Double Bill Emergency

Is it a dire emergency?  One can only surmise as to why there is a double bill venue at 6 pm on Monday at Bristol City Hall.  The two special meetings scheduled for Monday, December 28th are both regarding the sale of property on Bristol's former mall site.  Both the Board of Finance and the Special City Council meeting are scheduled for the same time.  This sale of the public's property happens to be subject to a waiver of the City of Bristol's procedures.
 The Board of Finance agenda states:

"  To waive Section 2.G.2 of the Purchasing Policies regarding disposition of real estate, relative to the sale of property at Depot Square to Bristol Hospital and to take any action as necessary"

 The City Council's agenda states:

"To convene into Executive Session to discuss an offer to purchase City owned property at Main Street and Riverside Avenue."

and

 "To reconvene into Public Session and take any action as necessary regarding an offer to purchase City owned property at Main Street and Riverside Avenue."

I fear that there may be reason for public concern.   It appears that the last article to appear in The Bristol Press about the issue may indeed be the last article published there by the city's favorite civic reporter. His resignation, which has garnered national news attention, sheds light onto his wife's reason for resigning in 2011 and it's relationship to the hospital's affairs, stating that she,

"quit in disgust after Mr. Schroeder cut a deal with a major advertiser, the local hospital, to keep a damaging news story under wraps."
 Both of the Collins' have resigned while controversy was amidst regarding the hospitals' affairs.  I honestly do not know if they are relative or just coincidental.  .  One thing for sure is that regardless of the intent of Connecticut's Sunshine Laws, Steve Collins' FOI request regarding the Letter of Intent pertaining to the conditions of the sale to Bristol Hospital was recently rejected by the City of Bristol.   The reason stated was,

"because it was a preliminary draft"  

Mr.  Collins' request further states that under sec. 1-210(b)(1) of the State of CT General Statutes that,

 "preliminary drafts or notes" can be exempt from FOI "provided the public agency has determined that the public interest in withholding such documents clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure."

 One would think that public deals concerning public land and possible public debt would be subject to public disclosure.  If the public interest is not determined by the public itself then what can be said for representative government?  Who decides what is best for the "greater good" or the "common good of Bristol" if it is not the citizens themselves?


As revealed in the article,

"Among the questions that city officials are weighing is how to cope with the parking needs for a building with 250 or more employees... "
Apparently, a consolidation of downtown offices and a consumption of available parking lot will place an unnecessary burden on patrons in the name of new construction and relocation.  As I have indicated in the past, the downtown plans have always been to include public parking garages that would come at a high and unnecessary cost to taxpayers. Could that be a condition of the sale?  If so, will taxpayers' hands then be tied?

 We cannot be sure what to expect under these circumstances.  But under these circumstances, it's hard not to ask a moral question.

   Has the City of Bristol declared itself the sole arbitrator of it's own dealings with public money and public land?

 I guess we will find out Monday the 28th.


There is no public comment scheduled for the meetings.

Identity Crisis Development in Bristol

Is fear mongering and self loathing a predevelopment strategy in Bristol, CT?  It seems as though some Bristolites are suffering from a nanny-state induced identity crisis.  Towns and cities across the country implementing new urbanist redevelopment strategies have embarked upon an effort to rebrand themselves using methods and labels that most regular folks find quite peculiar.  Much of what has appeared in the local media has been focused around some of the region's baseball teams, some whom have been moved around in deals focused on new taxpayer-funded stadiums and comprehensive economic development projects.   Hartford's Transit-Oriented deal includes high-density housing and commercial development at a projected cost of $350 million,  The $63 million dollar stadium project relies upon public debt to be repaid with projected revenues through the nonprofit quasi public-private Hartford Stadium Authority.  Hartford holds a twenty-five year contract with the former New Britain Rock Cats whom now yeild a new name based upon Hartford's railroad history.  The public has been told that the name "Hartford Yard Goats" was proposed in jest, chosen by lottery and subsequently adopted.  Most normal people consider it quite an odd identity.


 The State of Connecticut's Governor's legacy of chasing out industry and replacing it with housing can be seen reverberating in nearby New Britain.  Mayor Erin Stewart's name has been appearing in the local press and in Bristol's social media groups as the regional transportation agenda props up affordable housing with subsidies. Development within a half mile of transit transforms the city's downtown buildings from places of employment into transit-oriented housing.   She recently announced her city's new ball team name, "The Bees" in a press release.

 “On the city seal is a beehive, and underneath the city slogan in Latin it means ‘Industry fills the hive and enjoys honey.’ It’s a tribute to our industrial past.”

