to live in a nearly vacant downtown with almost no services is crazy. No wonder lenders are demanding tax help.
Meanwhile, the city is forgiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in back taxes to developers while it continues to track down every dime in unpaid car fees. It’s a pretty simple concept — everyone should have to pay taxes, and everyone should face the same penalties if they don’t. But it all depends on who you know.
It wasn’t that long ago the city forgave more than $3 million in back taxes on the decrepit building at 333 State St., which looks worse, if that’s possible, today than it did five years ago. (On my first trip into the city, I took one look at that building and thought, “Do I really want to work down here?”)
Probably the biggest blight on downtown — which is saying something — the building should have been torn down years ago. Especially with the housing crisis and all the new units in the offing, the structure just needs to go. Let Housatonic Community College get some room to breathe and take that thing down.
As for Bijou Square, the City Council has little choice but to come through with the money. What is it going to do, let it sit there unfinished? Bridgeport already has enough symbols of decay and unfulfilled promise; it doesn’t need another one.
The city can hope this is just an economic rough patch that must be endured, and that the housing market will soon regain some of its footing. But none of the indicators point in that direction. Without a shocking turnaround, this will likely not be last story of a promising local development in trouble.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor of the Connecticut Post. You can reach him at 203-330-6233 or by e-mail at hbailey@ctpost.com.
Surely no one thinks this is an isolated incident.
There was a collective gulp last week among believers in the future of downtown Bridgeport on the news that one of the area’s signature projects might be in trouble.
Developer Phillip Kuchma, whose Bijou Square has been moving along nicely for months, is looking for help from the City Council to complete his $24 million, 84-unit structure on Fairfield Avenue. The project’s main lender has apparently grown skittish, and wants tax help from the city before any more money is committed.
It’s possible, of course, that this is a short-term problem that can be solved with a little nudge from the city. But when it comes to downtown redevelopment, everyone has learned to be wary.
There are many promising projects in the planning stages — from the Magic Johnson site to Steel Point and the condominiums near Seaside Park — but those exist only on drawing boards. The Kuchma site was making real headway, with tangible progress. A hiccup there catches everyone’s attention.
After pledging all along to build the complex without state or city assistance, Kuchma now says lenders won’t provide the necessary money to complete the development unless sale prices are mitigated by a tax break.
He’s probably right. Why wouldn’t lenders be thinking twice about this sort of thing?
The underlying problem is that so much of the city’s growth is planned around the housing market, which is going through its worst stretch in years. Foreclosures are everywhere, and the near future promises a glut of available units. What looked like promising developments a year or two ago suddenly look dicey, at best.
It’s unfortunate that the city, cash-strapped itself, will likely have to step in and rescue this project, but it can hardly be called surprising. There’s a reason why there has been no new downtown construction in decades. For all the happy talk of a better Bridgeport around the corner, there is so much up in the air that even boosters are uneasy.
A variety of plans call for hundreds of new condominiums and rentals throughout downtown in coming years. But the problem, as anyone who’s seen the news in the past six months knows, is no one is buying anything. To think that people will buck that trend to live in a nearly vacant downtown with almost no services is crazy. No wonder lenders are demanding tax help.
Meanwhile, the city is forgiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in back taxes to developers while it continues to track down every dime in unpaid car fees. It’s a pretty simple concept — everyone should have to pay taxes, and everyone should face the same penalties if they don’t. But it all depends on who you know.
It wasn’t that long ago the city forgave more than $3 million in back taxes on the decrepit building at 333 State St., which looks worse, if that’s possible, today than it did five years ago. (On my first trip into the city, I took one look at that building and thought, “Do I really want to work down here?”)
Probably the biggest blight on downtown — which is saying something — the building should have been torn down years ago. Especially with the housing crisis and all the new units in the offing, the structure just needs to go. Let Housatonic Community College get some room to breathe and take that thing down.
As for Bijou Square, the City Council has little choice but to come through with the money. What is it going to do, let it sit there unfinished? Bridgeport already has enough symbols of decay and unfulfilled promise; it doesn’t need another one.
