1_PROPOSED_MARQUEE_VIEWThe renovation of Wrigley Field, as you my have noticed, is a complicated business, involving several layers and interested parties. With an agreement now in place, and the approval process to begin, it’s important to lay out – in excruciating detail – everything* involved in this renovation process. What’s changing, what’s new, who gets what, what happens when, and on and on.

As the approval process goes on, and the renovations take place, things will change. They always do. But, as I sit here on April 15, 2013, this is what we know, and this is the plan. The majority of the information here comes directly from the lengthy Wrigley renovation proposal to which the Cubs, the City, and Alderman Tom Tunney have agreed, and which was sent to the media earlier today.

*Of course, if the past three months (hell, three years) have taught us anything, it’s that there’s no way I could actually presume to discuss everything that could come up. But this is everything of which we are presently aware.

Improvements to/Preservation of Wrigley Field

  • Details of the planned improvements/preservations are available, together with pictures, here. These haven’t really changed since the Cubs first announced the plans at this year’s Cubs Convention back in January, and that post remains your best background on everything the Cubs plan to do to Wrigley, itself. In short: better player facilities, better fan amenities, reasonable modernization, and no more crumbling concrete.
  • The player facilities improvements are expected to be the immediate priority in the renovation, with completion desired before the start of the 2014 season.

JumboTron and Right Field Sign

  • In left field, the Cubs plan to place a large video board (they are colloquially known as JumboTrons, much in the way all booger tissues are known as “Kleenex”), approximately 6,000 square feet in size. The board would be three times as large as the The Old Scoreboard in center field, which would remain in place.
  • The Cubs will decide on precise location of the JumboTron, depending on the stadium’s abilities, with the goal of preserving rooftop views/minimizing impact on rooftop views.
  • The JumboTron might be cantilevered over the streets/sidewalks on Waveland to further that goal, if possible.
  • In right field, the Cubs plan to place a 1,000 foot advertising sign, similar to the Toyota sign currently in left field (which would, itself be replaced by the video board). That is approximately three times the size of the Toyota sign.
  • Once again, the Cubs will choose the precise location, with the goal of reducing the impact on the rooftop views. Given that the sign is described as “in the style” of the Toyota sign, I’m guessing it will be designed to be as see-through as possible.
  • The JumboTron is expected to display replays, statistics, and, of course, advertisements. It is not presently expected to include a Kiss Cam, and crap like that.
  • The expectation is that these items will be in place for the 2014 season.

Outfield Wall

  • The Cubs will be permitted to bump out each of the outfield walls, taking up the sidewalks currently on Waveland and Sheffield, as well as one lane of traffic on Waveland. The precise distance is not yet stated, but is believed to be about eight to ten feet. There will still have to be sidewalks, though.
  • The bump out will not affect the in-park dimensions, but will create additional concession space inside of Wrigley Field.
  • The bump out will allow the Cubs to place their outfield signage slightly closer to the rooftop buildings, reducing the impact on their sight lines.

In-Stadium Signage

  • There will be new signage within Wrigley, which will be placed at the Cubs’ sole discretion.
  • The new signage is expected to include a restoration of The Old Scoreboard (and a new LED sign below, likely), a new LED ribbon board along the upper deck of the grandstand, a “new sign on wall in right field” (which I assume means a sign like the Target logo or Under Armor ad in the outfield), and new ads behind home plate. These are likely to come in time for the 2014 season, given their revenue-generating capability.
  • The plan released by the Cubs today does not mention a new LED board in left field, like the one now on the wall in right field. The original plans revealed at the Convention did include a new board in left field. I guess we’ll see on that one.

