Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You brought up a lot of good points. I never saw Springfield in its glory, but I did see it at its depths about 5-10 years ago. Here are a few opinions about where it's at now.
I saw that Forest Park was recently featured in "This Old House" as one of the nicest Victorian neighborhoods in the US. A lot of the mansions there are being restored. (It doesn't feel dangerous, that's for sure.) It feels very comparable to Whitney Ave. in New Haven, if you know that area.
Mattoon St. still looks like a postcard, (although Mulberry St. could use some work.)
Main Street is not all the way there yet, but it has construction going on -- after taking over nearly the entire North End, Tufts/Baystate is moving their offices down to Main St. (They're refurbishing a beautiful building next to Tower Square.)
The Quadrangle is safe at night. Classical High, right across the street, is luxury condos. I stayed there a few weeks ago with a friend.------snip-----
.
I'll have to take a look next time I'm back there. If the Forest Park section is REALLY making a comeback, that is wonderful. If the library and quadrangle are safe, that's good. I was wondering in particular about Forest Park, the park itself too.
Forest Park was a bit of heaven on earth. It had Porter Lake with ice skating in winter and a big log house to go in and get warmed up. It had paddle boats in summer.
There were other little ponds and my favorite was the lilly pad pond, as we called it. It had real lotuses in it.
Behind that was a little museum house that at one time had a collection of (ugh) reptiles.)
There was a great picnic area and rose gardens. I know they got rid of the zoo--that was a good thing. There was a Santa's village all lit up at night at Christmas with a Santa who came down the chimney.
Up on the hill was/is the Barney Mausaleum (sp) that we used to play on as kids and gorgeous jungles of rhododendrons nearly all the way up the hill. There was also the Barney Estate that you could go into.
By the road (can't even remember the name of the street) there were nice clay tennis courts. In the park roads went up and down and curved around so you could get picturesque views. There was a large grassy area where men went lawn bowling and there was even a real American Chestnut tree, one of the few survivors! Not a horse chestnut either!!
If you went into the woods, you could go on trails. There were little waterfalls and a stream with green banks to sun yourself and rest. There was the duck pond--everyone went there after church to feed the ducks.
But the last time I ever went there, it was full of druggies sitting all over their cars. It wasn't safe. I did sneak back one last time to get an October photo of the foliage around Porter Lake but that was many years ago and I do not dare to return because I dread what I might see. Does anyone know? How is Forest Park, the park itself? Designed by Olmstead. Is it still there.
Forest Park, Springfield MA (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rusty_clark/sets/72157619701517871/show/with/3751067944/ - broken link)
Hey! I just googled Forest Park--and it's back! Looks just like it used to, maybe better. It's 750 acres and is almost as big as Central Park. I grew up with Forest Park and I've always looked for another park like that but no wonder I never found one. It's one of the best.
The lotus pond has real lotuses, imported from Egypt. The rose garden has been restored. So has the Barney Mausoleum--and its sphinxes came from Egypt many many years ago. In the slide show the lawns look neatly mowed. There is a huge diversity of plant and animal life. The zoo is back but now it's better.
The duck pond is still there and looking good. The Barney mansion was demolished but they saved and restored the carriage house and now it's used for weddings. Parts of the original arboretum remain.
This is a great place for a family destination. Take a picnic lunch and let the kids run and play. There's even a mini train ride now, apparently. I can't wait to go back. They charge a small admission now but maybe that's what's keeping the druggies out. (I'm not telling anyone if the American Chestnut tree is still there until I go and see for myself. Not that anyone cares.)
If Forest Park is this good and the X has a farmers market (can't quite believe that--last time I was there it was still looking horrible, and the Forest Park section of homes has been in a magazine, then maybe this time there really is hope. Bright Nights has replaced the Christmas decorations that I remember and Bright Nights is wonderful. I don't know if anything can be said yet for the rest of Springfield but Forest Park looks wonderful again and should not be missed. This year is Springfield's 375th anniversary.
OK, I've read this thread, and I thought that it would be important for someone who actually lives in Springfield to chime in.
I'm hell-bent on moving out of Springfield this summer, before the new school year starts. I have kids in the school system. It is awful. There is not a day that goes by that the cops aren't at the school, even the junior high school, to throw out some kid who has a weapon, has drugs, or was caught having sex on school property. A few times a year, both the junior high and the high school that my kids attend go on lock-down because of a kid bringing a gun to school. In addition to that, Springfield schools rank 3rd worst in the state as far as test scores go. All of my kids schools are scheduled for a state take-over, because they aren't even meeting their progress goals of improving their test scores.
My neighborhood is working class, which is fine. But a few streets over is a housing project. We have heard gun shots, and sirens go by at all hours of the day and night. That's how Springfield is; some streets are good, but right next to them could be a bad street or a section 8 building that ruins it.
Yes, property values are cheap, but there is a reason for that. I stayed here for a long time, working with neighborhood councils and the city council to make the city better. I have hit the same road block: neighborhoods want only what is best for their neighborhood, and to hell with the rest of the city. What they don't understand is that regardless of neighborhoods, everyone in Springfield shares the same police, hospitals, businesses, and schools. So by not taking a more city-wide approach, Springfield is doomed to spiral further down. Those not-in-my-backyard attitudes aren't going to go away anytime soon, thanks to the lazy and uneducated Springfield voters, who primarily vote for candidates first on name recognition, then by ethnic background. I'm afraid that no real progress is being made, and this is from a Springfield political insider.
So, I give up. I'm heading out to the suburbs for safer neighborhoods and better schools. I feel like a sell-out, but I need to think of my kids' safety and educations. Maybe if I was younger and had no kids, I'd be more inclined to stay.
My advice: if you want to live in the Springfield area, live in one of the suburbs. The night-life on Worthington Street can be dangerous, and you can find the same sort of cool factor in Northampton. Many companies are choosing to relocate out of the city because they are being raped on business taxes by the Springfield City Council, so living near your job isn't a consideration anymore either. The only reason to brave it is if cheap living is a priority to you, and you don't mind bad neighbors.
You brought up a lot of good points. I never saw Springfield in its glory, but I did see it at its depths about 5-10 years ago. Here are a few opinions about where it's at now.
I saw that Forest Park was recently featured in "This Old House" as one of the nicest Victorian neighborhoods in the US. A lot of the mansions there are being restored. (It doesn't feel dangerous, that's for sure.) It feels very comparable to Whitney Ave. in New Haven, if you know that area.
Mattoon St. still looks like a postcard, (although Mulberry St. could use some work.)
Main Street is not all the way there yet, but it has construction going on -- after taking over nearly the entire North End, Tufts/Baystate is moving their offices down to Main St. (They're refurbishing a beautiful building next to Tower Square.)
The Quadrangle is safe at night. Classical High, right across the street, is luxury condos. I stayed there a few weeks ago with a friend.
I agree with you though, a few years ago the city was dead. Now, in my opinion, there's a palpable sense that it's coming alive. A lot's been beautified, redone, and waiting to be rediscovered.
Maybe it's the new mayor..? I'm not sure, tbh. Maybe it's community re-investment. (I know that MassMutual and Hampden Bank have done a lot for the city.)
As is obvious from the posts on this forum--even from posters whose opinions I usually respect--bad reputations die hard.
The only section of the Forest Park neighborhood that is decent is the area south of Sumner Avenue, immediately surrounding the park. Yes, the mansions there are in good shape. However, many of them are being chopped up into multifamily houses. There goes that neighborhood.
Matoon Street? Really? I'm acquainted with a former city counselor from the Matoon Street neighborhood. He gave up his city council seat to get out of that neighborhood and move to the suburbs. The reason? Some homeless guy continued to wander into their yard and urinate, even after being told repeatedly to leave. They were afraid for their children's safety.
The Quadrangle area is only safe on the side facing the Classical High condos, and only because it is a main drag. The side that faces the Chestnut Street towers is really bad. This is because those towers are now Section 8 apartments. They weren't making enough money on them to get them sold as high rise condos, so they went to where the easy money was.
The only reason why these neighborhoods were picked up a little was because of Federal monies that were earmarked for those sorts of projects. Now that the economy is in the toilet and those Federal monies are drying up, that's all going to be gone. The mayor and the city council have no freaking idea what they are going to do, and are preoccupied with keeping their seats.
I like positive attitudes, but you don't live here. I do. It's a pit, and it's going to get worse. I tried to make it better with political action, and I saw that the biggest obstacle to Springfield's rebirth is the people. Not just welfare users or illegal aliens. It's xenophobic neighborhood councils that have so much in-fighting that nothing gets done. It's do-nothing city counselors and a mayor that are in over their heads, and are just looking to make headlines so that they can get re-elected. It's ignorant voters who vote on name recognition and ethnicity before good ideas and hard work. It's the good ole boy political network that donates money to candidates it can own. Any one of these would be a challenge for any city to overcome. But all of them together, and a bad economy on top of that? I just don't see how it can be done.
Thank-you south-bound. It's good to hear this from someone who lives there and has tried to make it better. This is actually just what I thought because I've been hearing that Springfield is making a comeback for DECADES now. It never makes a comeback.
I still can't wait to go to Forest Park in the spring though if it looks as nice as it does online. I went to Forest Park as a young kid when I lived in Springfield (when it was a nice place) and that's where I gained my love of nature and the outdoors.
