MGM Music Hall (née Fenway Theater) | 12 Lansdowne St | Fenway
- Thread starter 12345
- Start date
Re: Fenway Area Redevelopment
Some more information form the Globe
https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2018/09/28/music-venue-next-fenway-park-proposed/BALMBB5NEE7uR0cpUjPOWI/story.html
Some more information form the Globe
https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2018/09/28/music-venue-next-fenway-park-proposed/BALMBB5NEE7uR0cpUjPOWI/story.html
reverend_paco
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2012
- Messages
- 401
- Reaction score
- 261
Re: Fenway Area Redevelopment
odurandina
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2015
- Messages
- 5,328
- Reaction score
- 265
Music venue next to Fenway Park proposed
https://www.bostonglobe.com/busines...rk-proposed/BALMBB5NEE7uR0cpUjPOWI/story.html
Tim Logan GLOBE SEPTEMBER 28, 2018
The Red Sox and music industry giant Live Nation said Friday they have plans to build a performing arts center alongside Fenway Park that would be the city’s largest indoor venue of its kind.
Called Fenway Theater, it would seat 5,000 people and sit on a triangle of land behind the ballpark’s bleachers, between Landsdowne and Ipswich streets, an area mainly used for parking. An image provided by Fenway Sports Group, which owns the Red Sox, shows a three-story building that effectively extends Landsdowne Street’s line of nightclubs to where what is now a lot cordoned off by a chain link fence.
Here's a drone photo from above the site taken a few days ago,
with the Arts Academy High School across the street.
.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/busines...rk-proposed/BALMBB5NEE7uR0cpUjPOWI/story.html
Tim Logan GLOBE SEPTEMBER 28, 2018
The Red Sox and music industry giant Live Nation said Friday they have plans to build a performing arts center alongside Fenway Park that would be the city’s largest indoor venue of its kind.
Called Fenway Theater, it would seat 5,000 people and sit on a triangle of land behind the ballpark’s bleachers, between Landsdowne and Ipswich streets, an area mainly used for parking. An image provided by Fenway Sports Group, which owns the Red Sox, shows a three-story building that effectively extends Landsdowne Street’s line of nightclubs to where what is now a lot cordoned off by a chain link fence.
Here's a drone photo from above the site taken a few days ago,
with the Arts Academy High School across the street.
.
Last edited:
Current perspective:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3471611,-71.0944041,3a,75y,293.15h,91.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8ORm77ny7yZPYsHsgFvsdg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
For such deep-pocketed, theoretically sophisticated developers, that's... a really crude--indeed, literally cartoonish--rendering. Also bizarre that they don't have permission to write "Loretta's" on the sign so instead they inscribe "Leril's". I mean, come on, people.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3471611,-71.0944041,3a,75y,293.15h,91.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8ORm77ny7yZPYsHsgFvsdg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
For such deep-pocketed, theoretically sophisticated developers, that's... a really crude--indeed, literally cartoonish--rendering. Also bizarre that they don't have permission to write "Loretta's" on the sign so instead they inscribe "Leril's". I mean, come on, people.
Not every plot of land needs to be a skyscraper.
Also I wouldnt want to live above a big concert venue.
kingofsheeba
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2013
- Messages
- 1,049
- Reaction score
- 1,356
Re: Fenway Area Redevelopment
Not too shabby but interestingly enough, the statement from FSG indicates that this is going to be pushed through. I'm not sure that Boston is at a point where NIMBYs - especially the Fenway/Brookline ones - are going to be a pushover. If they are, then maybe we've turned a corner. But I feel a major fight coming with lots of push back.
Clearly it's going to be a long process, but Sox sound like this is going to be a sure thing. Like the neighbors have finally given in. And if that's the case, then great. More power to them, but I'm gonna see how this plays out.
On a side note, who else misses Avalon?
Not too shabby but interestingly enough, the statement from FSG indicates that this is going to be pushed through. I'm not sure that Boston is at a point where NIMBYs - especially the Fenway/Brookline ones - are going to be a pushover. If they are, then maybe we've turned a corner. But I feel a major fight coming with lots of push back.
Clearly it's going to be a long process, but Sox sound like this is going to be a sure thing. Like the neighbors have finally given in. And if that's the case, then great. More power to them, but I'm gonna see how this plays out.
On a side note, who else misses Avalon?
kingofsheeba
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2013
- Messages
- 1,049
- Reaction score
- 1,356
ErnieAdams
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2011
- Messages
- 280
- Reaction score
- 134
I'm fascinated by this proposal for what it is and how it interacts with the ballpark and neighborhood, and would greatly appreciate it if the group used this thread to discuss the proposal rather than to engage the OP and his standard fare. I will try to give you enough food for thought below to make it worth your while. Thanks in advance!
So...I am curious how they plan on doing this, because there are quite a few things at play here:
1) The parking lot alone will not be enough space for a 5,000 seat concert venue, at least I don't think, so they will have to cut into the laundry building to make this work. That's what the trapezoidal building behind the bleachers and next to the parking lot is called. Here's a 2005 Globe article from when Sox ownership sought landmark status for the ballpark, and here's what they were thinking at the time:
New seats up there, I think they realized, would be a really dumb idea, probably farther from home plate than almost any seat in any MLB stadium. But as noted above, they do have concessions and event space in there now at ground level, plus some high roller garage parking, and they won't want to give all that up. They will have to split the baby here to make this work, and do it in such a way that doesn't disrupt what has become an essential concessions space and open area in a chronically cramped ballpark. Or if they do trash the whole building, it will have to be replaced with something that includes and improves upon all public-facing park elements currently in place.
Here's what they should think about doing: build a new building with a roofline that matches the top row of the bleachers, then connect the bleachers/roof deck with the new building's roof, and put one of these up there (photo is from the Texas Rangers' park in Arlington). They'd never build this without something underneath it making them real money, but they'll never have a better way to further expand the exceedingly finite Fenway Park footprint than to go backwards from the bleachers, and it looks like they've been aware of this fact for at least 13 years.
2) Right this second if you were to go to the corner surface parking lot at this site, you wouldn't see cars but rather the ESPN mobile production trucks packing up for the night. This is the only location directly adjacent to the park where you can set up an 18-wheeler filled with production equipment that needs (a) line of sight to the southern sky for satellite uplink and (b) hardwired connectivity to every camera and microphone in the park. Given the value of MLB media rights, this is by far the most critical logistical issue for team ownership to solve, and judging by this proposal they must already have something in mind. What's it going to be? They could run some wires under Lansdowne Street and create a new media uplink center on the roof of the Lansdowne garage that they own. I suppose the same possibility exists across the street at the Ipswich garage that they also own. But neither solution is ideal for TV production because moving those crews across the street will hinder their ability to support the (collectively multi-billion $$) broadcasts of the games. It underscores the fact that they think this venue will be a real winner, because this is hardly dead space that they are planning to use.
3) In Foxborough, Kraft built a comprehensive Patriots Hall of Fame with a freaking snow plow hanging from the ceiling. TD Garden also has a dedicated sports museum, cleverly named The Sports Museum. Now I know the Red Sox would tell you that Fenway Park itself is a living museum, and certainly they print money on off days when they bring people in on tours. But if one of us got inducted into the "Red Sox Hall of Fame", our plaque would be hung in the club level of the park, at this point probably tucked away in some corner next to a high end Aramark booth where they make lobster rolls to order for a couple of State Street execs and their business guests. It's not an exaggeration to say that if the Red Sox consolidated their Hall of Fame display with all of the other museum-quality pieces that they have lying around that park, it would rival Cooperstown as a year-round destination for baseball fans worldwide. This again speaks to how much of a winner they think this venue idea is, because a museum on that site would be (sorry, sorry) an absolute home run.
4) Last thought for now. A friend who has some history working at the former Yawkey Way remarked to me, upon seeing these plans, that we should all be prepared for the Red Sox campus to be a much more overt concept by, say, 2030 than it is right now, with most of the team's non-ballpark holdings lying more or less fallow at this time. If Samuels "owned" the Fenway this decade, Fenway Sports Group will own it the next decade. When (not if) the D'Angelo family sells its real estate holdings to FSG, the Sox will have ownership of both sides of Jersey between Van Ness and Brookline. That's where they have their permanent easement right now, but you'd better believe they will try to cut another check to the city to buy the road outright when that happens. It's something to watch closely, because done wrong the redevelopment could result in some serious (some would argue simply additional) Disneyfication of the neighborhood at a time when most of us agree that the neighborhood has made great strides. The thing to take solace in is that ownership has treated Fenway Park with a real stewardship, and hopefully they would do the same with their other holdings, as it would certainly be in their interest to do.