Night Games

  • The Cubs will be permitted to schedule 40 night games, up from their current allotment of 30. (Subject to the points below.)
  • The Cubs will also have flexibility for night games that are mandated by MLB, pursuant to a national broadcast, for example. (This occurs when a team is good, and MLB says, “hey, we want that good team to be shown in one of our national slots!” – in other words, the flexibility thing shouldn’t be an issue for a couple years.)
  • The flexibility is a little tricky to explain. Here’s the exact language in the Cubs’ proposal: “If Major League Baseball or its national television contract requires Cubs to play more than five home night games in any season, such games will be authorized by special ordinance and will not count against the 40-game limit or require additional cost to Cubs.” Lawyer parsing alert: does this language mean that the Cubs can schedule only 35 night games on their own in advance of a season, because they have to preserve up to five dates for MLB? According to that language, the Cubs are permitted to go over 40 games *only* if MLB requires the Cubs to flip *more* than five games from day to night. If the Cubs schedule 40 night games, and then MLB asks them to flip 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 games, the Cubs would have violated this provision.
  • A guess on how this is resolved? The Cubs schedule 35 night games, and work with MLB to ensure that they get at least three or four games “mandated” by MLB as night games each year. That way, the Cubs can get as close to 40 as possible every year (and then can go plenty over 40 in years in which they are good and MLB wants the Cubs on many national broadcasts).
  • The Cubs and the City will reevaluate this plan after five seasons to see if it’s working. If it isn’t, the Cubs might get more night games – but, either way, they won’t have any night games removed. (This is pretty important because, as you’ll recall, the Cubs’ CSN TV deal is up after the 2019 season. In five years, the Cubs could add additional night games, and increase the value of their broadcast rights just in time for that negotiation.)
  • There are still no permissible Saturday or Sunday night games, except for those mandated by MLB for a national TV broadcast.
  • None of the following count against the Cubs’ night game limit: playoffs, All-Star Game, concerts, games rescheduled because of a rain-out, and other events where fewer than 15,000 people are expected to attend.
  • The increase in night games could come as soon as this season. The plan calls for a night game ordinance to be introduced in May of this year, and voted on by City Council no later than the June City Council meeting.

Friday Games

  • The Cubs additional want the ability to schedule 3:05pm CT games on Fridays. They will seek six 3:05pm CT Friday games, up from the current allotment of zero.
  • This Friday game plan is also to be implemented by an ordinance introduced to City Council no later than May, and voted on no later than June.


  • The Cubs will be permitted to host up to four concerts per year at Wrigley Field, up from the previous allotment of three.
  • Concerts do not count as “night games.” However, any concert in excess of four does count as a “night game.” So, the Cubs have the flexibility to schedule an extra concert or two in a given year if they feel like they won’t use up their night game allotment.

Street Fairs

  • The Cubs will get their street fairs on Sheffield avenue, subject to some limitations. The fairs may be conducted for weekend home games between Memorial Day and Labor Day beginning two hours before game and ending at the end of 2nd inning.
  • Once the open-air plaza on the Triangle Property is completed, use of Sheffield for the fairs will be reconsidered. In other words, the fairs might be moved to the plaza once it is ready to go.


  • The new hotel (affiliated with Sheraton) on the McDonald’s property will be a minimum of 91′ tall, and will have 175 rooms, 75 parking spaces, a 40,000 square foot athletic club, retail areas and dining areas.
  • Advertising signage will be permitted on the hotel.
  • A bridge will be constructed over Clark to connect the hotel to the new building on the Triangle Property. The bridge will be home to a “Welcome to Wrigleyville” sign … which … be careful, Cubs. There’s a fine balance between historic/delightfully tacky and just tacky.

Triangle Property – Building and Open-Air Plaza

  • The long-awaited Triangle Building is kinda-sorta happening. It will be 85′ tall, and will be at the north end of the Triangle property. It will house Cubs offices, hotel meeting space, a kids area, and retail.
  • Like the hotel, advertising will be permitted on the Triangle Building.
  • The building will be – as near as I can tell – adjacent to an open-air plaza on the other end of the Triangle Property, which will be used for community events (example: ice skating rink in the winter, farmers market in the summer). There will be large video boards in the plaza that will be used for advertising, movies, and viewing Cubs games.
  • The plaza area will also be home to various retail/restaurant/bar locations. It appears that the goal is a Cubs/Wrigley-themed fun/food/family area.
  • The Cubs also received an agreement from the City not to allow any new billboard signage viewable from the ballpark. (Large-scale advertising in this area, apparently, is going to be solely the Cubs’ business, and no one else’s.)

