archBOSTON.org

Go Back   archBOSTON.org > Boston's Built Environment > Development Projects

Development Projects New urban and/or architectural developments in Boston metro.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-19-2006, 12:30 AM   #21
bosma
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 173
Not that I would prefer this site, but what about the Bayside expo center site? The BCEC is obviously successful and it looks like the Hynes is here to stay. I would imagine Bayside would eventually begin to suffer and loose money.

I like the South Bay Site. Allot of land in that area. Boston Herald, the Flower buildings etc.
bosma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2006, 08:25 PM   #22
quadratdackel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Back Bay, Boston
Posts: 145
Did anyone else watch the World Cup final? ABC kept flashing shots of Government Center, where the city smartly set up a screen for watching the match. It was the only spot in the US they cut to. (Now that's some high quality, inexpensive publicity!) The setup was supposed to be a nod to the city's growing immigrant population, but I saw more "native" Americans following the Cup this year than ever before, despite a crappy showing by our team.

That, and people that I mentioned this new stadium to back when it came up have actually asked me for updates on its status. And everyone agrees Wonderland is the right location, because it's in the middle of a large Latino population, which means easy access for them, but it also means we get to feed off their enthusiasm when we go to the game, and get a nice cultural experience. Also because it gives us an excuse to go out to the Revere Beach/Wonderland area. Bottom line: This stadium idea should be a real winner.
quadratdackel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2006, 08:59 PM   #23
castevens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,051
http://architecturalboston.com/forum...opic.php?t=136
castevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2006, 10:38 PM   #24
jass
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,097
Does the MBTA run rail service to Gillette for soccer games?
jass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2006, 10:39 PM   #25
castevens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,051
I know they do for football games. Not sure about soccer. I've always driven. At least there's plenty of parking for soccer games. The place is made for 70,000 people, and has about 3,000
castevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 01:08 AM   #26
BostonSkyGuy
Senior Member
 
BostonSkyGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by castevens
I know they do for football games. Not sure about soccer. I've always driven. At least there's plenty of parking for soccer games. The place is made for 70,000 people, and has about 3,000
That's a shame. You know I really was thinking about getting season tickets to the Revs this year. They cost like 240 bucks for a season (16/17 games) for the cheapest seats which is only like 14 bucks a game. Probably the best deal in town. Especially when you can just move down to some of the better seats. Unless of course they check your tickets like hawks.

I never ordered them simply because I don't want to drive all the way out to Foxboro. Included in that was free parking but I don't know the 40 minute drive to Foxboro didn't seem like something I'd want to do 6-7 times a month.

How are the games though CS? Would you recommend getting seasons?
BostonSkyGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 01:11 AM   #27
BostonSkyGuy
Senior Member
 
BostonSkyGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 337
Also I know that some of the soccer specific stadiums in the league have really done well for their teams. Chicago being a good example. I'm really pumped to see them actually thinking about doing one, especially in the city (or at least around it).

I think soccer has a chance to grow, based on this World Cup there's a lot of interest. You just have to bring it to the people, it's not as popular as football here yet where people will drive to the middle of no where to see a game.

Having it near/around a T stop would be great.
BostonSkyGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2006, 05:50 AM   #28
jass
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by castevens
I know they do for football games. Not sure about soccer. I've always driven. At least there's plenty of parking for soccer games. The place is made for 70,000 people, and has about 3,000
I dont have a car, so unless the T (or a friend) can take me, I cant go.
jass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2006, 11:53 AM   #29
castevens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,051
Menino wants Revolution
Mayor would like a stadium built in the city, but MLS says some suburbs have also put up their hands

By Sasha Talcott, Globe Staff | July 15, 2006


Boston wants the New England Revolution to make the city its new home.

With the Major League Soccer team looking to build a stadium of its own in the area, Mayor Thomas M. Menino yesterday sent a letter to the soccer league's officials expressing his interest in it being located in the city. Menino said he will form a task force of prominent business and sports leaders to study the issue and identify possible locations.

