MGM Music Hall (née Fenway Theater) | 12 Lansdowne St | Fenway

bbfen said:
I clearly haven't been around for a few years, and this thread is the perfect example of why.

Have you seen FSG's CD/bid set? Are you a structural expert who can warrant this is "two separate projects?" Perhaps you're an engineer who knows the MEP are "two separate projects."

C'mon, this is an incredibly complicated build involving at least three existing structures (as described in the PNF), all heavily-modified over time, with compressed deadlines to phase pieces in during off-season, all on a tight construction site.
Click to expand...

Look at the PNF. There is a sizable "existing" section of the park to remain between the theater and the bleacher changes. The diagrams in the PNF even color code the theater and the "Improvements" differently, separated by "existing" and "to remain" components. Meanwhile, the bleacher changes don't even get a color code.

FiLa6Eb.png


You don't have to have access to this project's specific structural documents and bid set to see there is no possible way by which the theater's construction could possibly hinge on the bleacher changes.

Might the "Improvements" be more complicated to implement without changing the bleachers? Yes, perhaps. But that isn't the theater.

bbfen said:
In my opinion, FSG has gone above and beyond demonstrating their committment to Fenway Park so I gotta trust they know what they're doing here.
Click to expand...

I agree that FSG has been a great steward of the Park so far. But that doesn't mean we should have blind faith in them and rubber stamp each proposed change without giving it any second thought or critical analysis. See, for example, the way they grabbed rights to Jersey St (or, at the time, "Yawkey Way") from the City for a song.

And as far as I can tell, FSG themselves have never claimed that the bleacher changes are necessary for the theater project to proceed. Their documents pretty clearly spell out "Fenway Park Improvements" (including the bleacher changes) to be done by spring 2020 and then the "Fenway Theater" to be done by summer/fall 2021.
 
JumboBuc said:
Look at the PNF. There is a sizable "existing" section of the park to remain between the theater and the bleacher changes. The diagrams in the PNF even color code the theater and the "Improvements" differently, separated by "existing" and "to remain" components. Meanwhile, the bleacher changes don't even get a color code.

FiLa6Eb.png


You don't have to have access to this project's specific structural documents and bid set to see there is no possible way by which the theater's construction could possibly hinge on the bleacher changes.

Might the "Improvements" be more complicated to implement without changing the bleachers? Yes, perhaps. But that isn't the theater.



I agree that FSG has been a great steward of the Park so far. But that doesn't mean we should have blind faith in them and rubber stamp each proposed change without giving it any second thought or critical analysis. See, for example, the way they grabbed rights to Jersey St (or, at the time, "Yawkey Way") from the City for a song.

And as far as I can tell, FSG themselves have never claimed that the bleacher changes are necessary for the theater project to proceed. Their documents pretty clearly spell out "Fenway Park Improvements" (including the bleacher changes) to be done by spring 2020 and then the "Fenway Theater" to be done by summer/fall 2021.
Click to expand...
Did someone hack into your account? I'm being serious. Because I've never seen someone on this board so hung up over bleacher seat modifications. I'm just befuddled. I'd expect this from Ned what's-his-name from a few years back, but not from you. Sorry, but you sound like a concerned neighbor who goes to these meetings to voice your displeasure over shadows.

I get that you have an opinion and the Bleachers are probably going to be impacted in some fashion. But what are you trying to prove? The Fenway of 1967 doesn't exist. Sometimes, a ballpark has to keep up with the Joneses.

And yes, we should have blind faith in them. Because in any other city, a dump like Fenway would've been torn down. But JH and co. have worked wonders to make it a somewhat pleasurable experience. Is it expensive? Sure. But as I mentioned earlier, it's all part of the upkeep.
 
kingofsheeba said:
Did someone hack into your account? I'm being serious. Because I've never seen someone on this board so hung up over bleacher seat modifications. I'm just befuddled. I'd expect this from Ned what's-his-name from a few years back, but not from you. Sorry, but you sound like a concerned neighbor who goes to these meetings to voice your displeasure over shadows.

