Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 31 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 460
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    689
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by SenorGato View Post
    I want organ music and I want "In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida" to replace "Take Me Out to the Ballgame."
    And I want "All The Way" by Eddie Vedder to replace "Go Cubs Go".

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    222
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by HomerJSandberg View Post
    And I want "All The Way" by Eddie Vedder to replace "Go Cubs Go".
    I want a World Series

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Libertyville, Illinois
    Posts
    599
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by SenorGato View Post
    Hello higher prices.

    Anything else happen there that's worth mentioning?
    They did bring up the LED board but there was no concept art or anything like that so I'd say its unlikely in the near future. They also said people enjoyed having the ice rink, farmers market, etc and that they would try to keep space for that. There were numbers mentioned about exactly what percent increases of points of sale, bathrooms, etc. I think they said 42% increase in bathrooms, maybe 100% in points of sale? Concessions they were adding together made up about 1/4 mile I think. If anyone had any specific questions I'd be happy to try and give an answer about what I saw or heard.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    962
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by BUD Bleachers View Post
    Let's face it, this is the same old crap every year with regard to the renovations. ......
    I have to say, I actually agree with the majority of your points for once. Chicago is terribly corrupt, and they are broke, which is a recipe for disaster. No way in hell they get any money from the city/state, and because of that layers of protection due to landmark status, they can't actually make improvements that people want (i.e., completely rebuilding the infield seating to remove the obstructed views). They will basically spruce up the park, especially in the areas that make them a lot of money and none of us really ever see.

    The improved clubhouse and batting cages and crap for the players is a nice thing, so I can't complain about that too much.

    The best result would be for them to be able to expand the park onto that triangle lot and actually make it part of the park and have a connected basement and things of that nature so they could get the most usage out of it.

    Anyway, I do like the moves Theo and company have been making, and its only been a year, so I can't really say it's a failed exercise at this point.
    LETS GO CUB-BIES!
    DA BULLS!
    BEAR DOWN, CHICAGO BEARS!
    I-L-L! I-N-I!

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    6,348
    vCash
    1500
    The order in which they progress (i.e. clubhouse first) is in direct correlation with what MLB told Ricketts fam would need to be addressed prior to the team being able to host an All Star game... League was incredibly worried about media access to the clubhouse with expanded AS rosters...
    Ombudsman

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    3,461
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by redbird89 View Post
    They could have both the organ and music. Some teams do that.
    Yeah I mean I really dont care what other teams do. Stadium rock is typically cheesy as hell. As a result its annoying to hear. Plus The Cubs are obviously making an effort to preserve as much history as possible, keeping the organ would definitely help keep the feel of "old time baseball".

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    7,611
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by TimbrH2001 View Post
    Yeah I mean I really dont care what other teams do. Stadium rock is typically cheesy as hell. As a result its annoying to hear. Plus The Cubs are obviously making an effort to preserve as much history as possible, keeping the organ would definitely help keep the feel of "old time baseball".
    Amen brother!

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    6,116
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Yagyu+ View Post
    Yeah, it was mentioned a few posts up. According to Chicago Cubs Online:

    "A revised version of the Triangle Building is still in the plans. The original concept has been altered and this is where the hotel will be located."
    My apologies. I completely skimmed over that last part. Thanks for pointing out the triangle building info Yagu. So if the hotel is going up on the triangle site what about the McDonalds property across the street? Parking structure still? Not asking you directly Yagu but anyone. I guess I thought that is where the hotel was going.

    Lots of changes coming for Wrigleyville. Going to be an awesome time to be a fan. How someone could complain at a time like this is beyond me.


  9. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Libertyville, Illinois
    Posts
    599
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by NYF View Post
    My apologies. I completely skimmed over that last part. Thanks for pointing out the triangle building info Yagu. So if the hotel is going up on the triangle site what about the McDonalds property across the street? Parking structure still? Not asking you directly Yagu but anyone. I guess I thought that is where the hotel was going.

    Lots of changes coming for Wrigleyville. Going to be an awesome time to be a fan. How someone could complain at a time like this is beyond me.

    At the conference at the convention they said that what people want most about parking is to avoid congestion around the intersection at Clark and Addison. Crane said that parking is complicated because it obviously makes it worse if you add 400 cars in that vicinity.

    Edit: They also said that the old triangle building design was really dumb.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,817
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Wackoman1 View Post
    At the conference at the convention they said that what people want most about parking is to avoid congestion around the intersection at Clark and Addison. Crane said that parking is complicated because it obviously makes it worse if you add 400 cars in that vicinity.

    Edit: They also said that the old triangle building design was really dumb.
    Triangle area: The plans for a so-called “Triangle building” on the parking lot west of the ballpark was scrapped for an open-air area that can be used for a farmer’s market, ice rink, movie-watching and other activities.

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    3,461
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by 1972 Cubs View Post
    Triangle area: The plans for a so-called “Triangle building” on the parking lot west of the ballpark was scrapped for an open-air area that can be used for a farmer’s market, ice rink, movie-watching and other activities.
    They should still do something with that area to help incorporate it into the new park. If they want to do some underground parking for players/FO/coaches/etc..., they could obviously do that along with a ground level redesign with some kind of fan friendly amenities. As of right now that single story asphalt parking lot is just a waste of very valuable space and is kind of an eye sore.

    TBH, Im shocked it still remains as its current condition.
    Last edited by TimbrH2001; 01-21-2013 at 12:37 PM.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    3,786
    vCash
    1500
    Ricketts should just pack up the team one night and leave for Indianapolis like the Colts did all those years ago.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,975
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Rynoplasty View Post
    Ricketts should just pack up the team one night and leave for Indianapolis like the Colts did all those years ago.
    That might be a little drastic, but I am getting tired of the people of that community. They want the rewards of the Cubs playing there in the way of their property value but balk at anything the Cubs want to do that every other team can do. If they don't agree the Cubs should leave. then they can see about the value of their properties. If they don't like the changes they can leave and sell their property way over the value they woudl get if it was elsewhere.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    16,352
    vCash
    1500

    Ricketts moves Rahm on Wrigley — but not rooftops

    By Greg Hinz of Crain's Chicago Business:

    In moving from a position of supplicant to someone who just wants to use his own property, Cubs owner Tom Ricketts definitely hit at least a solid double this weekend with his plan to “self finance a $300-million reconstruction of Wrigley Field.”

    I've learned that the proposal has at least preliminary backing from Mayor Rahm Emanuel, and was produced after extensive negotiations between Cubs officials and top aides to the mayor. That could be critical.

    But the plan still faces one huge obstacle: owners of the rooftop clubs adjoining Wrigley and their staunch ally, Ald. Tom Tunney (44th). By all indications, both of them remain opposed to any deal that involves increased signage inside the ballpark that could block views from rooftops to the east and north. But without revenues from more signage, the numbers in the Ricketts deal won't add up.

    Ergo, if Mr. Emanuel wants a big economic and public relations success that a rebuilt Wrigley and a nearby hotel would be, Mr. Emanuel may have to more than twist Mr. Tunney's arm. Whether he will — or whether some other plan can be concocted — will be this spring's real drama at the ol' ballpark.

    Mr. Ricketts, of course, had originally pressed for more than $100 million in public assistance to rebuild Wrigley. But even though he argued he just was asking fora piece of all the new tax revenue his plan would create for City Hall, the plan was flatly rejected by former Mayor Richard M. Daley and never got very far under Mr. Emanuel — particularly after Mr. Ricketts father stepped up his political activity against President Barack Obama.

    So, with his plan stalled, Mr. Ricketts has been developing alternate plans. In discussions with first Chicago Chief Financial Officer Lois Scott and more recently Intergovernmental Relations chief Matt Hynes, a new plan was developed and, with approval, floated at this weekend's Cubs convention.

    The plan isn't exactly new — I hinted at it on Friday — but it turns the Ricketts public stance wholly around. Instead of asking for a subsidy, he wants a much more reasonable sounding freedom to generate more money from his own property to pay the cost of renovation.

    Overall, according to sources both inside and outside the Cubs organization, Mr. Ricketts needs perhaps $45 million a year in new revenues to retire bonds needed for the work and to pay for increased operating expenses for the modernized stadium. Some would come from new skyboxes and other premium seats, and some from more night games and a couple more concerts a year — the latter worth about $1 million a pop each.

    But the big money is more signage, perhaps a jumbotron, which insiders say could pull in $10 million to $20 million a year. Mr. Ricketts also wants to use Sheffield Avenue, at least on weekends, for an open-air market and gathering spot of sorts, similar to one outside the Red Sox facility in Boston.

    If Mr. Ricketts can get all of that, he won't need the public subsidy, he said over the weekend. And Mr. Emanuel won't have to make a difficult choice between throwing a subsidy at a rich guy when economic times are tough and a big economic development that would likely help the city and play well with voters.

    But more signage almost certainly means blocking some of those rooftop views. And the rooftop owners don't like that at all. Neither does Mr. Tunney, who though he hasn't been available by phone, is reported by several sources to be opposed to amending the landmark status of the stadium — a needed step to allow more signage.

    Said rooftop owner Beth Murphy in a statement, "The rooftops are a fabric of the experience at Wrigley Field. Any relaxation of the landmark ordinance that blocks our views violates our current 20 year contract with the Cubs and would jeopardize the tremendous economic contribution rooftops make to Chicago as businesses, taxpayers and members of the community."

    She adds, "Destroying one business to benefit the other shouldn't be the answer — we believe a better solution exists."

    Mr. Murphy clearly has her view that the rooftops are good, productive citizens that have a right to exist. Look for her group to advance some sort of expanded revenue-sharing deal with the Cubs in the near future.

    But the team also has its view, and it's that the team can do better selling its own space than letting someone else do it and take a big cut.

    That leaves Mr. Emanuel with the choice: push through a deal over Mr. Tunney's opposition, or watch the prize die.

    A source close to the team tells me it needs a decision by around opening day if it's to proceed with its plan this year. Mr. Emanuel's office isn't saying anything officially. A source close to him says only one thing is certain, that he won't back any public funding for the project.

    Will we have a deal? It should be an interesting few weeks.


    I heard you were looking for me.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Jordan
    Posts
    34,080
    vCash
    1500
    I think the rooftops shouldn't have any claim here. They're benefiting off of the Cubs without paying anything to the Cubs. Thats like yelling at your neighbors for covering their pool.

    Chicago Bears #23
    Kyle "Cheetah" Fuller

Page 4 of 31 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •