SkyscraperCity Forum banner

CHICAGO - Wrigley Field (41,072)

Tags
chicago
295K views 705 replies 138 participants last post by  nyrmetros 
#1 · (Edited by Moderator)
See less See more
9
#180 ·
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...ks-end-alderman-says-20130205,0,6924656.story

City Hall wants Cubs, rooftop signs deal done by week's end, alderman says

By Hal Dardick and Ameet SachdevClout Street
6:54 p.m. CST, February 5, 2013

.......City Hall is pressing the Chicago Cubs and the owners of nearby rooftop clubs to reach agreement on a sign deal by week’s end, Ald. Thomas Tunney said today.

Such a deal between the Cubs and rooftop owners could be a key component in a proposed $300 million renovation of aging, historic Wrigley Field.......

Mayor Rahm Emanuel has urged the Cubs, owned by the Ricketts family, and the owners of 16 rooftop clubs to come to an agreement so a much bigger rehab deal can get done. The pressure comes amid talk that an ordinance to increase the number of night games and concerts could be introduced at the next council meeting on Wednesday..........
....
 
#188 ·
Good grief :eek:hno:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...ield-scoreboard-0329-20130329,0,4959884.story

Jumbo-size hitch in Wrigley talks

Sources: Cubs want giant video screen inside ballpark


By Ameet Sachdev and Hal Dardick, Chicago Tribune reporters
March 29, 2013

A key sticking point in the negotiations over the rehab of Wrigley Field is whether to allow the Cubs to erect a giant video screen within the Friendly Confines, with the team seeking a 6,000-square-foot display that would be about triple the size of the iconic center-field scoreboard, sources say.

According to the sources, who are familiar with detailed proposals being discussed during the now-daily talks, the debate is focused more on the size and placement of a Jumbotron-like screen than on whether it would be allowed at all — with the Ricketts family that owns the Cubs rejecting anything smaller than 6,000 square feet.

"We are exploring adding a video board at Wrigley Field as part of opportunities to increase revenues for the baseball club," said Cubs spokesman Julian Green. "One of the points at issue is the size.".........

Sources say the video screen's location also is a significant issue. Since the Cubs have not suggested moving the center-field scoreboard, which is protected under Wrigley's designation as a Chicago landmark, a video screen would have to be placed behind the bleachers in either right or left field........

The current scoreboard, which was built at Wrigley Field in the late 1930s, is about 2,025 square feet, according to a city landmarks report. That would be dwarfed by the 6,000-square-foot video screen envisioned by the Cubs. According to sources, city officials have suggested a video screen of about half that size, but the Cubs have said no.........

..........At a closed-door community meeting Wednesday night, Cubs officials revealed more details about the hotel the Ricketts family would like to develop. The family is proposing a seven-story structure, with four floors devoted to the hotel, Green confirmed. The first floor would house retail, and two other floors would be leased to a health club. The family has an agreement with Chicago Athletic Clubs to open a 40,000-square-foot facility.

Green said team officials also offered more specifics on an office building the family would like to construct on a triangle-shaped property on the west side of the stadium. The six-story building would be about 125,000 square feet and house team offices, retail and a conference center. The team also proposed creating an outdoor, interactive children's play area on the second floor.

One of the most distinctive features of the office building would be a clock tower, Green said.

The renderings shown Wednesday night of the hotel, office building and plaza outside included advertising signs, sources said.
 
#194 ·
they don't watch for free though. those seats cost money and the rooftop owner have to pay the cubs a percentage.

also, while I don't think having a video board on one of the rooftops would be a bad idea - there is no way in hell it needs to be that large. half that size would look better IMO.
 
#198 ·
An Op/Ed but I think a good one IMO.........

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/03/30/wisch-a-giant-jumbotron-at-wrigley-how-about-a-big-fat-no/

Wisch: A Giant Jumbotron at Wrigley? How About a Big Fat No

March 30, 2013 7:00 AM

By Dave Wischnowsky –

(CBS) When the Tribune Company initially put the Chicago Cubs on the auction block back in 2007, I recall telling a friend how I was leery about someone as unpredictable as Mark Cuban ending up with the winning bid for the franchise.

“Who knows what he might do,” I said about the Dallas Mavericks’ mercurial owner. “He might put up a roller coaster in the Wrigley bleachers, or something.”

Well, it turns out that the Ricketts family – those so-called “fan owners” who ended up buying the Cubs instead of Cuban – want to end up doing that anyway.

On Friday, CBSChicago.com reported that a jumbo-sized sticking point has emerged in the negotiations over the rehab of 99-year-old Wrigley Field with the Cubs wanting to erect a giant video screen beyond the bleachers that would measure 6,000 square feet.

That’s about three times the size of the iconic centerfield scoreboard – or probably about as big as a roller coaster.

And at least as gaudy
.