``I am excited by the opportunity to showcase Boston to Major League Soccer and look forward to a long productive relationship moving forward," Menino wrote to commissioner Don Garber.

The Revolution currently plays in Foxborough's Gillette Stadium, home of the New England Patriots, and operated by Robert Kraft. In building a home, the team would join a growing number in cities such as Dallas, Chicago, and Los Angeles that have constructed stadiums or have plans to do so.

Though league officials support the idea of a stadium in Boston, they said they also have received letters of interest from several suburban communities, which they declined to name. Brian Bilello, the Revolution's chief operating officer, said team officials have not decided whether to ask for economic incentives or public financing for the project, but Garber said he supports at least partial public funding for the construction of soccer stadiums.

``I believe strongly in public-private partnerships for these facilities," he said. Public financing ``speaks to the commitment we're both making to each other. It also helps the community feel this team is theirs," Garber said.

Menino said he said he does not generally favor using public funds to build a stadium, but that he would consider a plan to reimburse the city for any money it invests, similar to the tax on hotels and rental cars that helped finance the new convention center in South Boston. He did not offer more details.

``That model has been so successful," Menino said. ``We could use that model once again."

Garber also likes the idea of a Revolution stadium because it symbolizes success.

Since the league's inception in the mid-1990s, critics have questioned whether professional soccer is financially viable in the United States. The construction of stadiums shows the league is here to stay, he said.

Soccer executives recently approached city officials about the possibility of building a soccer stadium in the city, as part of a broader process that involves soliciting input from other communities in the area. Bilello said the team would be ``very interested" in Boston if city officials want a stadium.

``It would have to be something the mayor and the city think would be great for the city," he said.

The new soccer stadiums generally seat between 20,000 and 30,000 fans, fewer than Fenway Park, and often double as concert venues.

Menino and the Revolution did not specify potential locations for a stadium. But over the years, various sports teams have considered building venues on the South Boston Waterfront, or in East Boston near the Suffolk Downs racetrack.

David Begelfer , chief executive of the Massachusetts chapter of the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties , said such sites may now be too expensive, but he suggested an alternative: the former Boston State Hospital in Mattapan, which he said has enough land for a facility.

Officials in several other area communities, including Somerville and Framingham, said they are not actively pursuing a stadium, but would consider the idea if approached by soccer officials. Somerville currently is focused on developing its available land for stores, housing, and office space, said Thomas Champion , a spokesman for Somerville Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone.

``If there are compelling reasons why someone would want to have other kinds of development here, we're always willing to talk," Champion said.
castevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2006, 08:00 PM   #30
Ron Newman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Davis Square, Somerville, MA
Posts: 8,399
Send a message via AIM to Ron Newman
I thought the Boston State Hospital grounds had been entirely subdivided into housing development parcels and the Mass. Audubon Nature Center?
Ron Newman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2006, 12:03 AM   #31
KentXie
Senior Member
 
KentXie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Fenway
Posts: 3,752
Too bad the Patriot just built a new stadium otherwise they can move back to Boston. Maybe they should move the Boston Cannons into that new stadium so it have more day of performances. However does this make Gillete Stadium profitable since there will only be 8 home games for the Patriot all year?
KentXie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2006, 05:47 AM   #32
KentXie
Senior Member
 
KentXie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Fenway
Posts: 3,752
Soccer officials want communities to kick in
Cities and towns are asked for stadium proposals

By Sasha Talcott, Globe Staff | July 25, 2006


BRIDGEVIEW, Ill. -- The New England Revolution's quest to build a soccer stadium somewhere in Boston or its suburbs is likely to play out far differently from the epic battles of the last decade for new homes for the Patriots, Red Sox, Celtics, and Bruins.

The biggest shift, if Major League Soccer's past experiences are any indication: Soccer officials want local cities and towns to submit proposals to host the team, and any public funds for the project are most likely to come from the local governments. In the past, both the Red Sox and Patriots have asked for state money to finance stadiums and the infrastructure improvements around them, and TD Banknorth Garden was built with significant state involvement.

Soccer officials are gauging the interest of local cities and towns. Already, since word of the plans became public several weeks ago, they have received letters from officials in several communities, including Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino. Menino earlier this month said he will name a task force of civic, business, and sports leaders to determine suitable locations, and he called Boston ``the perfect backdrop" for a new soccer stadium.

So far league officials have declined to name the other cities and towns that have submitted letters of interest.

In Illinois, the newly constructed soccer stadium for the Chicago Fire is a showcase for Major League Soccer's local approach. When the Fire unveiled plans to build its own stadium several years ago, a dozen towns went head to head to woo the team. They called the Fire's offices, wrote letters, and enlisted chambers of commerce.

As the Fire narrowed its choices, the towns became even more creative: Western suburb Hoffman Estates offered up land owned by its local corporate titan, Sears, Roebuck & Co., as well as the opportunity for more partnerships with the company. Hanover Park, also west of the city, said it would not take ``no" for an answer, Fire executives said. Then the village of Bridgeview, the ultimate winner, concocted a stunt that blew its competitors out of the water: It paved over part of the site of the proposed stadium with asphalt, painted an outline of a soccer field on it, and loaded the stunned Fire executives onto a helicopter to see it from the air.

To seal the deal, Bridgeview, located just south of Chicago, agreed to fund the entire stadium -- $100 million -- with public funds. It sold bonds to raise the cash.

Bridgeview Mayor Steve Landek said he adopted a simple strategy to persuade the Fire to pick his town: ``Sell, sell, sell."

``I ran it like a political campaign," he said.

Part of what had communities so excited: The soccer stadiums can be converted into outdoor concert venues, bringing in additional money. Villages such as Bridgeview, with an aging industrial base, envisioned the stadium as a catalyst for a broader redevelopment effort -- one that would bring hotels, retail stores, and restaurants to town. With its 20,000 seats, the new Fire stadium holds more than the village's 15,000-person population.

The stadium also serves as a central meeting point for youth soccer teams, and a potential host site for state soccer tournaments. Major League Soccer teams play roughly three dozen regular-season games from April through October, half of which are at home.

While the rest of the world obsesses about soccer, the sport has struggled to gain a large following in this country. For many years, all Major League Soccer teams played in football stadiums, generally half empty or more. But in the last several years, teams in four cities -- Los Angeles, Dallas, Chicago, and Columbus, Ohio -- built their own stadiums, and a half-dozen others have plans to do so, including Toronto , Denver, and New York.

The new soccer stadiums are critical to the growth of soccer in the United States, both because they are much smaller (crowded stadiums make for a better fan experience than half-empty ones), and because they boost the teams' finances. The new stadiums generally seat between 20,000 and 30,000 fans, less than Fenway Park.

Playing in a football stadium ``is not a soccer experience, it's soccer borrowing an NFL experience," said John Guppy , chief executive of the Fire, which previously played at the Chicago Bears' home, Soldier Field. Guppy said his team played some games with football lines still visible on the field. ``The fans want soccer the way it should be experienced," he said.

With their own stadiums, teams can control the revenue from parking, sponsorships, and concessions. In soccer, teams that play in their own stadium generally make money, while those that do not tend to lose money, the commissioner said. (The Revolution's situation is somewhat different, however, because Robert Kraft controls the soccer team, the New England Patriots of the National Football League, and both teams' home, Gillette Stadium.)

In Boston, early reviews from public officials have been good. City Councilor Salvatore LaMattina , who represents East Boston, Charlestown, and the North End, said he is ``excited" about the idea, while City Council President Michael F. Flaherty said he is open to any and all locations, provided that they are supported by the community.

``Look at the great dividends that it could provide the city," Flaherty said.

Unlike professional baseball or football, Major League Soccer does not promote separate ownership of its teams. Instead, its investors, such as the Krafts, operate a particular team but really own a piece of the league. The league often plays a strong role in developing soccer nationally; its commissioner, Don Garber, has been the point man so far on the Revolution's stadium project. Garber sent a letter to Menino earlier this month to gauge Boston's interest in hosting a stadium, writing that ``the League informed Kraft Soccer" that it would begin a search for a new home for the Revolution.