It seems that the past has eluded future planning.  The plans indicate that there is a housing imbalance in New Britain as jobs outnumber adjacent housing units by a 3:1 ratio.  This epitomizes the wrongheadedness of the state's direction as it pursues it's agenda of prioritizing housing over employment.   Has the entire state forgotten that employment is what brought people to the Hardware City in the first place?

Here in Bristol we are witnessing the same phenomenon.  We may likely have the best ball team name in the region because the Bristol Blues is not involved in such endeavors.  We have been spared from having to fund the erection of a new coliseum and parking facility, but there is indeed a focus locally to try to reinvent Bristol and make it into something new.  The efforts have not been led by the citizens themselves, but instead by a small group of people imposing a new identity onto a city that they feel has lost it's former self.  Not only has the public-funded branding excluded the public-at-large, the city's public meetings on the topic are practically inaccessible to most residents due to their early daytime scheduling.  The extended group's roster consists of a former employee of Bristol's former downtown master developer, board of finance members , city councilors, chamber of commerce employees and local nonprofit Mum City organizers looking to throw out the old and come in with the new.  "All-Heart" didn't stick with the residents, but they feel it will help grow Bristol.  It appears that it could more likely help grow a new government backed housing bubble.

click here for sources

Growth seems to be the focus of these individuals and other supporters of this downtown new urbanism plan.    But exactly what kind of growth are they seeking?   Bristol's grand list history shows growth of more than 40% in a decade and it remains more than 30% higher after the housing bubble started stabilizing.  When confronted with this fact, one advocate of taxpayer subsidies without public consent declared that "growth is much more than that".  Could this be a reference to the density and vertical development growth that these people are in favor of?  I received no explanation.  Employment growth seems to be the obvious necessity but has eluded the priorities of these people.  In this span of time we have lost more than thirty percent of manufacturing jobs in Bristol.  These market-driven jobs are what brought the largest growth and prosperity in the history of the city.    Production bears the fruits of growth in any healthy sustainable city.  Arts and culture are necessary elements in society and should be promoted, however, such depression-era priorities may pacify the whims of many but I do not find that such taxpayer-funded projects will lead to prosperous economic growth.   Rome also had it's bread and circuses.

 Bristol's  Enterprise Zone was created to entice development to a low-median-income area but Bristol's Public Annual Finance Reports indicate that Bristol's unemployment has lagged behind surrounding communities and is expected to continue to as a result of it's creation.  Additionally, a focus on retail development downtown is unlikely to bring good paying jobs to local residents. In fact, retail and food service jobs happen to be the lowest paying jobs in the country.  This type of development is designed specifically to boost transit ridership because the predominant users of public transportation at off-peak times have historically been recognized as low-income.  This is not a coincidence folks.  This is the future that is being planned for downtown Bristol and there are people that are "mum-city" about it.

Meanwhile we have commercial growth of the same nature these maestros are supporting (minus the high-density housing) occurring naturally and without a subsidy in Bristol's primary commercial corridor.  This also happens to be the areas that the self-loathing advocates are most unhappy with as they try to steer commercial growth into geographical areas that have proven to not be economically sustainable.    Even pharmacy giant CVS has relocated from across the street of Bristol's Depot Square to the most viable location in the Enterprise Zone.   This area also happens to be at the end of Bristol's major commercial corridor.  Most people are happy with the new construction as it is much more attractive than the former buildings at that location.  It will also generate more tax revenue for the city.  Some people however have voiced their discontent with the new construction stating that, 

"Bristol doesn't need a new pharmacy".  

Apparently unaware of the reason for relocation, the lesson in local economics has evaded their recognition.  As one local businessman pointed out at a recent city meeting, investors want to develop where there are high traffic counts because that's where the largest amounts of people can be reached. It's a fact of life not to be ignored, lest the residents suffer loss of personal property in the attempt to spite it.   The development of new pharmacies is in inevitability in a nation with more than seventy percent of it's residents taking prescription drugs.


When the majority of your city's residents own a bank account you will continue to see the construction of new banking institutions.  These are signals of consumer habits of the population and not the inadequacies of planning.   What would happen should a city choose to not allow for such development?  Wouldn't such action would be detrimental to the growth and reputation of a city?  To what extreme should a city strive to limit growth to a particular geographical location?

If we refuse to recognize and appreciate the free growth happening across Bristol, we will likely see the stagnation that some have been fear mongering about.  It's difficult enough for businesses in Bristol to establish themselves and remain afloat as the governor continues his agendas of excessive taxation and unsustainable budgets for radically expanding public transportation.

What some people fail to recognize or acknowledge is that grants and subsidies for centrally planned developments are not merely gifts from government.  These monies must first be taken from successful business owners and property owners whom are often struggling to stay afloat.  In this regard, subsidizing development, tax abatements, etc. creates a playing field that's not quite level and can be potentially damaging to existing businesses.





