Quote:
A skybridge is way, way out of sync with all that. It will, in particular, affect the feel of the Clark St experience, probably all the way down to Roscoe. |
The 3750 N Halsted (@ Bradley) tower crane is visible from inside Wrigley I believe (noticed it during evening news coverage of a game the other day). So, maybe this has been mentioned before, this new building will become a part of the outfield skyline. The skyline (such as it is) isn't all that pretty from there, so I wonder if this will improve it a bit.
|
Quote:
For me, Wrigley has always been one of the unique American experiences. It was something Chicago had one-up on NYC. It's honestly something I've almost lost complete interest in these past few years. Not that it matters as the Cubs will reap rather large financial rewards by doing whatever is in their best interests. But you wouldn't know about the emotional attachment many Cub fans have to the stadium. As someone who hasn't ever been to a Cubs game, or doesn't care for the Wrigleyville scene, this whole thing is a non-issue for you. This process has been on the same level as the banal redevelopment of Maxwell St. or the Prairie District. I'm not against redevelopment of certain things but at least approach change through a fresh and creative lens. As clunky as aspects of the Soldier Field development plan turned out, the overall approach was at least clear in its modernity and increased intimacy. |
I'm less concerned about the planning aspects of the skybridge and more concerned with the architectural consequences. It will be very weird to have a skybridge flying over the Ernie Banks statue and plugging into the facade. I think this compromises the historic appearance of the stadium far more than the advertisements do.
If the Ricketts were to propose (and fund) a pedway, I'd be all for it. I really don't care whether tourists mix with the hoi palloi on the street or not. |
Quote:
One need not be a fan of the Cubs or even of baseball to want the renovation to be done thoughtfully. Not so much for the benefit of either the Cubs or their fans as for the city at large. It would be a rather short sighted to see this reconstruction as an iusse limited to just the club and its fans. Just as one need not care for boats or water in wanting to see Navy Pier redone right one need not be a Cubs fan to want to see Wrigley touched up well. Open up almost travel book on Chicago and one of the first things listed to do is to "take in a day game at Wrigley". It is still I believe the second or third most visited tourist site in our state. Outside of downtown it is probably the most visited part of the city by suburban, regional, and national visitors. It is important to do right and not cut off the nose despite its face. There should be more public discussion about what makes Wrigley special to those that do venture to Wrigley both locally and from outside. I would argue the outfield sweep, bleachers, and vistas are the highest on that list. I really feel that the Ricketts are being extremely short sighted and consider their plans perilously close to defacing Wrigley's best assets and lessening its appeal. All the while making very minimal if any improvements to aspects of the parks that could use the real overhaul. And Rahm doesn't seem to have any intent of directing a more thoughtful reconstruction. To him its just a headline grabbing win if the Cubs pick up the full tab no matter what the end result. And Tunney cares but for seemingly all the wrong reasons. |
^^ I would figure the skybridge would just hop across Clark into the "triangle buliding" -- traversing clear across the plaza directly into the stadium would indeed be a ridiculous eyesore. Although I haven't been following what might be going on with the triangle lot in these negotiations.
A subterranean connection, with limited access between basements of the respective structures to prevent public mobs from peeing and spilling beer in there at all hours, is a much better idea. |
who do these people think they are ? Northwestern Memorial Hospital
Quote:
First of all how many hotel guests are going to have reasons to be using the bridge to go to Cub front offices ? Hardly any. This structure is primarily for the benefit of Cub executives and office workers to use the bridge to go to lunch, work out, and run to conferences in the hotel with out having to walk outside and endure the weather, street rif raf and the other harsh realities of urban living they supposedly embrace and want to preserve. |
No skybridge. Seriously you let one happen and they'll be going up all over Chicago. The only places that should be allowed to build skybridges and immune to public objection are hospitals or office buildings / malls connected to elevated transit stations. That's it.
I'm worried this will be some monumental structure like the Sox skybridge over 35th. |
Crain's has the outlines of the deal, to be announced tomorrow.
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...n-deal-reached It includes all the things that have been mentioned so far, including a left field jumbotron, expansion into Sheffield/Waveland, more parking, and a skybridge between the hotel and triangle building. Lots of things to hate, including this little surprise: Quote:
|
^ Gotta let a business adapt to the demands of a new era. Modifying Wrigley is needed to save it. Fenway had to do this as well.
