Forget Oakland Or Hoboken. Worcester, Mass., Is The New 'It' Town (Boston: real estate, renting)

[missionhill]

Originally Posted by airunxc

I always found Worcester geography and sense of place confusing. It has a highway going right through the middle of it (not underground which say what you will about the big dig has been a huge success for downtown Boston), rail road tracks that break up downtown, and no waterfront (yes there is lake to east of city and few small ponds downtown, but no river, ocean, etc). Atlanta, Dallas, Denver, etc are all cities that don't have waterfront and done okay, I just found Worcester geography (hills) to be a detriment to development rather than a help. Also, the lack of a unique downtown green space has hurt the city as well to attract business.

Parks don’t predict growth or decline. Seattle hasn’t any notable green space downtown and it’s doing just fine. All San Francisco has downtown is Union Square, about the same size as Worcester Common. Boston Common is unusually big for a city center green space. OTOH, Boston also has the beautiful Franklin Park meant to be a kind of Central Park but that didn’t really work out as the surrounding neighborhoods aren’t very good. Bushnell park lies between the Hartford business district and the state capitol, not unlike the layout in Boston, but the city isn’t doing all that well. Bushnell park may have helped Hartford develop in its heyday, say 1860 to 1920, but the park effect, if there is one, hasn’t stemmed the city’s decline since then.

Personally I don’t mind the highway through Worcester as much as the ones through Hartford and Springfield, where they pretty much destroy the river frontage. Whereas the Worcester highway appears to go through a kind of warehouse area at the edge of downtown. Boston’s central artery, bad as it was, didn’t obliterate the waterfront the way I-91 blasts through Hartford and Springfield. It also kind of protected the North End from much of the tourist invasion/gentrification that’s overwhelmed the neighborhood since then.

[OutdoorLover]

Originally Posted by timberline742

It's kind of eery how vacant the downtown is after business hours. Very unwelcoming to me. Not sketchy at all, just dead.

I am not thinking of moving, Newburyport is pretty ideal for my needs, but after seeing the NPR story, I read numerous other ones about projects in Worcester like CitySquare, the expansion of colleges and new businesses. I haven't visited there in more than 10 years to be honest, and I think I'll make a visit on some upcoming weekend, just to see what's new.

[magicshark]

Originally Posted by timberline742

It's kind of eery how vacant the downtown is after business hours. Very unwelcoming to me. Not sketchy at all, just dead.

Hopefully this is starting to change. They opened the Beer Garden directly across from the common and a couple new restaurants have opened near the common. The city has been hosting both family events and the occasional beer events on the common at night.

It does need more though. I would love to see some more bars directly downtown. Most of that kind of growth, restaurants and bars, seems to be in The Canal
District. I'm not complaining I just wish it would spread to downtown or as they are trying to rebrand itt The Grid District.

[BostonBornMassMade]

I was in Hoboken and Weehawken NJ this weekend visiting my wife’s friends. The cleanliness urbanity and diversity was SHOCKING. It is so many EONS ahead of Worcester (decent normal city) but Worcester honestly comes off as a trash heap compared to Hoboken. The architecture, density, and views of NYC Skyline along the waterfront park are impeccable. The late night eats, walkability, and public transit was beyond abundant. Never would I compare Worcester to Hoboken or Oakland. They left an apartment I. manhattan to live in Hoboken -by choice/not economic pressure.

The demand is such that rents in Hoboken for 4K a month, Newark-Hoboken-Jersey City would rival Boston if it were in MA. Oakland is far better than Worcester minus the crime.

[timberline742]

Eh, I just spent a few days in West Oakland for a music festival. Fun place, but damn, the homeless tent cities are just off the chain. It's sad. Worcester doesn't have anything like that, but its also far cheaper.


But its hard to compare these. Oakland is right next to (well, the bay) SF and next to Berkeley, Hoboken to Manhattan is what? 30-45 min? Pretty tough comparisons.

[bjimmy24]

Hoboken functions for all practical purposes as a neighborhood of NYC. Worcester isn't particularly close to Boston.

[missionhill]

Some headline writer came up with the “forget Hoboken and Oakland” line. It’s not part of the story and really just a throwaway line to attract readers/listeners. If you consider Worcester in the context of the larger New England cities it’s a hopeful story and seems accurate. Now there are at least two cities about 40 miles from Boston with a lot to offer, three including Lowell.

Hoboken (and JC) and Oakland CA are much more analogous to Somerville, Malden, Chelsea than to Worcester.

I’ve lived in Hoboken. It has its charms but the finance bro invasion there is tough to take.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by missionhill

It has its charms but the finance bro invasion there is tough to take.

Yeeech, yeah, that would be cringeworthy.

[GeePee]

If it wasn't for the Pavilion, i would wish the whole Seaport to wash into the sea for this very reason

[Greendale]

Originally Posted by OutdoorLover

I am not thinking of moving, Newburyport is pretty ideal for my needs, but after seeing the NPR story, I read numerous other ones about projects in Worcester like CitySquare, the expansion of colleges and new businesses. I haven't visited there in more than 10 years to be honest, and I think I'll make a visit on some upcoming weekend, just to see what's new.

Yes definitely visit. There is a lot going on that is positive. When my College friends visit that have not been back in 10-20 years they are very surprised.