I get that you have an opinion and the Bleachers are probably going to be impacted in some fashion. But what are you trying to prove? The Fenway of 1967 doesn't exist. Sometimes, a ballpark has to keep up with the Joneses.

And yes, we should have blind faith in them. Because in any other city, a dump like Fenway would've been torn down. But JH and co. have worked wonders to make it a somewhat pleasurable experience. Is it expensive? Sure. But as I mentioned earlier, it's all part of the upkeep.
Click to expand...

Nah man, still me. Everybody has a heterogeneous set of things they care about. Mine includes all the things I usually post about on this board, a bunch of other stuff that is completely unrelated from anything that'll ever make its way onto aB, and not eliminating the upper bleachers at Fenway Park. There are a lot of thoughts behind my feelings on this, but part of it is probably rooted in my view that Fenway Park is in so many ways representative of this city as a whole and I see the removal of the most "blue collar" part of Fenway in order to make room for a lower-density higher-priced "Improvement" as a microcosm of much wider society-level displacement trends.

That being said, scroll back through the 180 posts up until today and you'll see that maybe 5 of them are me saying anything about the bleachers. Yes, for me that's a crazy rant but for others that's a quiet Tuesday afternoon. And one of the reasons I've gotten more worked up about this than usual is that so many of the takes I've been responding to are just so damn wrong. That's not me passing a subjective opinion, it's just fact. If you're okay with tearing out the upper bleachers to put in more expensive table seating at a lower density, then okay, fine, we disagree. Nothing wrong with that. I'm not going to convince you to change your mind, but at least you acknowledge what's happening. But if you claim that removing the upper bleachers is somehow an absolute prerequisite of building a theater behind the Park (a theater that I totally support) or that removing the upper bleachers is somehow related to "upkeep" of the Park then you're just plain wrong. And if you believe that "blind faith" in literally anyone is warranted, then I don't know what to say to you.
 
kingofsheeba said:
I don't think that means that the bleachers are being left alone.

Also, I'm not seeing any revisions in the renders.
Click to expand...

They show the versioning of the renders in the presentation itself - it's a series of images. Also, I don't think they're leaving the bleachers alone, I just didn't want people to think there was an update if there wasn't one.
 
DPIR:

http://www.bostonplans.org/document...-landsdowne-street-draft-project-impact-repor

First detailed renders I've seen of the Fenway Park improvements half of the project. Still don't see how this is anything but a middle finger to less-than-wealthy Red Sox fans...

First mention I've seen of alternate use proposals for the site. Among the three, I think they picked the right one. Quadruple down on Lansdowne as a four-season entertainment hub.
 
Equilibria said:
DPIR:

http://www.bostonplans.org/document...-landsdowne-street-draft-project-impact-repor

First detailed renders I've seen of the Fenway Park improvements half of the project. Still don't see how this is anything but a middle finger to less-than-wealthy Red Sox fans...

First mention I've seen of alternate use proposals for the site. Among the three, I think they picked the right one. Quadruple down on Lansdowne as a four-season entertainment hub.
Click to expand...

C'mon. They're getting rid of about 5 rows of seats that are a mile from the diamond. Fenway has tons of terrible seats, including these, and upgrading them to tables along with building in additional concession and bathroom space is a nice improvement to the park.

There's absolutely an argument that baseball is generally becoming a rich fan's sport (and, sadly, older fan's sport) as parks become more expensive to attend games at, but removal of a few rows of the bleachers isn't some major targeted shot at baseball's light-walleted fans.
 
SlothofDespond said:
C'mon. They're getting rid of about 5 rows of seats that are a mile from the diamond. Fenway has tons of terrible seats, including these, and upgrading them to tables along with building in additional concession and bathroom space is a nice improvement to the park.