The city can hope this is just an economic rough patch that must be endured, and that the housing market will soon regain some of its footing. But none of the indicators point in that direction. Without a shocking turnaround, this will likely not be last story of a promising local development in trouble.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor of the Connecticut Post. You can reach him at 203-330-6233 or by e-mail at hbailey@ctpost.com.
Downtown stuck in the dark
11/18/07
Nothing drives someone out of a neighborhood faster than a boarded-up building.
Bridgeport’s South End has some outstanding housing developments, in the works and already open. The trend of turning abandoned factories and schools into fashionable lofts has taken off.
But amid those new oases, in an otherwise nondescript residential neighborhood, there they are — burned-out, falling down, abandoned buildings, with who-knows-what inside and an air of menace on the street.
Maybe Magic Johnson’s pleasure palace up the street will change things, or the luxury towers planned on the former Remington site. Either way, it’s going to be hard to excite potential homeowners with lingering urban decay on many blocks.
Then there’s the garbage.
Walk down any street outside the downtown core (ably kept up by the Downtown Special Services District) and you’ll be dodging trash the whole way. Post employees park on State Street and then walk a few blocks up to the main office, and it’s an obstacle course of wrappers, plastic bags and discarded paper (if you’re lucky) the whole way.
Also, streetlights. That walk on State Street includes a stretch under the Route 8/25 connector. It’s a short distance, but it gets plenty dark under there, especially this time of year. There are four different streetlights in the underpass; they’re all burned out.
Most cities have faced similar problems. Before he became a national figure on Sept. 11, Rudy Giuliani’s biggest claim to fame was “cleaning up” New York City. Never mind that every major city in the country made similar gains in crime-fighting and quality-of-life issues; it was Rudy who received, and still claims, the credit.
But even taking the national trend into account, there’s no denying New York got a lot safer. And one of the main drivers behind that was what became known as the broken-windows theory of crime-fighting. The thinking is, when presented with a dangerous, drug-infested neighborhood, start with the little things — cracked pavement, fallen-down fences, garbage on the streets, broken windows.
As the theory goes, as those quality-of-life issues get better, so does the general tone of the neighborhood, to the point that people feel safer, crime starts to drop and more people move in.
There’s more to it than that, and a stepped-up police presence is necessary, which means more money. But the basic idea is sound. Fix the little things, start at the bottom and watch those changes make a difference at the top.
If any city could use that kind of approach, it would have to be Bridgeport.
We have no shortage of the alternative, the top-down approach. The promised gains from the recently approved Steel Point plan are 100 percent based on the trickle-down theory. No, the people who live here won’t be able to afford a home there or maybe even to shop there, but the money that comes in through increased tax revenue will benefit everyone.
Even at the most optimistic, though, we’re talking 20 to 30 years down the road when that tax revenue starts to make a difference. But the city is counting on success there — and in other large projects — to change the culture of Bridgeport, make it a place where people feel comfortable investing and building. That, theoretically, is how the people who live here will see immediate gain, in the city’s improved reputation and its accompanying benefits.
Talk about a dicey proposition.
Even in the best-case scenario, all this taxpayer money is going toward something ephemeral, something that may or may not happen down the road. The gains are real for the out-of-towners who buy a luxury condo on the water, but not so much for a working family here.
In the meantime, spending money on cleaning up garbage, knocking down abandoned buildings and fixing broken windows could have immediate benefits.
Imagine walking down well-lit streets around downtown. At the moment, there aren’t many places to go in the area to eat, have a drink, see a movie, etc. But there are some. And the best way to guarantee no one will take a stroll through the area is to keep those streetlights dark.
Broken-windows fixes aren’t cheap, but it’s about priorities. Taking that approach doesn’t benefit developers or banks, at least not immediately, but it can make a difference in ordinary people’s lives.
And there’s no reason that approach precludes development, even on a large scale. But what it could mean is that for every dollar set aside for a private development, a certain amount must be set aside for infrastructure improvements and the like.
It should be clear to everyone that it will take much more than luxury development to get the city going again.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor at the Connecticut Post. You can reach him at 203-330-6233 or via e-mail at hbailey@ctpost.com.
Nothing drives someone out of a neighborhood faster than a boarded-up building.
Bridgeport’s South End has some outstanding housing developments, in the works and already open. The trend of turning abandoned factories and schools into fashionable lofts has taken off.
But amid those new oases, in an otherwise nondescript residential neighborhood, there they are — burned-out, falling down, abandoned buildings, with who-knows-what inside and an air of menace on the street.
Maybe Magic Johnson’s pleasure palace up the street will change things, or the luxury towers planned on the former Remington site. Either way, it’s going to be hard to excite potential homeowners with lingering urban decay on many blocks.
Then there’s the garbage.
Walk down any street outside the downtown core (ably kept up by the Downtown Special Services District) and you’ll be dodging trash the whole way. Post employees park on State Street and then walk a few blocks up to the main office, and it’s an obstacle course of wrappers, plastic bags and discarded paper (if you’re lucky) the whole way.
Also, streetlights. That walk on State Street includes a stretch under the Route 8/25 connector. It’s a short distance, but it gets plenty dark under there, especially this time of year. There are four different streetlights in the underpass; they’re all burned out.
Most cities have faced similar problems. Before he became a national figure on Sept. 11, Rudy Giuliani’s biggest claim to fame was “cleaning up” New York City. Never mind that every major city in the country made similar gains in crime-fighting and quality-of-life issues; it was Rudy who received, and still claims, the credit.
But even taking the national trend into account, there’s no denying New York got a lot safer. And one of the main drivers behind that was what became known as the broken-windows theory of crime-fighting. The thinking is, when presented with a dangerous, drug-infested neighborhood, start with the little things — cracked pavement, fallen-down fences, garbage on the streets, broken windows.
As the theory goes, as those quality-of-life issues get better, so does the general tone of the neighborhood, to the point that people feel safer, crime starts to drop and more people move in.
There’s more to it than that, and a stepped-up police presence is necessary, which means more money. But the basic idea is sound. Fix the little things, start at the bottom and watch those changes make a difference at the top.
If any city could use that kind of approach, it would have to be Bridgeport.
We have no shortage of the alternative, the top-down approach. The promised gains from the recently approved Steel Point plan are 100 percent based on the trickle-down theory. No, the people who live here won’t be able to afford a home there or maybe even to shop there, but the money that comes in through increased tax revenue will benefit everyone.
Even at the most optimistic, though, we’re talking 20 to 30 years down the road when that tax revenue starts to make a difference. But the city is counting on success there — and in other large projects — to change the culture of Bridgeport, make it a place where people feel comfortable investing and building. That, theoretically, is how the people who live here will see immediate gain, in the city’s improved reputation and its accompanying benefits.
Talk about a dicey proposition.
Even in the best-case scenario, all this taxpayer money is going toward something ephemeral, something that may or may not happen down the road. The gains are real for the out-of-towners who buy a luxury condo on the water, but not so much for a working family here.
In the meantime, spending money on cleaning up garbage, knocking down abandoned buildings and fixing broken windows could have immediate benefits.
Imagine walking down well-lit streets around downtown. At the moment, there aren’t many places to go in the area to eat, have a drink, see a movie, etc. But there are some. And the best way to guarantee no one will take a stroll through the area is to keep those streetlights dark.
Broken-windows fixes aren’t cheap, but it’s about priorities. Taking that approach doesn’t benefit developers or banks, at least not immediately, but it can make a difference in ordinary people’s lives.
And there’s no reason that approach precludes development, even on a large scale. But what it could mean is that for every dollar set aside for a private development, a certain amount must be set aside for infrastructure improvements and the like.
It should be clear to everyone that it will take much more than luxury development to get the city going again.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor at the Connecticut Post. You can reach him at 203-330-6233 or via e-mail at hbailey@ctpost.com.
As usual, Bridgeport left to fend for itself
11/04/07
Forget about neighbors. Listening to contenders for local office come through for endorsement interviews the past several weeks, it’s hard to believe some of these communities are on the same planet.
Candidates talk about what’s making news in their towns, and it’s striking how priorities differ. Some are concerned about maintaining the Colonial charm downtown, or fighting overdevelopment. Traffic is always a problem. In one town, the local outrage is all about height and bulk restrictions on million-dollar homes.
