Fenway Corners (Red Sox) | 1 Jersey Street | Fenway

The city also allowed the Red Sox to privatize some of the area surrounding Fenway, to mitigate the need for a replacement. This project is just the latest step in that.
 
HalcyonEra said:
Unfortunately, our antiquated liquor license laws combined with non-native-driven political shenanigans create an extremely bleak outlook for any local owner-run establishments
Click to expand...

Genuine curiosity, what are “non-native-driven political shenanigans”? Like, people living in Boston who weren’t born here being involved in politics? Foreign dollars? Not sure I get it.
 
Justbuildit said:
Genuine curiosity, what are “non-native-driven political shenanigans”? Like, people living in Boston who weren’t born here being involved in politics? Foreign dollars? Not sure I get it.
Click to expand...
What I mean by that is that natives are more likely to work with neighborhoods and have a better understanding of local culture to promote and preserve locally owned businesses. They usually know the families, at least tacitly. When political outsiders enter a community as a stepping stone up the political ladder (eg the current mayor), they are much more likely to make deals to appease their donors and many times, non-native interests. This practice, by its very nature, deters locally owned businesses. To be certain, the corporatization of Boston restaurants, bars and retail has been occurring for the past 30 years, but even with the Mumbles and Walsh admins, there were a lot of newbies driving policy. This is true for the state as well.

I was in Phoenix recently and was truly impressed with the authenticity of the restaurant and bar scene. They do not have the extreme cost prohibitions to get a liquor license, which is a necessity for almost all restaurants. Where you have strict limits on the # of available licenses, you need the political support of local businesses or else they disappear forever. I am not overly concerned with what is happening around Fenway as it was always a dump, but changing policies in places like the North End concerns me. I am sure I am in the minority, but depending on my mood, I really prefer dives like the Penalty Box or Sullivans over Tavern in the Square. Perhaps its just the nostalgia of it all.
 
Last edited:
I agree with you on the liquor license issue, and it would be one of the top 3 things I would change if I were god-emperor on day 1. I have to say, though, blaming non-native politicians for something that's been ongoing for decades in the first years of the Wu administration is a little bit of a dog-whistle to my ears. Believing Walsh and Menino were also somehow driven by outsiders rather than long-standing entrenched interests from labor to neighborhood groups to developers also doesn't resonate.

Seems to me that Boston is just a really desirable place to be and so areas that have terrible land use should absolutely be improved so long as there is a net increase in housing and amenities. I love the north end and lived there for several years when I was younger and I think by virtue of its extremely dense, well-developed land use and ever diminishing surface lots (where some locals made a metric ton of cash) it's protected from ever undergoing any kind of radical change. As mentioned above, Fenway was nothing like that.
 
Justbuildit said:
I agree with you on the liquor license issue, and it would be one of the top 3 things I would change if I were god-emperor on day 1. I have to say, though, blaming non-native politicians for something that's been ongoing for decades in the first years of the Wu administration is a little bit of a dog-whistle to my ears. Believing Walsh and Menino were also somehow driven by outsiders rather than long-standing entrenched interests from labor to neighborhood groups to developers also doesn't resonate.

Seems to me that Boston is just a really desirable place to be and so areas that have terrible land use should absolutely be improved so long as there is a net increase in housing and amenities. I love the north end and lived there for several years when I was younger and I think by virtue of its extremely dense, well-developed land use and ever diminishing surface lots (where some locals made a metric ton of cash) it's protected from ever undergoing any kind of radical change. As mentioned above, Fenway was nothing like that.
Click to expand...
You are missing my point. To say that any upwardly mobile politician in this town is not heavily influenced by outside influences is disingenuous. What I am saying is that political outsiders, no matter where they are, or where they come from, will frequently enact policy or drive development in opposition to the status quo. By no means is that an absolute nor is it always a bad thing. Nor am I fully blaming them. But you can't on the one hand decry the loss of locally owned establishments and on the other hand not hold elected officials at least partially responsible for their demise. Menino padded his own pocket, Walsh played with the big dogs, hence his promotion. Neither had 100% control over everything that was going on in their admins. But both, IMO, did not do enough to preserve owner-operated joints. Jury is out on Wu.

If we are not careful, even Hanover could someday become a street of chains. That is really my only point - outsiders typically do not give a shit as to what they leave behind.
 
I am hopeful Healy will significantly change the liquor license policy as that, along with incredibly high rents is what has driven Boston to become so corporate in its dining and entertainment scene. Baker was fully dug in with keeping the status quo on liquor licenses which hurt nearly all his constituents save restaurant industry big shots.
 
