I was being glib
Franklin Park - White Stadium Renovation
- Thread starter shmessy
- Start date
Yeah, these things are bad, but they are trade-offs. The number of trees removed looks really minimal, and fine when compared to the resulting improvements to the grounds. Turning over space to be used exclusively by the team is bad. A terrible precedent for a public park. The obvious thing to is for the city to pay to fix up this stadium it owns, and keep complete control. But governments seem allergic to doing absolutely anything beneficial for people unless it's a part of some Public-Private Partnership of dubious value. I'm not even mad at the Emerald Necklace Conservancy for railing against this their lawsuit. They're right. But at a certain point, I'd just like a stadium.
Yeah, cars suck. They ruin cities. But this plan to keep cars away can work, I think, depending a lot on the details. There is literally not enough space in the area for any large number of people to drive and park, and people will figure that out pretty quick. Aggressive parking enforcement, with offending cars getting ticketed and towed, that'll deter drivers pretty quick. There aren't many spots better suited for public transit. I think this plan works.
This I don't understand at all. You will still be able to go to Franklin Park for peace and quiet, exactly as usual, 345 days a year. On those few game days, other people want to use the park to be loud and rowdy. They should be able to do that, too. If you still want peace and quiet on those days, the park is more than 500 acres. Find a quiet spot. There will be plenty.
Also, I don't understand this complaint because the noise and the crowds would be there in any situation where the stadium is fixed up and filled to capacity. Even if it's just for high school football, a filled ~11,000 seat stadium will be loud from spectators and stadium speakers. So what do you want to actually happen to this stadium? Demolish it? Fix it up, but cut the capacity way down? What would you actually want here?
On this note: do we all go to the same Franklin Park on weekends in the summer? White stadium is right behind the Zoo - it's not quiet over there to begin with. On top of the Zoo, there are tons of people barbecuing and playing baseball/other games between the rear of the Zoo and White stadium. The area is buzzing in good weather, and I am not even included all the annoying ATV and moped groups.
edit: bad autocorrect
Last edited:
bigeman312
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 2,163
- Reaction score
- 1,764
I go to Franklin Park daily and use White Stadium weekly (would use it more but the hours it’s open to the public are very, very limited, unfortunately).
I’ve gone to plenty of meetings about this project and others and the most common transportation request has been for resident parking on streets that are currently unrestricted. The city says no time and time again, with no explanation beyond “the department that handles that program is not expanding it at this time,” sometimes even with a “yes, we hear you. That would be great but it can’t happen.” If the city actually wanted to meet residents halfway and show good faith, that would be the starting point.
I’ve gone to plenty of meetings about this project and others and the most common transportation request has been for resident parking on streets that are currently unrestricted. The city says no time and time again, with no explanation beyond “the department that handles that program is not expanding it at this time,” sometimes even with a “yes, we hear you. That would be great but it can’t happen.” If the city actually wanted to meet residents halfway and show good faith, that would be the starting point.
I think it’s pretty simple. If you’re talking about doing something for a company or a public private partnership, that leads to any nuisance for the surrounding neighborhood, people should have a much greater say in that decision than they should in something that truly improves the common good, such as better and safer transportation, denser housing, more geographic equity in education, etc.
Perception creates its own reality, and for that reason I think there is a major difference between a stadium owned by the city hosting events for the citizens of the city (let’s not forget, it was built for high school games), and hosting events at the behest of some national sporting group that some people might like, but is not really something coming from or enjoyed by the grassroots. I am not saying this is a complete parallel, but this is why we didn’t want the Olympics here: hosting the Olympics doesn’t do anything for the people on the ground, it’s for other people’s benefit. So this distinction does matter to me and I suspect to many others.
In your previous post you said we as a region are sunk if the neighborhood could defeat something like this, and I would disagree with that. I think these are the things that the neighborhood actually should have a say in, even though it frustrates me that the neighborhoods can defeat so many other things that truly should be forced upon the city, even against resistance, that I mentioned above. I don’t live near here and I have not participated in the process, but if it is true, as some have said, that the typical process for approving this has actually been rushed, then I am with the critics. If a reasonable and fair and consistent process is followed and it still happens, then sure, detractors can sod off, but it sounds like we’re not there yet as far as I can tell.