In these suburbs, it all comes down to taxes. The services are there, but no one wants to pay for them, so candidates argue about who can do more for less. There were a dozen variations on the “I’ll make government work smarter” theme from various challengers (as well as the unfortunate promises to “think outside the box”).
Then there’s Bridgeport. With a recent report saying its high schools function as “dropout factories” and a childhood poverty rate more than twice the state average, Bridgeport’s mayoral hopefuls would give anything to have the problems of the suburbs. Instead of maintaining old-time charm, leaders here are trying to build an entirely new city.
Bridgeport for decades has absorbed the problems from its neighbors, leaving the outlying towns to fight over zoning minutiae and traffic signals. No, it’s not minutiae to the people whose houses and streets are affected, but for the wider population, it’s hard to get worked up about.
The candidate interviews give lie to the idea that any sort of regional planning is ever coming here. The idea behind that goal goes to the question of why Connecticut’s cities, so often surrounded by wealth, can struggle as much as they do. Why are Hartford and Waterbury and Bridgeport in so much trouble if their suburbs are sailing along unscathed?
The answer is that those cities could be doing just fine if they and their five or seven closest neighbors were under one government. If Bridgeport annexed, say, Fairfield, Trumbull, Shelton, Stratford and Easton, there would be dramatically more wealth to work with to solve the inner city’s problems, and significantly more resources to dilute the negative effects of the post-industrial economy.
Instead, every town and city is stuck playing essentially a zero-sum game, where what’s good for one is often to the detriment of a neighbor. If wealthy families or businesses leave Bridgeport for Fairfield, it’s not a two-way street in terms of benefits.
But regional planning need not involve some sort of supercity swallowing its richer neighbors. Just increasing the ability of well-off towns to help poorer neighbors, and efforts to evenly distribute problems among the wealthy and the not-so-wealthy, would pay huge dividends for the cities.
The problems is that it’s not in the interests of suburban voters. It’s not that Fairfield and Trumbull don’t care about Bridgeport; leaders there rightly recognize that what happens to the region’s largest city affects everyone. But they’re not willing to risk what their towns have built up. To surrender autonomy or tax dollars in a possibly fruitless attempt to help a neighbor in need would be to guarantee a potent election-year issue for any challenger.
It’s the same reason why cities get short shrift in the Capitol. It’s a suburban-dominated state, so suburban issues take precedence in the Legislature. The cities get what’s left over or worse, especially if their delegations can’t get their acts together.
So Bridgeport is left to fend for itself. It’s little wonder the city has to take what it can get when developers come calling.
There’s plenty of talk about how Bridgeport has turned the corner, and how all these new apartments and development deals will finally lift the city to its former glory. Maybe they will. But whoever wins Tuesday’s mayoral election ought to know full well what he’s getting into. It’s going to take a lot more than tweaking the zoning regulations to get Bridgeport where it wants to go.
Maybe in a decade or so, the city will be lucky enough to have candidates who can vow to fight overdevelopment. Then Bridgeport and its neighbors will finally feel like they’re in the same boat together.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor at the Connecticut Post. You can reach him at 203-330-6233 or via e-mail at hbailey@ctpost.com.
Forget about neighbors. Listening to contenders for local office come through for endorsement interviews the past several weeks, it’s hard to believe some of these communities are on the same planet.
Candidates talk about what’s making news in their towns, and it’s striking how priorities differ. Some are concerned about maintaining the Colonial charm downtown, or fighting overdevelopment. Traffic is always a problem. In one town, the local outrage is all about height and bulk restrictions on million-dollar homes.
In these suburbs, it all comes down to taxes. The services are there, but no one wants to pay for them, so candidates argue about who can do more for less. There were a dozen variations on the “I’ll make government work smarter” theme from various challengers (as well as the unfortunate promises to “think outside the box”).
Then there’s Bridgeport. With a recent report saying its high schools function as “dropout factories” and a childhood poverty rate more than twice the state average, Bridgeport’s mayoral hopefuls would give anything to have the problems of the suburbs. Instead of maintaining old-time charm, leaders here are trying to build an entirely new city.
