not total bullshit. total bullshit is a downtown that does nothing to inspire commerce, creative thought or human interaction; basically, exactly what we have today. If nobody came along and mucked with the area in the first place we woulden't be going through this, but somebody did muck things up, now we're taking advantage of the ability to fix that; hopefully before the economy shits the bed and leaves us with a half built erector set.
Another vote for not bullshit. Seconding paxton's reasoning. I don't know what downtown was like before it was mucked with, but I'm optimistic about the project.
Not knowing much about the economy, what are the chances the economy could shit the bed in the middle of the project? Could this really happen?
people can find info about the site from the developers' point of view at www.newcitysquare.com.
total bullshit. worcester will not be a creative environment of production by and for all of its citizens by effacing itself into an any-location-whatever for developers to drop in higher value retail chains. so the downtown as is doesn't inspire commercial ventures such as banana republic, a store which they obviously hope to attract as evidenced by rendering no. 2; that seems great to me since i've never sensed creative thought of any sort (aside from my own) in one of its stores and the only kind of human interaction you'll find in there is alienated alienated alienated.
i'm not downtown everyday, at all times of day, but whenever i am there, there seems to be tons of foot traffic, tons of people interacting with each other, so what's the problem? could it be that the people who are down there and easily visible are busy producing interactions and exchanges with one another that are not easily recoupable by sundry financial entities? my problem comes from elsewhere, directed toward various financial agglomerations already operating in worcester, the greed of which has effectuated the co-optation, destruction and perpetual frustration of various sites, spatial and temporal, in which worcesterites could hope to commonly produce their and, by extension, this city's, future. but instead, a hegemonic utopia! great, right?
as for the economy shitting the bed, i can't really respond to that since i'm not really trained in neo-liberal bourgeois apologist economics. i can say, however, that the production of desire and the production by desire is quite certainly implacable, no matter how relentlessly and effectively it may be attacked and diminished by other forces, and that communities that project a future commonly, immanently produced are far less susceptible to the vicissitudes of the market than the mouthpieces of control would have us believe.
Hmmm....I don't think I know enough about or have thought enough about the city square deal to really know what to say but as a resident of not that far from downtown I'd venture to say that I think there IS something the matter with the present conditions of our city center. I'm definitly not for the influx of starbucks on franklin st. but I don't think that the empty paris cinema, closed down restaurant supply place, and the amount of prostitution and heroin traffic going on is exactly inspiring. Of course there are beautiful wonderful people and things happening and I'm the first to be confrontational with a "I'm from Worcester...What? you got a problem with that?" but I also try to be realistic and proactive.
The word 'banana' in a sketch sure did upset you Jon. If I was you, I would be much more afraid of the 'obvious' plan to bring holographic trees and one dimensional toddlers to the area.
I say 'almost' because I do think that the city govnt should encourage (locally-owned) buisnesses to settle in vacant storefronts, and I think something must be done with the waste land that is the mall/parking lot. Additionally, creating a mixed-use (commercial AND residential) central downtown area is a good idea.
However, the plan for City Square is a cookie-cutter plan, one that does not seem to take into consideration the people who actually live in Worcester and the culture that exists here. The few local buisnesses that currently exist in the development zones I assume will be demolished (including the awesome midtown mall) to make room for Barnes and Noble, Banana Republic, and other large chain buisnesses who have no interest in local development. How is this development any different from the mall when it was first built in the 60s? And later when it was re-developed in the 90s as a discount mall? Will this be a third failure? The city has hopes of attracting more middle and upper class residents to shop at these future stores-- an increase in condominiums and constant decrease in support of social services for the CURRENT residents of Worcester seem to point at this. I highly doubt that the planned housing in City Square will be affordable housing.
I have only lived in Worcester for 3 years, but I don't think a third attempt at this type of 'development' is going to benefit the current residents of the city. I am also disappointed that the developers (Berkely Investments) refused to build in a environmentally consious/Green manner. There were many proposals at ways to implement Green building techniques, which would have been a chance for the city to make a REAL investment in the city. ( http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220 this is one example of Green Building)
I wonder how a shopping mall will encourage creative thought or MEANINGFUL human interaction?
I think we need to really examine what development is to answer whether or not City Square is a good idea. Why do we need to redevelop the downtown area? How do we do it.... can we simply erect new buildings; fill in empty spaces with expensive retail? Who should this development benefit? Can it benefit everyone?
Theres certainly a lot to be talked about here; my apoligies for a horribly organized ramble.
Heres interesting history of downtown: http://www.worcestermass.com/places/downtown.shtml
I live downtown, and bought property there recently. As it stands the place is pretty much broken in terms of functionality. I laugh and laugh every time I go running down there, as I go down Front Street and then have to work my way around more than a half-mile to get to Union Station and Shrewsbury Street. That mall is just plain in the way of logical traffic flow, and is a physical barrier against linking what assets the city does have in and around the downtown. It's a damn good thing that it's going to get knocked down and will be replaced with more of a traditional grid, and the buildings reused and built will incorporate retail and other elements that will actually encourage people to head down there and stay a while.
Random comments:
For those who are lamenting about a decrease in social services: Please explain how the city of Worcester has an influence on WIC, welfare or other federally-funded programs.
Also, please tell me why "local development" will suffer because of this development. Last I checked, Berkeley is looking for tenants and I think they won't turn a local away.
Will Citysquare benefit 'everyone'?
Well, that depends. It seems smartly planned and well-capitalized. If the tenants and offerings come in as planned, the condos get bought up, and the locals choose to spend some of their dollars and time down there, then yes, it will benefit the city by generating tax revenue and making good re-use of an under-utilized area.
However, it definitely has great potential to go wrong. Maybe the real estate market will stay cold (not likely). Maybe nobody will come downtown even if they are giving away beer because of the 'stigma' it has. (Painfully likely).
(P.S: Carolyn: Please tell me you didn't call the Midtown Mall 'awesome.'Come on.)
"The word 'banana' in a sketch sure did upset you Jon. If I was you, I would be much more afraid of the 'obvious' plan to bring holographic trees and one dimensional toddlers to the area."
It's funny because I started this thread but then I didn't check it for a while. Paxton, in regards to the above comments, which seem to be either misinformed or disingenuous (not to mention rude), I feel inclined to point out that the City *is* farming in specific businesses, and that those businesses are more or less of the same ilk as Banana Republic. Anyone looking for evidence need only witness the collective orgasm in city government that seemed to result from the announcement that Pizzeria Uno's would be coming to town. (Not that I'm upset that they did; Uno's is an essential feature of a vibrant city culture. A real live authentic Eye-talian Restaurant right down town, garsh!)
Another way to say it is this: your comments are not entirely off base. It is exactly the specter of "holographic trees" as opposed to real ones and "one-dimensional toddlers" (who grow into one-dimensional adults) that is raised by City Square. Well, that and the looming specter of its horrible, depressing, expensive, and wasteful failure.
Paul, Pizzeria Uno is a terrible restaurant, without question. It's also exactly the kind of terrible restaurant out-of-town customers of the DCU center have been screaming for since it opened as the Worcester Centrum. I have little use for the place, but then again, I'm from here and have no problem finding what I need in Worcester. If the city is going to be welcoming to the 30 thousand or so college students in the consortium as well as the growing number of people coming into the city for business and pleasure, one of the first things it has to do is offer a sense of familiarity, make people comfortable. That’s how we get them to stay and make them comfortable with unfamiliar surroundings. Because honestly, there are not enough of us who care to take each and every college student by the hand and show them around; some of them are going to have to figure it out on their own.
Same goes for City Sq. Will there be chain stores? Of course there will. Will those chains bring in people into the center of the city and force them to interact with the local economy? Yes they will. Will City Sq be a strip mall? Not if things stay on course. Regardless of your particular feelings about capitalism, commerce and urban design, we're talking about a pretty standard plan to mix familiar business with local culture with the hope of making money. That’s a good thing, city services don't grow on trees. Unlike bananas, which do grow on trees; but not holographic trees.
We've got a pretty old school way of doing things in Worcester in terms of Government and I'll be the first to say it sucks. But that way of doing things won't change until the people running the show are convinced that taking a risk on a local service economy can do more for the city than established outside investors. So in that light, yes City Sq could end up being bullshit. But only if our super talented locals don't step to the plate and start putting in those intents to lease, directing the flow of funds into the project. If we don't take that responsibility then we are forced to take responsibility for what ever kind of holographic outdoor shopping mall we're handed.
Plus, Banana Republic has nice pants for us skinny guys, sometimes.
The best effect of City Square will be in the facilitation of traffic flow through downtown, benefitting the Main St. buisnesses. Given the state of the mall, at least they cannot shit up the space any further. "Mixed Use Residential" is a misnomer. Look at the plans, their idea of mixed use is just big office buildings and big condos on the same block.
As for the entrenched city politics, any development and revitalization that goes on in this town will have to be and end around that bypasses their terminal lack of vision of the past 50 years. Super talented locals have no responsibility for bolstering a large commercial venture like this. I may be a fan of capitalism with socialist guard rails, but I am also wary of centralization and concentration of power and capital. Making strings of singular big-gambles is a sure way fire way to continue screwing up the city. In my opinion it is better to make lots of little bets and see what sticks. They should decentralize economic development and let the city's industrious people develop the economy organically with the support of city services things. For CitySquare, that would mean something like re-establish the connecting streets, then parcel off the land and sell the lots to individual local investors on the contingency that they develop true mixed-use structures.
Woah! Guys this is so awesome! How often can you go back in time and see a question you asked two years ago, and then have THE REAL TRUE answer for it two years later?!?
Neil wrote, on December 23rd, 2006 : "Not knowing much about the economy, what are the chances the economy could shit the bed in the middle of the project? Could this really happen?"
So crazy! It happened!
City Manager O'Brien is shitting his pants right now because demolition down town is being put off AGAIN until this winter. The original deal was that the project would only move forward after a certain amount of space was pre-leased, in order to ensure that the tax base would be large enough once the project was done to pay for the project itself. I can't remember what the original number was, but City Council just voted to reduce it to something like 135,000 sq feet (does that sound grossly wrong? i can't even remember...) so that the project could move forward, because they absolutely couldn't reach the original requirement.
So, to be clear, the city originally set a requirement of having a certain amount of space pre-leased as protection for itself against going into serious debt over the project (because it's supposed to be paid for by its own future tax revenue). Then, when it couldn't meet that goal, instead of rethinking the project, its scope or its timeline, they decided to lower the requirement. It also looks like O'Brien might end up trying to push it through even if they don't meet the new lowered benchmark (which might end up being the case, considering the current economic situation). So we will have a beautiful, state-of-the-art, brand new down-town that has as many vacant storefronts as Millbury Street (shout out, Green Island--represent). But they will be beautiful, very expensive empty store fronts.
In the end, although I know the current economic situation (the C.E.S., if you will) was surely not created by our City administration or officials, I think their reaction to it (or lack thereof) with regards to the City Square project is a reflection of their general tunnel-visioned approach to urban development. To echo previous posters, I think it's a little ridiculous and pretty myopic to try to attract retailers that serve upper-middle to upper class patrons to a city whose biggest industry is social services. And I think both decisions, to continue with the project as-is despite revenue issues AND to try to rebuild a working class city by attracting leisure-class business, stem from that same single-minded way of thinking.
I could say so much more, but I will stop here.
And please all, let's be kind to each other in this thread! We may have different opinions, but we still all obviously have mad Worcester love!
bullshit... this poject changes every year and at the end of the day the people that live here are suffering the consequences honestly like worcester is getting more boring by the minute and i thought with this project te city would kind of gain some ecxitment.... but ive been waiting for 4 years now and nothing has happend
As for city square, In 2008, I read somewhere that Unum, the largest disability insurance company in the country, is going to expand it's operations further downtown. I don't know if that is good or bad for the city, but it's better than unused, empty storefronts that just scream abandonment and economic depression. The cool,upscale artsy eyeglass place that was across the street from the worcester RTA office has gone out of business, and ice skating rink where people throw their trash in, that was in the little park at City Hall, turned into a seating area for us city dwellers on lunch breaks. Meanwhile, there is a big hole on the sidewalk near Woosta Pizza that nobody has fixed. A hole, in Worcester, since 2007. The Mayor was there to see it. And I recently discovered a hot little diner inside the midtown mall and a store that sells sharpies, but they are not sharpies, they are called 'stauniouns'. They look exactly alike, but write totally differently. So even without city square, there are still some gems here and there but people have to work with what they got and make the most of it.