Whither or wither Connecticut?  Strategic thinking from 1999.

Aquarion Water Company in CT (light blue);  Connecticut Institute for the 21st Century warned of our becoming a "cul de sac" - read selected pages here.

Sliding toward third-tier
Manchester Journal-Inquirer
Published: Saturday, July 12, 2008 12:07 PM EDT

Hartford was never a Boston or San Francisco. But it was once a decent and livable small city — as Providence and St. Paul are now.

You could say that, among small cities, it was second-tier.

It is slipping rapidly toward third-tier now.

That means something more than that fewer people from the suburbs will go to the Hartford Stage or the Atheneum. It means that it will be harder to attract business to Greater Hartford and harder to sell homes here.

There are real consequences to being third-tier.

The trend must be slowed. Slipping to third-tier, combined with the impact of a Wall Street based recession on the western part of the state, will put Connecticut in dire straits.

Hartford has been in decline for 30 years, maybe 40. The changing economies of cities, bad public policy, and sheer delusion have badly wounded it.

But now the Hartford region is in danger of being written off and forgotten. The perception that Hartford is a deeply unsafe and uncivilized city, which has sharpened in the last five years, is turning it into a place that people do not want to live in if they can help it. Or even visit.

Another recent blow to the region makes it seem third-tier. It could be the death blow to Greater Hartford.

It has to do with the airport.

At the very time when Bradley International Airport is being rebuilt, and the airport brought up to 21st-century standards, the airlines are going into a tailspin.

Bradley has, in recent days, lost its direct flights to Amsterdam, Los Angeles, and Denver, all acquired after much work and with much fanfare.

This is a significant setback, not only to Bradley, but to the region, and the hopes for economic development in the region.

•

Think about fuel cells.

Greater Hartford could be one of the world leaders of this technology. (Arguably, we are already a leader in knowledge.) But people need to be able to get here.

The state of Connecticut is always acting and investing after the fact — after the damage is done.

For example, some want the state to save the Mark Twain House as it saved the Old State House or to bolster the Atheneum.

And those places are treasures.

But the state needs to attract industry.

New industry.

And not just the movie industry.

It needs to look toward the future, and not just its past.

State government should be asking:

— What can we do to help with fuel cell innovation and the marketing of the region’s scientific and technical community?

— How can we strengthen Bradley?

— Can the governor help to entice some airline to make Hartford a hub, or mini-hub?

Maybe none of that is possible.

But let’s ask the questions.

If we can spend hundreds of billions on hotels and museums on the Hartford riverfront, we can surely spend some time and thought on attracting commerce and industry.

And we have to stop fiddling while Hartford burns.

•

Hartford needs three things, short-term.

It needs an infusion of cops. The state will have to pay. But it is worth it, on economic and humanitarian grounds.

Hartford needs lower taxes.

It needs fewer but new and refurbished schools.

With the energy crisis, small cities have a chance to make a comeback.

But for that they must be livable.

That means basics, like safety, schools, and neighborhoods, not new superstructures.

Long term? Hartford should be annexed by West Hartford, which has really become the central city of the region.

The state will have to pay for that too, in large measure. But it will be  cheaper than the new science center, and the result may be a sustainable city.

The time for bold action is now.

Not in five years.

Vernon, Manchester, and East Hartford sink or swim with Hartford.

But at the current rate, Greater Hartford will be a dead region in five years — Scranton without the charm.

We want to be Providence or St. Paul.

Or Hartford as it once was.


Introduction and Overview:  approved CT Plan of C&D 2004-2009

In accordance with Sections 16a-24 through 16a-33 of the Connecticut General Statutes, the Office of Policy and Management (OPM) is required to prepare a State plan of conservation and development on a recurring five-year cycle.    The plan serves as a statement of the development, resource management and public investment policies for the State.  The Plan is used as a framework for evaluating plans and proposals submitted to OPM for review through mandated review processes.

Specific requirements set forth in Section 16a-31 of the Connecticut General Statutes include the following:

1.   State agencies are directed to consider the Plan when they prepare agency plans.  In addition, agency prepared plans, when required by state or federal law, are to be submitted to the Office of Policy and Management (OPM) for a review of conformity with the Plan.

2.   State agencies are required to be consistent with the Plan when undertaking the following actions:

    a)   The acquisition of real property when the acquisition costs are in excess of one hundred thousand dollars;

    b)   The development or improvement of real property when the development costs are in excess of one hundred thousand  dollars;

    c)   The acquisition of public transportation equipment or facilities when the acquisition costs are in excess of one hundred  thousand dollars; and

    d)   The authorization of any state grant for an amount in excess of one hundred thousand dollars for the acquisition,   development, or improvement of real property or for the acquisition of public transportation equipment or facilities.

 3.   The Secretary of OPM submits to the State Bond Commission, prior to the allocation of any bond funds for any of the above actions, an advisory statement commenting on the extent to which such action conforms to the Plan of Conservation and Development.
 
 

The Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut, 2004-2009
http://www.opm.state.ct.us

The Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut, 2004-2009 (C&D Plan) is comprised of two separate, yet equally important, components – the Plan text and the Locational Guide Map (see links below).  Both components include policies that guide the planning and decision-making processes of state government relative to:  (1) addressing human resource needs and development; (2) balancing economic growth with environmental protection and resource conservation concerns; and (3) coordinating the functional planning activities of state agencies to accomplish long-term effectiveness and economies in the expenditure of public funds.

The policies contained in the C&D Plan text provide the context and direction for state agencies to implement their plans and actions in a manner consistent with the following six Growth Management Principles (GMPs):

1)      Redevelop and Revitalize Regional Centers and Areas with Existing or Currently Planned Physical Infrastructure

2)      Expand Housing Opportunities and Design Choices to Accommodate a Variety of Household Types and Needs

3)      Concentrate Development Around Transportation Nodes and Along Major Transportation Corridors to Support the Viability of Transportation Options

4)      Conserve and Restore the Natural Environment, Cultural and Historical Resources, and Traditional Rural Lands

5)      Protect and Ensure the Integrity of Environmental Assets Critical to Public Health and Safety

6)      Promote Integrated Planning Across all Levels of Government to Address Issues on a Statewide, Regional and Local Basis

Municipalities and Regional Planning Organizations are also encouraged to consider these Growth Management Principles and must note any inconsistencies with the Plan when developing their own plans of conservation and development.

 The Locational Guide Map plays an important role in coordinating relevant state actions by providing a geographical interpretation of the state’s conservation and development policies.  The Map comprises the best available digital, standardized, statewide data for each policy’s definitional criteria.

Development Area Policies (In order of priority)

1) Regional Centers – Redevelop and revitalize the economic, social, and physical environment of the state’s traditional centers of industry and commerce.

2) Neighborhood Conservations Areas – Promote infill development and redevelopment in areas that are at least 80% built up and have existing water, sewer, and transportation infrastructure to support such development.

3) Growth Areas – Support staged urban-scale expansion in areas suitable for long-term economic growth that are currently less than 80% built up, but have existing or planned infrastructure to support future growth in the region.

4) Rural Community Centers – Promote concentration of mixed-use development such as municipal facilities, employment, shopping, and residential uses within a village center setting.
 
 

Conservation Area Policies (In order of priority)

1) Existing Preserved Open Space – Support the permanent protection of public and quasi-public land dedicated for open space purposes.

2) Preservation Areas – Protect significant resource, heritage, recreation, and hazard-prone areas by avoiding structural development, except as directly consistent with the preservation value.

3) Conservation Areas – Plan for the long-term management of lands that contribute to the state’s need for food, water and other resources and environmental quality by ensuring that any changes in use are compatible with the identified conservation value.

4) Rural Lands – Protect the rural character of these areas by avoiding development forms and intensities that exceed on-site carrying capacity for water supply and sewage disposal, except where necessary to resolve localized public health concerns.

For a more detailed description of Locational Guide Map, please wait until July 15, 2005 for a link!  Please see links below for other data:

Greenways Plan:
http://www.opm.state.ct.us/igp/cdplan/C&D%20-%20greenways2.pdf

Definitional Criteria:
http://www.opm.state.ct.us/igp/cdplan/C&D%20-%20Definitional%20Criteria.pdf

Adopted Plan of C&D 2004-2009:
http://www.opm.state.ct.us/igp/cdplan/Adopted%202004-2009%20C&D%20PlanA.pdf


Old news:  These are comments taken into consideration by the Legislature when they chose to "reconsider" and then "pass temporarily" 5044 in 2004:
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2004/fc/2004HB-05044-R000248-FC.htm

Approved Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut, a.k.a.
CONNECTICUT PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT, 2004-2009 - click HERE.
Legend for the C&D PLAN land use map below:


THE MAP FOR THE SOUTH WESTERN REGION OF CONNECTICUT (Regional Planning Organization boundaries in gray):