When we moved to the suburbs, we still went to Forest Park for skating and picnics and when I was old enough, I could ride my bike to it. It's a place that I always treasured. Seems that there are some good people involved in keeping it nice -- maybe they are not from Springfield.
I still take my kids to Forest Park. They charge an admission to go, and I think that that keeps a lot of the trouble makers out. However, I wouldn't walk around in the neighborhood around the park.
I enjoy taking my kids to Bright Nights, and in the summer I take them there to play in the park sprinkler system. It's still a good time.
lol my son lives in the neighborhood around the park and it is fine,and they only charge if you drive in,walking in is free. Springfield is fine to live in and not the dangerous and scary place you make it out to be. Two of my kids went to Springfield public schools and one went to an Ivy league school and the other to RPI. I think south-bound just has an issue with urban living. Why not go spend some time in Revere or Charlestown or Dorchester or even Lowell or Lawrence and then tell me how big and bad Springfield is.
lol my son lives in the neighborhood around the park and it is fine,and they only charge if you drive in,walking in is free. Springfield is fine to live in and not the dangerous and scary place you make it out to be. Two of my kids went to Springfield public schools and one went to an Ivy league school and the other to RPI. I think south-bound just has an issue with urban living. Why not go spend some time in Revere or Charlestown or Dorchester or even Lowell or Lawrence and then tell me how big and bad Springfield is.
I'd be more amenable to Springfield if I hadn't been exposed to the powers that be that run the city. It's going downhill. I tried to make it better, but there was too much in-fighting. Since the voters aren't particularly savvy, and vote on name recognition and ethnicity instead of talent, ideas, and hard work, I don't see anything positive for Springfield's foreseeable future.
Also, your experience with Springfield schools is a few years removed. My kids currently attend at the high school, middle school, and elementary level. If you kid got into the Ivy League, great! It most likely means that you are an active and involved parent. Sadly, most parents in Springfield are not. And that affects the quality of education for ALL of the students, not just the bad apples. My kids are in the tops of their class because of what I do at home, not because of the schools.
Comparing Springfield to Revere, Charlestown, or Dorchester is just silly. I don't live in those areas, nor do I plan to. Springfield is the only major city that we have west of Worcester in MA. If we make it the economic and cultural lynch pin for all of Western MA, then we are screwed.
Comparing Springfield to Revere, Charlestown, or Dorchester is just silly. I don't live in those areas, nor do I plan to. Springfield is the only major city that we have west of Worcester in MA. If we make it the economic and cultural lynch pin for all of Western MA, then we are screwed.
s-b, your testimony speaks with the resonance of experience, on topic and to the point.
... If we make it the economic and cultural lynch pin for all of Western MA, then we are screwed.
I've enjoyed reading your posts and have either agreed with or, at the very least, sympathized with all of your points. Except this one.
A major city (in the local sense), by its nature, is the economic and cultural center of its region. Again, I agree with just about all of your points. However, I think that Springfield's flaws are more a result of NOT being the economic and cultural hub that it should be.
When you read posts about the "glory days" of Springfield, there are common elements among all anecdotes. The economy was much stronger (more/better jobs), and the population was mostly employed and hard working which created safe, diverse, working class neighborhoods and schools. It was a proper gateway to Western Massachusetts.
The goal should be to restore the jobs that were the driving force behind Springfield's finer years. The rest (culture, safety, people) will follow. Sure, it needs a lot of work, but the raw potential is there. Great schools (higher ed.), beautiful scenery, great strategic location (highway, air, water, rail, etc). The city has the potential, it just needs to reach it.
If Springfield shouldn't be the economic or cultural hub of the region, what should? Northampton? Don't get me wrong, Northampton is great and it's certainly a small-town mecca for culture; but it's no economic capital for a region of over 800,000 people. There's no reason Springfield can't see a successful turnaround while Northampton maintains its niche as a scenic, liberal Western MA community.
This culture/economic hub concept is certainly not unique to Springfield. Many (most?) great areas have an urban regional capital. Seattle to the Pac NW, Boston to New England (on a more local scale, Portland to coastal, ME). I could go on, but you get the point. There's no reason Springfield can't be the hub and gateway that the Berkshires and Western MA deserve. All of the right ingredients are in place. They just need to be taken advantage of.
In short, I would contradict your point by saying that not only are you not "screwed" if Springfield becomes the regional hub that it should be, you'll be better for it. Urban hubs are a great asset to excellent rural regions. No trip to Alaska is complete without a stop (at least) in Anchorage or Fairbanks. You can't visit Northern California without at least a stop in the Bay Area. You may not choose to live in the urban setting (i.e. Springfield), but it's hard to deny what a proper city does for a region as a whole. Western Massachusetts needs Springfield to be that city.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