Captain Morgan Club

  • A new, two-story Captain Morgan Club (probably replacing single story version currently on Addison) will be constructed, which will house the bar, as well as a Cubs retail area, and the visiting clubhouse. (Insert joke about boozing up the opponents before the game.)

Other In-Park Changes

  • The Cubs plan to build connection points in right and left field between the grandstand and the bleachers, which could prove tricky, given that bleacher seating is general admission.
  • Beer sales will be extended from the middle of the 7th inning to the end of the 7th inning, or 10:30pm, whichever is earlier.


  • The Cubs will make annual contributions for community projects, which projects will be jointly determined by Alderman Tunney and the Cubs. The amount of the contributions are $500,000 per year for 2014-2018, and $250,000 per year for 2019-2023. If you are prone to political cynism, this is where that cynism goes.
  • The Cubs will pay for a new traffic light on Clark Street ($350,000!), and two more will be paid for by the CubFund (a fund set up by the Cubs over the years to pay for community needs).
  • Thirty new security personnel will be assigned to Cubs games, ten of whom will be paid for by the Cubs.
  • The Cubs will contribute $1 million to the School Street playlot and park.


  • The Cubs will reconstruct the Eddy Street (Brown) lot, which will add an addition 100 parking spaces, increasing the total there to 300.
  • The Cubs will now provide shuttles to remote parking lots for free, rather than charge $6. The remote parking spots are free, though there is a limit of 1,000 spots.
  • The parking plans will be readjusted if the cost to the Cubs for the free remote option exceeds $100,000 after three years.
  • No new parking garage is currently planned.


  • The clear goal is reduce the impact of the renovation on the rooftops, and the Cubs appear to intend to fulfill the current contract with the rooftops (which runs through 2024, and provides the Cubs a 17% revenue share from what the rooftops earn).
  • The rooftops issued a press release soon after Tom Ricketts met with the media today, in which they say very nice things about the process moving forward, but preserve their right to enforce their contract if necessary.
  • We aren’t going to know whether a lawsuit is forthcoming until the final plans are in place, and the rooftops have an opportunity to evaluate just how negatively they will be impacted by the two outfield signs. A lawsuit to block the renovation seems unlikely to succeed, whereas a suit for damages – if the Cubs block their views, causing them actual damages, and if doing so is an actual breach of the agreement – is possible.


  • In the Planned Development process, the community offers input on a variety of aspects of the plan (as they already have with respect to night games, for example) by way of zoning controls and statements, as well as review and comment on specific project plans. This process occurs before City Council votes on a particular plan, and is designed to help guide the project into an approvable form. Some of the particulars of the renovation plan will likely change throughout the Planned Development process, but probably not the general framework.
  • The Landmarks Commission will have to approve various aspects of the plan, given that Wrigley Field is subject to certain landmark restrictions. It does not appear at this time that the landmark designations are going away as a part of this renovation. That said, the landmark restrictions are not expected to impede the implementation of this plan. Indeed, the City of Chicago is expected to support the Cubs’ application for Class L property tax status, which provides a tax incentive to entities that renovate landmarks.
  • City Council will have to approve aspects of the plan, and certain items will require ordinances on an ongoing basis. That said, with Alderman Tunney’s support, this should not be an issue.
  • The renovation plan calls for the Planned Development process to start as soon as possible, and the final approvals to be granted prior to October 2013. Not that the Cubs are expect to be able to start renovations in October, right? I mean, that’s when the playoffs happen!
  • The City will coordinate the approval process in such a way as to aid the Cubs in meeting a construction schedule that minimizes the risk of interfering with the baseball schedule.
  • The Cubs will receive rezoning as necessary to effectuate the renovation plans.
  • A fun inclusion, in bold and italics, at the end of the Cubs’ renovation plan: “Except where specifically noted above, it is not intended there will be any additional cost to Cubs nor will Cubs be asked to pay any special fee or cost not imposed on other Chicago professional sports teams (for example, no special Wrigley Field tax or policing costs, except as noted above).”
  • Jim

    #booger tissues.

    Great write up.

    • Spencer

      Generonyms ftw!

  • cjdubbya

    Holy crap. You weren’t lying this morning on Twitter this morning when you said this was going to be super long!

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      I need a drink.

      • MichiganGoat

        I’ll buy buddy, I could use one two.

      • TWC


        • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

          I hoped it would be you.

          • TWC


  • MichiganGoat

    I’m interested in seeing how the outfield “bump” will impact the signage, I do wonder if it is being sold as a way to not block the rooftops as much or that is just spin. Wouldn’t it also add a few more bleacher seats?

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      No – the bleachers already hang over the wall, so this will just bring the wall out closer to the edge of the seats.

      But, yes, the Cubs are getting a clear benefit from bumping out the walls, in the form of more internal space at Wrigley.

      • MichiganGoat

        Gotcha ya so basically making the walls flush with the bleachers

    • aCubsFan

      It really is the other way around. How will the JumboTron and signage impact the bump out. While they will try to minimize sight line interruptions for the roof tops the positioning of the signage will be based on best lines of sight for TV in order to maximize ad and TV revenue.

      This agreement really needed to get done before the Cubs start negotiations on the WGN TV contract, which will begin shortly.

  • Michael Eberlein

    Brett, how the hell did you manage to write this up so fast? Incredible. Need a few drinks? Lol

    • Njriv


      • DarthHater


        • Coach K

          I believe it was a joke in regards to what Paul Sullivan tweeted last week(?)

  • Spencer

    I just hope the JumboTron isn’t overwhelming…twice the size of the scoreboard? Yikes. I’m excited for everything to get rolling!

    • MichiganGoat

      It just part of the future of baseball, at first I hated the idea but now I understand that i must happen.

      • Spencer

        I mean, I’m fine with the idea of a JumboTron, I just think it’s going to completely dwarf everything else at the ballpark. Hope it’s appropriately shaped and placed.

        • MichiganGoat

          I feel like they will make the Jumbotron as natural as they possibly can, but it will dramatically change how Wrigley looks.

          • JoyceDaddy

            I thought dippin dots was the future of baseball? Or was it the future of ice cream? I forget.

  • MichiganGoat

    I’m impressed by how fast they are making some of these changes. Increasing night games and afternoon Friday games this season, plus updated facilities, clubhouses, and JumboTron by 2014. Guess this is the last year to see the Old Wrigley.

    • Tom A.

      Yes, the 2014 season will be the last chance for anyone that wants to buy a ticket (via StubHub from a selling season ticket owner) to see one of the most beloved baseball stadiums as it was originally built. The ticket stub for the game(s) you attend is sure to become for you a treasured keepsake.

      There only are 156 games remaining during the 2013 and 2014 seasons and after that you only will be able to see the newly designed stadium. Think of attending a game at the historical Wrigley Field as a limited time offer. You truly owe it to yourself to attend a game (or even many games) very soon ! Check out StubHub today while the supplies last !

      • MichiganGoat

        Wait are you a StubHub employee? Regardless is the plan for the JumboTron to be up before the 2014 season? So that would make this year the last year. As for the current stadium being “as it was originally built” that’s not correct either. The Ivy is not original and countless other changes have been made throughout the years, but this will be the most significant upgrade in most of our lifetimes and yes the purist will flock to see old Wrigley one more time.

        • Tom A.

          Ssssh, I am just trying to sell a few games’ tickets over the next couple of seasons. Actually, actual facts may just get in the way.

          Nope, I don’t work for StubHub.

