CHICAGO | Wrigley Field Redevelopment News - Page 10

untitledreality · #**181** Posted **Jan 20, 2013, 8:16 AM**

Images from today's presentation:

Source: cosbysweaters.com

the urban politician · #**182** Posted **Jan 20, 2013, 1:28 PM**

Awesome, now they just need to actually win...

Mr Downtown · #**183** Posted **Jan 20, 2013, 3:34 PM**

^I always say that Wrigley Field is a great argument for preservationists, as it proves that people value the design of the venue over the quality of the programming.

N830MH · #**184** Posted **Jan 20, 2013, 5:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Awesome, now they just need to actually win...

I agree as well. They needs to win the game. All I can say "Sorry Cubbies, they have wait for next season." Because they were always losing the game all of the time. That's why they never wins the WS championship for 105 years. It's unbelievable!

Let's go Cubbies!! What are waiting for??? Come on Cubbies!!

J_M_Tungsten · #**185** Posted **Jan 20, 2013, 7:56 PM**

Today

The Cub Fan.

Neuman · #**186** Posted **Jan 22, 2013, 2:29 AM**

Looks to me like they are getting closer and closer to having a pretty good plan for this. I still want them to build the annex to the West someday. Having a prominade on that side of the stadium would be pretty neat. The main lower consourse and the upper deck roof concessions area looking pretty good, especially the reintegration of the arching iron work in the main concourse. The 2010 concourse renders looked like they were trying to recreate Shea Stadium...

LaSalle.St.Station · #**187** Posted **Jan 22, 2013, 9:24 AM**

Glad to hear seating bowl will be replicated with the modifications primarily under the surface with the concourse and facade arching back to 1930'S design. If only old comisky was repurposed with it's outfield bleachers opened up to the city skyline, we would probably have Comisky Park as a leading tourist attraction in the city. I wouldn't mind if they alter the light standards atop the Wrigley roof. I dont mind the design but iI think they should be copper or metalic coated to better mimic the era. ( even though it didn't debut til 1988 )

MegaBass · #**188** Posted **Feb 16, 2013, 1:08 AM**

Wrigleyville Rooftop LED proposal

ardecila · #**189** Posted **Feb 16, 2013, 1:32 AM**

Cool. I wonder if the Ricketts are okay with this? Their goal is to get greater control of their ballpark, not purely to get advertising revenue.

PerryPendleton · #**190** Posted **Mar 1, 2013, 5:12 PM**

That LED plan is a joke. I hope the Ricketts don't go for that.

Signed,

Season Ticket Holder

intrepidDesign · #**191** Posted **Mar 1, 2013, 5:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by PerryPendleton

That LED plan is a joke. I hope the Ricketts don't go for that.

Signed,

Season Ticket Holder

How would this affect you experience at Wrigley? I'm not a season ticket holder, but when I do go (which is often), I'm pretty focused on the game. It's not like they are putting LED displays on home base and the mound. If you're annoyed by these signs try watching the game.

Also, as much as I love Wrigley, it's in ROUGH shape. The place needs a major overhaul, and I don't know about you, but I would much rather those upgrades be paid for with ad revenue as opposed to some shady deal that uses public funds.

joeg1985 · #**192** Posted **Mar 1, 2013, 6:49 PM**

I'm a bit concerned about how it's going to look from the street level around Wrigley. I imagined it's going to be really ugly having a line of screens five stories up in the air. Planting trees to create a canpopy along the outside of the park would be a good solution for this. They should plant trees regardless of the outcome of this advertising screens deal.

PerryPendleton · #**193** Posted **Mar 1, 2013, 7:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by intrepidDesign

How would this affect you experience at Wrigley? I'm not a season ticket holder, but when I do go (which is often), I'm pretty focused on the game. It's not like they are putting LED displays on home base and the mound. If you're annoyed by these signs try watching the game.

Also, as much as I love Wrigley, it's in ROUGH shape. The place needs a major overhaul, and I don't know about you, but I would much rather those upgrades be paid for with ad revenue as opposed to some shady deal that uses public funds.

I am not opposed to any part of the plan EXCEPT for the LED displays.

It is undeniable that this will be a major distraction from the game and the whole experience. Most importantly - it will look like garbage.

Your argument that you are "watching the game and it won't matter unless it is on home plate" is absurd.
1. If people weren't going to look at them then that would defeat the point of advertisement.
2. Baseball is a passive sport for the spectator in many ways. Often your mind wanders and you do look around to appreciate the scenery. Wrigley is the most gorgeous scenery in all of professional sports. One most be delicate when making any modification and the LED screens are far from delicate.

ardecila · #**194** Posted **Mar 2, 2013, 2:55 AM**

Ricketts claims that fans are in favor of the LEDs. It's one way to place additional ads in the park that can also function as scoreboards. The traditional scoreboard is great but it can be difficult to read from a distance and it can't be altered to display different kinds of information (AVG, last at-bats, ERA).

LaSalle.St.Station · #**195** Posted **Mar 2, 2013, 5:15 AM**

Given how much a pain in the ass the Roof Top owners have become in letting the Cubs run their business, I wouldn't let these people get further entangled into the Cubs operations.

eleven=11 · #**196** Posted **Mar 2, 2013, 5:54 AM**

how will this compare to the reno of dogers stadium?
like the dugouts and locker rooms?

untitledreality · #**197** Posted **Mar 7, 2013, 2:09 AM**

Quote:

Planned Wrigley Hotel Would House Huge Chicago Athletic Club Gym

Read more: http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20130...#ixzz2Modyo91o

More news about the Ricketts intended use of the McDonalds site.

ardecila · #**198** Posted **Mar 7, 2013, 6:14 AM**

LOL this is crazy. First M&R announce a hotel for south of Addison, then the Ricketts announce a hotel for the McDonald's site. Then M&R switches to a large XSport gym as the anchor, and Ricketts reaches a deal with Chicago Athletic Clubs. Ricketts is basically piggybacking on the ideas of M&R at this point, but with deeper pockets and more clout.

I'd rather see the McDonald's developed before the south-of-Addison site, though, especially because the latter would displace a bunch of Clark St businesses.

Mister Uptempo · #**199** Posted **Mar 7, 2013, 3:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

LOL this is crazy. First M&R announce a hotel for south of Addison, then the Ricketts announce a hotel for the McDonald's site. Then M&R switches to a large XSport gym as the anchor, and Ricketts reaches a deal with Chicago Athletic Clubs. Ricketts is basically piggybacking on the ideas of M&R at this point, but with deeper pockets and more clout.

I'd rather see the McDonald's developed before the south-of-Addison site, though, especially because the latter would displace a bunch of Clark St businesses.

Perhaps if M&R announced it was building a winning baseball team at its development, Ricketts might actually do the same.

Swicago Swi Sox · #**200** Posted **Mar 7, 2013, 4:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister Uptempo

Perhaps if M&R announced it was building a winning baseball team at its development, Ricketts might actually do the same.

^^Zing! Love it!