I'm reading the same article, and I'm just not reading anything all that outrageous. By the way, it appears that the pedestrian bridge connects the hotel to the triangle building, not the stadium itself. |
Quote:
TUP, seriously, do yourself a favor and get to Wrigley Field before any changes happen. You obviously have a lot of time. And then ask yourself if you feel the same way. |
I thought the Cubs patronizing campaign slogans ("its a way of life" etc.) were embarrassing but they truly have a Disneyesque approach that is intent on making the immediate neighborhood there little kitschy kingdom. Putting up a sign that says "Welcome to Wrigleyville" takes the cake in treating fans and neighbors as nothing other then contemptible custies.
Quote:
Quote:
I actually don't figure the Cubs executives or workers care that much about connected right at the hotel. If it was a bridge from the Triangle Building (Cubs offices) into the ballpark then I think there would be some of that. |
It's a tricky balance, I'll admit. You need to be respectful of the ballpark's history and update its amenities to be comparable with a modern baseball palace, while at the same time avoiding Disney schtick.
I thought we had gotten away from the retro ballpark stuff with awesome contemporary ballparks like Target Field and Great American, but obviously that kind of design would be inappropriate for Wrigley. The only proven approach is to be as accurate as possible, working off of old photos and drawings to bring back the 1920s appearance of Wrigley. It's really tough to do that when the Ricketts are breathing down your neck and trying to stuff video screens on every surface bigger than a street sign. |
Quote:
The Cubs are alright. |
I went to a game at this outdated pile of junk tonight.
j/k Seriously, I hope it can tastefully be done. With it on my mind, I only thought about the screens today looking across the field and seeing them blaring and bright. It's like people who go on a camping trip and don't put down their phones. We stare at screens all day. Then again many phones stare at their phones at Wrigley regardless. |
Quote:
Now just think how much richer they'd be if the Cubs were actually good. My God, just win a damn pennant this century. That's not too much to ask for, really |
Quote:
And the estimates I've seen are 5 million for the ads on the jumbo tron. Some nice extra pocket change? Sure. Is 5 million anywhere near the difference between a world series winner when most MLB payrolls are +100 million and Forbes estimated their revenues last year to be 275 million (with the MUCH more lucrative TV deal they will be able to pursue in a few years). I don't think 5 million is simply worth it in the larger scheme of things when you factor in that a lot of people will feel the experience at Wrigley is diluted with all the LED noise. It will be less attractive to at least some of the tourist and suburbanites who venture to Wrigley when they otherwise wouldn't. The same people who come to the park to enjoy and take in a game even when the team isn't winning and allows the Cubs to charge the 2nd highest tickets in baseball and still draw close or over to 3 million (the gold standard in MLB) without winning for years. ANY other team would love to have such insurance policy against having to do well to draw at the gate and yet the Cubs are seriously jeopardizing that I think. Quote:
|
If you miss Tribune ownership their is something wrong with you Alexi. Ricketts is doing everything the Trib should have been doing themselve while they owned the team for almost 30 years. The Cubs have been leaving millions upon millions in revenue on the table for decades because of the Trib's lack of vision and incompent management of the franchise. They even sold the team for far less than what it actually is worth, especially now that these regional sports network tv deals are adding $100 million plus annually to the revenues...
|
Quote:
The new office building on the triangular plot of land West of the park is going to be connected directly to the ball park by two sky bridges that will hang over the Seminary Promenade between the office building and stadium. This was in the renderings released at the convention. The hotel sky bridge will most likely link to the roof of the office buidling as well. I have a feeling the top of the office building is going to be open space for concessions and seating for people to picnic. Hopefully the two new buildings will compliment Wrigley. I'm hoping for a white terracotta brick exterior. |
Quote:
Cubs will be either #2 or #3 in generated revenues with their new T.V. deal for the 2015 season. And that's without any changes to the ballpark/surrounding streets. So what are we really talking about here? Are we talking about, as your argument was, survival of a business? Or is it more about building millions more in value for a family that's already oozing in cash? Because if you haven't experienced the Wrigley experience, you really don't know what's at stake here. I can't tell you how many people who I dragged to games who hated baseball come out in love with the Wrigley experience. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:22 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.