Proposed Wrigley Field Renovation/Makeover

[J.R.]

The freshest renderings date to 2005, and all of those were of the exterior. It is a given that the new ownership will have much to say about what will eventually be built.

[doc_blume]

The freshest renderings date to 2005, and all of those were of the exterior. It is a given that the new ownership will have much to say about what will eventually be built.

When the Rickett's took control in November, they basically said that 2010 was going to be spent setting up all the plans for the renovation.

Expect some new drawings/renderings to be released near the end of the upcoming season.

This offseason some work is already being done including minor renovations of the bathrooms, changes to concessions, a new club/bar for season ticket holders on the luxury box level, and a badly needed restoration of the center field scoreboard.

For the team, a new weight/training room is being made for the team.

More details will leak out over the course of the season. I just hope they don't do a half-ass job on this renovation.

[9&10]

The three stadiums will become the historic stadiums once Fenway and Wrigley are gone. WHich wouldnt be anytime soon I guess.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

[Chevy114]

Quick Question, when teams make annoucements this far in advance, do they change a lot of ideas of that time frame? I felt like I heard so much about the marlins stadium before they even had definate plans, and they continue to add ideas.

[RationalNYYfan]

Well obviously the sketches aren't set in stone, but if they say that renovation plans are in place then we know that much is true. The design and stuff is probably still in development.

[Goober]

Quick Question, when teams make annoucements this far in advance, do they change a lot of ideas of that time frame? I felt like I heard so much about the marlins stadium before they even had definate plans, and they continue to add ideas.

I think what you're seeing is that this was the first Cubs Convention with the new ownership group, and to avoid answering 10,000 questions about the future of Wrigley, they came up with a generic press-release about future renovations.

That said, have faith that renovations are going forward, even now (Bleed Cubbie Blue report on the Scoreboard rehab):

[doc_blume]

Well obviously the sketches aren't set in stone, but if they say that renovation plans are in place then we know that much is true. The design and stuff is probably still in development.

The Cubs have not released any sketches or plans since 2005 (which is where the drawing posted earlier were from). A year ago there was talk about an almost complete reconstruction of the grandstand which would have required the Cubs to move to another location for a year. This plan was not acceptable to the Ricketts and almost all renovation planning stopped when negotiations with the Ricketts family started early in 2009 for transfer of ownership.

The Triangle building will be built. This will allow for widening of the concourses and renovation/expansion of the Cubs clubhouse.

Look for renovation of the luxury suites, and expansion of the press box.

I would also assume, in a piecemeal process, almost the entire upper deck will be rebuilt to replace the crumbling concrete.

Outside of that, it's really unknown what else will be done to the old ballpark.

[RationalNYYfan]

So am I correct in saying that the Triangle Building is an entirely separate building adjacent to Wrigley that will be filled with shops and attractions and the like? It's not part of the stadium, but it will be something for fans to see while at the game?

[Coach Bombay]

So am I correct in saying that the Triangle Building is an entirely separate building adjacent to Wrigley that will be filled with shops and attractions and the like? It's not part of the stadium, but it will be something for fans to see while at the game?

Correct, but they will be knocking down walls on the 3rd base side of Wrigley.

[The Korean]

You say that like it's a bad thing.

What makes you think that? Because I actually like the new Yankee Stadium and not mope about old one being knocked down? Being a realistic fan?

[Goober]

So am I correct in saying that the Triangle Building is an entirely separate building adjacent to Wrigley that will be filled with shops and attractions and the like? It's not part of the stadium, but it will be something for fans to see while at the game?

They plan/hope to create a Yawkee Way/Eutaw Street type atmosphere between the Triangle building and Wrigley (open to the public when no games are going on, but a ticketed-area during game-time). The space between the two buildings (Wrigley and the Triangle Building) used to be a road (Seminary Street IIRC), but was abandoned a long time ago. The Cubs spent a long time arguing with the City of Chicago over who "owned" the former street...

[baseballman1243]

I feel the Yankees should have done that with Ruppert Place instead of that stupid sidewalk cafe on the 1st base side.

[doc_blume]

Correct, but they will be knocking down walls on the 3rd base side of Wrigley.

It sounds like that is all up in the air a bit, actually, especially with some of Crane Kenney's statements. As I said before, the plans are still somewhat up in the air and may change with the new Ricketts ownership. They very well, could have the triangle building connected to the third base side of the ballpark.

They have talked about a Fenway type of experience, but the may intend to put some player facilities, and fan concessions in the building too.

[hsnterprize]

Wow, I never realized the Cubs don't play Friday night games. ?

Too much local bureacracy was involved with that. The only reason why Wrigley's been given the "landmark" status was when the Cubs first wanted to expand the ballpark, too many people in the neighborhood were against the addition of seats, and more night games. The status was only set so if the Cubs wanted to do what they ultimately did (i.e., expand the bleachers, add more seats behind home plate and the baselines, etc.), they would have to get permission from the Chicago City Council.

The biggest problem a lot of residents have is the addition of night games. Any time there's talk here in Chicago about the Cubs wanting to play more night games at home, there's a huge brew-ha-ha over it.

[Chevy114]

Too much local bureacracy was involved with that. The only reason why Wrigley's been given the "landmark" status was when the Cubs first wanted to expand the ballpark, too many people in the neighborhood were against the addition of seats, and more night games. The status was only set so if the Cubs wanted to do what they ultimately did (i.e., expand the bleachers, add more seats behind home plate and the baselines, etc.), they would have to get permission from the Chicago City Council.

The biggest problem a lot of residents have is the addition of night games. Any time there's talk here in Chicago about the Cubs wanting to play more night games at home, there's a huge brew-ha-ha over it.

I remember as a kid they got pissed they had to add lights to get a home playoff game. Crazy that they still abid the idea that they shouldn't have a lot of night games.