The Davis Square Community

In a nutshell:

Question 5 - a yes vote on a non-binding agreement is a waste of time, and is arguably both irrelevant and stupid.

Question 6 - vote no because the US lacks moral high-ground, and because it is his opinion that Israel does not deserve sanctions.

2AM License - Vote no, otherwise drunken Tufts students will sing, drive loudly, and pee on his house after hours; and because Orleans is lame.

From:

ron_newman

I tend to favor the Burren's application but I think the opponents have valid points to make, which is why I linked to this post.

From:

I think they've some valid points, but I don't know how railing on a completely different establishment makes them.

From:

on-reserve.livejournal.com

I really wish there could be something age-related with regard to 2 AM-ness. Like, open until midnight for those 22 and under, until 2 for everyone older than 22. That would cut the college core out but also be ridiculously difficult to enforce which is why I'm guessing it isn't done.

From:

ron_newman

You already have to be 21 to drink. I don't know whether you have to be 21 to be in the Burren (or Orleans) at all.

From:

on-reserve.livejournal.com

Right, but 21 year-olds are college seniors so it doesn't curb the "drunken irresponsible college kids" problem which is not to say that there aren't equally drunken and inconsiderate 35 year-olds.

From:

Vive la curfew!

From:

hiddenbear.livejournal.com

Nice summary.

Gotta love someone who buys/rents a place in Davis Sq. and then complains about it being too loud and people having fun.

From:

ron_newman

But surely there's a difference between "people having fun" and "people pissing on your lawn" ?

From:

hiddenbear.livejournal.com

He mentions that first, but then goes on to complain mostly about the noise.

And if people are pissing on his lawn a lot, all he would have to do is keep a front light on on weekend nights. I'm sure those kids wouldn't want to piss where there is enough light that they could be seen.

From:

Oooo... logical fallacy time?

There's no evidence that more people will pee on the blogger's lawn if the Burren gets extended hours. The peeing is already occurring, and the Burren does not yet have a 2AM license.

There is no evidence that the patrons of the Burren are the ones peeing on the blogger's lawn. There are numerous other bars in the area, not to mention numerous parties that take place over the weekend. In fact, that the offenders are bar/party-goers and not some other denizen of Davis is purely conjecture.

The OP's complaints concerning noisy patrons apply wholly to Orleans.

From:

watchamacallit.livejournal.com

Maybe the pissers know the blogger and choose that lawn for a reason.

From:

Nah, they don't know me. And I'm not saying I'm 100% opposed, either.

As I say in my post, I'm generally in favor of late-night establishments and I feel like a hypocrite saying "but this one is in my back yard." But seriously, it's *right in my back yard.*

Anyway, that's why I didn't sign the petition against the 2AM license. A late close on weekends, possibly with an extra officer or bouncer to handle loudness, a real effort to quiet people, might be fine.

But you gotta realize that the Davis Sq. central business district is very closely packed with residences. And while it's been changing slowly over the years, and while I love most of those changes, I don't want to see it become Allston.

You can see why I'm conflicted on the issue and I hope that I managed to convey my ambivalence.

From:

yagagriswold.livejournal.com

Kudos to you. You have managed to stay polite and to remain focussed on articulating your point while others have stooped to rudeness. Thank you.

As someone who lives next door to a bar, I empathize with your dillema.

From:

Same here, such an effort to stay quite would be transient at best. It is the nature of that type of buisness. In three weeks the bar will have a different late night manager, you may have to begin any process of reasoning with someone anew. Or the place could be sold to a new owner who gets the license. Cities have zoning laws just for this reason. What zone it the Orleans in? Is it a CBD too? Or is it a residential zone?

I live near a very loud bar in Inman square. Initially it was just a neighborhood bar which would be a lot better than what it is now. That is when it aquired all of its licenses. But it has morphed into a live rock venue that has very loud music with totally different crowds of strangers nearly every night. There is no telling what these places may change into, so that is why I believe it is best to give out these kinds of licenses based off of what zone they are in or how close they are to residential property.

From:

ron_newman

This is the Somerville Zoning Map. If you're interested, you can also read the Zoning Ordinance, in particular Article 7 which designates what is allowed in each zone.

It appears to me that Orleans is in a Neighborhood Business district, while the Abbey Lounge is in a Residence C zone. The Abbey is probably a grandfathered use which may even predate the city's first zoning ordinance.

The Aquarium restaurant, which preceded Orleans, caused lots of noise complaints from the neighborhood because of its live music. A condo dweller who shared a wall with it actually had to move out for a while. My impression is that Orleans is a much more resopnsible and neighborly establishment.

From:

Pissers are generally loud as well as bottle breakers. If there was a petition I am sure this was not the only house or the only reason people near the place don't want it to happen. If the Bar knew that it could not open past a certain time when it moved into the neighborhood why should it be surprised if people still don't want it to happen?

From:

watchamacallit.livejournal.com

Pissers are only bottle breakers if they are at a party, not if they are at a bar. Keeping a bar open another 30 minutes doesn't increase pissing or bottle breaking. It's an effort for them to remain competitive with other bars in the neighborhood.

From:

Or in town. There's nothing to suggest that the pissers aren't unloading from the T at 1AM and walking up Holland Street after having been in Boston or Cambridge getting their drink on. The complaints have far more to do with residing in a lively, mixed-use neighborhood than with patrons of the Burren.

From:

Quite true. Mostly I was just being annoyed at inconsiderate yodelers.

However, the point is that one bar with a 2AM license would be OK, but you know if one gets it the others will too, and it's not fair to give a late license to the Burren and not to Redbones & Orleans & Sligo.

I could buy some ear plugs. If the T ever gets to the point of running all-night service... (hahahaha) I imagine we'll all have trouble.

From:

Perceived entitlement demonstrates that ~~the world revolves around you~~ one's community should conform to one's own desires. Davis should be a vibrant and active place while the blogger is awake, but must necessarily roll up the carpets otherwise.

From:

Isn't that what community process is for-- so that residents can shape their community to the way they want? Hence Arlington having no liquor stores or bars at all, Davis having some, and Allston being Allston?

From:

Sure, but voting against the Burren's 2AM license does nothing to alleviate your main complaints, namely, that someone is peeing on your house and that Orleans patrons are unruly and noisy at odd hours.

It also begs the question of why, if you prefer the peace and quiet of a dry suburb like Arlington, you chose to live across the street from a bar in a fairly lively neighborhood like Davis.

From:

it does, It alleviates noise as well as other issues at later hours.

From:

How does voting against a 2AM license for an establishment that is some distance away 'alleviate the noise' caused by the patrons of the establishment that is directly across the street?

From:

we are assuming that if one place gets the license the rest will as well? or not? The stakeholders should be the members of the community who live close by. And yes I would consider a landowner or someone who plans to stay in Somerville for a long time to be more of a stakeholder than a college person or young renter. Businesses can earn more money if they stay open later at night. Residential property owners can get more rent or more money for their home if the neighborhood is less noisy or allston like. And consumers just want cheap wallmart prices. I think if you look at the best long term investment or decision based on giving you the most 'quality of life' return for all age groups you would choose to have the stores close much earlier. If you are interested in qaulity of party life for college kids then keep them open to 2:00 am. Hopefully the longterm residents will be the true stakeholders and decision makers in this.

From:

The long-term viability of Davis will be guaranteed not by looking solely or even primarily to the interests of home and rental property owners, but by ensuring that all stakeholders - owners, renters, and business people - work together to preserve the "mixed-use" model that has evolved there. Allowing the Burren to set hours that allow it to be competitive seems to be a step in the right direction. Talking about the slippery slope that will ultimately turn Davis into an Allston student slum, on the other hand, seems like so much doomsaying. In order to have a student slum like you'll find in parts of Allston, you first and foremost need a critical mass of students. Unless I'm gravely mistaken, Davis is mostly young professionals at this point.

From:

Mixed use is great as long as it serves the community. 'The people that live here'

From:

That Davis is so appealing as a place to live is due to the way that it has developed in the past 10-15 years. Granted, not everything that has happened has been benefit to actual long term residents - in fact, rising property values has changed the demographics of the resident population - but Davis exists as an enclave for liberal young professionals because the community evolved as it has. There is transportation and services, restaurants and night life, and these exist alongside a residential neighborhood that didn't start taking its present form until the mid-90s. The community has grown since then and continues to grow, and I think it's a bit disingenuous at this point to say that this is where it should stop.

I disagree with the idea that the sole stakeholders in the development of a community are residential property owners, and that they do not benefit from a community's continued evolution. I also think that our understanding of the term, "long term resident," is fundamentally different. These biases limit further conversation to the point where I'm happy to take my leave.

From:

dirty-devlin.livejournal.com

Agreed.

From:

magpie-leah.livejournal.com

It's obviously very much in The Burren's financial interest to be open until 2am or they wouldn't want to do it, right? I wonder if they could spring for paid police detail to be right outside of the bar to handle the people who are being loud and disorderly? I'm guessing this has already been raised and that it's not a good solution but it seems like a good idea.

From:

an-art-worker.livejournal.com

His reasons against 5 are just silly. His reasons against 6 I would partly agree with but the recent Lebanon incursion certainly overrides all his arguments. Yes on both.

The Burren/2 am? mmm... I'm mixed. Davis Square is changing/has been changing more and more into a party destination. It's not a mini-Allston yet and may never be but I guess that is the concern. People come and leave their money. They also leave their bodily fluids. I suppose a weekend 2 am closing is not that unreasonable.

From:

ron_newman

The proposed 2 am closing would occur only on Friday and Saturday nights.

From:

The Lebanon incursion was stupid and wrong, I'll agree with that. Lebanon was really getting back on its feet, and Hezbollah got exactly what it wanted: a pile of rubble it could rule.

From:

cos

By that logic, we ought to divest from the United States. Its recent invasion of Iraq certainly overrides all anti-divestment arguments.

From:

push-stars.livejournal.com

Richard Nixon said that (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Rumsfeld).

Who was he was talking about? Saddam Hussein possibly?

That would be a good guess, and you’d be warm.

That “ruthless little bastard” was Donald Rumsfeld. He’d have to be for him to shake hands (http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/) with Saddam Hussein after Hussein started using chemical weapons against Iran, and later (http://www.casi.org.uk/info/usdocs/usiraq80s90s.html) against the Kurds (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-10-19-saddam-trial_x.htm).

(http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/)

But if Rummy thought it was okay back then, and now Saddam is sentenced to hang for the crime of gassing the Kurds, shouldn’t Rummy be sentenced as an accomplice? Especially since United States complicity in actions like the gassing of Iranian Shiites goes a long way toward explaining why the United States is so vilified in that part of the world.

From:

an-art-worker.livejournal.com

I am hoping we "divest" from the GOP tomorrow...

From:

warlord-mit.livejournal.com

Strangely I didn't get questions 4, 5, or 6 on my Absentee Ballot from ward 7 precinct 2.

From:

ron_newman

Not strange at all. The non-binding questions are on the ballot only in Denise Provost's legislative district. You are in Carl Sciortino's district.

From:

marmota.livejournal.com

I see the 2am licensing as influencing the nature of the Square in general. Personally I'm not fond of what the pubs have done to the area, and can't imagine why anyone who *lives* around it would want to increase rowdy drunk traffic. If any establishment could get extended hours, it should be the Store 24, which is at least useful.

From: