Aesthetically and architecturally, Springfield is one of the two most attractive, mid-sized cities in the Northeastern United States. Also, I would argue that it is Western New England's best planned city. Springfield's downtown, although it contains a patchwork of attractive, diverse buildings and open-air parking lots that would, ideally become covered garages-or, at least become fenced-in by wrought-iron and decorated with trees-this city's urban architecture is-in the eyes of this architect and city planner-extraordinar Thinking about Springfield architecture in the context of the Western New England cities', it is more elegant than Worcester's, and its urban fabric is more cohesive. Likewise, for all of Hartford's recent skyscraper building, and widening of boulevards, Springfield's human-scale and walkability make it stand out all the more. Waterbury and Bridgeport, although they both possess architectural gems, are not in the same league as Springfield and these other cities architecturally. New Haven is the only Western New England city comparable to Springfield in terms of the aesthetics of its downtown urban core. There is no city in western New England that can compare with the architecture of Springfield's neighborhoods. The McKnight Historic district features houses that would not be out of place on Nob Hill in San Francisco. Maple Hill features grand old mansions in which people still live. The area of Forest Park near to the park itself, and Forest Park Heights, feature exceptional examples of Victorian, Arts & Crafts, and Edwardian architecture. There is no other city in western New England that can lay claim to such a magnificent architectural legacy in both commercial and residential architecture. Many northeastern cities were decimated during the 1960s by “urban renewal projects.” Hopefully we in Springfield have learned our lesson. |
Comments