To simplify the point, let's say that market demand in a community of 60,000 residents such as Bristol was able to sustain six locally owned businesses in a particular market.  Market research would indicate to potential business investors that there is not sufficient market demand and investors would not likely be interested in entering the local market.  But when municipalities offer incentives to encourage investment where the market does not, the new business that would not otherwise have been established can encroach upon the potential incomes of the existing six businesses.  This puts an additional burden on existing businesses competing in this government-induced crowded market.  This an often unforeseen consequence of local market intervention.  New business doesn't necessarily equate to more business nor business growth. 

The spending habits and attitudes of the residents are what most strongly affects the market growth in any free society.   Americans must recognize the fact that free-market growth is the lifeblood of America's prosperity.  It is the essence of the reflection of the free choices of the consumer.  If we do not embrace it, we will surely lose what is left of the freedom of choices it offers.  It's happening right in front of our eyes.  How's your vision?

Enemies of An Open Society: Downtown Deception Pt. 1

Upon visiting one of Bristol's greatest assets called the local library, I found a fascinating book called The Open Society and It's Enemies.  After reading the first few chapters I found myself relating what I was reading to the rockiest and roughest outcrops of Bristol's political landscape infrastructure.    It had me thinking about the suggestion I have received from some members of the public that perhaps it's come time to start talking about the actions of some individuals and what length some will go to in order to protect their agenda.
Have THEY engaged in an effort to derail and deride any opposition or independent thought regarding Bristol's redevelopment?
This group of people whom seem to be in a position where they have a great deal of information about the future of Bristol.  One can only wonder why they're not sharing the details with the general public.

These people are intricately involved in the process.  They should be explaining the benefits of the projects they are advocating for and clarifying the facts with the public.   They are instead focusing all of their effort on trying to discredit those asking questions.   They refer to those opposed to implementing a centrally planned top-down agenda in downtown Bristol as anti-investment, downtown conspiracy theorists, self proclaimed messiahs with ridiculous claims of lack of transparency whom are suffering from irrational paranoia from contrived conspiracies about government cabals trying to get people to give up their cars and get onto public transportation and into dense urban environments.


They claim, "There is no connection between the busway and the RD plans other than old commentary. "  Most incredulously, they stated that "Depot Square is not about transportation."
They also say,  "These folks need to stay off the internet. "

Well, IT IS amazing what you can find on the net.

Let's compare some of their quotes to reality.

In this chart from Bristol's former Master Developer, we can see a graph of a public-private partnership that Renaissance Downtowns calls The Unified Development Approach.  Members of this group of stakeholders have a profound understanding of the development process that Bristol has embarked upon.  Despite the assertions of some members of this group, one can plainly see that the transit agency is a key component in this type of development.

With public ire reaching frenzy levels regarding the planned downtown housing project in the local Bristol Press blog, I called for a town meeting to clear the air.  It never happened.  Can you fathom the reason?  According to one source, Bristol's former mayor told city councilors in 2013 "not to talk about" the details of the project.  One can see in section 3 in the meeting minutes below that the plan is to alter the regional demographics.  Stakeholders in attendance at the meeting must certainly be able to explain the role that demographics plays into this downtown scheme and have been asked to do so.  Instead they have resorted to a tirade of demeaning members of the public.   If the partnership they support provides the transparency they claim then why hasn't the public been informed of these details?

Stakeholders have asserted that the Depot Square plan is not part of a larger plan.  One can clearly see that the Central Connecticut Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) is indeed part of the incorporation of an integrated regional plan.  One can find that much of these regionally planned projects have been spun like a web into some local political campaigns,   It appears that some want to take credit for following a carrot on a stick and pretend these projects were their own idea.

One has to wonder how a weekly writing spinster whom claims that the mayor is part of a cabal that lacks transparency can publicly claim that the Depot Project has nothing to do with transportation.  The following downtown CEDS projects "may be seen as interrelated", according to the description from regional planners.  Do I need special glasses for the vision to see it this way or are members of the public excluded from this perspective?  Perhaps only the members of this exclusive and elusive group are allowed to see or speak of it?


Structured parking has only recently become part of the city's Plan of Development but it has appeared for years in the 2011 CEDS report.  Structured parking, high-density housing and public transportation are integrated in the plan and described as supportive of each other.  The downtown transportation hub is described as intermodal.  Is this about transportation?  Do you believe the local commentary and opinion or the state and regional documents?

Commentaries and annual reports are worlds apart.  Do you believe that the reorganization of planning organization to Councils of Governments renders all previous plans and documents irrelevant?  Some stakeholders have implied so.  Do you believe that the Depot Square Project has nothing to do with transportation just because they said so?

