New Haven Independent

posted by: JMAC on January 17, 2008  10:42am

Thank you NHI, for posting the upcoming dates. I really appreciate that you include that information in your articles - promoting civic engagement among your readers!

posted by: DingDong on January 17, 2008  12:37pm

This is, of course, an excellent vision. Hopefully Hartford will stop ignoring Connecticut’s cities and help fund this too. The federal government has, in a sense, a debt to New Haven for ruining much of downtown in the 1960’s with the then-fashionable ideas of urban renewal.

posted by: robn on January 17, 2008  1:31pm

The mayor sees commercial taxes as the holy grail and appears to be willing to hurt the middle class with overzealous commercial development. Before pro-development people squawk, please note that I’m all for a bigger tax base….its just our current property tax structure, and the mayors lack of awareness of the repercussions of the last reval thats bothering me.

I’ve always insisted that Mayor D’s refusal to challenge the absurd burden shift in this years reval (burden shifting from commercial to residential) is because of his desire to widen the commercial tax base. This article illustrates that connection.

The current tax burden shift is unjustifiably large…my own property taxes will go up 80% in this next five year period… which is far higher than the historical 18% cumulative inflation from our last five year period. Thats just not fair. I hadn’t intended to sell my house and it was therefore not an asset with any immediate monetary value to me. Commercal actually produces income. They’re totally different animals.

If the differences between residential and commercial aren’t recognized by our lawmakers, then at least we shold have another reval. The last reval was based upon the peak of a bull market and New Haven taxpayers are owed a new reval (this year or next) reflecting lower turnover, moderated sales prices, and the growing foreclosure crisis. If this isn’t done then the last reval has no connection with actual value…this may not be technically unlawful, but it certainly feels that way.

posted by: Esbe on January 17, 2008  3:37pm

It is a good vision, one that will be hard to implement.  It will require substantial funding from the State and/or the Feds to turn Rte-34 from a “highway” into a “boulevard”, but it is a great idea to try to knit parts of the city back together.  The focus on jobs and taxes is absolutely necessary for the survival of the city.

posted by: Darnell on January 17, 2008  4:54pm

I haven’t seen the plan yet, but I agree with the general concept that vision is a good thing. What I find distressing is that our “leadership” tend to have these visions with others money. If the Mayor wants to expand the tax base, it should not be accomplished at the taxpayer’s/homeowner’s expense. In addition, with the predicted collapse of the housing market, and the possibility of hundreds of vacant homes deteriorating in New Haven neighborhoods, perhaps the Mayor should be having visions on how he can shrink the tax burden on New Haven citizens, especially property owners.

posted by: East Rock resident on January 17, 2008  5:23pm

This is a great vision for the city, I’m on board with Destefano for the first time since his failed race for governor - Welcome back to New Haven, John! Good to see that you still have a vision for the City.

posted by: East Rockette on January 17, 2008  10:19pm

This sounds wonderful. Along with the taxable commercial buildings, a crucial way to “re-knit” communities is with greenspace, pocket parks, and welcoming public spaces. The major highways—and the particulate pollution they bring to downtown neighbourhoods—aren’t going away, so we need to drown them out with as much greenery and life as possible. (Think of how different Providence feels now that a real river runs through it).

My first nomination for a new pocket park: the block bounded by State, Audubon, Orange, and Grove. It’s a parking lot right now, with a church clinging forlornly to one edge of it. It’s an ugly, fenced-in expanse of tarmac with no redeeming aesthetic or environmental features. It links - or fails to link - the charming Audubon precinct with the looming AT&T and FBI buildings. Anyone trying to get from East Rock to Wooster Square or Ninth Square, whether on foot, bike, or in a car, has to travel a series of very glum blocks to get there.

Imagine the city acquiring that block and returning it to greenspace instead. Grassed fields, graceful trees. A southern counterpoint to East Rock Park, a waystation for wildlife and picnickers between the Green and Wooster Square. Call it Audubon Square and maybe the birds will move back in.

Where will the cars park, that park there now? I don’t know, in one of the many ugly parking buildings around there already? I can imagine the kerfuffle: cost, convenience, blah blah blah. But what price breathing space?

posted by: pedro on January 18, 2008  9:39am

As unfortunate as that parking lot is, it has been proposed several times for alternative use, most recently the Arts high school now going up on crown.
However, that is AT&T’s only parking lot, and they have stated that if they were to lose that lot, they would leave New Haven for the suburbs, not an idle threat.

It would be very nice if that lot could be reimagined somehow to accomodate both parking and something linking state street and the audobon district together. Perhaps an underground parking garage? Some other sort of land-swap?

Getting back to the mayor’s plans for the city, I am definitely a fan. Taking empty lots and filling them in, bringing more people to live downtown and expanding the notion of ‘downtown’ in many directions are both very positive steps.
Who knows, maybe in 10-20 years when all of this is born through, the city will be a cohesive whole from long wharf and route 34 all the way across the city!

posted by: cedarhillresident on January 18, 2008  9:45am

East Rockette
I agree that the greenspaces are very important part of building this city. Keeping it a “New England City”. I am a member of our citys greenspace program and find it to be one of the biggest reasons my community made a turn around in the right direction. And it is cost effective because it is the community’s doing the labor.

But I do like this vision to. We need tax payers we need a commercial and industrial growth in this city. We need to market it as a place for big businesses to come….(and pay taxes :) 

This is not an overnight fix… it is the long term plan… but I see it working.
As Esbe stated… Welcome back John… it’s nice to have you back were you belong…..

But as Darnell stated we still need some kind of tax freeze to help the residents…come on john… We are with you on this… and are ready to back you and work with you…. but we need a break :)

posted by: Archimom on January 18, 2008  10:53am

I sorely wish this had been done 20 years ago.  It’s about time.  I wonder if this reflects the long-awaited (on my part) awareness that the worshiped “Green” is not physically capable of being a city “center” or commercial “Stadtmitte” as you see in German cities, for example.  The Green is too large and has far too many Yale buildings and institutions on its periphery for it to ever be a really viable, bustling commercial center.  (Re-read Jane Jacobs.) The beauty of this new plan is that it gives the rest of the downtown enough additional square footage to reach “critical mass” in terms of pedestrian traffic, which in turn generates demand for businesses.  And the plan recognizes that this square footage needs to be dense and diverse in order to work.  Bravo!  Now, do you think we could apply such innovative thinking to property taxes and schools?

posted by: charlie on January 18, 2008  2:46pm

I disagree with your assessment of the Green, Archimom.  I think it could easily be a more vibrant center if the surrounding areas were densified and transformed in a significant way, e.g., if Yale filled in its parking lot by Yale University Press with a residential tower, retail and major cultural spaces.  Chapel Street on one side is already fairly vibrant.  Also, as the downtown grows as a whole, the Green will become even more important.  It is one of the most beautiful public spaces in the world, and a place I very much enjoy going to have lunch or get away from the downtown streets.  It isn’t always “activated” with festivals and people like you might want it to be (especially in the winter—in the summer, it actually gets pretty crowded with children playing), but it could easily become that over time.

posted by: charlie on January 18, 2008  5:57pm

This is obviously a great idea if it happens, but I wish the city would pay more attention to the small stuff too.

Like the fact that there is no pedestrian signal at College & Rt 34, one of the busiest pedestrian intersections in the State of Connecticut.  Not having a signal there is a crime.  It pretty much guarantees that a pedestrian will die or be seriously injured there at least twice per year.

Stuff like this is also bad for the economy.  Businesses choose where to go based on quality of life issues.  What if the person potentially killed there once per year is about to be the founder of the next Amgen (or the mother of the unborn founder)?  That would be a multi-billion dollar tax loss to the city, more than enough to pay for this project several times over.

I could go on with 100 other examples of tiny improvements that the city could make, but the thing is, the city officials already know what they are.  It just takes more of us (the citizens) speaking up to make them happen in a more timely fashion.

posted by: andy ross on January 19, 2008  10:32am

I am glad to see a focus on growth for our commercial tax base.  This will mean more jobs, and more spending in the city. It will also lead to more people wanting to live here in New Haven.