I really don’t like the fact that government, as you say, won’t do anything on its own and public private partnerships are the only way to do things. We are just sliding deeper and deeper into totally unfettered capitalism and corporate dominance of every decision making process, and I don’t think we need a race to the bottom to outcompete other states’ “gimmes” to attract investment. Wu, out anyone, ought to hew close to that ethos.
Lastly, a major event is a major event. People drive, get dropped off, Uber, and there buses, security and emergency vehicles, and concessions and equipment delivery vehicles that all swarm in. It doesn’t matter if this was here or in downtown crossing, a big event is a zoo and that’s just the way it is, and certainly this area is very tight quarters other than Seaver itself, and a BRT line is not going to simply solve that problem.
Coda: I would definitely go these games if it was built; as a non-abutter, it sounds pretty fun. I am just trying to put myself in their shoes, since it would not impact me the way it would them.
real_EthanHunt
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2019
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 304
this x1000. I golf there on weekends and there is always music blasting from different areas of the park that carry sound through the park. its a unique golf experience thats for sure and adds to the experience in my opinion.
this is not correct. the City has committed to having the team install RPP signs for game events, similar to Brighton for BC football games. they did push back on making it a more permanent condition because they need a separate public process for that (and more parking enforcement officers to be able to enforce it 24/7).
HenryAlan
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 3,685
- Reaction score
- 3,243
And what you are describing is one of my favorite uses for a public park. There is so much active community engaging with and enjoying the Playstead area on summer evenings. I bike through there a lot, in part, just to enjoy seeing and hearing all the activity. Not every park is meant for bucolic contemplation, and Franklin Park is great because it offers both that and active use elements. Kinopio can go to the Arboretum if he really can't find any respite within Franklin Park itself.
@FK4 Yeah, I mostly agree with what you're saying. Just a couple of things, though:
Yeah, not a complete parallel, but I take your point. One other difference here, though, is this project really does come with a lot of local benefits. BPS gets a fixed up, professional quality stadium. Youth soccer teams, the YMCA, and other youth groups are lining up behind this because they'll get to use the stadium. In my opinion at least, the balance of costs and benefits here comes out way better than the Olympics.
That's not exactly what I meant in my post there. My point was a lot narrower. Someone suggested that neighbors might oppose the project because it would mean more busses in the area on game days. I was saying that if something like that (improving public transit) was so considered so horrible that it could tank the project, then yeah, I think we're screwed.
bigeman312
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 2,163
- Reaction score
- 1,764
What part isn’t correct? Since I’ve been called out, in spite of attending many of these meetings, I’ll provide a source:
Roxbury, Jamaica Plain residents want assurances their streets won't be clogged by suburbanites driving into town to see women's soccer at White Stadium
The only two possibilities I can think of are:
1. Something has changed in the last couple months and I wasn’t aware. If so, please provide a source!
2. You are spreading misinformation. I’ll hold out hope for #1 though!
real_EthanHunt
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2019
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 304
its #1. the article is 5 months old, there have been multiple meetings since then where they have committed to it for game days.
didnt mean to make you feel called out, was just trying to keep information current. you are definitely correct that they were noncommittal during the fall meetings, but that was due to concerns about being implemented for more than just game day events and at the time having a record low number of parking enforcement officers (theyve been graduating classes since then to get numbers back up).
didnt mean to make you feel called out, was just trying to keep information current. you are definitely correct that they were noncommittal during the fall meetings, but that was due to concerns about being implemented for more than just game day events and at the time having a record low number of parking enforcement officers (theyve been graduating classes since then to get numbers back up).
bigeman312
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 2,163
- Reaction score
- 1,764
Great news! Do you have a source? I’m pleased about this development.
