[MikefromCT]

Originally Posted by GoHuskies

The bus route works for Hartford because CT isn't all that urban. A dedicated bus route allows existing bus routes to avoid the traffic on major highways. Buses using Fastrak can reach into towns that don't even border the bus lanes.

A light rail is only useful if you live along the tracks. It would require more parking to be effective in CT and it requires more expense to build and has higher upkeep costs. Light rail works here in NJ because a crap ton of people live along the Hudson River and the light rail shuffles them up & down the riverfront.

BTW the city of LA has "bus rapid transit" routes and they are used by thousands everyday. Here in NJ again buses uses dedicated bus lanes during rush hour to approach the Lincoln Tunnel. Manhattan has dedicated bus only lanes and express buses that cost upwards of $6 for a ride. Buses are not just poverty transports.

New Haven-Springfield rail could change that. Currently there's a proposal to focus on commercial development along where these rail stops would be. Personally, I feel it's a smart and effective approach to building. And also, as we've seen in more mertropolitan areas, when residential buildings go up near rail stops, it may prompt the devlopment of multi-story buildings where we build upward, not outward, and in many of these towns, where land is scarce, that's the only way to go. That doesn't mean the answer is 20-story high-rises like you see in Co-op City (no thank you!), but it does offer what is, at least in my mind, a more practical approach to using space, combining residential and commercial areas. This works best where people have close access to public transit like this, IMO.

I know LA has a bus system, but that also works because it's a city where the car is king. Really, that was the first city that really was shaped solely by the automobile. Whereas cities back east and in the midwest where building updwards and relying on subways and streetcars, LA was more suburban.

I agree buses aren't always transporation for the poor, but it depends on the city. In larger cities where people are more reliant on mass transit, this is less likely the case. In smaller cities like those in CT, it's a different clientele. Maybe the idea behind Fastrack was to offer an alternative for middle-class suburban commuters, but that idea hasn't resonated with most people. Everyone I talk to says the same thing: They're thrilled that ligh-rail service is finally coming to their towns, and so am I. I realize central CT isn't the same as those who live in New Jersey or LI and commute to the city every day, but it's a start.

[GoHuskies]

I think the technical term transportation planners like to use is intermodal passenger transportation. Mixing different transit methods to complete the overall journey quickly & efficiently. Fastrak allows foot to bus to foot and reaches towns all along the route because it provides a dedicated lane for existing bus routes that were around before the bus lanes. I think the official stats are something like 7000 commuters who took buses prior to fastrak now get to Hartford easier thanks to a dedicated busway.

The New Haven rail project has existing service already in the form of the Amtrak shuttle. The state can now move in and expand the station & track network while adding trainsets from SLE. In this specific case a busway might have been more expensive overall.

The reason I didn't support a rail network instead of Fastrak is the additional step it would add for many commuters. Those 7000-odd bus commuters would need to take a bus to a rail station then the train to Hartford. Once in Hartford there still needs to be buses to shuttle commuters from Union Station to various employers. More station parking would also be needed. Fastrak simplifies this because existing buses can use the busway along with dedicated Fasttrak buses that make loops into downtown.

[RunD1987]

Only reason not a fan of FastTrack is its so limited. I mean there's very few public transportation services for commuters from Waterbury to Hartford or Waterbury to Danbury or Waterbury to New Haven and limited service of Waterbury to Bridgeport. FastTrack really only serves the area of New Britain to Hartford area.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by RunD1987

Only reason not a fan of FastTrack is its so limited. I mean there's very few public transportation services for commuters from Waterbury to Hartford or Waterbury to Danbury or Waterbury to New Haven and limited service of Waterbury to Bridgeport. FastTrack really only serves the area of New Britain to Hartford area.

The reason there is no service between the communities is that there are few people commuting between them. Implementing any mass transit service is expensive so there need so to be people using it to justify the expense. So don't hate on CTfastrak. It is doing well. Jay

[BPt111]

Landlords: Hartford's firming apartment market a mixed bag | HartfordBusiness.com

[MrGompers]

Originally Posted by BPt111

Landlords: Hartford's firming apartment market a mixed bag | HartfordBusiness.com

LOL. I read the entire article and there wasn't one mention of rental prices. Seems like that info would be crucial in an article about rental property.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by MrGompers

LOL. I read the entire article and there wasn't one mention of rental prices. Seems like that info would be crucial in an article about rental property.

I know. They are finally have some competition and are complaining because newer nicer apartments are the same rent they want to get from their 10 year old properties. Tough problem to have. Notice Martin Kenny is putting the money into his apartments on Trumbull? They will rent, the others may not or may have to actually drop their rents to more reasonable levels. Good for Hartford either way. Jay

[Mr_250]

Originally Posted by BPt111

Landlords: Hartford's firming apartment market a mixed bag | HartfordBusiness.com

I can't get a "read" on the article. The vacancy rate are some of the best in the country so that's a good thing but the other hand is that apartments are being built without really a catalyst. They are building these in hopes that Uconn and that state build up so much they can keep the rents high. Even the article states that. They are building in hopes. If Uconn doesn't come through with people, we might see some steady rental prices which is actually a good thing.

I mean, these apartments are expense. Some are twice how much my mortgage is. Is Hartford worth that?

I'll be interested in seeing these rents 4 years from now to see how they stack up.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Mr_250

I can't get a "read" on the article. The vacancy rate are some of the best in the country so that's a good thing but the other hand is that apartments are being built without really a catalyst. They are building these in hopes that Uconn and that state build up so much they can keep the rents high. Even the article states that. They are building in hopes. If Uconn doesn't come through with people, we might see some steady rental prices which is actually a good thing.

I mean, these apartments are expense. Some are twice how much my mortgage is. Is Hartford worth that?

I'll be interested in seeing these rents 4 years from now to see how they stack up.

I think they are complaining that their 10 year old apartments are facing competition from newer apartments. Apartments downtown are still renting quickly. 777 Main is renting quickly. And Martin Kenny's apartments are renting but he is updating them. Sounds like they are just complaining. Jay

[EUPL]

Moody's downgrades Hartford again | HartfordBusiness.com


Bye Bye Hartford.