Quote:
Originally Posted by nomarandlee
Huh? That ship has sailed with the new bleachers and jumbo-trons as far as I'm concerned. The outfield terraces and vistas inside and out are the one element that made Wrigley really unique and beautiful IMO.
They would contend, along with some here, that they have actually refurbished the park to its original style with the improvements mentioned by BuildThemTaller mentioned. And those have been OK improvements on the brutish mix-mash concrete panels and chain link fencing on the ballpark before but still, I would struggle to call them at all beautiful or inspiring. It's refurbishing still done on the relative cheap.
I contend at this point they should have just torn down much if not all the stadium and go ultra-modern and hi-tech on the same spot. That would have cost REAL money however and would have been a tough job given site constraints though I imagine it could have been done.
A complete rebuild of the grandstand would have been welcome given it has little in the way of redeeming qualities with its myriad obstructed view seating and lack of premium skybox seating.
|
In the end, the Cubs are a business, and doing what you described would be an incredibly stupid business decision. It would effectively shut down the Cub’s nostalgia tourism.
A cornerstone of historic preservation is guarding against passing fads and poor stewardship. It had kept the Ricketts in check and prevented a trendy ballpark design which would have inappropriately represented the architectural standpoint in ballpark design which a stripped down, minimalist expression of intricate structure.
A piecemeal reconstruction sits better with fans attachment to Wrigley and in the end the bones of the structure are still original and maintain timeless familiarity.