Worcester Infill and Developments

I mean, the subsidies are questionable (as with many projects anywhere), but if the surrounding blocks actually get developed and filled as planned, it will essentially double the walkable (for "middle class" people) downtown area and really integrate the Kelly Square area. Right now the whole area is dumpy with tons of abandoned lots, fast food, open drug use but with some improvements happening steadily (Crompton Collective and shit like that). It will really change the downtown area from a disjointed, dilapidated mess to something at least on par with other mid-sized New England cities.
 
I'll give LL credit where credit is due. He totally washed his hands clean of Gina Raimando. How she keeps getting elected down there is beyond me, but every single one of my friends (far left, moderate left, moderate right, far right) all loathe her. She's evidently an idiot but I also don't live in Rhode Island.

Can't believe they couldn't work something out down there. No, I'm not a fan of my tax dollars going to build sporting venues. And yet, I still can't believe that the state and the front office couldn't work something out. It's a shame because that was one of the great charms of Rhode Island.
 
kingofsheeba said:
I'll give LL credit where credit is due. He totally washed his hands clean of Gina Raimando. How she keeps getting elected down there is beyond me, but every single one of my friends (far left, moderate left, moderate right, far right) all loathe her. She's evidently an idiot but I also don't live in Rhode Island.

Can't believe they couldn't work something out down there. No, I'm not a fan of my tax dollars going to build sporting venues. And yet, I still can't believe that the state and the front office couldn't work something out. It's a shame because that was one of the great charms of Rhode Island.
Click to expand...

I can't speak to Raimondo's effectiveness overall but I do think as well that the state really dropped the ball. They didn't seem to realize that 1) they had a real threat in Worcester, and 2) Pawtucket was doomed from the get go.

The only way these stadiums work is if they're part of a larger area of things to do. There's nothing going on in Pawtucket and the new stadium location was terrible. Providence was the smart move even after the initial site had too many problems. Like Worcester it would merely be an extension of the central area if they put it on one of the vacant parcels by the highway. Like Worcester, the highway exit and transit is already there as well as restaurants, bars etc. Also most likely PVD could have financed it themselves like Worcester did instead of going through an already burned legislature for funding. I would have expected someone on her team to take the lead in making all that happen but it seems they overestimated sentimentality and didn't seriously consider that the team would bolt.
 
Rover said:
I can't speak to Raimondo's effectiveness overall but I do think as well that the state really dropped the ball. They didn't seem to realize that 1) they had a real threat in Worcester, and 2) Pawtucket was doomed from the get go.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think the state new exactly what the threat was and there was no way they were going to match the offer. While I'm bummed to see the team leave, I don't think Worcester's deal was a good one. It puts a lot on the city and the taxpayers. Rhode Island was understandably reluctant to offer something similar. Most places would be reluctant to offer something similar - even Providence.

The Apex site in downtown Pawtucket would have also worked fine. If Worcester didn't come in and blow the Rhode Island offer away, the stadium would have been there.
 
Lrfox said:
I disagree. I think the state new exactly what the threat was and there was no way they were going to match the offer. While I'm bummed to see the team leave, I don't think Worcester's deal was a good one. It puts a lot on the city and the taxpayers. Rhode Island was understandably reluctant to offer something similar. Most places would be reluctant to offer something similar - even Providence.

The Apex site in downtown Pawtucket would have also worked fine. If Worcester didn't come in and blow the Rhode Island offer away, the stadium would have been there.
Click to expand...

Have to agree to disagree then! ;) RI diddlefuked for 3 years trying to get this done and they still reached an inconclusive solution (land owner hadn't agreed to sell, no guarantee there was a market for the bonds that would have been floated). If they had sensed a real threat they would have wrapped up negotiations much sooner IMHO.

I could see the team ending up at the Apex site as a fallback if they had no other suitors but if that was the best option it just begged someone else to swoop in and make a bid, which is exactly what ended up happening.
 
Sadly, Notre Dame Church is history

TGfRdRd.jpg


Across the street, this beer garden in place of the old Paris Cinema is now open to the public

YmqkAvR.jpg
 
The Visigoths of Worcester must be happy to have decimated one of their city's major landmarks for the last century.

And for poaching a minor league ballteam from another New England city. And for the taxpayer-funded, money-losing albatross of a stadium that will require.

When do they build the monorail to Wachusett? And can they please call the minor league affiliate the Worcester Visigoths?

Stay classy, Wormtown.
 
Two of the gems of downtown are gone, one because of the fear of gay people and the other because of the worship of money, but hey, rich people can drink outside now so that's a win... right?
 
NPR says:"Forget Oakland Or Hoboken. Worcester, Mass., Is The New 'It' Town"

The city is especially hot right now for tech, biomedical and specialty manufacturing businesses. And the types of services that come with that kind of boom. City officials have greenlighted $2.6 billion in recent construction — new housing, as well as retail and restaurant space. And Worcester is finally growing, after losing residents for much of the past century.
Click to expand...
 
Beton Brut said:
Of interest:

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/1/10/the-real-reason-your-downtown-died
Click to expand...

I appreciate the point the author is trying to make here, but I do have a small pet peeve. I can't speak to any national corporate conspiracy funded by the car industry to get people to give up mass transit 70 years ago, but I think articles like this miss the fact that people just preferred to live differently coming out of the sacrifices of the Great Depression and WWII. They weren't being led around by the nose of an evil cabal between industry and government, but rather just decided that cars and having your own space was better than crowding into apartments and on public transit. For public transit such as street cars the demand just wasn't there anymore first and foremost based on the preferences of its former customers.
 
Rover said:
I appreciate the point the author is trying to make here, but I do have a small pet peeve. I can't speak to any national corporate conspiracy funded by the car industry to get people to give up mass transit 70 years ago, but I think articles like this miss the fact that people just preferred to live differently coming out of the sacrifices of the Great Depression and WWII. They weren't being led around by the nose of an evil cabal between industry and government, but rather just decided that cars and having your own space was better than crowding into apartments and on public transit. For public transit such as street cars the demand just wasn't there anymore first and foremost based on the preferences of its former customers.
Click to expand...

I'd disagree. It isn't an unproven conspiracy of the automakers, it is a fact. They simply stopped making trolleys which were firmly established throughout the land. Predatory industry practices occur continuously in an open market. Bigger companies buy up smaller competitors with superior products and then mothball those products. Oracle & IBM are exhibit A in the tech sector over the past 25 years. It happens in every industry.

While there may have been a decline in demand, there was certainly still ample usage, especially by the working poor of the times. What was not foreseen, and where government failed, was envisioning the future where you can longer add capacity to the road system.

The same thing happened with heavy rail. From an efficiency standpoint most hard goods in theory should traverse the country through rail. But the interstate system, the rise of the teamsters' influence and the decline of once powerful rail industry by not adapting to society changes decimated the industry. Thankfully it has stabalized and, I believe is now growing somewhat.
 
Discussion of the history is fine, but it's pretty well set that American's seem to really like suburban living and driving cars. There's well over half a century of evidence to support that observation at this point.

The fact is the United States is huge and has a ton of land relative to its population. Nothing is forcing us to live in cities and be densely co-located besides the fact most jobs are in our around cities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top