Dynamic Social and Economic Effects of the Connecticut Turnpike Annette M
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
28 sistance of Ian R. Kingham, George E. Frangos, and Highway Research Record 399, 1973, pp. 12-26. Krieger W. Henderson, Jr., of the NCHRP staff is 13. P. L. Niebanck and J. B. Pope. The Elderly in gratefully acknowledged. Older Urban Areas: Problems of Adaptation and the Effects of Relocation. Univ. of Pennsylvania REFERENCES Press, Philadelphia, 1965. 14. G. Fellman. Implications for Planning Policy of 1. J. E. Burkhardt, N. K. Boyd, and T. K. Martin. Neighborhood Resistance to Urban Renewal and Residential Dislocation: Costs and Consequences. Highway Proposals. Urban Planning Research and RMC Research Corporation, Bethesda, MD, Dec. Demonstration Project, Brandeis University, 1976. Waltham, MA; Massachusetts Department of 2. F. P. Bosselman and others. New Approaches to Housing and Urban Development, Boston, 1969. Compensation for Residential Takings. NCHRP, 15. M. Fried and P. Gliecher. Some Sources of Report 107, 1970. Residential Satisfaction in an Urban Slum. Journal 3. A. Downs. Losses Imposed on Urban Households of the American Institute of Planners, Vol. 27, by Uncompensated Highway and Renewal Costs. 1961, pp. 305-314. ill Urban Problems and Prospects, Chicago, Mark 16. L. Watts and others. The Middle-Income Negro ham Press, 1971. Family Faces Urban Renewal. Florence Hellen 4. F. I Michelman. Property, utility, and Fairness: Graduate School for Advanced Studies in Social Comments on the Ethical Foundation of "Just Welfare, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA; Compensation" Law. Harvard Law Review, Vol. Massachusetts Department of Commerce and De 80, April 1967, pp. 1165-1258. velopment, Boston, 1964. 5. J. M. Mogey. Social Effects of Eminent Domain. 17. C. W. Hartman. The Housing of Relocated Boston University Press, Boston, 1971. Families. In Urban Renewal: The Record and 6. W. H. Key. When People Are Forced to Move: Controversy(James 0. Wilson, ed.), Massachusetts Final Report on a study of Forced Relocation. Institute of Technology Press, Cambridge, 1967. Social Security Administration, 1967. 18. J. T. Mao. Relocation and Housing Welfare: A 7. C. W. Hartman. Relocation: Illusory Promises Case Study. Land Economics, Vol. 41, Nov. 1965, and No Relief. Virginia Law Review, Vol. 57, pp. 364-370. 1971. 19. J. E. Burkhardt, A. Lago, and J. Rothenberg. 8. W. G. Adkins and F. F. Eichman, Jr. Conse Changes in Neighborhood Social Interaction. RMC quences of Displacement by Right-of-Way to 100 Research Corporation, Bethesda, MD, 1971. Homeowners, Dallas, Texas. Texas Transporta 20. S. Keller. The Urban Neighborhood: A Sociological tion Institute, College station, Bull. No. 16, Sept. Perspective. Random House, New Yo1·k, 1968. 1961. 21. E. W. Butler and others. Moving Behavior and 9. D. Thursz. Where Are They Now? Health and Residential Choice: A National Study. NCHRP, Welfare Council of the National Capital Area, Rept. 81, 1969. Washington, DC, 1966. 22. M. Fried. Grieving for a Lost Home. In The Urban 10. U.S. Housing and Home Finance Agency. The Condition (Leonard Dul:J,l, ed.), Basic Books, New Housing of Relocated Families: Summary of a York, 1963. Census Bureau Survey. In Urban Renewal: The 23. M. A. Perfater and G. R. Allen. Diachronic Record and the Controversy (James 0. Wilson, ed.), Analysis of Social and Economic Effects of Reloca Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, tion Due to Highways. TRB, Transportation Re Cambridge, 1967. search Record 617, 1976, pp. 19-25. 11. B. Kemp. Social Impact of a Highway on an Urban Conununity. HRB, Highway Research Record 75, 1965, pp. 92-102. 12. D. C. Colony. Study of the Impact on Households Publication of this paper sponsored by Committee on Social, Economic, of Relocation from a Highway Right-of-Way. HRB, and Environmental Factors. Dynamic Social and Economic Effects of the Connecticut Turnpike Annette M. Gaegler and James W. March, Office of Program and Policy Planning, Federal Highway Administration Paul Weiner, Department of Economics, University of Connecticut This paper summarize~ tho findings of a study of the long·term social and creases in accessibility afforded by the Connecticut Turnpike and wero economic impacts of the Connecticut Turnpike on the ea.stern Connecti· compared for towns adjacent to the turnpike and for control towns in cut region. Data developed in a 1965 report, The Connecticut Tumpike the eostern Connecticut region that were not located on the turnpike. A Ribbon of Hope, were updated and the dynamics of change in the high· Findir1gs from the study indicate that the Connecticut Turnpike has had way corridor were investigated. Changes in population, manufacturing a continuing influence on the level and distribution of population and employment, retail sales, and assessed property values were related to in· economic activity in the eastern Connecticut region. During the first 6 29 years the turnpike was in operation, only the eanern Connecticut towns paper reports on a study conducted by Paul Weiner of located directly on the turnpike grew faster in population than the state tbe University of Connecticut for the Federal Highway es a whole. Since then, towns throughout the entire eastern Connecticut Administration to update data ln the origin.al study and ro.gion have grown foster than the ren of the state. Although increases to assess the long-term social and economic impacts of in population were widespread throughout the region, increases in ma~u the Connecticut Turnpike (~). facturing employment, retail sales, and land values were concentrated in towns along the turnpike. Moreover, among the turnpike towns signifi· cant differences in impact were found. The study concludes that the SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES Connecticut Turnpike has had a significant long-term impact on the eastern Connecticut region, but that not all towns in the region have The overall objective of this study was to analyze the shared equally in that growth. long-term social and economic impacts of the Connecti cut Turnpike on U1e eastern Connecticut region. The Connecticut Turnpike was chosen because it is one of the Hi ghways are usually constructed in response to in few major highway projects constructed primarily to creased traffic demands associated with economic de stimulate economie growth and development. The Con velopment. The Connecticut Turnpike, however, was necticut Turnpike is divided, for purposes of this study, constntcted primarily to stimulate development in east into two sections-the section designated CT-52, which ern Connecticut, an area that had become economically goes from the Rhode Island borde'r to the junction with depressed following the demise of the textile industry in I-95 and the section of I-95 from the Connecticut Rive1·, the northeastern United States. The textile industry had whidh is the western edge of the study area, to CT-52 dominated the economy of eastern Connecticut until the (Figur·e 1). Because the eastern portion of I-95 was an 1950s when the textile mills began to move south. Large ticipated to have an impact on the area as well as the pockets of unemployment developed, wages fell below Connecticut Turnpike _portion of the highway, it was in the state average, and there were extended seasonal lay cluded in the study. offs. Attempts to attract new industries were uot suc Impact indicators chosen for the study were changes cessful. In 19 57, the Connecticut General Assembly in population, employment, retail sales, and property authorized the construction of the Connecticut Turnpike values in eastern Connecticut towns over a 15- to 20- in an attempt to stimulate the region's economic growth. year period. Two groups of towns were analyzed-23 A research pl'oject, undertaken by the University of Con turnpik.e towns within 8 km ( 5 miles) of the turnpike or necticut in cooperation with the Connecticut State Highway I-95, and 13 control towns not adjacent to either of these Department and the U.S. Bui·eau of Public Roads, mea two highways. The two groups are the same as those sured the impact of the new facility on the economy of used in the earlier Ribbon-of-Hope study. Because the eastern Connecticut in the years following the opening of earlier study found that the effect of the turnpike on dif the turnpike. ferent conununities in eastern Connecticut was not uni The final repol·t of that project, entitled The Connec form, the Weiner study examines the 23 turnpike towns ticut Turnpike: A Ribbon of Hope (1), ma.de several con in greater detail. Tlu·ee groups of turnpike t.owns are clusions about the effects of the Connecticut Tui·npike on analyzed-those bordering CT-52 those bordering I-95 persons and businesses in the region. This study found (including the nonturnpike portion\ and three of the that towns along the Connecticut Turnpike had relatively larger cities in the r egion-Groton, New London, and greater economic growth than either control towns in the Norwich. Grouping the towns in this manner was ex region or other towns around the state. It also round pected to enhance the analysis of the differences in the that the turnpike had reversed the sentiment of eastern degree and timing of social and economic change in the Connecticut's inhabitants from one of pessimism to op region and to assist in ideuti.Iying whether 01· not there timism. They perceived the Connecticut Turnpike as are specific actions that towns can take to enhance the enhancing the economic development of the region, par development potential created by major highway im ticularly after its prior downward trend. provements. The turnpike also improved both intraregional and interregional accessibility, malting existing job oppor IMPROVED ACCESSIBILITY AND tunities more accessible and stimulating creation of ad ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ditional jobs, particularly those in manufactul'ing. The study found that la):Jo1·-market areas for firms within the The link between highway improvements and economic region became more elliptical following construction of development is improved accessibility.