Yes it is true that the Central Connecticut Regional Planning Agency is now defunct, but it is clear that the agendas of some have not changed.  Despite claims from the self-proclaimed seeker of transparency, the Central Naugatuck Valley COG did not assume Metropolitan Planning responsibilities for Bristol until July.  The Capital Region Council of Governments MPO 2016-2017 Unified Planning Work Program  document refers to their support of the Depot Square project and the implementation and compliance of the Complete Streets law.  The CRCOG is working to integrate projects in the Sustainable Knowledge Corridor, implementing Transit-Oriented projects on the from the regional level on down to Bristol.

The Department of Transportation's website says that they adopted the Complete Streets policy in October of 2014.  The report states that the prime consideration of motor vehicle users when designing of roads, "has led to a motorized vehicle dependent society."  This is the same philosophy that can be found in many of the city's planning documents as planners would have you believe that it is societal habits and not the conveniences of personal transportation or the inability to afford it that lead people to live with or without an automobile.

Even the 2011 Downtown Concept Plan Submission from Bristol Rising (whose public relations liaison was employed by Renaissance Downtowns) mentions that some are seeking alternatives in life and transportation to the "car-crazed lifestyles" of personal transportation.  I have yet to meet someone in Bristol whom is an advocate who will "lead by example" in this manner.  The advocates all seem to want to plan this for someone else to live in.


This "freedom from auto dependence" is supposed to be what allows the disposable income that provides the boost to the local economy.  Do you think that that such a development sounds like something that will be affordable housing for teachers, police officers and other people of similar wages?  Perhaps we should ask the people involved in the Unified Development Approach who don't claim that the project has nothing to do with transportation.  Where are they? 

Governor's Vision A Campaign Strategy of Bristol's Political Wizards

   A 'vision' for downtown has become a part of a political campaign for some Bristol politicians.  But what exactly is this 'vision' and where does it come from?  Connecticut legislators, planners and regionalism advocates claim that the visions of the futures of cities and towns come from the citizens themselves through the public participation process.  Federal transportation policy guidelines mandate such input.  But what is very new to Connecticut is a much stronger tie of financial allocation to the State of Connecticut's newly formed councils of governments and their member municipalities' Ten Year Plans of Development.   Bills were introduced in the legislature this year that direct the revenues of municipal automobile taxes to newly formed regional organizations.  The premise of reducing the high costs of automobile taxes in cities with high mill rates seems a noble thing but anyone with a remotely remedial understanding of economics knows that this "savings" of money has to some from somewhere.  Senate Bill 1, introduced by State Democrat Senators Looney and Duff, introduces a scheme to distribute revenues and allocations from automobile taxes, hospital funding, and economic development grants from these agencies on merits tied to the state's "Responsible Growth" guidelines.   

These mandates have communities like Bristol at odds with the free-market in it's pursuit of economic development.  The partnership of  the state's sustainable communities efforts include the Department of Transportation, Department of Housing and the Office of Policy Management and their role in the equation equates to state sponsored economic development targeting communities' distressed neighborhoods to promote transit ridership.  This is why the City of Bristol's targeted place for growth (the enterprise zone) is in the city's highest rail-oriented poverty area.  The results of the policy have been costly and time consuming.  Most residents don't understand this is one predominant reason for the city's inability to garner private investment capital. 

As economist Milton Friedman once famously said,

" One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results."

Incredibly, despite the fact that experts have expressed that the city's current plan would fail, some people have blamed the lack of development of the property on the city's current mayor and have made it part of their campaign against him.  Ironically, it was the one of those candidates whom voted to buy the barren parcel of local ire for municipal use years ago.  However, the original plan sold to taxpayers was a community center for public use.  That plan was scrapped when the state and federal funding didn't come through.  Now what we have being pushed by a party claiming that the current mayor "has no vision" is publicly-funded high-density, busway-oriented affordable housing apartments originally sold as a "no public funding" project.  Whose vision is that?  It's not the residents of Bristol's as one can clearly see in the city's Plan of Development survey report.  The company that the City of Bristol contracted to do the survey included their suggestion of a locally inspired plan based upon the survey's results.

Governor Dannel Malloy has professed his dedication to his transportation vision for walkable communities on numerous occasions.  His party leaders even crafted a bill to create a transit corridor authority to push the ugly details through in top-down fashion if he cannot get his subservient party members to implement it.  It has become apparent to many residents that some particular candidates and project stakeholders have made their biggest priority to try to convince you that the governor's vision is Bristol's vision (as if everyone in the corridor simultaneously woke up one day and decided they all wanted exactly the same thing as all these legislative changes were taking place.)   Some even went as far as to suggest that the Planning Commission remove factual information from from the city's website that does not support their agenda.

One of the biggest issues for residents is not how do we develop the Depot Square parcel but what can we do with the parcel that does not involve pushing the risk burdens onto unaware taxpayers.  I concur that the only moral course of action in the pursuit of allocations is to inform the public of the risks and to allow for referendum.  This has been at the forefront of my advocacy for the past eighteen months.  Some political candidates have endorsed the idea of referendum while others have declared that they "were elected to lead."   Do they really think that subservience to the governor displays vision and leadership?   I hope these people soon realize the purpose of their oath to the state constitution is to define the guidelines of their service in office.  Therein it is clearly stated in SEC. 2.

"All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority."  

It would appear that the biggest issue for some politicians and their political operatives is "What's the best way to sell the citizens a pig-in-a-poke?" These Democrat insiders have been entrenched in the establishment for more than a decade but claim to be campaigning against "the good ole boys".  It's sad really just how far people can try to stretch the truth.  And just how great is this ambiguous  "vision" they claim to have?  This grand vision this is so great that it cannot survive public disclosure of the details.   It's so wonderful that they fear it cannot survive a referendum.   It's a plan so great it cannot survive a public debate.  It's a vision so wonderful that it requires ignoring the responses of the citizens in their survey.  It's a plan that is so financially unsustainable that it is at complete odds with the free market.  It's a plan that necessitates the propagation of untruths by the allies of public figures.   It's a development model so great that when the experts speak of it they include the disclaimer, "when it's done right".  It's a plan so controversial that it requires the creation of public-private nonprofits free from open meeting requirements.  It's a vision so great that it demands ambiguity from elected officials whom respond, "I don't know", when asked if my assertions are true.      Whose vision are they really promoting while campaigning on open government and transparency?  Perhaps the people whom worked on the 2012 GOP national platform are onto something?

This is why reading left-leaning editorials comparing the mayor to the Wonderful Wizard of Oz is like reading hyperbole.  The mayor and a few other candidates seem to be seeking local solutions to local problems and are willing to let the people of the city have a say using the democratic process if the project requires large amounts of public funding.  That is hardly the ruler that Frank Baum's book illustrates, for to enter the Emerald City one must lock on the glasses of illusion and embrace their ruler's vibrant green vision. It's a vision better compared to the vibrant green busway vision of the governors that local democrats have reverbiated with their talk of growth and walkable downtowns.  It's a vision that has left schills in local social media demanding you look at it from their point of view and  declaring, "If you don't like it, then move."  You can buy 'vision' like that for $.40 at vibrant Rainbow Symphony.

Is Malloy the Wizard of Our Cities' Economic Prosperity?

Metro Goldman-Mayer omitted Frank Baum's metaphors about society when transforming Baum's children's novel into it's classic film.  You be the judge.

" First you must put on the spectacles.”“Why?” asked Dorothy.“... Even those who live in the City must wear spectacles night and day. They are all locked on, for Oz so ordered it when the City was first built, and I have the only key that will unlock them.”He opened the big box, and Dorothy saw that it was filled with spectacles of every size and shape. All of them had green glasses in them. The Guardian of the Gates found a pair that would just fit Dorothy and put them over her eyes. There were two golden bands fastened to them that passed around the back of her head, where they were locked together by a little key that was at the end of a chain the Guardian of the Gates wore around his neck. When they were on, Dorothy could not take them off had she wished, but of course she did not wish to be blinded by the glare of the Emerald City, so she said nothing. Then the green man fitted spectacles for the Scarecrow and the Tin Woodman and the Lion, and even on little Toto; and all were locked fast with the key...Even with eyes protected by the green spectacles, Dorothy and her friends were at first dazzled by the brilliancy of the wonderful City. ...There were many people–men, women, and children–walking about, .... Many shops stood in the street, and Dorothy saw that everything in them was green. ....There seemed to be no horses nor animals of any kind; the men carried things around in little green carts, which they pushed before them...."

Depot Square A Cookie-Cutter Plan?

I have heard advocates of Bristol's urban renewal plan say they don't want a cookie-cutter downtown.  With Bristol's redevelopment parcel's name being Depot Square, I was an immediate skeptic of the notion that it's characteristics were locally inspired.  Transportation planning is a regional effort and New Urbanism projects are almost exclusively adapted from a centrally planned model.   This is why I was not surprised to find common results in my internet search.   Here's a look at five of the top location results.  Can you spot the common elements of the Google Search?

 Depot Square: Boulder, Colorado
This endeavor captured the most amount of responses using Google's browser.

Ads:

 "Welcome to Depot Square Apartments, affordable apartments Boulder, Colorado.  Our neighborhood sits close to everywhere you want to be. Walk to shopping. Walk to entertainment. Walk to public transportation. If you’d like to rent your new apartment home with a great location you’ll love the community we’ve created...."