The Revolution has publicly backed the efforts, deferring to league officials. While the commissioner has promoted some public funding for new soccer stadiums, the Revolution's chief operating officer, Brian Bilello , has said that the team has not decided yet on the issue. ``We think it'd be a great facility for the city, and for the youth of the city," he said.

The Revolution's operators, the Krafts, have been burned by stadiums before. When they sought public funds for the Patriots' new home, Gillette Stadium, the Krafts ignited an uproar in the state Legislature and ultimately wound up financing it with private money.

The Fire's new stadium, which opened earlier this season, is built with an overhang that magnifies the sound of the crowd. Inside the stadium, fans sit far closer to the field.

``It's awesome -- they're so close you could hold a conversation with them," said Ian Pozdol, 16, watching the players warm up at a recent Fire game. Pozdol, who has been a Fire fan since the team's inception in 1998 , said he is convinced the atmosphere of new stadium will attract more fans to soccer.

``You're right on top of it," he said. ``You see the pain and the sweat, and it's a lot louder."
KentXie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2006, 07:04 AM   #33
castevens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,051
Quote:
However does this make Gillete Stadium profitable since there will only be 8 home games for the Patriot all year?
I'm thinking it'll make them more profitable. They probably lost money opening up the stadium, paying workers, light, etc, for 8 people (including myself) to watch a game.
castevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2006, 02:59 PM   #34
BostonSkyGuy
Senior Member
 
BostonSkyGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by castevens
Quote:
However does this make Gillette Stadium profitable since there will only be 8 home games for the Patriot all year?
I'm thinking it'll make them more profitable. They probably lost money opening up the stadium, paying workers, light, etc, for 8 people (including myself) to watch a game.
In the long run too, I think it'll make them more money having the stadium AWAY from Foxboro. I had hoped all along once LA and Chicago got their own soccer specific stadiums, that the Revs would get one. But since they played in Gillette, I didn't expect it to happen.

Having it closer to the city, at least something with a T-stop or Commuter Line in a town I think will boost attendance. There's plenty of people interested in soccer, it just needs to be closer and easily accessible to them.

Maybe once these stadiums are built the MLS can work on something else...strengthening the talent pool.
BostonSkyGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2006, 03:42 PM   #35
Ron Newman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Davis Square, Somerville, MA
Posts: 8,399
Send a message via AIM to Ron Newman
But the question above was, what does this do to the profitablility of Gillette Stadium. It now hosts more soccer games than NFL games.
Ron Newman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2006, 04:26 PM   #36
castevens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,051
but that was exactly what my comment was refering to. They probably are better off having nothing going on for 7 months of the year than having soccer games. It ruins the field, they have to pay workers to come in for ushering/concessions/announcing/etc. And they have to pay for lighting for those games and waters and such (for bathrooms).

All so that a few soccer hooligans (and once again, I am one of them) can watch a game.

Gillette Stadium itself will probably profit from them not being there.

Now your next point will probably be "why would a new stadium make it any different?" The answers are: 1) it would be smaller, so less of stupid little things like electricity when they open it up, 2) it would be closer to the city, more easily accessible, 3) The fact that it is smaller, IMO, will attract more people. It discourages you from going to future games with the atmosphere at current games. There are only a few thousand people, and in a stadium that seats 68,000 -- you can hear the crickets chirp even after a goal is scored. The more intimate environment will create a better atmosphere.
castevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2006, 04:29 PM   #37
ckb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Newman
But the question above was, what does this do to the profitablility of Gillette Stadium. It now hosts more soccer games than NFL games.
Possibly more shows and special events could happen througout the summer with less worry about the condition of the field for the Revs?

Last summer the DCI (Drum Corps International) Championships were held at Gillette -- to big crowds for a multi-day event. It would be nice to see Gillette as a regular stop for DCI (they wouldn't have the Championships each year, but this year there was an event at teeny tiny Endicott College up on the North Shore that was totally sold out ... and this even though it was a pain to get to and the seating was awful).