So...I am curious how they plan on doing this, because there are quite a few things at play here:
1) The parking lot alone will not be enough space for a 5,000 seat concert venue, at least I don't think, so they will have to cut into the laundry building to make this work. That's what the trapezoidal building behind the bleachers and next to the parking lot is called. Here's a 2005 Globe article from when Sox ownership sought landmark status for the ballpark, and here's what they were thinking at the time:
New seats up there, I think they realized, would be a really dumb idea, probably farther from home plate than almost any seat in any MLB stadium. But as noted above, they do have concessions and event space in there now at ground level, plus some high roller garage parking, and they won't want to give all that up. They will have to split the baby here to make this work, and do it in such a way that doesn't disrupt what has become an essential concessions space and open area in a chronically cramped ballpark. Or if they do trash the whole building, it will have to be replaced with something that includes and improves upon all public-facing park elements currently in place.
Here's what they should think about doing: build a new building with a roofline that matches the top row of the bleachers, then connect the bleachers/roof deck with the new building's roof, and put one of these up there (photo is from the Texas Rangers' park in Arlington). They'd never build this without something underneath it making them real money, but they'll never have a better way to further expand the exceedingly finite Fenway Park footprint than to go backwards from the bleachers, and it looks like they've been aware of this fact for at least 13 years.
2) Right this second if you were to go to the corner surface parking lot at this site, you wouldn't see cars but rather the ESPN mobile production trucks packing up for the night. This is the only location directly adjacent to the park where you can set up an 18-wheeler filled with production equipment that needs (a) line of sight to the southern sky for satellite uplink and (b) hardwired connectivity to every camera and microphone in the park. Given the value of MLB media rights, this is by far the most critical logistical issue for team ownership to solve, and judging by this proposal they must already have something in mind. What's it going to be? They could run some wires under Lansdowne Street and create a new media uplink center on the roof of the Lansdowne garage that they own. I suppose the same possibility exists across the street at the Ipswich garage that they also own. But neither solution is ideal for TV production because moving those crews across the street will hinder their ability to support the (collectively multi-billion $$) broadcasts of the games. It underscores the fact that they think this venue will be a real winner, because this is hardly dead space that they are planning to use.
3) In Foxborough, Kraft built a comprehensive Patriots Hall of Fame with a freaking snow plow hanging from the ceiling. TD Garden also has a dedicated sports museum, cleverly named The Sports Museum. Now I know the Red Sox would tell you that Fenway Park itself is a living museum, and certainly they print money on off days when they bring people in on tours. But if one of us got inducted into the "Red Sox Hall of Fame", our plaque would be hung in the club level of the park, at this point probably tucked away in some corner next to a high end Aramark booth where they make lobster rolls to order for a couple of State Street execs and their business guests. It's not an exaggeration to say that if the Red Sox consolidated their Hall of Fame display with all of the other museum-quality pieces that they have lying around that park, it would rival Cooperstown as a year-round destination for baseball fans worldwide. This again speaks to how much of a winner they think this venue idea is, because a museum on that site would be (sorry, sorry) an absolute home run.
4) Last thought for now. A friend who has some history working at the former Yawkey Way remarked to me, upon seeing these plans, that we should all be prepared for the Red Sox campus to be a much more overt concept by, say, 2030 than it is right now, with most of the team's non-ballpark holdings lying more or less fallow at this time. If Samuels "owned" the Fenway this decade, Fenway Sports Group will own it the next decade. When (not if) the D'Angelo family sells its real estate holdings to FSG, the Sox will have ownership of both sides of Jersey between Van Ness and Brookline. That's where they have their permanent easement right now, but you'd better believe they will try to cut another check to the city to buy the road outright when that happens. It's something to watch closely, because done wrong the redevelopment could result in some serious (some would argue simply additional) Disneyfication of the neighborhood at a time when most of us agree that the neighborhood has made great strides. The thing to take solace in is that ownership has treated Fenway Park with a real stewardship, and hopefully they would do the same with their other holdings, as it would certainly be in their interest to do.
Last edited:
Actually, Odurandina, they need to raise Fenway Park to sit above a 750 foot building of its footprint. We've put up with this old, crappy landscraper since 1912. Enough is enough!!!!!!
Last edited:
odurandina
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2015
- Messages
- 5,328
- Reaction score
- 265
i've been thinking of a tower at this site for a long time. Upside; If you consider the neighborhood, surrounding buildings, new highrise construction in Kenmore Square, Fenway Center, and what's planned for the parcels on the other side of Brookline Ave, 12 Lansdowne is possibly, the least 'shadow-problematic' for serious height in all of the Fenway. i've oft mentioned building the parcel >600' in the Globe, (going back a few years). The parcel can easily handle 700' w/ like 8 floors of sky boxes w/ up to ~1000 seats above the bleachers.... theater down low, offices in the lower floors, and condo's up high. You could theoretically go as high as 700' or higher if Massport would go along with it.