"Boulder’s most unique affordable housing community, Depot Square!

Silva-Markham Partners is pleased to announce that it has been awarded management of Depot Square, which is part of a long-awaited transit oriented project; a Pedersen Development Co, Regional Transportation District and the city of Boulder collaboration, which provides for 71 permanently affordable, well-designed one and two bedroom apartment homes. An adjacent parking garage will provide a parking space on the same level as each apartment home. The uniquely planned community will also have bicycle parking, laundry facilities on every floor, large storage units, and controlled access. Depot Square residents will also enjoy a new city park and the Goose Creek Trailway just outside their doors!

In the news.:

"Roughly 20 would-be residents of the Depot Square apartments opening at Boulder Junction are scrambling for housing after city officials said they didn't meet Boulder's eligibility requirements to live in permanently affordable units.  The residents are all students who applied to live in one of 71 permanently affordable one- and two-bedroom apartment units built by developer Scott Pedersen in Boulder Junction. The city contributed $5.4 million in affordable housing funds from another Pedersen project, the Solana, 3100 Pearl St.

Of 48 apartments for which applications were submitted, the city rejected 14 of them as being rented to ineligible students. Roughly 20 people were going to live in those 14 apartments. The apartment units, which are in the process of leasing now, are intended as housing for people who work in Boulder but could not otherwise afford to live there."

(Click here for link)

"...the Depot Square development in central Boulder, which will include an underground Regional Transportation District bus rapid transit station. 
......DepotSquare is a $50 million to $55 million development that will include a 140-room Hyatt Place Hotel, a busrapid transit station, 71 permanently affordable apartments and a five-level parking structure built around the historic depot building.....
......Pedersen has been working on getting the project going for about three years. Other than the hotel, he said, he didn't yet have any tenants to announce. "Now that we've started construction and have a delivery date, our marketing effort can come back into focus," Pederson said. The project is part of a joint effort between the city of Boulder and the Regional Transportation District to create a transit area that incorporates a mix of uses, including a large affordable-housing component. Land to the west of Depot Square, where Pollard Motors sits now, will someday consist primarily of affordable housing. The Boulder Junction area has been eyed by the city for at least two decades, said Susan Osborne, former Boulder mayor, as she addressed the crowd at the groundbreaking, and the current plan is a far cry from consultants' early ideas that included a large surface-level parking lot with a simple bus turnaround. The new bus station will be a six-bay station located completely underground in the Depot Square development below the parking structure. "We're really proud of it," current Boulder Mayor Matt Appelbaum told the crowd. "It took a really strong and committed partnership to pull this off."

 Delray Beach, Florida

City commissioners gave initial approval to the $20 million Depot Square Apartments in advance of a final vote on the site plan scheduled on July 9. The Caribbean-themed Depot Square would include 284 apartments, with 71 units dedicated to affordable workforce housing. The complex is designed with a mix of one, two and three-bedroom apartments.................................. City officials hope the project provides much-needed housing inventory near where residents work. The project site is minutes away from Delray’s downtown ..."

 

Beverly, MA

RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES, Depot Square Condominiums  

Windover completed the design/build of this mixed-use, transit-oriented, multi-unit residential building. Located adjacent to the Beverly train station, the project included 46 condominiums, first floor retail and two levels of underground parking."

Depot Square. Englewood, NJ

St Johnsbury, VT

Depot Square Apartments

"located downtown close to public transportation. 0 & 1 bedroom apts., heat & hotwater included. rent based on 30% of income"

"... following 2 years of negotiations and groundwork, announced it will not purchase Depot Square Apartments at the corner of Railroad Street and Eastern Avenue. The building's owner - Herb Berezin of Holyoke, Massachusetts - rejected a $1.43 million offer from St. Johnsbury-based Kingdom Development Company and its partner, Lyndon-based RuralEdge.

Bangemann-Johnson said issues at Depot Square have included health hazards such as bed bugs and on-street problems such as fistfights. Every apartment unit is subsidized by the federal Housing Assistance Program, or HAP, which is administered locally by the Vermont State Housing Authority, he said."

One site called Begbugger.com reports:

"Depot Square, a heavily infested building where canine scent detection teams found bed bugs in 39 of 47 units.  WCAX.com reports,

"For the last four months, tenants living in the Depot Square building have been living side by side with bedbugs, even after repeated attempts to exterminate them.

“It seems like they can’t get rid of it then you have to throw away all of your stuff and start from scratch,” Stepp said.

A dog specially trained to sniff out bedbugs recently went through the Depot Square apartment complex and found that all but eight of the 47 units are infested."