CBSChicago.com reported that city officials have suggested a video screen about half that size, but the Cubs have said no, with team spokesman Julian Green telling the Chicago Tribune, “We are exploring adding a video board at Wrigley Field as part of opportunities to increase revenues for the baseball club. One of the points at issue is the size.”

And with that statement, I say to the Ricketts family: Enough.

In many ways, I sympathize with the Cubs owners. The rooftop operators do effectively steal their product, and Ald. Tom Tunney is so deep in their pockets that he could be lint. The neighborhood does handcuff the team and should let the Cubs have things like a street fest on Sheffield Avenue, which is already closed to traffic on game days. And the organization should also have the freedom to put up some additional signage around Wrigley – as long as it’s tasteful.

But a monster Jumbotron at Wrigley? That’s not tasteful.

That’s tacky. No, it’s worse than that. It would be a tragedy.

It’s bad enough when you field teams that lose 101 games for about $101 a ticket. But when you start messing with my personal Wrigley Field experience as a Cubs fan, you’ve gone too far. I don’t think I’m the only fan who feels that way today in light of Friday’s news about what would be a jumbo-sized mistake.

A monstrous squawking and flashing video board looming beside the timeless hand-operated one goes against everything that makes Wrigley Field what it is. The ballpark’s unique authenticity and simplicity are huge reasons why millions of fans are drawn to the Friendly Confines each season – heaven knows it isn’t to see the product on the field. If fans want to see exploding scoreboards and flashy video displays, they can head down to the South Side.

Wrigley doesn’t offer that. I don’t want it to, either.

Ever since the ballpark began to crumble, I’ve said that if the Cubs were forced to tear down the Wrigley Field grandstands for a complete rebuild and had to play a season elsewhere for a year, I could live with it. I could, at least, if the ballpark was rebuilt at the corner of Clark & Addison and its bleachers, ivy and scoreboard were preserved intact at Sheffield & Waveland.

After all, what makes Wrigley Field so special isn’t just the ballpark. If it was located in, say, Rosemont it wouldn’t be nearly as cool. Rather, Wrigley’s positioning in the heart of real, vibrant Chicago neighborhood makes it unique. And the sweeping vista of the bleachers and the antique scoreboard that rests high atop them are what make the ballpark as beautiful in the world of sports as the Rocky Mountains are in nature.

I understand that the Cubs want to further monetize the Wrigley Field, but a Jumbotron bastardizes it. According to Forbes, the Cubs were the most profitable team in baseball last year – without a monster video board, although I’m sure the Ricketteses say they need one to pay for the ballpark renovations.

But as a friend astutely pointed out on Twitter on Friday, ruining the timeless feel of the ballpark in order to renovate means that the operation was a success.

But the patient died.

So, kill the Jumbotron idea, Cubs. Not Wrigley Field’s charm.
...
 
#199 ·
They are doing everything pretty much ass backwards IMO. They are really only doing a superficial touch up of the one part of the ballpark, the grandstand and second deck, that I think could use a whole demolition or overhaul for aesthetic and structural reasons.

They are basically defacing and fugllifying the best part of the park (outfield and vistas onto Lake View) and making a mockery of the use of landmark designation further in this city in order to put up oversize jumbo tron kiss cam that is reported to be three times the size of the current center field scoreboard. And given these are the hick owners who have brought us the shack that is the Captain Morgan Club, the Noodle, and used car lot Toyota signage I am not very optimistic on what plans they have for the hotel and triangle building.

Given that this is the third most visited tourist site in the state I wish the alderman and city had wielded more control over the process even if it meant using some of the amusement taxes to do a tasteful and collaborative redesign of Wrigley. I'm not sure why the Bears and White Sox get access to that money but the Cubs get excluded. Anyway, at best it will be a missed opportunity or even looking very schlocky and worse for it at the end of the rehab.
 
#200 ·
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-0414-diamondvision-20130414,0,7565426.story?page=2

Cubs owners see dollar signs in proposed video screen

Associated advertising could raise $5 million a year, baseball executives say

By Robert Channick and Gregory Karp, Chicago Tribune reporters
April 14, 2013

.......Green declined to speculate on the advertising revenue potential of the screen, but industry sources said a screen at a ballpark like Wrigley could generate several million dollars a year, perhaps as much as $5 million. Over 20 years, that would represent nearly one-third of the renovation cost.

But the extra revenue may be only part of the story. To keep fans coming to the ballpark, the Ricketts family must add a big screen, just as they need to refurbish the bathrooms, add new dining facilities, rehabilitate the clubhouse and make all the other repairs the 99-year-old stadium needs, experts say..........

"Wrigley attendance is not driven by whether there's a Jumbotron or not," said Kevin Adler, president of Engage Marketing, a Chicago-based sports marketing firm. "What's driving this for the Ricketts family is the fact that they're leaving money on the table."

The Ricketts family has been pursuing a Wrigley Field makeover since buying the Cubs in 2009 from Tribune Co. in a deal valued at $845 million. (Tribune Co., parent of the Chicago Tribune, retains a 5 percent stake.) Sources say the team envisions a 5,000-square-foot, high-definition video screen rising behind the left field stands...........

Chicago sports venues are relatively small players when it comes to the big screens. U.S. Cellular Field has a Diamond Vision screen of less than 1,500 square feet. The United Center features 13-by-21 scoreboard screens, a fraction of the new 1,080-square-foot screens at Bankers Life Fieldhouse in Indianapolis. And the Chicago Bears have a 1,890-square-foot Daktronics screen at Soldier Field that is among the smallest in the NFL..........

The closest parallel for Wrigley Field is Fenway Park, a historic venue that required a thoughtful integration of technology and tradition. Working with ANC, the team installed a nearly 3,800-square-foot HD Diamond Vision screen above the center-field bleachers two seasons ago, employing old-time fonts and painting the frame Fenway green to blend with the quaint ballpark...........
More in link.
 
#201 ·
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-wrigley-field-0415-20130415,0,1294478.story

City, Cubs announce Wrigley rehab framework

......City Hall and the Cubs announced an agreement Sunday to renovate iconic Wrigley Field, a $500 million plan that gets owner Tom Ricketts nearly everything he sought, even as it leaves questions about the impact on rooftop owners and the neighborhood........

Ricketts gets more night games and lucrative advertising signs, even if some of his plans were scaled back a bit........

Specific plans must be submitted to the city for approval. The Plan Commission, City Council and Landmarks Commission all will have to hold public hearings. Although the mayor usually wins in such circumstances, it's not uncommon for plans to be altered in the process. Ricketts acknowledged his plan faces some hurdles..........

Perhaps the most substantial changes in the proposed $300 million stadium rehab are a Jumbotron-like screen in left field and a new sign in right field akin to the Toyota sign now in left. The team also could install additional signs within the stadium that would not block the rooftop club views, according to the statement..........

Although the city did not announce the size of the left- and right-field signs, sources said that the documents the Cubs will seek a video screen of up to 5,000 square feet, more than twice as large as the vintage, hand-operated scoreboard in center field. The right-field sign would be up to 800 square feet, more than twice the size of the Toyota sign..........

As much as the signs will change the look inside Wrigley, the $200 million plan for a 175-room hotel, Cubs offices and an adjacent plaza would alter the immediate neighborhood.

A walkway over Clark Street would connect the hotel and office building, which also would contain hotel meeting rooms. Signs would be allowed along the hotel, office building and plaza "to accommodate significant advertising and sponsorship opportunities," according to the statement...........

Sheffield Avenue would be closed for street fairs from two hours before games to the end of the 2nd inning for weekend games from Memorial Day to Labor Day. Yearly concerts would increase to four from the three.........

Other changes envisioned include a two-story Captain Morgan Club on Addison Street........
..
 
#202 ·
Wrigley Field's $500 million facelift approved

The Chicago Cubs and the city have agreed on details of a $500 million facelift for Wrigley Field, including an electronic video screen that is nearly three times as large as the one currently atop the centerfield bleachers of the 99-year-old ballpark.

Under terms of the agreement, the Cubs would also be able to increase the number of night games at Wrigley Field from 30 to 40 — or nearly half the games played there each season. They would give Cubs chairman Tom Ricketts the ability to renovate the second-oldest park in the major leagues, boost business and perhaps make baseball's most infamous losers competitive again
.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...00-million-dollar-wrigley-renovation/2083463/
 
#207 ·
I'm a Sox fan and I enjoy going to Wrigley once every couple of years for the novelty. I wouldn't want to spend 30-40 summer days there, but once in a while is fun.

The changes don't sound good for most Cub fans I know. The good news is, hopefully it will force Jerry Reinsdorf to update the scoreboard at US Cellular.
 
#210 ·
wouldn't it be funny if the cubs attendance dropped significantly as a result of this bullshit? people go to Wrigley to experience what is today a unique environment for MLB. while, yes, there are some very rabid cubs fans, many of the tourist that attend games do not do so to watch the cubs win. it's the experience and this will destroy that.
 
#223 · (Edited)
The mayor of Rosemont has offred free land there. It DOES have some pluses but it also has some serious negatives. From a metro perspective it does have a very good location. Right near the airport and not to far from the north, west, and central suburbs. It is a bit near the Blue Line which runs out to the airport (though pedestrian access would need to be built. Good luck with that). Also Rosemont does have some amentites like its casino, movie theatre, hotels, new outlet shopping center etc. I don't see them as great of an attraction as Wrigleyville's offerings but it does have a few side attractions.

Its negatives? It is VERY close (mile or so) to O'Hare and would be like taking a game in at Shea/Met Life Stadium as it is literally right under a busy flight path for planes coming in from the east. There is little in the way of there being a real neighborhood there. Few people live in Rosemont. It itself holds little appeal. It would be 15 miles from downtown. I can't think of a team that has moved farther away from the city over the last 40 years and thinks the better for it.
 
Top