Down side. It's likely you'd take the winds above Fenway and screw them royal. Balls hit high to right field could sail straight into the deep corner in Right Center and get caught, or veer foul. Pop fly's to the deep power alley in Left might sail clear over the Monster Seats. Kind of a freak show. Maybe a circular shaped tower would reduce the negative effect a triangular tower would create.
Down side. It's likely you'd take the winds above Fenway and screw them royal. Balls hit high to right field could sail straight into the deep corner in Right Center and get caught, or veer foul. Pop fly's to the deep power alley in Left might sail clear over the Monster Seats. Kind of a freak show. Maybe a circular shaped tower would reduce the negative effect a triangular tower would create.
stick n move
Superstar
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 11,119
- Reaction score
- 15,029
^ No way in hell. Haha Ill give it to u Odurandomdiana your consistent asf. Build a 700 footer on every single parcel in the entire city gadalmut!! What are we waiting for?? In an alternate future where NYC never passed Boston that would be badass lol, but it didn't happen and now were left with this measly wonderfully proportioned human scaled city. They were worried about 2 Charlesgate west having adverse wind effects on the ballpark lol. Not a chance on gods green earth u get 600' abutting the park.
Anyways, great proposal, BUiLD!
Anyways, great proposal, BUiLD!
stick n move
Superstar
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 11,119
- Reaction score
- 15,029
Re: Fenway Area Redevelopment
Why would there be a major fight with lots of pushback on a 3 story corner building right here? Maybe some but this is going to barely even be a blip I would imagine. Nimbys actually like this stuff its a 3 story theater and adds to ground level in the area. Nimbys dont just argue against every single thing thats built in the city they mostly dont like tall or shadows. Imagine if they VE'd this down to 2 stories lollll.
Why would there be a major fight with lots of pushback on a 3 story corner building right here? Maybe some but this is going to barely even be a blip I would imagine. Nimbys actually like this stuff its a 3 story theater and adds to ground level in the area. Nimbys dont just argue against every single thing thats built in the city they mostly dont like tall or shadows. Imagine if they VE'd this down to 2 stories lollll.
JeffDowntown
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 4,561
- Reaction score
- 3,199
Re: Fenway Area Redevelopment
NIMBYs also push back on traffic and crowds. Of course, if you choose to live in the Fenway area, it is not like you are not on notice that there will be traffic and crowds.
NIMBYs also push back on traffic and crowds. Of course, if you choose to live in the Fenway area, it is not like you are not on notice that there will be traffic and crowds.
dshoost88
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2008
- Messages
- 2,158
- Reaction score
- 2,510
I think given that a 5,000-seat theater at capacity still only marks 1/7th or 1/8th of the capacity at Fenway Park, this will be a non-issue most of the year in the neighborhood. If there's ~80 home game/year that' make the neighborhood 'really' hopping, I like the idea that a 5,000-seat theater can add foot traffic and business to other complimentary businesses the other 285 nights of the year.
stick n move
Superstar
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 11,119
- Reaction score
- 15,029
The house of blues is right there too and its not a shit show unless its coinciding with a game. Then its real bad, but thats expected seeing that Fenway is an MLB ballpark with no parking. I know the less parking the better but with things like a stadium its not the same because lotssss of the fans live outside the city so they travel by car. A new condo tower in the city is fine w/o parking when the person is living and working within the city.
odurandina
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2015
- Messages
- 5,328
- Reaction score
- 265
Damn. Then, why not put a 1,200 car garage below??
When they develop Lansdowne Street they'll need a garage.
Seems a no-brainer. The sponsor has plenty of $$$.
Regardless, they should still go 8~12 stories for office space and enclosed baseball seating,
or at least, tall enough for roof seats like Wrigleyville.
When they develop Lansdowne Street they'll need a garage.
Seems a no-brainer. The sponsor has plenty of $$$.
Regardless, they should still go 8~12 stories for office space and enclosed baseball seating,
or at least, tall enough for roof seats like Wrigleyville.
stick n move
Superstar
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 11,119
- Reaction score
- 15,029
Theyre putting a garage up for phase 2. In most cases Im in the boat against new garages but for a ballpark Its actually a good thing. Youll still have the spread out lots scattered around and Ive used garages for some of the condos but having a dedicated garage should help a lot for the bulk. After that its worked this long without so itll be fine.
Equilibria
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 6, 2007
- Messages
- 6,959
- Reaction score
- 8,038
I believe we heard whispers a little while ago that the Red Sox are thinking of the museum for across Brookline Ave on the parking lot parcel, married with new team offices...