Suffolk 83 said:
I am hopeful Healy will significantly change the liquor license policy as that, along with incredibly high rents is what has driven Boston to become so corporate in its dining and entertainment scene. Baker was fully dug in with keeping the status quo on liquor licenses which hurt nearly all his constituents save restaurant industry big shots.
Click to expand...

That would make sense and benefit the consumer. But it seems like a moonshot at this point unfortunately. Too many well established and connected parties stand to lose money if this were to happen. Drinking in Boston for the most part is expensive and really not worth it on a regular basis.
 
HalcyonEra said:
What I mean by that is that natives are more likely to work with neighborhoods and have a better understanding of local culture to promote and preserve locally owned businesses. They usually know the families, at least tacitly. When political outsiders enter a community as a stepping stone up the political ladder (eg the current mayor), they are much more likely to make deals to appease their donors and many times, non-native interests. This practice, by its very nature, deters locally owned businesses. To be certain, the corporatization of Boston restaurants, bars and retail has been occurring for the past 30 years, but even with the Mumbles and Walsh admins, there were a lot of newbies driving policy. This is true for the state as well.

I was in Phoenix recently and was truly impressed with the authenticity of the restaurant and bar scene. They do not have the extreme cost prohibitions to get a liquor license, which is a necessity for almost all restaurants. Where you have strict limits on the # of available licenses, you need the political support of local businesses or else they disappear forever. I am not overly concerned with what is happening around Fenway as it was always a dump, but changing policies in places like the North End concerns me. I am sure I am in the minority, but depending on my mood, I really prefer dives like the Penalty Box or Sullivans over Tavern in the Square. Perhaps its just the nostalgia of it all.
Click to expand...
I’m a fan of nostalgia but also progress. Chain restaurants aside, you still have The Fours and West End Johnnie’s. The Penalty Box wouldn’t fly in that area today. 1) It would look out of place amongst the new buildings. 2) It’s not a welcoming atmosphere.
 
HalcyonEra said:
What I mean by that is that natives are more likely to work with neighborhoods and have a better understanding of local culture to promote and preserve locally owned businesses. They usually know the families, at least tacitly. When political outsiders enter a community as a stepping stone up the political ladder (eg the current mayor), they are much more likely to make deals to appease their donors and many times, non-native interests. This practice, by its very nature, deters locally owned businesses. To be certain, the corporatization of Boston restaurants, bars and retail has been occurring for the past 30 years, but even with the Mumbles and Walsh admins, there were a lot of newbies driving policy. This is true for the state as well.

I was in Phoenix recently and was truly impressed with the authenticity of the restaurant and bar scene. They do not have the extreme cost prohibitions to get a liquor license, which is a necessity for almost all restaurants. Where you have strict limits on the # of available licenses, you need the political support of local businesses or else they disappear forever. I am not overly concerned with what is happening around Fenway as it was always a dump, but changing policies in places like the North End concerns me. I am sure I am in the minority, but depending on my mood, I really prefer dives like the Penalty Box or Sullivans over Tavern in the Square. Perhaps its just the nostalgia of it all.
Click to expand...
It's too bad your first paragraph was complete nativist garbage, because it obscures a very valid point made in the second paragraph.
 
kingofsheeba said:
I’m a fan of nostalgia but also progress. Chain restaurants aside, you still have The Fours and West End Johnnie’s. The Penalty Box wouldn’t fly in that area today. 1) It would look out of place amongst the new buildings. 2) It’s not a welcoming atmosphere.
Click to expand...

unfortunately the Fours on Canal st. is no more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W-4
As your local Boston-born, New York Yankees fan, I am envious over this development. I hope it looks like a lab >: )

No, jk... it looks great.
 
Anyone have the specifics on the new zoning? The article doesn't specify and I wasn't able to quickly find them on Google.
 
SuffolkHeights11 said:
bpda.app.box.com

2023-04-13_BRA_04_Ricco_AuthTextAmendment_PetitionBostonZoningCommission_AmendArticle66_FenwayNeighborhoodDistrict_Fenway_DOC8045.pdf | Powered by Box

bpda.app.box.com bpda.app.box.com
Click to expand...

Text amendments to Article 66 propose to increase the allowed height for PDAprojects in the Brookline Avenue Community Commercial and the resultant FenwayTriangle Neighborhood Development Area subdistricts. Allowed height for PDAs inthe Brookline Avenue Community Commercial subdistrict would increase from 150feet to 300 feet. Allowed height for PDAs in the Fenway Triangle NeighborhoodDevelopment Area subdistrict would increase from 150 feet to 250 feet. Thesechanges are demonstrated in Exhibit B.
Click to expand...

Seems to be relevant passage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top