Bridgeport for decades has absorbed the problems from its neighbors, leaving the outlying towns to fight over zoning minutiae and traffic signals. No, it’s not minutiae to the people whose houses and streets are affected, but for the wider population, it’s hard to get worked up about.
The candidate interviews give lie to the idea that any sort of regional planning is ever coming here. The idea behind that goal goes to the question of why Connecticut’s cities, so often surrounded by wealth, can struggle as much as they do. Why are Hartford and Waterbury and Bridgeport in so much trouble if their suburbs are sailing along unscathed?
The answer is that those cities could be doing just fine if they and their five or seven closest neighbors were under one government. If Bridgeport annexed, say, Fairfield, Trumbull, Shelton, Stratford and Easton, there would be dramatically more wealth to work with to solve the inner city’s problems, and significantly more resources to dilute the negative effects of the post-industrial economy.
Instead, every town and city is stuck playing essentially a zero-sum game, where what’s good for one is often to the detriment of a neighbor. If wealthy families or businesses leave Bridgeport for Fairfield, it’s not a two-way street in terms of benefits.
But regional planning need not involve some sort of supercity swallowing its richer neighbors. Just increasing the ability of well-off towns to help poorer neighbors, and efforts to evenly distribute problems among the wealthy and the not-so-wealthy, would pay huge dividends for the cities.
The problems is that it’s not in the interests of suburban voters. It’s not that Fairfield and Trumbull don’t care about Bridgeport; leaders there rightly recognize that what happens to the region’s largest city affects everyone. But they’re not willing to risk what their towns have built up. To surrender autonomy or tax dollars in a possibly fruitless attempt to help a neighbor in need would be to guarantee a potent election-year issue for any challenger.
It’s the same reason why cities get short shrift in the Capitol. It’s a suburban-dominated state, so suburban issues take precedence in the Legislature. The cities get what’s left over or worse, especially if their delegations can’t get their acts together.
So Bridgeport is left to fend for itself. It’s little wonder the city has to take what it can get when developers come calling.
There’s plenty of talk about how Bridgeport has turned the corner, and how all these new apartments and development deals will finally lift the city to its former glory. Maybe they will. But whoever wins Tuesday’s mayoral election ought to know full well what he’s getting into. It’s going to take a lot more than tweaking the zoning regulations to get Bridgeport where it wants to go.
Maybe in a decade or so, the city will be lucky enough to have candidates who can vow to fight overdevelopment. Then Bridgeport and its neighbors will finally feel like they’re in the same boat together.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor at the Connecticut Post. You can reach him at 203-330-6233 or via e-mail at hbailey@ctpost.com.
Keeping up with downtown development
6/24/07
The mayor was mad at me.
In response to some unkind words I wrote in this space a few weeks back about the pace of downtown Bridgeport’s redevelopment, Mayor John M. Fabrizi offered to take me around town and show me all the bright spots, all the progress being made.
I was happy to accept, mostly because, since I haven’t been doing this all that long, I liked the idea that the mayor knew who I was.
But I also liked the idea of getting a firsthand look at these places I read so much about. It’s true, I could have driven myself down to any number of these spots — and I have checked out a good number of them — but still, a legitimate tour guide seemed like an opportunity worth taking.
In my life outside work, I take classes toward a degree in urban planning. Waterfront redevelopment, transportation initiatives, inclusionary zoning — these topics put plenty of people to sleep, but I spend my spare time on this stuff.
It affects everyone. We all drive on I-95, we all pay taxes, we all go to the mall, or the beach, or the movies. Land-use regulation can seem pretty arcane, but no one’s life is detached from it.
And of all the cities in the country to live in, it’s hard to think of a better petri dish than Bridgeport. This city has faced every urban blight in the books these past few decades — disappearing industry, flight to the suburbs, dangerous streets, epic corruption. The fact that it’s maybe, possibly on the way back is a testament by itself.
There’s a niche for Bridgeport to fill. Working people, especially young ones, need to live somewhere, and Bridgeport might be a palatable possibility. The multitude of housing proposals on tap needs to pay some dividends for the downtown.