          • MichiganGoat

            Well thanks for being honest 😉

      • TWC

        “Yes, the 2014 season will be the last chance for anyone that wants to … see one of the most beloved baseball stadiums as it was originally built.”

        What a pile of crap. If you wanted to see Wrigley as it “was originally built”, you missed out by not attending a game halfway through it’s inaugural season, as the outfield fences were moved out by 25 feet before the season was over.

        This is how Wrigley was when it was “originally built” — that pic is a few weeks before the home opener.


        • MichiganGoat

          Exactly, not to mention the Marquee, the lights, and the bleachers all not original. With the new right field patio and video board it’s better to say the last chance to see Wrigley as it was in 2012/13.

          • Tom A.

            So basically, most everything I said in my two paragraph sales pitch was wrong.

            I do know that there are 156 games remaining during the 2013 and 2014 seasons. There is a truth !

        • DarthHater

          Here’s the seating capacity of Wrigley over the years:

          Seating capacity
          14,000 (1914)
          15,000 (1915–1922)
          20,000 (1923–1928)
          38,396 (1927)
          40,000 (1928–1937)
          38,396 (1938)
          38,000 (1939–1940)
          38,396 (1941–1948)
          38,690 (1949–1950)
          36,755 (1951–1964)
          36,644 (1965–1971)
          37,702 (1972)
          37,741 (1973–1981)
          37,272 (1982–1985)
          38,040 (1986)
          38,143 (1987–1988)
          39,600 (1989)
          38,710 (1990–1993)
          38,765 (1994–1996)
          38,884 (1997)
          38,902 (1998–2005)
          41,118 (2006)
          41,160 (2007–2008)
          41,210 (2009–2010)
          41,159 (2011)
          41,009 (2012)[6]
          41,019 (2013-present)[2]

          Yep, the current version is exactly the way it was originally built. 😛

          • hansman1982

            Don’t forget this treasured piece of “history” and “heritage”:


            • MichiganGoat

              Planted in 1937 before that billboards surrounded the walls.

              • MightyBear

                Trivia: Who planted the ivy on the Wrigley Field walls?

                • Tom A.

                  Bill Veeck

                  • MightyBear

                    Give that man a charute. Bill Veeck is correct.

              • hansman1982

                So, the advertising on the doors in the OF is actually more tradition-y?

          • Tom A.

            Wow, very interesting Mr. DarthHater ! My first attended game was 1963 and thus the 10th version of Wrigley Field.

            Thanks for updates all !

            • DarthHater

              I’ve been called a lot of things here, but never before “Mr.” Darth Hater. 😀

        • Tom A.

          Do you think that all those guys in the lower right of the picture are on a break at Murphy’s bar ?

          • TWC


            And Beth Murphy can be seen complaining that the horse cart is obstructing view of the field.

            • hansman1982

              The picture was from the original rooftop club. PROOF THEY EXISTED BEFORE WRIGLEY!

            • DarthHater

              Now you’re just being silly. That obviously has to be great-grandma Bessie Murphy.

              • Tom A.

                Do you think she is the lady in the picture that is driving the beer cart wearing a halter-top ?

                • DarthHater

                  Yea, gramps always said ol’ Bess had a bit of a reputation as a strumpet.

  • Derrick

    Why are there restrictions on the amount of 3:05pm CT Friday games? I understand why the Cubs would want those scheduled, but what ‘harm’ does it do otherwise?

    • DarthHater

      Hmmm, let’s see … 30,000 fun-seekers already in varying degrees of intoxication suddenly appear on the streets of Wrigleyville right around 7 pm on a Friday night. … Nope, can’t imagine any issues there.

    • MichiganGoat

      Noise, takes away the after game bar crowd, increased evening traffic, blah blah blah is what the “community” as always claimed. Basically the same as the night game argument.

  • Die hard

    What about the bullpens?

    • MichiganGoat

      This might be the best question and response you’ve ever written.

