The ULI Study: A 2007 Blueprint for Downtown Springfield

In 2007, the Urban Land Institute’s Boston District Council delivered “Downtown’s Report,” a Technical Assistance Panel study requested by the City of Springfield. Its core finding: Downtown Springfield’s layout is a “textbook” example of good urban design — compact, walkable, and home to a diversity of retail, cultural, civic and business uses. Many of the elements common to great downtowns, the panel concluded, were already in place.

People Downtown, All Day

The panel’s organizing principle was round-the-clock vitality. Events and visitors help, but a downtown thrives only when enough people spend significant time there — employees during the day, residents at night and on weekends. It recommended jobs, market-rate housing and higher education as target uses, and noted that each new resident, employee or student makes the next tenant easier to recruit.

Public Anchors Belong Downtown

The panel identified public-sector institutions at the federal, state and local levels as particularly good downtown tenants. Downtown office space suffered an image bias and was seen as less cost-effective than suburban sites, but for public agencies, the panel said, any real or perceived cost difference can be justified by the public benefit of strengthening downtown, stabilizing the office market and spurring further activity.

Lead by Example

The report called on every downtown stakeholder — the City included — to review its assumptions and contribute to downtown vitality. With planning and permitting recently moved to a public works facility far from downtown, the panel recommended relocating appropriate City employees and services back into the core, possibly into the Main Street Federal Building or Old First Church.

Enhance Activity, Don’t Relocate It

Transportation infrastructure, the panel said, should strengthen downtown rather than draw activity away from it. It saw Union Station as a major gateway but warned that overdevelopment of the site could pull activity from the existing core.

Perception and the Media

Nearly everyone interviewed raised downtown’s reputation for crime and blight. The panel agreed with the earlier national ULI finding that perception was worse than reality, argued that Springfield need not wait for public safety to be “solved” before moving forward, and recommended regular engagement with local media so reporting reflects downtown’s activity and investment.

Priority Projects

Four projects were named as immediate priorities, most to be addressed within 12 to 24 months: occupancy at Court Square, including 13-31 Elm Street and Old First Church; reopening Pynchon Plaza; keeping the Main Street Federal Building occupied; and redeveloping the Civic Center garage and its Dwight and Court Street frontage. Nine secondary projects followed, including Union Station and gateways, neighborhood services at Apremont Triangle, market-rate housing, the Hippodrome, and connecting the riverfront bikeway to a regional trail system.

Leadership, Parking and Funding

The panel recommended a downtown-focused organization with the capacity to assemble land and negotiate deals, favoring a new private nonprofit development corporation working alongside the City and the Business Improvement District. It urged treating parking as an asset through consolidated management, better maintenance and market-based rates, and pointed to state aid, tax credits, federal grants and CDBG funds as sources.

About the Study

The panel followed a 2006 ULI National Advisory Panel that studied the city as a whole, and focused on implementation downtown. Its study area ran from the railroad tracks south to State Street, and from Interstate 91 east to the Springfield Armory. Co-chaired by Eric Fellinger and Nancy Springett, the panel brought expertise in planning, urban design, development, banking, housing, architecture, transportation and parking. Over two full days in May 2007, plus auxiliary meetings, it toured downtown, interviewed residents, business and property owners, cultural institutions, police and City officials, and presented its recommendations publicly at Old First Church.

The panel’s final word: sustainable revitalization is a twenty-year effort, and however good downtown becomes, it can always be made better.