It all comes down, in many people’s opinion, to eyes on the street. If there are people downtown, at all waking hours, then everything else will come together. The safest cities in the country (like New York) have constant activity, perpetual motion. The more people are around, the safer everyone feels, and the more skittish potential criminals become.
This isn’t a novel concept. It goes back at least to New York City legend Jane Jacobs, a Greenwich Village resident and activist who fought to keep her neighborhood intact when it was threatened by an expressway. The plan, at the time seen as a foregone conclusion, was to extend Manhattan’s Fifth Avenue south through Washington Square Park and connect it to the planned Lower Manhattan Expressway.
That road never got built. Activists saw how other highways had chopped neighborhoods to bits, and were determined it wouldn’t happen to them. Farther north, the Bronx is just now starting to recover from its multiple body blows, the most egregious of which, the Cross-Bronx Expressway, is held up as the symbol of all that is wrong with out-of-control planners who care nothing for the cities they purportedly serve. I-95 through Bridgeport could fill that same role.
Jacobs fought to keep neighborhoods together; she recognized the fundamental value in local stores, sidewalk encounters and person-to-person contact. It’s what makes New York City great, and what cities around the country, Bridgeport included, have been trying to build for generations now.
The downtown is here; the buildings are up. Now we just need the people. No one wants to see the city recover more than the people who live and work here, and I do both. And with Citytrust, the Remington site, Read’s and even Steel Point, things are happening.
In the meantime, we need people. Walkers, runners, pedestrians, stroller-pushers, theater-goers, lunch-eaters, game attendees — all sorts. They are the ones who will get Bridgeport back where it belongs.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor at the Connecticut Post. You can reach him at 203-330-6233 or via e-mail at hbailey@ctpost.com.
The mayor was mad at me.
In response to some unkind words I wrote in this space a few weeks back about the pace of downtown Bridgeport’s redevelopment, Mayor John M. Fabrizi offered to take me around town and show me all the bright spots, all the progress being made.
I was happy to accept, mostly because, since I haven’t been doing this all that long, I liked the idea that the mayor knew who I was.
But I also liked the idea of getting a firsthand look at these places I read so much about. It’s true, I could have driven myself down to any number of these spots — and I have checked out a good number of them — but still, a legitimate tour guide seemed like an opportunity worth taking.
In my life outside work, I take classes toward a degree in urban planning. Waterfront redevelopment, transportation initiatives, inclusionary zoning — these topics put plenty of people to sleep, but I spend my spare time on this stuff.
It affects everyone. We all drive on I-95, we all pay taxes, we all go to the mall, or the beach, or the movies. Land-use regulation can seem pretty arcane, but no one’s life is detached from it.
And of all the cities in the country to live in, it’s hard to think of a better petri dish than Bridgeport. This city has faced every urban blight in the books these past few decades — disappearing industry, flight to the suburbs, dangerous streets, epic corruption. The fact that it’s maybe, possibly on the way back is a testament by itself.
There’s a niche for Bridgeport to fill. Working people, especially young ones, need to live somewhere, and Bridgeport might be a palatable possibility. The multitude of housing proposals on tap needs to pay some dividends for the downtown.
It all comes down, in many people’s opinion, to eyes on the street. If there are people downtown, at all waking hours, then everything else will come together. The safest cities in the country (like New York) have constant activity, perpetual motion. The more people are around, the safer everyone feels, and the more skittish potential criminals become.
This isn’t a novel concept. It goes back at least to New York City legend Jane Jacobs, a Greenwich Village resident and activist who fought to keep her neighborhood intact when it was threatened by an expressway. The plan, at the time seen as a foregone conclusion, was to extend Manhattan’s Fifth Avenue south through Washington Square Park and connect it to the planned Lower Manhattan Expressway.
That road never got built. Activists saw how other highways had chopped neighborhoods to bits, and were determined it wouldn’t happen to them. Farther north, the Bronx is just now starting to recover from its multiple body blows, the most egregious of which, the Cross-Bronx Expressway, is held up as the symbol of all that is wrong with out-of-control planners who care nothing for the cities they purportedly serve. I-95 through Bridgeport could fill that same role.
Jacobs fought to keep neighborhoods together; she recognized the fundamental value in local stores, sidewalk encounters and person-to-person contact. It’s what makes New York City great, and what cities around the country, Bridgeport included, have been trying to build for generations now.
The downtown is here; the buildings are up. Now we just need the people. No one wants to see the city recover more than the people who live and work here, and I do both. And with Citytrust, the Remington site, Read’s and even Steel Point, things are happening.
In the meantime, we need people. Walkers, runners, pedestrians, stroller-pushers, theater-goers, lunch-eaters, game attendees — all sorts. They are the ones who will get Bridgeport back where it belongs.
Hugh S. Bailey is assistant editorial page editor at the Connecticut Post. You can reach him at 203-330-6233 or via e-mail at hbailey@ctpost.com.
Oysters can't stop Bridgeport deal
7/10/08
Yet another abject lesson in how nothing ever gets done in Bridgeport: The case of the future oyster beds.
Adjacent to Seaside Park sits the former Remington Products factory site, which has stood vacant for years. Instead of an inviting destination with pristine views of Long Island Sound, the land lies fallow, closed off to the public.
A developer has a $500 million plan to transform the property into waterfront condominiums and a 250-slip marina. A boardwalk would provide public access, and the new luxury homes, in theory, would pour tax dollars by the bucketload into city coffers.
But, this being Bridgeport, none of it may come to pass.
State officials are refusing to issue a permit for the marina, which would intrude into an offshore area reserved for future oyster bed development. Without the marina, which would also include the boardwalk and a restaurant, the 1,200 condominiums won’t be built.
The Department of Environmental Protection says both sides are working toward a compromise, but the developer seems far less sanguine. If the state insists on fewer boat slips, that could make the project less appealing financially, and possibly bring down the whole deal.
Mayor Bill Finch is pushing the state to be, as he put it, “flexible.” His administration could use some good news, and seeing real progress on one of the city’s three planned mega-projects, alongside Steel Point and the Magic Johnson development, would provide some.
No one denies the value of environmental protection, or the hard work put in by the DEP. But someone at the top level of state government needs to step in and make sure proposed oyster beds don’t kill this project. The window of opportunity in Bridgeport is already edging shut, what with the nationwide housing crisis, and more bad news could be a death knell for the short-lived “recovery” in the Park City.
No, developers should not be allowed to run rampant over environmental regulations in the name of economic development, but neither should anyone lose perspective. City and state officials must consider what Bridgeport needs, and find a way to get there. The development team may not get everything they want, but they must not walk away from the deal over a few boat slips.
This project won’t make oysters extinct. Most of the beds in question are not currently productive. The state has to give a little, and make sure this project happens.
Yet another abject lesson in how nothing ever gets done in Bridgeport: The case of the future oyster beds.
Adjacent to Seaside Park sits the former Remington Products factory site, which has stood vacant for years. Instead of an inviting destination with pristine views of Long Island Sound, the land lies fallow, closed off to the public.
A developer has a $500 million plan to transform the property into waterfront condominiums and a 250-slip marina. A boardwalk would provide public access, and the new luxury homes, in theory, would pour tax dollars by the bucketload into city coffers.
But, this being Bridgeport, none of it may come to pass.
State officials are refusing to issue a permit for the marina, which would intrude into an offshore area reserved for future oyster bed development. Without the marina, which would also include the boardwalk and a restaurant, the 1,200 condominiums won’t be built.
The Department of Environmental Protection says both sides are working toward a compromise, but the developer seems far less sanguine. If the state insists on fewer boat slips, that could make the project less appealing financially, and possibly bring down the whole deal.
Mayor Bill Finch is pushing the state to be, as he put it, “flexible.” His administration could use some good news, and seeing real progress on one of the city’s three planned mega-projects, alongside Steel Point and the Magic Johnson development, would provide some.