Do the rock concerts do well in Gillette? Could Gillette compete with the nearby Tweeter Center (nee Great Woods) and give an alternative to Live Nation (nee Clear Channel)? Perhaps. Although a smaller, closer to Boston, T-accessible stadium like the one proposed for the Revs might do even better.

Given that the Krafts own the Patriots and Gillette Stadium, as well as the Revs, profitability as a whole is more important than profitability of just the Stadium. Plenty of dedicated NFL stadiums sit idle for all but 8-10 Sundays a year (plus the assorted concert or, if in the south, college bowl game). And the consensus here (and I think a good one) seems to be that the Revs would be more profitable if their stadium was a dedicated soccer stadium closer to Boston.
ckb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2006, 04:30 PM   #38
PerfectHandle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 218
I hope the state doesn't pay for it.
PerfectHandle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2006, 05:36 PM   #39
BostonSkyGuy
Senior Member
 
BostonSkyGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Newman
But the question above was, what does this do to the profitablility of Gillette Stadium. It now hosts more soccer games than NFL games.
I didn't answer it in my post, because I agree 100% with CS about the stadium opening, spending money on electricity and people to work the game--the Krafts probably aren't making a whole lot of money, if they are even making money purely off the stadium. I'm sure with sponsors, television, etc. that the Revolution are turning some sort of profit.

However with a new stadium, I'm fairly certain that the modest 3,000 people watching from Gillette (if that) will turn into something like at least 10,000. I believe this for a few reasons. 1- I think that being closer to the city, or even a town with a commuter line will draw more people. I for one don't feel like driving 40-45 minutes to go see a Revs game in Foxboro. 2- One of the reasons I don't feel like driving it the atmosphere. Having less than 10% of the stadium (around...5800 people would be 10%) filled during a match is not really a great place to see a game. I'd rather have a 12,000-17,000 seat stadium that's going to be at 80% capacity (and I expect it to sell out more frequently than not) and be loud in a concentrated area than the current state.

There's a reason why this stadium NEEDS to be built, not just purely because MLS needs exposure and soccer needs to grow in this country. Atmosphere when going to a sporting event is probably the most important thing. If the team was good (as I'd say the Revs are) and no one goes to the games, why would I go instead of watching it on television? The Bruins games in the Fleet/Garden were horrible last year because no one went. The Celtics in the same building, at the end of the year the team still wasn't good, wasn't a playoff team and the place was packed and LOUD. Both the Bruins and the Celtics sucked last year, neither went to the playoffs, and yet the Celtics games were great to attend.

Gillette stadium is going to benefit equally from having a new Revolution stadium. Summer is a HUGE concert season, and having no summer tenant to Gillette will help get more concerts. I know there's been some country music events there (I'm not a country fan but...) that have been the biggest draws in New England in terms of concerts. So it's feesable that Gillette can become one of the most desirable places to see big, live acts. Also add to the fact that concerts probably won't do as much damage to the field as the Revolution games do. There won't be as much wear and tear, it would be spot times when there were sets, etc. on the field for the concerts. It really benefits everyone to get a new Revolution stadium, I hope it's not just a pipe dream.
BostonSkyGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2006, 05:54 PM   #40
BosDevelop
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,115
How about getting rid of the Bank of America Pavilion and building the new soccer stadium down by the water (obviously not at the same site of the Pavilion)? Then you can use the soccer stadium as a summer concert venue and have shows ranging from a capacity of 5,000 all the way to 20,000+ Between soccer matches and concerts, they could easily have 50 events a year at the stadium and there couldn't be a better location in terms of public transportation.
BosDevelop is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Somerville Soccer Stadium chumbolly Development Projects 592 11-18-2014 01:04 PM
Minor League Stadium proposed in Charlestown KentXie Development Projects 10 07-31-2007 07:18 AM
Cool Site of the Day statler General 0 01-24-2007 09:51 AM
Interesting Site Sofla951 Boston Architecture & Urbanism 2 11-13-2006 04:42 PM
2 groups consider a minor league stadium near BC High statler Development Projects 7 07-21-2006 08:37 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.