  • JulioZuleta

    Street lights in Chicago cost $350K: $10 K for parts, and $340K for the 8 hours of work. Sounds about right.

    • Cubbie Blues

      $350k seems quite high for a new traffic signal by about $150-250k.

      • hansman1982

        Washington state says $250-500K.

        Out of pocket costs to me?
        It costs the taxpayer $250,000 to $500,000 to purchase and install a traffic signal. Electric bills and routine maintenance amount to about $8,000 a year. Drivers also have increased costs for fuel, time delay, and accidents. This adds to the reasons for installing signals only where clearly justified.


        • Cubbie Blues

          I used to design them. The expensive ones are usually around $200k and that is with long conduit runs for back detection or video detection (which IL uses a lot of).

          • TWC

            But then you add new curb cuts, pavement repair/ADA upgrades, switching and traffic controls, all at union and/or prevailing wage and you’re right up to ~$350k.

            • Cubbie Blues

              Maybe I was going too much by traffic signal and not including intersection modernization. New curb, pavement overlay mill/pave, and ADA upgrades I could see it going up a bit more. When you say traffic controls the interconnect should already be in place and new cables would be run. The cabinet itself is only about $10k installed if new P foundation is required add in another $2k. Most of the conduit would probably be able to be reused as well. For instance there are two new signals going in at I-69 and SR 38 in Indiana for $200k.

              • TWC

                Nah, by traffic controls I mean the additional 2 flaggers slowing/directing traffic around the construction zone and any relevant lane closure(s), etc. I’m also factoring in the soft costs, like paying the A/E firm to do the drawings, permit fees, and so on.

                Now, if this were in the Coastal Zone of California, you’d also have to perform a Initial Study of the affected area and potentially write a Mitigated Negative Declaration showing how the new light will have minimal impacts on sensitive species in the area. That’s $350k right there!

                • Cubbie Blues

                  I could see the A/E costs being ~$20k. I would have the whole thing designed in less than a week. One day for surveying, one day to get that line work into CAD and 3 days for the signal/interconnect/signing design. OK so maybe up to two weeks when you bring in maintenance of traffic and extra hoops to make it “pretty” for the neighborhood.

                  • TWC

                    Don’t forget the community meetings.

                    • Cubbie Blues

                      Eh, that will be for the General Contractor not the Traffic Sub. If it goes all the way down to the Traffic Sub, there is going to b A LOT of extra costs accrued.

                    • Cubbie Blues

                      Where else can you go to a baseball site and have an intelligent conversation about Civil Engineering?

  • CubFan Paul

    So the $4.75M that goes to community that Ricketts mentioned didn’t include the $350K for the intersection.

    That’s $5.1M to the neighborhood. City Council and the Landmarks Commission will be rubber stamping this project so fast.

    • hansman1982

      $5.1M spread out over 10 years or 1/10th of a percent of the entire cost of this project.

      • CubFan Paul

        Thanks for the math lesson?

  • ETS

    So let’s say the Cubs schedule 5 concerts and the cubs already have used there maximum allotment of night games (by the way you interpret the language, 35) then MLB deems a game necessary to be played at night – that doesn’t count as going over, right?

    • Dan

      I don’t think so. The first four concerts don’t count, the fifth one counts as a night game. The actual allotment of night games is 40. If they scheduled 35 and you add 1 for the fifth concert, that would be 36. Unless MLB asked them to play more than 4 extra night games the extra concert wouldn’t count against them.
      I’m curious as to what happens if they do go over the night game limit, is it just a fine paid to the city? I can’t imagine the city would require them to reschedule a different night game (or cancel a concert) in the event that MLB deemed an extra night game necessary.

  • Spriggs

    Can’t wait to see the artist renderings!

    • TWC

      I can’t wait to criticize the landscape architectural drawings!

    • http://401klogic.net Westbound Willie

      I can’t wait to stop waiting

      • dumbledoresacubsfan


  • jstraw

    Yuda Mann

  • ETS

    The CubFund to pay for community needs? Is there a SoxFund or a BullsFund or a Bears or BlackHawksFund – no wonder we haven’t won in a 100 years. We are too busy being raped by the city of chicago.

  • parser

    Subtle, additional parsing, here.. occasionally Wrigley elects to host a summer soccer friendly among european clubs. Does this agreement make any differentiation among the various sporting events at Wrigley and their role in the annual count of night time events? Northwestern football would enter the conversation here too. Perhaps all non cubs games fall under “Concerts/etc” and the quota is no more than four? What if the cubs welcomed Kane County to Chicago for the sake of twilight big league exposure AND -expected- an attendance greater than 15,000? Maybe soccer doesn’t yield a turnout large enough to matter here…

  • Rizzo44

    Great write Brett… I just want to get a preview of the scoreboard. 6000 square feet?? How big is the Royals and Braves scoreboards?? Im so excited for all this!!

    • DarthHater


      Could you please re-post the picture you did a couple weeks ago with a mock-up of a 6,000 sq ft jumbotron in left field? I could hunt it down in the archives, but I suspect you can locate it more easily. Thanks.

      • DarthHater

        I found it! 😀


        • DarthHater

          Gee, your own picture won’t even post correctly! 😛

          • DarthHater


            • baseballet


              • DarthHater

                It’ll look better when DeRosa’s face isn’t on it. 😉

        • Drew

          No more “Wind blowing in from Left today . . . ” Wow, it looks HUGE!

        • MightyBear

          June 20 is my birthday.

  • Indy57

    Sounds like a good deal for the Cubs. Looked through the history of Wrigley last night and this is all (Jumbotron, signage, etc.) just another evolution of the park. Over time, the upper deck, bleachers, scoreboard, ivy, suites, seats on the catwalks and lights have all been added to increase revenue. It will be nice for Wrigley and fans to have access to many of the amenities even minor league parks enjoy. Yes, it will make Wrigley more like Petco, Atlanta, Texas or many other “modern” parks, but it is still tucked inside of the Lakeview community in a century old stadium. Details still to be finalized, but this looks like a nice win. Looking forward to the drawings as well.

  • Featherstone

    The whole night game restriction leads me to wonder, How many night games do other teams play each year?

    • Richp


    • ncsujuri

      What he said. If you figure that roughly 2/3 of their home schedules is night games because of the getaway day games generally being afternoon games you get 54 and change. (81* .67)

  • Cub Fan Dan

    Thanks for the Cliff’s Notes version of this Brett. Excellent work!

  • forlines

    This is all pretty exciting news as far as i’m concerned. I live nowhere near Chicago, but I see this as nothing but positive. And the diehard in me loves the fact the Ricketts promised a WS win @ Wrigley. Go Cubs Go!

  • hawkcub

    Great write up. Looks like the Cubs got most what they wanted.

  • Idaho Razorback

    Hansman, where in Washington do you live? Join me in Spokane for a Boise Hawks game this summer? (If summerf arives)

    • hansman1982

      I don’t live in Washington, I am an Iowan. Google just returned that as one of the top results.

  • OCCubFan

    “The parking plans will be readjusted if the cost to the Cubs for the free remote option exceeds $100,000 after three years.”

    Does this make sense?
    81 games per year means ~$1,240 per game. Remote parking spots capped at 1,000, resulting in about 2,000 fans to transport to each game. That allows 62 cents to transport each fan. Is that reasonable or feasible?

    If they could do that, perhaps the Cubs should take over all of Chicago’s public transportation.

  • Believe in 2015

    Say a prayer for the Boston marathon victims and their families. Very sad

  • walterj

    Sounds great to me .

  • Die hard

    If the deal includes a decent sized Ferris wheel so fans can see game while stuck at the top it’s a win- win if Rooftoppers have share in receipts

  • Kevin

    Great write up Brett! Bleacher Nation is like “one stop shopping” to get the latest and most accurate news on the Cubs.