However, we must address the issue of fairness in the property tax assesments to the residential base. To complete this plan, residential property tax relive should be made a part of it.

posted by: Chris Gray on January 19, 2008  1:22pm

Not that I believe that all drivers or pedestrians would obey it, thus saving all possible lost lives and potential, but I second a “walk light” at College and Rt. 34,

Mayor D certainly is counting on a national Democratic win in November but the local tax burden issue and the foreclosure issue certainly need addressing and may well sink this city before his plans can have any discernible benefits.

Knitting together damaged, abandoned and blighted neighborhoods, devoid of their middle class residents, will do nothing to promote a vibrant, expanded downtown.

posted by: Archimom on January 20, 2008  11:37am

Let me clarify—-I’m not “assessing” the Green, merely observing a reality.  The Green is a lovely destination, just like Central Park is a lovely destination, but notice that not much retail in NY is located on the exact periphery of Central Park—it is mostly residential.  For a thriving retail center, you need many densely commercial interconnecting streets and blocks, so that people can quickly walk from store to store and meander.  If you’ve ever had to park on one side of the Green and push a stroller across it in a stiff wind to get to a place on the opposite side of the Green, you know what I’m talking about.  No new commercial tower is going to make a difference regarding that physical distance from one side of the Green to the other….not to mention the fact that there is a legitimate argument to be made regarding how an increase in “towers” would alter the character of the Green, itself, both aesthetically and historically.  New Haven has never been the same since the demise of both Macy’s and Malley’s dept. stores and no amount of “boutiques” can make up for that.  I recently overheard a question from a young man to a group of Yale students at the Broadway intersection…he asked “Where do you go to buy SNEAKERS around here?”.....a good question, indeed.  The answer is Hamden or Orange.  In terms of retail, New Haven is only good for fabulously expensive clothing and trinkets ...i.e. Chapel St.(and the chic, but ugly IKEA box that was supposed to be so much more urbanistically friendly than a mall.)  The city’s plan, in the end, is simply to reclaim land and space for building that was already there many years ago when New Haven really was a “downtown.”—before it was experimented on by people with good intentions, but faulty logic.  We’ve recognized the mistakes…now it’s time to rectify them and this plan represents a good start.

posted by: cedarhillresident on January 20, 2008  11:42am

Andy I agree the residents need help… with the economic crisis across the nation we as a city should be protecting and helping the residents make it through this rough time. A city that cares!  I do relize that John and his people are in Hartford trying to change State Laws that will benefit many of us but it will not happen under Rell’s leadership.  I give a big Bravo on this.
http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/state_capitol/local_officials_seek_tax_relie.php

But this is a national crisis. Our food, gas, ui, have all gone up. Our taxes will be going up again in a few months… This second raise in taxes is going to hurt alot of working family’s. We need to hold off till the country is better. You need to spark the economy in New Haven and freezing taxes is something that will help. Or as andy has stated   fairness in the property tax assessments as most new assessments were based on a healthy economy and now there is a market dive on property’s.

Chris my community is working with the city to improve our little Gateway into downtown. We are a small community that many drive through and get there first impressions of New Haven. If we can change the perception of New Haven we may attract more company’s willing to do business in this city. I think that town hall is starting to look at the growth of the city in a different way, and the possiblity’s this city really has.

but we still need to protect the little guy of being priced out

posted by: charlie on January 21, 2008  12:10pm

Of course prices are going up quickly. Ever hear of a little country called China? If you think this is bad, wait a couple years and you’ll see what “increase” REALLY means. 

The only solution to this crisis is to completely abandon our wasteful suburbs—the residents of which use 40 times more energy than the average person in the world—and reclaim our central cities.  People may have to get used to living in 800 square feet instead of 2800, and actually getting to know their neighbors again, but in my opinion, that’s a good thing. 

In summary, it is time to raze East Haven to the ground and put up a few organic farms there.

posted by: Esbe on January 21, 2008  4:58pm

In summary, it is time to raze East Haven to the ground and put up a few organic farms there.

Charlie—how about if East Haven agrees to a longer runway at Tweed we offer them a new tax-paying “entryway” to Tweed on the East Haven side and [ii] we agree not to tear the town down.

Besides which, East Haven is modestly dense and close to dowtown New Haven.  It is Madison that you want to replace ;-)

posted by: streever on January 22, 2008  3:34pm

I wish more of you had been at the meeting! The mayor showed us how our “wasteful” suburbs actually finance our existence.