I’ve searched everywhere and found nothing. Even the most recent official documents mention nothing about it. If you have a source that backs up your claim, please provide it.
Last edited:
real_EthanHunt
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2019
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 304
It would be in the recordings from the recent BPDA meetings.
Otherwise look here
Then click on transportation
Otherwise look here
bigeman312
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 2,163
- Reaction score
- 1,764
It would be in the recordings from the recent BPDA meetings.
Otherwise look here
Then click on transportation
I read through the entire PNF and there is no such reference that “the City has committed to having the team install RPP signs for game events.”
The closest thing I can find is a bullet point on the city website (that was conveniently never referenced in any published documents) that says “Engage in a public process around new RPP in all three neighborhoods.”
A commitment to engage in a process is very different than a commitment to install.
So, I will return to my original comment, if the city actually wanted to meet residents halfway and show good faith, they would commit to expanding the resident parking permits into the neighborhood, not just to commit to an undated future process during which they examine options that include doing nothing. If there is no expansion of the RPP into these streets, there is no expansion. A commitment to hold meetings does not check that box.
I am 100% open to being shown any evidence that I’m incorrect and that the city has committed to resident parking in the area. I would love that very much. Until then, I push back on the notion that the a sufficient job has been done with respect to transportation.
bigeman312
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 2,163
- Reaction score
- 1,764
Great news! Hopefully it happens and some less cryptic details come to light (which streets, for example). Because without any details, I remain cautious.
I hear ya. Thanks for clarifying.
I was reading more about this history of this place and they had some pretty awesome concerts in the 70s, including Gil Scott-Heron. Would be a pretty amazing venue for live music (as a suburbanite from Rozzie
My god, I was just digging though some of that same history. Those shows looked incredible. The Isley Brothers the same night as Gil Scott-Heron. All through the summer, Sly and the Family Stone, Tower of Power, Richard Pryor.... It'd be great to bring back even a fraction of that energy to the stadiumI hear ya. Thanks for clarifying.
I was reading more about this history of this place and they had some pretty awesome concerts in the 70s, including Gil Scott-Heron. Would be a pretty amazing venue for live music (as a suburbanite from Rozzie
themissinglink
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2018
- Messages
- 525
- Reaction score
- 1,626
Court ruling allows White Stadium renovation project to proceed - The Boston Globe
The Emerald Necklace Conservancy filed its lawsuit last month against the city of Boston, Mayor Michelle Wu, Boston Unity Soccer Partners, and others, arguing that the plan was rushed through the approval process and would illegally privatize the land by housing a professional sports team.
www.bostonglobe.com
After saying I supported residents who wanted a more transparent process, I have to say this language of these community leaders is absolutely ridiculous. The use of racial and other justice-oriented language as weaponry to force your demands to be met is out of control and these examples are egregious:Court ruling allows White Stadium renovation project to proceed - The Boston Globe
The Emerald Necklace Conservancy filed its lawsuit last month against the city of Boston, Mayor Michelle Wu, Boston Unity Soccer Partners, and others, arguing that the plan was rushed through the approval process and would illegally privatize the land by housing a professional sports team.
Comparing the dismissal of a private lawsuit over the renovation of a stadium that ultimately will benefit the students of Boston, to Dred Scott, which is when the US Supreme Court said black people weren’t legally citizens and therefore had no legal rights in court? Excuse me? Is this really where things are these days?
Edit -- this should go without saying, but since this is a sensitive subject these days, I want to add that of course there remain serious issues of racism and racial bias in Boston and that includes decision-making power in city policy. But there is a difference between saying this exists and a knee-jerk claim that this judge's court case represents an indictment of the whole system along racial lines. And to compare it to Dred Scott is really just harmful blood-letting that helps nobody other than contributing to the seeming never ending rage cycle. Although I would also say (and I said it upthread) that I do have a nagging feeling of carpetbaggery around any plan to bring in something that is likely to appeal more to white suburbanites than to the people that live around Franklin Park, so there probably is some truth to the claims above.
Last edited: