Red Sox / BRA Land Swap

I am not sure if I added this little tid bit about the good corporate citizens of the Red Sox organization. In the original deal, the Red Sox and BRA acknowledged that in taking over the street, they would be inconveniencing a percentage of the population that would have wanted to use that street to navigate around the city. Therefore the Red Sox agreed to let any citizen of Boston traverse Yawkey Way when they had taken it over. Anyone wishing to walk down the public street would be escorted by the Red Sox Staff.

In reality - I tried this once, as I was on my way to meet some family members. I was threatened with arrest. I know of people who lived in the neighborhood - who were also told they were not allowed to pass thru. In speaking with the Boston Finance Commission - I was told that they had received notice from numerous people - stating that they were also refused entrance when trying to walk down Yawkey Way.

So anyone else want to join my petition -
http://www.change.org/petitions/may...top-the-bra-sale-of-yawkey-way-to-the-red-sox

Thanks.
 
kguarnotta,

Yes, welcome. I hope you stick around and comment in some other threads, it's great to have a new user with a distinct perspective who comments thoughtfully and intelligently, something that has been lacking as of late.

whighlander said:
I doubt that the Sox would leave for Providence or Worcester if the deal failed to be completed
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree, I doubt they would leave over something this trivial. However, I think it could begin a dangerous precedent. The Sox and the city currently have an amicable relationship, that while perhaps not completely fair works pretty well for both parties. The Sox don't whine and threaten to leave every time they want something, and in return the city doesn't make it incredibly difficult for them to conduct business.

For instance this deal - the city isn't directly making money by selling the 120 day rights to the Sox, at the end of the day it will probably be a wash. But more events at the park mean more people spending money in the Fenway, Kenmore and Back Bay. This is particularly true on game days. People don't just come, watch the game and leave as they do at most other parks in the country. Fans come into town in the morning and spend the day in the city, dropping cash in the Back Bay and Fenway on food and shopping. They flood every bar within a few miles, hell, I see people come into the city just to watch the game at a bar with other fans. The city makes a boatload off sales taxes from all this, as does the T from fares and parking. Then there are events like the parade today (setting aside the overboard costs of our police-state), where the Sox aren't even making much money. But the entire city is flooded with people blowing cash the whole day.

My point being, while the city certainly could get more money from the deal, I don't think they should. Treating the team well has many indirect benefits that are greater then the possible loss of not getting the maximum revenue out of this deal, for the city and the region as a whole.

EDIT: Regarding passing through Yawkey during events, I would hope that is just miscommunication between management and their minions. However, this deal's purpose is to provide an alternate route to Yawkey, so wouldn't that help this particular complaint? Also, I mean, Yawkey and Kilmarnock are less than 600 feet apart, so I understand anger that they are not following the agreed upon terms, but is it that huge a deal? If it was me I would avoid that area like the plague during games anyway.


Now, the BRA using eminent domain to help the Sox acquire land - that's something that does need more looking into.
 
Last edited:
Yawkey Way is not really a heavily used street or particularly necessary byway for traversing the area. The closing wouldn't even be all the time.

If anyone wants to TRULY be upset about a closing to the public of a byway - petition the eggregious closing off of a large part of Fort Point Channel (even to pedestrians) by the USPS facility.

No Bostonian is allowed to walk the channel. Whenever we have tried, we are turned away. Yawkey Way is nothing compared to that travesty.
 
davem
I hear you and understand. There are all sorts of ways of financially analyzing this deal, looking at increased tax revenue, money spent on neighboring businesses etc. But the reality is the BRA did not do that analysis, they just came up with some number.
If they really did a true appraisal, and came back to the table with a REAL appraised value of $7.3 million, then I guess that is what it is worth. The fact is they never did an appraisal. Additionally they rushed the deal through – even though the Inspector General of Massachusetts – who disagreed with the initial agreement ten years ago, also disagreed with this agreement, and asked the City to do a more thorough analysis of the numbers -because they don't make sense.

Please Consider -
1. The Red Sox going back on an earlier agreement and no one in government was willing to ask them for it back. I know I tried. The Red Sox changed their mind about a deal that was made with the city, and that was that. There were no repercussions at all. Our elected officials did nothing about it.
2. If the Red Sox are such great corporate citizens, and the relationship is amicable, why don't they set up the agreement to be reviewed every 10 years. Historically speaking every financial person who has looked back on the agreement from 10 years ago has said it was a terrible agreement for the city. Do you think that perhaps in ten years the city would look back on this deal, and possibly say, “You know what, we can do better”. Alternatively, if the city's inclination in ten years was to do anything possible to keep the Red Sox using that street, and staying in town, then we rent it to them for $1/year for ten years.
3.Lastly – for this post anyway – consider that the BRA is a separate entity from the City of Boston. They originally claimed the property via eminent domain, but now deny that. The BRA and the City of Boston are somehow separate entities, and the BRA has to answer to no one but the mayor. All their deals are done behind closed doors. Think about this –this is a public street, which the BRA claimed due to urban blight. To give some context – Condos in the Fenway area are selling at over $600SF. That doesn’t sound like blight to me.

I'll keep posting my petition, for anyone who wants to join.
http://www.change.org/petitions/may...on&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition
 
Hi Shmessy -
Ok I hear you, it is not too far if you are on Boylston street, and want to get to Brookline AVe, you are looking at having to go over a quarter mile out of your way. But why exactly are you going out of your way? Just so the Red Sox can make more money. A Private entity, is going to make more money, and you as a citizen are going to be inconvenienced.

I hear you about closing off the area of the USPS facility area. Please start a petition on it, I'm trying to address the BRA taking property owned by the city under the guise of Urban Blight, then turning around and selling it to a private entity, without actually determining its' value.
 
Could someone link to a map showing where this new Ross Way is going to be?
 
Ron Newman said:
Could someone link to a map showing where this new Ross Way is going to be?
Click to expand...

I presume it is to be named after the King of the Grey Beards David Ross Catcher

My concern is that as a pecking order of World Series 2013 Heroes with Great Beards shouldn't we have a Big Papi, a Dustin Pedroia, and Perhaps Mike [the Other Major League Beard] and Johnny [Wild Beard and Wildman Gomes] Ways, as well
 
How long do you all think Fenway will be operating as a major league ballpark? 15 more years maybe? 25?
Click to expand...

We could very well be hearing talk of a new arena in Boston for the Celtics and/or Bruins in the next 7 or 8 years. The TD Garden is turning 18 years old in a week and a half.
Click to expand...

For comparison, Symphony Hall has been in use since 1900 and I never hear any talk about the BSO having to move out and replace it.
 
Ron Newman said:
For comparison, Symphony Hall has been in use since 1900 and I never hear any talk about the BSO having to move out and replace it.
Click to expand...


Ron -- Sport venues have interesting lifespans and lives

1) First they are the state-of-the-art -- TD Garden circa 1995
2) Then others start to have what they have and while young they are no longer the talk of the town -- TD Garden the past few years
3) Mid Life extension -- mostly new seats, scoreboards, visitor amenities -- TD Garden in the next couple of years
4) repeat of state 2) but now the core infrastructure is starting to get old
5) torn down and something new is built probably somewhere else -- return to 1)

Occasionally for some reason -- usually a bad spell financially the facility slips past 5) into a protracted period of
6) old but not beloved -- eventually headed for demolition
or 6a) old and beloved but still eventually headed for demolition -- the ole Gaaaaahdn [1928-1885/1997], Yankee Stadium, Comiskey Park, Tiger Stadium, Chicago Stadium [1929-1996]

7) Really rarely something misses and the old and beloved or old and nearly taken for granted misses getting torn down and the facility becomes one of the rarefied "Historic Venue" -- example Wrigley Field
home ballpark of the Chicago Cubs since 1916. It was built in 1914 as Weeghman Park for the Chicago Federal League baseball team, the Chicago Whales. It was called Cubs Park between 1920 and 1926 before being renamed for then Cubs team owner and chewing gum magnate, William Wrigley, Jr..
Click to expand...

