| Marry it to the Hartford-New Britain busway project that is currently stuck trying to find a way through the No Man's Land of which the parking morass is a part; marry it to the Hartford 2010 planning going on now for the Asylum-Farmington-Broad Street "triad" by planning consultant Ken Greenberg for the city of Hartford and the MetroHartford Alliance; marry it to the Farmington Avenue Alliance's plans for the revitalization of Farmington Avenue; and marry it to the transportation study that CRCOG is currently conducting of Asylum Street at Union Station, where two I-84 ramps join the street. And marry it especially to the attempt by nearby neighborhood groups to exact a price from ConnDOT for the impending $100 million patch that the agency is about to start on the "Aetna Viaduct". The point: it's all the same project. Smart growth and common sense would suggest that all of these efforts be pursued together, with everyone at the same table at the same time working for a solution to the most ugly, dangerous, and economically depressive infrastructure complex that the state of Connecticut has ever built.
The "Aetna Viaduct" is an elevated section of Interstate 84, approximately 3/5 of a mile long, in Hartford. It extends from Exit 46 (Sisson Avenue) through Exit 48 (Asylum/Capitol), and consists of a series of connected bridges ranging in condition from "poor" to "satisfactory". It was completed in 1965; the current cost of maintenance is very high. In late 2006 "A Study Report for the Aetna Viaduct" was completed by the firm of Hardesty & Hanover under contract with the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT). In the introduction the authors say that their goal: " ...is to recommend a feasible, cost effective, and constructible solution to rehabilitate this deteriorating, heavily traveled bridge. Future roadway capacity and serviceability issues, beyond construction impacts, will not be addressed in this study."
The life of the recommended rehabilitation was projected at 10 years. Later the Department discovered that the Federal Highway Administration, which typically funds 80% of such work, would fund only a 20-year upgrade. Subsequently a 20-year project was selected. The Department has sought $100 million for this work, which has been recommended for the project by the Transportation Strategy Board (TSB) in its January, 2007 report. If funded in this session of the legislature, design work would begin immediately. Construction is projected to begin in 2009 and take three years. Upon completion the road would presumably be good until the year 2032.
In other words, the decision has already been made by ConnDOT, and substantial funding has been sought to prolong the life of the Aetna Viaduct -- the most dysfunctional piece of highway in Connecticut -- for another generation.
The Hardesty and Hanover study also says: "A long-term strategy for replacement of the viaduct structures, with an emphasis on alternative facilities improvement and a general upgrade of the transportation system through the greater Hartford region should be developed, and implementation should proceed within the next 10-15 years." And, "This section of highway has extremely high volumes, high speeds, high truck percentages, and entering and exiting roadways. Safety, economic and pollution issues need to be thoroughly addressed in any planned reconstruction of this section of I-84".
And all we're getting is an expensive patch? Where are the plans for this larger strategy that is recommended and that is so badly needed?
Perhaps as the price for this this narrow and expensive rehabilitation project, a small portion of that $100 million should be used for McClusky's parking lot study, for implementation of the busway station stops, and for the "design of alternative facilities and a general upgrade" that is called for by the highway consultants, coordinated with the other three planning efforts as well.
It seems apparent that the probablity of seeing the larger redesign project undertaken by ConnDOT much before 2032 is, uh, slim to none. Funding for the larger project, and redefinition of it as not only a safety and mobility project, but also as an urban design, commercial revitalization, TOD and economic development project should be funded now, and coordinated with all of these other efforts. |