  • North Side Irish

    Danny Ecker ‏@DannyEcker 1m
    Ald. Tom Tunney out w/ a statement on Wrigley deal: “There remains a great deal of work to do, especially with regard to community input…”

    Make it stop…

    • Tom A.

      Yes, they must determine how to split up the monies agreed to by the Cubs.

  • JR

    Ok, what do you guys think the asking price of D. Price is? I have been reading that the Cardinals may very well make an offer of Adams or Craig, and Shelby Miller to get it done. The Cubs need to put on their big boy pants and make a splash. They have the #2 pick this year and will probably have a top 2 pick next year to replace Baez, and whatever else it takes.

    • JR

      And if the Cards got Oscar Taveras involved the Cubs might as well not even try.. Time to nut up in Cub country.

    • JR

      Obviously, this all depends if the Rays are out of it at the deadline. But they like bad this year. Maybe the Cubs could be seller and buyers at this years deadline…

      • DocPeterWimsey

        The price for Price will be huge: it will basically like a food frenzy with about 10 great white sharks going at it. And, knowing the Rays, they’ll probably get the final bidder to start bidding against itself. In all honesty, I expect that a Taveras or a Profar will be in the mix there. I’d love to see the Cubs get Price: but I also suspect that another team will be both willing and able to outbid them.

        Ditto that conversation for Stanton: but maybe the Cubs will have a better chance on the 2nd guy traded, because the team that acquires Stanton/Price first is not going to have a farm left to acquire Price/Stanton!

        As for the Cubs being stealth buyers, Chase Headley might become available mid-summer. The Tigers were the team that (supposedly) were absolutely hottest for him 15 months ago, but they (reportedly) found the Pads price too high. (“Over the moon” or something like that was the phrase being tossed about in Dec. 2011.) They probably are considering themselves set at 3rd between Miggy and then Castellanos, so they (hopefully) will be out of the bidding. The Phils also were supposedly quite hot for Headley: but they might be going for a longer rebuild plan now that the ’08 team is going the way of all mortal flesh. If they contend this year and Michael Young plays OK or better, then they’ll be looking to fix other holes. (Being in the same division as the Braves and Nats, I’m not expecting a last hurrah by the Phils: but weirder things have happened!)

        • JR

          Yeah I know the price for Price will be huge. It seems that true studs like him won’t hit free agency anymore. They need to make a move sooner or later. And after this train wreck of a year, 2014 could be high pressure for the FO. Hopefully moving guys like Garza, Schierholtz, and Feldman at the deadline can help replace some of the prospects. But, I think it’s time to make a move…

      • CubFan Paul

        Price is definitely gone before the deadline this summer. Price will be at max value with 1.5yrs of service time left. On top of that, the Rays won’t be able to afford him in 2014. They couldn’t even afford his $10M 2013 salary ($4M deferred til ’14). Between that deferment and an escalating ’14 salary that’s damn near $20M next year.

        • BluBlud

          Don’t be surprised if the Cubs try to fast pace Vogelbach towards Daytona, and if he hits there, towards Tennessee. A Vogelbach promoted to Tennessee, or close to being promoted to Tennessee, because he put up good numbers in the FSL is worth more then a Vogelbach with good numbers in KC. The Cubs could offer a Package of Almora, Vogelbach and Vizcaino to get Tampa to at least listen. Ultimately, it may not be enough. But I do expect the Cubs to go down swinging.

          Lets not forget, Price will ultimately be able to dictate where he goes. No one is going to sale the farm for him without knowing that he is coming with an extension. If Price doesn’t want to go to a particular place, all he has to do is decline to negotiate an extension and that team will have no choice but to pull out. so basicly he has a no trade clause. I’m sure the Rays will know what his list of teams are before they even think about negotiating a trade with him involved.

  • Fastball

    Why wouldnt the Cubs just pay to raise the rooftop bleachers higher up in the air. He would ensure that revenue forever.