The results for Depot Square, in Bristol, CT brought me to the Bristol Rising page featuring the  Depot Square Unified Downtown Development Project Special Permit Application.

Below is a glimpse into what has long appeared in Bristol's regional Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy documents.

Bristol and CEDS Projects

One excerpt from Bristol's West End Plan is to the right.

Do you think that the people in Bristol's community really have had a say in the creation of "affordable housing" on the former mall site?

Do you think that a grassroots effort is what brought about the idea of a so-called "walkable downtown" in downtown Bristol?
Do you think residents should have a say in how Bristol is to grow in the future?

View post on imgur.com

*Top locations are not in consecutive order of top five results.   The author makes no assertions nor claims as to whether readers find similar results when doing an internet search of their own using different search engines or methods and encourages readers to experiment with similar searches on his or her own. 

Busway: Free Rides to UCONN Games Fails to Boost Bristol's Ridership

A new strategy unrolled Saturday among the numerous tactics that the State of Connecticut is using to promote ridership on it's newest Bus Rapid Transit system.  The first promotion that the CTFastrak has associated with UCONN football however appears to have been a bust at the West End of the Bristol line.  Most Americans will agree (as does the author of this blog) that the government does not do enough for those whom have served.   So why not offer free rides to veterans to boost public support and ridership numbers?  It seems this is the thought in mind as the press release from CT Transit has echoed the back-patting rallies of success from Governor Dan Malloy and DOT Commissioner James Redeker as of late.  The press release begins as follows.

"One day after surpassing the million-rider mark, the Connecticut Department of Transportation announced the start of a new CTfastrak Bus Rapid Transit service to all Saturday University of Connecticut football games at Pratt & Whitney Stadium at Rentschler Field in East Hartford. The new transit service will start this Saturday, September 12, 2015, when UConn plays Army at noon. "

So how did it work?  I met up with Bristol residents Justin Moutinho and Newington town planner Craig Minor at 8 am that morning for a twenty minute conversation prior to Mr. Minor's departure.  Justin is the editor at The Goodman Chronicle where he has analyzed public policies pertaining to the CTFastrak.  The twenty minute conversation was quite interesting but I have only included a portion of it in this blog below.

Click here to watch the entire video.
Although the concept of using public transportation for high-attendance events is a logical one, it seems that it did not spur the ridership activity expected.   I drove downtown at the edge of the West End an hour after the game began and the bus stood alone and empty without a passenger's car parked in the adjacent lot known as Depot Square.

A ride back down to the Todd Street commuter lot at 1:15 showed even less promise.  There are roughly two hundred available spaces available at the lot.   Fourteen motor vehicles were on the lot, but most were not commuter vehicles.  In fact, there three times as many cars on the back of this rig than there were parked there for the bus.
One other rig sat parked in the other back corner of the lot.  The area is clearly marked to prohibit such use but when there is no demand for the parking spots there is no point in pushing tired tractor-trailer drivers onto the roadways.  At least someone is getting use out of the expanse of asphalt on the weekend.  Without them the count would only be three.  Another victory?

Reports from Newington residents indicate that new busway stops in their town were just as empty. CT Transit will again offer free rides to veterans when UCONN plays the Navy on September 26th.

Transit Oriented Directives in CT : TOD 202

One planning guide that local regional planners are looking at has some interesting things for both planners and citizens to consider.  The TOD 202 Guide to Station Area Planning is a publication by the federally funded nonprofit group Reconnecting America.  Borne of the Great American Station Foundation and formed in 2002, their website states that ReconnectingAmerica.

"not only develops research and innovative public policy, but we also build on-the-ground partnerships and convene the necessary players necessary to accelerate decision-making."

The map from their website indicates how expansive the nonprofit's efforts are.  The Chairwoman of the Board of Directors of ReconnectingAmerica is Andriana Abariotes, whom is also the Executive Director of the Twin Cities Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC).  LISC was chosen to manage the State of Connecticut's $15 million predevelopment and acquisition fund by Governor Dannel Malloy in 2014 as stated in this CHFA press release.  The purpose of the fund is described as

 "to provide financing that will encourage developers to carry out transit oriented development in communities with transit stops along the CTFastrak"

Bristol is at the farthest west end of  one of the New CTFastrak bus lines as indicated by their service map.  The expansion of a guideway is unlikely at current ridership levels.   One need merely drive by city hall in downtown Bristol to find the mostly empty buses idling and waiting to shore up transit arrival times.   Perhaps the efforts to increase density around it's Depot Square destination are to fill this purpose.  Some very involved stakeholders have incredulously claimed that the busway and the project are completely unrelated.  Nothing could be further from the truth.

As indicated at the Bristol Downtown Development Corporation's July meeting, the developer of the Depot Square project whom sought state funding for their high-density affordable housing development through the Department of Housing and Urban Development has applied for state predevelopment funds under the recommendation of the agency.  With the State of Connecticut's Office of Policy and Management having given Bristol the designation of a Regional Center with Priority Funding, it has given the aforementioned document significance.  This is not so much the association of the nonprofits involved but the simple fact that Bristol's Regional Council of Governments Planners are using these guides as a resource.  To quote a recent reference from the President of the Central Connecticut Chamber of Commerce, "The devil may be in the details."
Let's see if we can learn what to expect to come and what is already in the works by taking a look inside the guide.

Local reports from the media have described the downtown New Urbanism redevelopment as the transformation of Bristol into an "urban center".  The focus seems to be almost the same in either case.  A dedication to the creation of dense housing near public transportation is a key role in the expansion of transportation ridership.   A Federal Transit Administration funded report called Transit-Oriented Development in the United States: Experiences, Challenges, and Prospects illustrates (among many other things)  that the increase of ridership is the number one goal of transit agencies involved in transit-oriented development projects.   This is precisely why developers and city leaders are encouraged to increase density in TOD projects..

According to Bristol's chosen master developer, the density for the Depot Square project is approximately sixty units per acre.  This is a significantly higher density than most of the residential buildings in the city save for the obvious ones. I'd like to note that the developer is seeking CHAMP funding for targeting middle-income persons in need of affordable housing options.  That may be an acceptable pursuit for some but one has to wonder what will happen if this housing does not become occupied by the demographic it is intended to be marketed to.  What percentage of high-density residential buildings in the city do you suppose are primarily inhabited by people that are not living on assistance?

Either way, Regional Center or Urban Center, one can clearly see that the number of units targeted by planners in both are well over what Bristol's downtown currently offers.  Some people have indicated that they think just a phase one building will be the end of the density created in the downtown.  Almost all indications prove otherwise.  The plan that Renaissance Downtowns has brought forward is underway as we speak.   Under the Malloy administration, the majority of CT towns along the Metro North's New Haven Line have adopted TOD plans.   The State Bonding Commission's most recent allocations of transportation funds left more than half of our transportation funds (more than $205 million) for  "Bus and rail facilities and Equipment Including Rights-of-Way, Other Property Acquisition and Related Projects"


In addition to the creation of minimum density standards, the report makes suggestions regarding housing types and target goals for housing units to be created in the development.

Click Here to view the CT DOT's Complete Streets report

Included in the ReconnectingAmerica TOD202 publication is a TOD checklist which is completely in line with the State of Connecticut Department's adopted "Complete Streets" guidelines and priorities in 2013.  These guidelines commonly narrow roadways to include bicycle lanes to provide opportunities for those without automobiles. Of course, these people are described as those seeking alternative lifestyles that depart from conventional auto-centric lifestyles.   I'm sure that these people exist somewhere where they are free from the hazards of snow and ice that makes this impossible for year round transportation options in the Northeast United States Tri-State area.

Among the numerous other indications that these transit-oriented projects are customarily planned outside the municipality, the document suggests that planners involve local planning commissions and city council members to "help ensure a public buy in".  I could not help but notice there was no advocacy of pretending the entire plan was completely locally initiated.  I guess some people involved in Bristol's so-called Unified Development Approach did not get the memo.

One can find the basis of the quality of life mantra for TOD in the charts provided by the ReconnectingAmerica's sister organization's "Center For Transit-Oriented Development."study.    The measure to expand disposable income for struggling residents is focused upon the savings of household transportation expenses by decreasing automobile dependency.  This is precisely the same ideology and source I previously found in both the CCRPA's recent Housing Draft Report with the information cited from a CT DOT official illustrated in one of my earlier blogs.  Renaissance Downtowns' Concept Submission for their comprehensive downtown plan also refers to the same strategy that describes this method as an economic booster.  With the massive subsidies required to implement the plan it will be impossible to recover the investment capital.  This is precisely why I say that this plan can be better described as a social and environmental than one of economic development.

I'm sure that the local  "Naysayer Branding Committee" will say that all this information put forth here is circumstantial regardless of the fact that these parties' plans for Bristol's future all contain the same references to what is clearly a central plan directed by special interests.  How many uncanny similarities it will take to reveal to the public before they come clean remains to be seen, but for now we have a whole lot of people in this city whom have no intention of revealing much to the general public about how density, demographics and transportation plans are guiding the future of Bristol.  Without revealing these details to the public while advocating for public monies for such investments is not only an immoral act but flies in the face of the very definition of representative government.  Without such disclosure, the Plan of Conservation and Development's poll and accompanying public input amount to a farce or authoritarian consent form.