Board kneads to slice through pizza controversy in Fields Corner, where a Papa John's wants to move in
The Boston Licensing Board could decide tomorrow whether to grant a food-serving license to a Papa John's franchisee for an outlet at 1501 Dorchester Ave. in Dorchester's Field's Corner.
Under the latest proposal by franchisees Joe and Ralonda Johnson, the outlet would be open between 10 a.m. and midnight Sunday through Thursday and between 10 a.m. and 1 a.m. on Friday and Saturday.
At an unusually spicy hearing today, the proposal by a New Jersey-based franchisee - but with a local manager who went to Burke High School - was met by opposition from a local business group and residents, who say they don't want some national chain with unhealthy food competing with home-grown small businesses in a neighborhood that already has more than enough pizza options. One of the opponents owns a pizza place across the street - and formerly rented the space where the Papa John's would go for a burger joint.
The Johnsons, though, countered that their food is a lot better for you than some of the stuff you can get elsewhere in the neighborhood. "Our opponents sell fried food," Joe Johnson said. "We don't sell anything fried." In fact, he continued, their pizzas are made with "from the vine into the can" sauce with no additives and are baked, not fried.
And he said the "public need" for a Papa John's - down the street from where another franchisee failed with the concept a few years ago - is not just the food but the fact that he, his wife and Tabb are all Black, in a state where Black and Brown restaurant ownership is far below the minority percentage of the population.
"Just as important as what's being sold is who's selling it," he said.
They said their proposed manager, Charles Tabb, is as local as you can get - he grew up in Dorchester, went to school there and still lives there, and will be a part owner. "I'm from the city and I worked so hard to get to where I'm at," Tabb said, adding all the opposition "is kind of heartbreaking to me."
Joe Johnson, who said his company has already poured $500,000 into the Fields Corner location, said that as he and his wife have grown their business to 23 franchises, they have developed a program to educate employees in franchising and to bring some on - such as Tabb, as partners in individual outlets.
However, as their lawyer, Dennis Quilty said, unlike with liquor licenses, food serving licenses do not require any showing of "public need," only that the restaurant will meet certain requirements for food preparation and running a decent operation.
Still Quilty said all the opposition to the proposal was being ginned up by Antonio's Hi-Fi owner Brian Chavez, whom he accused of being out to scuttle a competing pizza option, in part over bitterness of getting kicked out of his BosBurger space for failing to pay his rent.
Chavez, though, said he objects to "mischaracterization and outright lies," although he added, "this is not the forum for what would be a private business dispute."
He said his objection was simply that Fields Corner already has "a saturation of pizza" and Papa John's would have "no emphasis on healthy options." Sure, he admitted, he used to sell burgers out of the space, but his place also had "healthy options" on its menu and even offered fruit.
Ellen Schmarsow, president of Fields Corner Main Street, which advocates for local businesses, opposed the proposed Papa John's. She said the area needs locally owned businesses - and more fresh food - and that the Johnsons "have not been transparent" about their own personal location. "New Jersey does not count" as local, she said.
Board Chairwoman Kathleen Joyce started her questions by asking the Johnsons: "What is your response to the fact there are four other existing pizza places in the same general area?" She continued, however, that her main concern was with parking and congestion outside a place whose owners estimated 70% of their business would be takeout and delivery.
Joe Johnson said that while the outlet would allow third-party deliverers, he said it would concentrate on using its own employees to deliver orders, and that they would have a space in a parking lot out back.
Joyce said "times have changed," because the pandemic made third-party delivery far more common - and said a national chain such as Papa John's might spur even more delivery runs than a locally based outlet. She asked the Johnsons and Quilty to supply a written plan on how they will minimize potential traffic and parking issues - something the board now routinely asks eateries that plan to allow third-party delivery.
He and Quilty said they doubted traffic would be any worse outside the Papa John's than the previous BosBurger.
Ad:
Comments
Magoo sez
Magoo luvs pizza (or Za as Magoo likes to call it). Magoo’s favorite Za topping is orange sherbert. Magoo thinks an orange sherbet Za is da’ bomb-diggity no doubt. Magoo.
screw protectionism
compete on value or go home
Papa John’s certainly can’t
Papa John’s certainly can’t compete on quality.
NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY
Clear case of NIMBY. Reading the above makes it clear that the "neighborhood association" and other pizza shops are pressing this not to happen.
Look I don't love Papa Johns (as I've stated here before) but there is one thing they can do, offer pizza at a competitive price. (Whether its good pizza remains to be seen around here)
I think the opposing association and related business are upset that someone who might offer pizza at a lower cost than they do, so they might have to match prices to compete.
I've grown tired of the "but we need healthy options". Darling, if this was the case and businesses felt there was a market, it would be there. I can't imagine a sweetgreen or some over priced salad place doing well here. But these groups love to throw this stuff out there (akin to "but for the children" phrase that gets tossed around) because it sounds good, but its pandering and merit less. But may I ask what this 'neighborhood association' is doing to attract healthier options. I bet dollars to donuts that its a big fat nothing. So these people are just looking out for their member's interest, not for the community as they say they are.
I live in Fields Corner and
I live in Fields Corner and like many of my neighbors, I just don't care to see another bland national chain fast food on the main street. And how is not wanting our commercial district taken over by another junk food outlet "pandering and meritless"?
We actually have some local landlords who care about the community and won't rent to this type of tenant. And although it may takes more work and commitment, they are able to attract a variety of businesses who bring something of value to the neighborhood (ethnic restaurant, coffee shop, bookstore etc.)
Did I say that?
I didn't say that. I said using the "but we want healthier options" as an excuse to veto this place opening is pandering and meritless because phrases like this are often empty statements that are often just self serving agendas.
You don't want it? Then don't patronize the place, and get your friends not to either. It will close like the other location did nearby because the market said it didn't want it.
So why not allow it. It will give people jobs and fill up a empty store front. If neighborhood doesn't want it, it will fail and close as fast as the other one.
Okay and are their storefronts empty I assume? I mean if they are 'waiting for the right tenant', then its empty. So you'd rather have an empty storefront that sits there for months/years while a landlord 'waits for the right tenant', vs giving people jobs and another affordable food option? Remember, empty storefronts = less foot traffic = more crime.
I'd rather have *something* there than an empty store front. But that's just me.
And who knew there was a long waiting list of chains who wanted into Fields Corner, according to you. I doubt that to be true at all.
One more thing, I live in a town (Chelsea) that has a similar demographic to Fields Corner. Chelsea is full of centroamerican taco shops and bodegas. I can spit off my front steps and hit about of 7 of them within a 100 yard radius. Yes we have that many. But I don't roll my eyes or attend planning meetings to opposite when one of these wants to open, even though I am not their target customer. I understand that people may *want* these options and they are simply just not for me. Chelsea could use far more healthier options, but I'd rather have another taco shop than an empty store front anyday. Think about that a bit. You might want to take a hint and realize this isn't always about you and what YOU want or you may THINK the neighborhood wants.
“ Think about that a bit. You
“ Think about that a bit. You might want to take a hint and realize this isn't always about you and what YOU want or you may THINK the neighborhood wants.”
What a snotty comment.
A shame Boston codes have
A shame Boston codes have empowered neighborhoods to think this is The Truman Show where the loudest mouths with flexibility to attend meetings get to choose what they want on everyone's private property.
Free Market
We live in a "free market" society, and that market should dictate whether the franchise will sink or swim, not some neighborhood association.
The other location failed and closed, who's to say that it won't happen here, if the market decides that it doesn't want a PJ's.I also don't buy the franchisers excuse that the previous location wasn't owned by black or brown people, which why they say it failed. If it was similar to my PJ's experience here in Boston, it failed because it was plain old gross.
Furthermore, any long time poster here can attest the opening and closing of shops due to over saturation of places. Examples: Froyo Shops, Cookie Shops, Muffin Shops, Salad places, bagel places.. the market decided it didn't want those type of stores in abundance, and many up and closed fast.
Used to be a PJ's nearby, it failed
Wasn't there one down by DBar? It went out of business, surprising for a pizza biz.
It will be a tough environment. Now, a Starbucks or similar on the other hand . .
I don't like the idea of publicly-funded non-profits (Main Streets) taking advocacy stands against local businesses.
It smacks of "curating" the neighborhood, with all the social class implications of that word.