No one denies the value of environmental protection, or the hard work put in by the DEP. But someone at the top level of state government needs to step in and make sure proposed oyster beds don’t kill this project. The window of opportunity in Bridgeport is already edging shut, what with the nationwide housing crisis, and more bad news could be a death knell for the short-lived “recovery” in the Park City.
No, developers should not be allowed to run rampant over environmental regulations in the name of economic development, but neither should anyone lose perspective. City and state officials must consider what Bridgeport needs, and find a way to get there. The development team may not get everything they want, but they must not walk away from the deal over a few boat slips.
This project won’t make oysters extinct. Most of the beds in question are not currently productive. The state has to give a little, and make sure this project happens.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Redevelopment plodding along
3/27/08
No one ever thought redeveloping downtown Bridgeport would be easy. But the way it’s playing out has been more difficult than even some of the skeptics were predicting.
The latest blow came this week with the announcement that the Fat Cat Pie Co., long touted as a key cog in the development plans, has given up on the city. A Norwalk-based gourmet pizza restaurant, Fat Cat had been slated originally for the Lofts at Lafayette building and then for the Citytrust building, a landmark former bank retrofitted for apartments.
But after waiting more than two years on the Citytrust site, the restaurant’s owner has had enough, and is pulling the plug. “It has taken too much time and there were too many promises,” owner Anthony Ancona said, noting the original planned opening date came and went two years ago.
The way things are looking, he could have been talking about more than his own restaurant. It’s good news that Citytrust officials are reporting an 80 percent occupancy rate, but the overall picture downtown is mixed at best.
One restaurant coming or going isn’t the end of the world. Development projects take time, and getting an entire neighborhood back on its feet was always going to be difficult. But the national economic picture raises questions about the entire endeavor.
The housing market, upon which much of Bridgeport’s hope was based, is collapsing, and lenders look increasingly unwilling to provide the cash necessary to build more of it. The work stoppage on Phillip Kuchma’s Bijou Square project is just the most visible sign of a problem likely to plague Bridgeport for years.
The mixed-use mega-projects around town are all supposedly on schedule, but may not open for years, even in best-case scenarios. Smaller deals have seen mixed results, but the housing slump is weighing on everything.
The early success of Two Boots restaurant, along with established downtown eateries like Ralph & Rich’s, have shown that people are willing to come downtown for food and entertainment. But they need places to go. If the housing picture doesn’t turn around, Bridgeport’s downtown could end up back at square one. Someone ought to have a backup plan handy.
No one ever thought redeveloping downtown Bridgeport would be easy. But the way it’s playing out has been more difficult than even some of the skeptics were predicting.
The latest blow came this week with the announcement that the Fat Cat Pie Co., long touted as a key cog in the development plans, has given up on the city. A Norwalk-based gourmet pizza restaurant, Fat Cat had been slated originally for the Lofts at Lafayette building and then for the Citytrust building, a landmark former bank retrofitted for apartments.
But after waiting more than two years on the Citytrust site, the restaurant’s owner has had enough, and is pulling the plug. “It has taken too much time and there were too many promises,” owner Anthony Ancona said, noting the original planned opening date came and went two years ago.
The way things are looking, he could have been talking about more than his own restaurant. It’s good news that Citytrust officials are reporting an 80 percent occupancy rate, but the overall picture downtown is mixed at best.
One restaurant coming or going isn’t the end of the world. Development projects take time, and getting an entire neighborhood back on its feet was always going to be difficult. But the national economic picture raises questions about the entire endeavor.
The housing market, upon which much of Bridgeport’s hope was based, is collapsing, and lenders look increasingly unwilling to provide the cash necessary to build more of it. The work stoppage on Phillip Kuchma’s Bijou Square project is just the most visible sign of a problem likely to plague Bridgeport for years.
The mixed-use mega-projects around town are all supposedly on schedule, but may not open for years, even in best-case scenarios. Smaller deals have seen mixed results, but the housing slump is weighing on everything.
The early success of Two Boots restaurant, along with established downtown eateries like Ralph & Rich’s, have shown that people are willing to come downtown for food and entertainment. But they need places to go. If the housing picture doesn’t turn around, Bridgeport’s downtown could end up back at square one. Someone ought to have a backup plan handy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)