Forget Oakland Or Hoboken. Worcester, Mass., Is The New 'It' Town (Framingham: rent, job market)

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by lrfox

You're right about all this, but I think the gap is pretty large. Worcester has slightly (about 5,000) more people in more than double the land area (37+ square miles to Providence's 18). Neighboring Pawtucket (pop 71k) and East Providence (pop 47k) add nearly 120,000 people in a combined 22 square miles. So there are about 115,000 more people when you draw Providence's borders out to a comparable size to Worcester's. That still doesn't include Cranston (another 81k), North Providence (32k), Warwick RI (82k), and all of the MA cities and towns which are part of PVD's metro area. The city proper population is irrelevant in this case. Providence is the larger urban area by a significant margin. And that's still not factoring in, as you pointed out, the fact that Providence is a state capital and larger employment center. The "2nd largest" stuff is misleading. Worcester is functionally a lot smaller than Providence. Saying Worcester is larger is like saying Jacksonville or Charlotte is bigger than Boston - in terms of city proper population, sure. But functionally? Not even close.

City population is just that, city population. Nothing more, nothing less. That is the most accepted way of measuring the size of a city, only it's notoriously taken out of context. On the municipal side of things; if I am figuring out how to distribute educational grant money, then it's totally legit to say that the CITY of Jacksonville is bigger than Boston and that the CITY of Worcester is bigger than Providence. If I am deciding where to locate my new corporate HQ or my hockey team, then I am looking at the whole metros.

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by massnative71

City population is just that, city population. Nothing more, nothing less. That is the most accepted way of measuring the size of a city, only it's notoriously taken out of context. On the municipal side of things; if I am figuring out how to distribute educational grant money, then it's totally legit to say that the CITY of Jacksonville is bigger than Boston and that the CITY of Worcester is bigger than Providence. If I am deciding where to locate my new corporate HQ or my hockey team, then I am looking at the whole metros.

Again, I agree with you on most of that. My point is that, apart from distribution of funds, grants, etc. the city limits aren't really that important from the perspective of every day life in the city. And they paint a misleading picture. There are people out there who really think Worcester is "bigger" than Providence when by almost every metric apart from the city limit population, the two are not even close. Providence's metro is nearly double Worcester's. Providence's GDP is nearly double Worcester's. Providence is a bigger, denser urban area by far. Providence is a bigger shopping/dining/cultural hub, Providence is a more significant transportation hub in all major areas (land, sea, and air). I could go on.

Comparisons between the two are natural because they're not far from each other geographically, but they're not really peer cities. Worcester is a closer peer to Springfield, Manchester NH, or even Portland, ME when you look at size and economic output. Providence's closest and really only New England peer is Hartford.

[Shrewsburried]

Originally Posted by GeoffD

The Indian engineer in the giant plastic box house in Westboro doesn't go to Worcester very often even though it's only 10 miles.

This is so Worcester county it's painful. I'm dead.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by lrfox

Again, I agree with you on most of that. My point is that, apart from distribution of funds, grants, etc. the city limits aren't really that important from the perspective of every day life in the city. And they paint a misleading picture. There are people out there who really think Worcester is "bigger" than Providence when by almost every metric apart from the city limit population, the two are not even close. Providence's metro is nearly double Worcester's. Providence's GDP is nearly double Worcester's. Providence is a bigger, denser urban area by far. Providence is a bigger shopping/dining/cultural hub, Providence is a more significant transportation hub in all major areas (land, sea, and air). I could go on.

Comparisons between the two are natural because they're not far from each other geographically, but they're not really peer cities. Worcester is a closer peer to Springfield, Manchester NH, or even Portland, ME when you look at size and economic output. Providence's closest and really only New England peer is Hartford.

Yeah, I'm so glad I chose Providence, despite the commute. One other person in my HOA moved to PVD and works in Worcester, and I have another friend that works at a Worcester hospital too that lives on the South side. Both lived in Worcester for upwards of a decade and just find the quality of life / culture/ everything much better.

[Shrewsburried]

Originally Posted by timberline742

Yeah, I'm so glad I chose Providence, despite the commute. One other person in my HOA moved to PVD and works in Worcester, and I have another friend that works at a Worcester hospital too that lives on the South side. Both lived in Worcester for upwards of a decade and just find the quality of life / culture/ everything much better.

It really depends on what your priorities are.

If I were to live in a condo in a city core, I would certainly choose Providence over Worcester (at this moment in time). If, however, you want a SFH in a good school district with access to a robust job market, I'm picking Worcester's suburbs to the north and east.

Unlike Worcester, much of greater Providence and it's affordable 'burbs are rather scuzzy. Sure, I could swing living in a neighborhood like blackstone, but lets be real here: for a similar COL I could live in Lincoln/Conc and make that Kendall SQ $$$MO-nay$$$

[timberline742]

Well, none of these people (and almost none of my friends at all) are interested in suburban anything, but more arts, diversity (and diversity within the arts), dining, music, walkability, etc.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by Shrewsburried

It really depends on what your priorities are.

If I were to live in a condo in a city core, I would certainly choose Providence over Worcester (at this moment in time). If, however, you want a SFH in a good school district with access to a robust job market, I'm picking Worcester's suburbs to the north and east.

Unlike Worcester, much of greater Providence and it's affordable 'burbs are rather scuzzy. Sure, I could swing living in a neighborhood like blackstone, but lets be real here: for a similar COL I could live in Lincoln/Conc and make that Kendall SQ $$$MO-nay$$$

Honestly what's so great about Worcester's affordable burbs ie. Millbury, Leicester, Clinton...?


I'd say the suburbs of each are a wash, giving Providence an edge for its coastal options and Worcester for its nearby ruralish towns.


Where Worcester beats Providence is less crime/blight/poverty, more clean middle-income neighborhoods to choose from (in the city itself), MUCH better managed city government, and better future outlook (the way things look at the moment anyway).

[Shrewsburried]

Originally Posted by massnative71

Honestly what's so great about Worcester's affordable burbs ie. Millbury, Leicester, Clinton...?


I'd say the suburbs of each are a wash, giving Providence an edge for its coastal options and Worcester for its nearby ruralish towns.


Where Worcester beats Providence is less crime/blight/poverty, more clean middle-income neighborhoods to choose from (in the city itself), MUCH better managed city government, and better future outlook (the way things look at the moment anyway).

Um ... Holden, Shrewsbury, Boylston, Paxton, Grafton?

All of these towns have good to excellent school systems and, with the exception of Paxton, access to the eastern MA job market. What are comparable school systems in greater Prov? Barrington is great but the COL is obscene. North Smithfield is comparable 'burb in terms of COL and school systems, but it's distance is equivalent to Sterling/Princeton to Worcester. The rest of the nicer 'burbs are south of Prov and, trust me, I'd happily live in E Greenwich or N Kingston but there's no way both my wife and I can find employment in the region.

Providence is the city I want; Worcester is the city I need/am stuck with. Maybe when and if I retire I can enjoy RI coastal living, but as a 30-something working in healthcare R&D and expecting a child, central MA provides better opportunity for my family.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by Shrewsburried

Um ... Holden, Shrewsbury, Boylston, Paxton, Grafton?

All of these towns have good to excellent school systems and, with the exception of Paxton, access to the eastern MA job market. What are comparable school systems in greater Prov? Barrington is great but the COL is obscene. North Smithfield is comparable 'burb in terms of COL and school systems, but it's distance is equivalent to Sterling/Princeton to Worcester. The rest of the nicer 'burbs are south of Prov and, trust me, I'd happily live in E Greenwich or N Kingston but there's no way both my wife and I can find employment in the region.

Those aren't what I would call "affordable", but at that level I suppose Cumberland and Lincoln N of Providence (but I think the RI counterparts are generally cheaper). I'm not so sure if Barrington COL is that much out of whack with a town like Shrewsbury these days. And if stellar schools aren't a requirement, there are more affordable coastal options like Bristol and parts of Warwick that Worcester simply can't match.


But at least once you step outside the Worcester city limits, you don't have shartholes like Pawtucket and Central Falls to contend with (big + for Worcester).


And yes, the Central Mass. economy is healthier than RI. Never argued with that.

[timberline742]

Huh, my friends who live in Pawtucket adore it, but hey, my friends who live in South Providence like it too and all I see is crap talked about it on here.