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

[stick n move]

Im under the impression though that its not just to add table seating, its because those last supports under the bleachers would need to be removed to tuck the theater under that part of the stadium to get the room required. Then from the second to last supports, now the last, it flattens out to meet the roof. Theres 6 rows in my last pic between supports. Its not entirely clear about this, but thats the impression that I get. So my point was theyre not adding a theater that fits fine and then removing 6 rows just because, but its a byproduct of adding the theater and needing the room.

I definitely agree though, they should either find a way to fit it without having to remove those seats, or add lots more seating above like I drew. I think they can do both the new flattened out part and then add more seats above.

My guess is the part where the 150 tables + new concessions is going to be is where it now flattens out and meets the new roof of the theater. I think they could still do that and itd be fine, leave a gap for a pass through to the roof, then add a lot more bleachers above. I think thatd be the best way to go and you could end up with a large net gain in seating. Id like to see this.

 

[Suffolk 83]

^ I quoted the PNF, that's what theyre doing... not something else.

 

[stick n move]

I know theyre not adding more, I think they should. The removal of 6 rows appears to be so they can remove the last column support that abuts the building there now, giving more room.

 

[Suffolk 83]

Just seems like you're missing the whole point. You keep mentioning they could or will add more seats, they're not adding anything, nor do they have any intention to. They are now if seat reduction mode/maximizing revenue from each square foot.

Remember the Tullymore Dew or (whatever that liquor is) section? That was taking seats away, now they want to take more away. It's happening all over baseball where teams are taking away seats. If you go on stubhub on any given night you can get cheap seats for like 8 bucks for low profile games. This is a trend.

 

[stick n move]

Na I was saying they should use it as an opportunity to add more, I know theyre not.

That wasnt the point of contention. That was whether it was necessary or not. It seems they need the room alllotted to them by removing the last support column supporting these last 6 rows in order to fit the back end of the theater. Removing those 6 rows removes the last column giving more room. I agree I wish theyd find a way to fit it without doing this, but the point of removing the seats is more room to fit the theater. So the question is, is 300 less seats on gameday worth it, for a new theater that fits a niche in the Boston market. I say yes, although I wish they could leave the seats and build the theater.

They also dont explain and no render shows, but I feel these 6 rows need to come out for the stadium bleachers to meet the roof of the new theater building. Then theyre probably going to put the tables on the flat area here, and then the concessions etc. So its likely that they need to remove these 6 rows regardless, to allow the stadium and theater building to line up for the new concessions, but were able to gain back 150 seats by allowing the table seating on the flat area. Well need more info to know for sure but it seems so.

 

[JumboBuc]

Na I was saying they should use it as an opportunity to add more, I know theyre not.

That wasnt the point of contention. That was whether it was necessary or not. It seems they need the room alllotted to them by removing the last support column supporting these last 6 rows in order to fit the back end of the theater. Removing those 6 rows removes the last column giving more room. I agree I wish theyd find a way to fit it without doing this, but the point of removing the seats is more room to fit the theater. So the question is, is 300 less seats on gameday worth it, for a new theater that fits a niche in the Boston market. I say yes, although I wish they could leave the seats and build the theater.

They also dont explain and no render shows, but I feel these 6 rows need to come out for the stadium bleachers to meet the roof of the new theater building. Then theyre probably going to put the tables on the flat area here, and then the concessions etc. So its likely that they need to remove these 6 rows regardless, to allow the stadium and theater building to line up for the new concessions, but were able to gain back 150 seats by allowing the table seating on the flat area. Well need more info to know for sure but it seems so.

Stick, you keep talking about them "needing the room by removing the last column" or something. I really encourage you to look at the PNF. It's here.

Page 43:

Or Page 54:

Or Page 64:

There are a whole bunch of other views and I could go on, but I think that get's the point across.

The changes to the bleachers have absolutely nothing do to with the theater. they are within the scope of a totally different project.

Let's zoom in on the bottom left render from page 64:

The green boxed section the borders the park is not the theater. The theater is the set back part with the grey siding. Note that the "Fenway Park Improvements" (the green-sided section) juts out into the bleachers. That is by design. It is not necessary. The Sox are making a conscious choice here that by eliminating 450 cheap bleacher seats and replacing them with 150 more expensive table seats (that will likely include food and drink minimums, as the tables on the right field roof deck do) they can make more cash.

Also, the "Longitudinal Section" from page 63:

The blue part is the theater. They they're leaving the "Existing Toilets," "Commissary," and "Existing Roof to Remain" unchanged between the theater and the park. The "bleacher overlook" is the part that takes away the 6 rows of seats. It has nothing to do with structure and nothing to do with a theater. It is a choice by the building owners.

Plenty of other renders in that document (pages 55 - 60) show that scope of the project remains outside the existing bleacher wall on all lower levels, then it reaches out over the bleachers to take away the bleacher rows, then goes back outside of the existing bleacher wall for the function space up top.

These renders clearly show that this change has nothing to do with "meet[ing] the roof of the new theater building." Any first-year architecture student could draw up a version of this project that doesn't sacrifice the last 6 rows of bleachers.

And as I and others have said, the Sox know this will be a controversial move. That's why they're burying it in the fine print of a theater PNF. And unfortunately you're falling for their tricks...

 

[Equilibria]

And as I and others have said, the Sox know this will be a controversial move. That's why they're burying it in the fine print of a theater PNF. And unfortunately you're falling for their tricks...

Put differently, the Red Sox have proposed to eliminate the possibility for 450 fans of limited means to see their games, per day. They've also proposed to eliminate the Dunkin' Dugout seats that were routinely given to local childrens' charities.

 

[stick n move]

Thanks for sharing the PNF, I guess I had missed it with the way the threads were separated so was trying to picture how theyre doing this.

So no column removed, gotcha, but the second part I was guessing where they had to remove the 6 rows to flatten it out to get to the new concessions and “Fenway park improvements” area was right, its just not on the roof of the theater.

My second paragraph shared described this exactly, just remove theater roof for old building roof.

Anyways yea Id rather have the 6 rows.

 

[odurandina]

Great discussion; convincing me more with each passing minute what an evil & terrible thing this project will be to the common man. As the population within just a few miles of Fenway will rise by some 300,000 in just a few decades–w/ near nil seats added to a Ballpark that's already short by some 10,000 seats (already)–those last 300 net tickets multiplied by 81 games will be a hard rain that's gonna fall. .....brought to you by the same bastard who stopped 2 Charlesgate W.

Take the example of the final Rolling Stones tour dates (17): you see the exponential effect in demand vs price points, creating a scarcity of decent seats –to soar to astronomical prices and beyond–and those final garbage seats as well.

 

[Suffolk 83]

Physically what is taking place of the regular 6 rows of seating are the newer, more expensive seating. That's not even a question, you just have to look at the renderings.

 

[393b40]

This entire thread since about after the first page is certifiably stupid.

 

[stick n move]

Physically what is taking place of the regular 6 rows of seating are the newer, more expensive seating. That's not even a question, you just have to look at the renderings.

I know Ive never said otherwise. I just thought where it flattens out to go to the new concessions area was on the roof of the theater, but its actually on the roof of the existing garage building. My mistake.

So yes it is not necessary to remove the 6 rows in order to build the theater, I see that now in the PNF. They could have probably rearranged it so it wasnt necessary to remove them for the added concessions either, like if it were at the top of the 6 rows vs removing them to allow 2 levels. So it definitely sucks to lose those rows, but at least it does include expanded food, beverage, restroom areas, improved circulation, and exit facilities. I think the project overall with the addition of the theater and the concessions improvements is still a net gain, although it could have been executed better.

This entire thread since about after the first page is certifiably stupid.

Agreed, so thats cleared up. Moving on..

 

[Lrfox]

Put differently, the Red Sox have proposed to eliminate the possibility for 450 fans of limited means to see their games, per day. They've also proposed to eliminate the Dunkin' Dugout seats that were routinely given to local childrens' charities.

I doubt the Dunkin' Dugout is dead. It'll be there in similar form (maybe even closer to the field). Charitable seating is a huge piece of what the Red Sox do, and it won't go away.

 

[Arlington]

As social equity / class warfare stuff, I generally find universal access to healthcare, education, and employment more compelling issues than access to gladiator spectacles

Being self-aware, I realize this makes me a historical oddity, since Bread and Circuses have been hot political topics since panem et circenses.

 

[HenryAlan]

Something that they say in the PNF is that the "legal capacity" of the Park will not change. That means accompanying the net loss of 300 seats, there will be a net increase of standing room capacity by 300. It's kind of a mixed bag, but if we are talking affordability, more standing room is a good thing.

Anyway, on the topic of the theater, I think this is a great location for a venue like that, and it is an entertainment niche not currently filled in this city, so I'm cautiously optimistic.

 

[jass]

Why is it so incredibly flat?

 

[Lrfox]

Something that they say in the PNF is that the "legal capacity" of the Park will not change. That means accompanying the net loss of 300 seats, there will be a net increase of standing room capacity by 300. It's kind of a mixed bag, but if we are talking affordability, more standing room is a good thing.

For a cheap ticket, I've found the SRO to actually be a better buy than outfield grandstands, high bleachers, etc. Often times the sight lines are better, easier access to bathrooms and concessions (inc. the 1st base line deck which I love), and generally, more elbow room. So yeah, more SRO is a great thing.

Anyway, on the topic of the theater, I think this is a great location for a venue like that, and it is an entertainment niche not currently filled in this city, so I'm cautiously optimistic.

Agreed, the location is perfect. I love what it'll do to that corner.

 

[odurandina]

Why is it so incredibly flat?

Because this is

1. Boston

2. The Fenway

3. A billionaire's parking lot & warehouse
re; who cares about making it a truly valuable/iconic/ incredible/
all it can be type of project (that serves the public interest)

Bonus/Odurandina snark;
what you think; we're even close to NYC, SF, Chicago, LA level?

 

[stick n move]

To me the loss of the seats is one thing and the theater is another. It doesnt make the design of the theater itself sub par. I think the theater looks great. It blends in perfectly and will look like its always been there, which in my opinion is a good thing.

The PNF shows the first floor as standing room, so its going to be able to handle 2x larger concerts than the house of blues too. It also describes how they work together so they wont schedule shows on the same nights and how there is a void in the city for +2500 person size venues, so this will be a cool little nook of the city for lots of shows of differing capacity on this 1 street alone.

 

[jass]

Because this is

1. Boston

2. The Fenway

3. A billionaire's parking lot & warehouse
re; who cares about making it a truly valuable/iconic/ incredible/
all it can be type of project (that serves the public interest)

Bonus/Odurandina snark;
what you think; we're even close to NYC, SF, Chicago, LA level?

If the purple building was the height of the red building, the floor could be sloped so it is actually a theater people want to go to