Typically the Transition to Venerable occurs well after 50 years of age or after some additional historic event -- then as it approaches 100 years the bar to tear it down approaches infinity -- Fenway [circa 1911], LA's 1932 & 1984 Olympic Stadium [Memorial Coliseum circa 1923],
In 1984, the State of California and the United States Government declared the Coliseum a State and Federal Historical Landmark for its contribution to the history of California, as well as to that of the United States as a whole.
Click to expand...

Fenway having crossed the century mark now will not be torn down [barring a catastrophe] in the lifetime of anyone involved with this forum
 
whighlander said:
I presume it is to be named after the King of the Grey Beards David Ross Catcher

My concern is that as a pecking order of World Series 2013 Heroes with Great Beards shouldn't we have a Big Papi, a Dustin Pedroia, and Perhaps Mike [the Other Major League Beard] and Johnny [Wild Beard and Wildman Gomes] Ways, as well
Click to expand...

I assume it's named after Mike Ross, the politician behind the revitalization of this section of Fenway.
 
whighlander said:
Ron -- Sport venues have interesting lifespans and lives

1) First they are the state-of-the-art -- TD Garden circa 1995
2) Then others start to have what they have and while young they are no longer the talk of the town -- TD Garden the past few years
3) Mid Life extension -- mostly new seats, scoreboards, visitor amenities -- TD Garden in the next couple of years
4) repeat of state 2) but now the core infrastructure is starting to get old
5) torn down and something new is built probably somewhere else -- return to 1)

Occasionally for some reason -- usually a bad spell financially the facility slips past 5) into a protracted period of
6) old but not beloved -- eventually headed for demolition
or 6a) old and beloved but still eventually headed for demolition -- the ole Gaaaaahdn [1928-1885/1997], Yankee Stadium, Comiskey Park, Tiger Stadium, Chicago Stadium [1929-1996]

7) Really rarely something misses and the old and beloved or old and nearly taken for granted misses getting torn down and the facility becomes one of the rarefied "Historic Venue" -- example Wrigley Field


Typically the Transition to Venerable occurs well after 50 years of age or after some additional historic event -- then as it approaches 100 years the bar to tear it down approaches infinity -- Fenway [circa 1911], LA's 1932 & 1984 Olympic Stadium [Memorial Coliseum circa 1923],

Fenway having crossed the century mark now will not be torn down [barring a catastrophe] in the lifetime of anyone involved with this forum
Click to expand...

This is true of general architecture as well.

In the 1950s, we were tearing down everything 50-60 years old because it was "obsolete" and "ugly as fuck". Today, what surveyed is a "national treasure".

Today, people want to tear down anything thats Brutalist because its 50-60 years old and obsolete and "ugly as fuck".

If the building manages to hang around just a couple more decades....BAM, its historic and it will stick around as a national treasure.

Sadly for RFK stadium, the 49ers stadium and the Oakland stadium, theyre old enough to be "kill it with fire" but not old enough to be "save for eternity".

Just a little longer and they might make it...

Fenway is obviously good forever. As are many of the classic college stadiums (Harvard etc).

Edit: Dodgers stadium is also in danger land.
 
Last edited:
How is Dodger Stadium in danger? They now have Janet Marie Smith, who designed all the recent work to update Fenway.
 
Brutalism is and was always "ugly as fuck." That was its point: to make people reel in horror and flee the city.
 
Math -- I don't think that there ever was a reason for Brutalism -- except lack of imagination on the part of the architecture departments

Somehow we went from Beauty using modern materials --Art Deco
sine the Beauty is only Skin deep so lets see the bones -- International Style
to Well let's screw around with the skin and the bones to ? -- Brutalism
to -- well let's just copy something earlier but screw around with it -- Phillip Johnson and others
to -- well lets just Screw Around -- Frank Ghery
to????

Perhaps we will now see -- Neo Internationalism or perhaps Neo Deco
 
we romanticize the past partly because we are left with many of the best remaining parts of it. not all brutalism will/should stay. but what will stay will be those that best exemplify it and work with the world today. Think Christian Science vs. Gov't Center.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top