There's absolutely an argument that baseball is generally becoming a rich fan's sport (and, sadly, older fan's sport) as parks become more expensive to attend games at, but removal of a few rows of the bleachers isn't some major targeted shot at baseball's light-walleted fans.
Click to expand...
This. So much this.
 
kingofsheeba said:
This. So much this.
Click to expand...

Fenway is already not a huge venue. They are removing $10 seats and building a high-rent party venue. I stand by my observation. If the seats are full (and they often are) they aren't useless.
 
Gotta go with Equilibria on this. It's overall a loss for people who would like to see the Sox in person without breaking the bank.
 
If theyre getting rid of 5 rows, in the image above you can see that theres 2 rows of standing room, which at a minimum is 2 rows worth of people added back to the capacity. But really more people fit in standing room than in seats so its more like 3-4 rows worth of people who will be able to see down to the field, so its really more like losing around 1-2 rows total. Thats not too bad if it has to happen, I can live with that. That being said I have a much better idea...

I think they should add bleachers to the roof so there is actually a net gain of seating in the park to go with the new concessions and standing room. That would be awesome, and the best of both worlds. Fenway is already one of the smaller venues and theyve already been adding more seating in recent years, why remove some now, they should add more. It wouldnt have to be huge, 5 rows would be perfect. Then the billboard could be raised above them like it already is now.

-Another option would be to put bleachers directly above the first standing room floor, with the second floor behind them. These bleachers would line up with the existing bleachers to the right and look like they were always there. They could also line up the “welcome to fenway” part with the beam next to it that holds the retired numbers. If they wanted access to the 2nd floor from the bleachers they could have a hole in the bleachers like at td garden if need be. This is a good idea if they want it to blend in and they feel bleachers on top of the roof would be too high. Either option can work though and one of them definitely should be included.

I threw 2 crappy examples together quick in paint just to better show what I mean.

Bleachers on the roof of the theater above both standing room areas and with the billboard moved above them.
https://gasstation-nearme.com/chevron


Or:


Bleachers directly above the first standing room area to line up with the bleachers on the right. The second floor is still there but it is behind the bleachers. This layout blends in really well and it would look better in real life, the point would be to match it to the upper level to the right.


Why not add more seating while they have the chance?


Edit: also whats up with the seats always blocked off in center field with the black cover? Why not make those paying seats too? Above these seats they could also install green monster style seating above that wall and raise the billboard.
 
Last edited:
SlothofDespond said:
C'mon. They're getting rid of about 5 rows of seats that are a mile from the diamond. Fenway has tons of terrible seats, including these, and upgrading them to tables along with building in additional concession and bathroom space is a nice improvement to the park.

There's absolutely an argument that baseball is generally becoming a rich fan's sport (and, sadly, older fan's sport) as parks become more expensive to attend games at, but removal of a few rows of the bleachers isn't some major targeted shot at baseball's light-walleted fans.
Click to expand...

Cmon. Those housing projects are ugly as shit, and the towers that are replacing them are gonna be so much nicer. Those projects crammed in too many people, anyway, cutting the density to accommodate 5k sq ft units for millionaires is a huge improvement. I know Boston sadly I becoming a rich man (?person’s) city, but demolishing these ugly buildings for poor people is overall a big improvement.
 
A better analogy imo would be demolishing 5 apartments out of hundreds to add retail.
 
Equilibria said:
http://www.bostonplans.org/document...ings/12-28-lansdowne-iag-meeting-presentation

Well, they cut it back from 6 rows taken to 3.
Click to expand...

Apparently about 130 seats are being lost in the process of building the Fenway Theatre

I think its a good compromise -- there are a whole lot of games in the Spring and could be some in the Autumn [for a non-wildcard non division team -- it can happen] when those seats would be empty [and cold/cold-wet]

On the other hand the expanded standing room offers something which used to be available until the fire laws got enforced -- and it was an Experience [depending on the vising team & game itself]

From what I saw in the pdf -- win win- (*)

* the loss of the outdoor video boards in earlier incarnations
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top