The Chicago Cubs plan to add rooftop-style seating, a patio, and a 75-foot LED board to right field before Opening Day. But, because of the landmark status associated with portions of Wrigley Field, the Cubs wanted to make sure there were no issues with their planned implementations. So, out of an abundance of caution, the Cubs sought the approval of the Commission on Chicago Landmarks.

The staff of that Commission will recommend that the Commission’s permit review committee (ah, political bodies – so many … useful layers) approve the Cubs’ proposal at a Thursday meeting. The approval, however, will come with four minor conditions, per the Tribune:

1. Provide all dimensions, materials, finishes and details of proposed 75’ LED changing image signage for Historic Preservation staff review and approval as a part of the sign permit application;

2. Provide details, colors, etc. of chain link fence in front of sign;

3. Provide colors and finishes for concrete panels and new railing installations, which shall match the existing color scheme for the outfield bleachers; and,

4. Proposed signage is reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and the Commission’s approval of the proposed sign should not be considered indicative of how it may consider other similar proposed signs in the future, both in terms of the specific proposal as well as relative to the cumulative visual impact of signage on the historic and architectural character of the ballpark. Additionally, the Chicago Cubs may wish to consider submitting a Master Sign Program to govern the future review and approval of signage if additional signs are contemplated.

Items one and two are accomplished easily enough, assuming Historic Preservation staff approval is perfunctory. Item three is something the Cubs will want to do anyway, and item four doesn’t appear to expressly require the Cubs to do anything.

I doubt I’ll be important enough to grab a seat in the new area any time soon, but I very much look forward to getting a look at it from across the way this year.

  • Rich G

    That ‘historical landmark’ status is an anchor around the park’s neck. How did that come about in the first place? Was it sought by the city, or the team?

    • Mick

      There are two sides for the Cubs to achieve National Landmark status. The first is a substantial tax credit for the upgrades that were made thus the delay in elavating their current status. The other side is that all renovations must first be approved. It’s sort of like getting married, you get all of the mating benefits but just need to check with your wife with anything and everything you want to do.

      I found a brief article that describes Fenway and Wrigley’s historical status’ and details the the positives and negatives.

      • Rich G


  • scottie

    if the patio goes to groups we could always do BN Day at Wrigley!

    • juice

      I like it. FIELD TRIP!!!

  • SirCub

    “I doubt I’ll be important enough to grab a seat in the new area any time soon”

    In 5 years, Bleacher Nation will have its own section.

  • Andrewmoore4isu

    I’d prefer jumbo tron. Not led

  • jim

    Sit in new patio area so we wont have to look at it 😉

  • mooks

    cool it’ll give me something to look at so I don’t get as upset scanning our stellar OF of Soriano,Byrd, and Dejesus.

  • Spriggs

    Is it known whether home run distances will change? It looks like the baskets are still up in the rendering. Would they even be needed?

    • Toosh

      I believe the playing field dimensions will not be affected.