Quantcast

respect wrigleyA minor, but notable update to the physical aspects of the Wrigley Field renovation plan: the Chicago Tribune reports that the Cubs would like to add another gate to Wrigley, on the west side of the stadium next to the proposed plaza.

The idea would be to connect the plaza – which is, itself, connected by way of a bridge over Clark to the proposed hotel – to the ballpark, directly. Folks could then enter and exit Wrigley by way of the plaza, which would theoretically increase fan interaction with the variety amenities/advertisements located there. Given the purposes and location of the plaza, it makes a lot of sense.

An additional gate could also improve post-game-get-the-hell-out-of-there congestion. It can take a while to exit Wrigley after a game as it is, given that there are just four gates presently.

The Tribune’s report includes sketches of the plaza with the gate adjoining, and notes on the timing of its approval. Because it would affect the exterior walls at Wrigley, which are landmarked, you would assume that any changes like this would have to be approved by the Landmarks Commission. The new gate does not appear in the original framework for the renovation, so I’m not sure if this is a new idea, or if the Cubs never planned to include it in that framework.

In any event, it’s a minor, but cool, change, and one that will probably face hurdles for approval, because, you know.

  • Ross Wallace

    Cubs have shown multiple renderings (black & white, still in design phase) of the proposed west gate just east of the plaza at neighborhood meetings.

    Two main points of contention. The level of signage allowed and displeasure in the fact the cubs keep making changes to the plans.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      Thanks, Ross.

    • Cubbie Blues

      Nobody ever like changes to plans. However, it’s better to get the changes done now rather than to have to pay for Change Orders during construction. Those come at a premium. There isn’t a Contractor out there that doesn’t enjoy a good Change Order.

  • Jay

    Whatever. Jesus H. Christ—it’s their park now, let them do what they want. All this handwringing over the “landmark” status of the park is idiotic. I’ll never understand how the city got their claws into a private enterprise the way they have here.

    • Sully

      Thank you Jay. Right on. Everyone needs to get out of the Cubs way.

    • Kevin

      I agree with Jay 100%

      • Jay

        Thank you. I mean, all these people freaking out over signs and a jumbotron and all that either need to buy out the Ricketts and make the Cubs publicly owned (ala the Green Bay Packers) or accept that the future is upon us. Believe me, I’d love to get in the DeLorean and go back to the time of my first game (1978) when bleachers seats were a buck, 20,000 seats were sold day of game, when parking around the park was a no-problem proposition, when the ushers didn’t care where you sat, when the beer vendors had personality, when the rooftops were nothing but a handful of people in lawn chairs with beer coolers, etc. etc. etc. But those times are gone, and they ain’t coming back. I personally think all the proposed changes show reasonably good taste (and I’ll get used to the Jumbotron eventually) especially compared to the circus sideshows that some of the newer parks have become (ie; Turner Field’s outfield concourse) and can only help enhance the comfort and viewing experience of the patrons.

    • D.G.Lang

      I don’t think that the landmark status would be a problem since the new triangle building will be so large that the view of that particular wall is going to be obstructed anyway.

      The other wall however will still be in plain view and therefore would be much harder to get approval for any changes.

      If there were no new triangle building to obstruct the view of the left side outer wall then any changes would face the same scrutiny as the right field exterior wall.

  • Toby

    Don’t forget about the new gate for the skybridge.

  • itzscott

    Wrigley will never be what it was, so why not go whole hog and make the area as cheesey and glitzy as possible with the actual team being a distant secondary reason to go there?

    I’m actually starting to side with the neighborhood after seeing all the drawings…. it’s one thing to choose to go to a carnival and a completely different thing to live in one.

    • josh2

      i didn’t see cheese or glitz in any of the drawings. Everything looked tasteful imo.

      • DarthHater

        No cheese? What do you think’s on those pizzas, hmmm?

        [img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7318/8744564265_79587865a6.jpg[/img]

  • cubzforlife

    Till my dying day I will never forget leaving Wrigley after game five. It was like 40,000 people leaving a funeral for your very best friend. And it took forever. Another gate will speed it up for next time.

  • Pingback: Obsessive Wrigley Renovation Watch: Alderman Tunney Still Not Crazy About the Plaza | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary()

Bleacher Nation Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Bleacher Nation is a private media site, and it is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago Cubs. Neither MLB nor the Chicago Cubs have endorsed, supported, directed, or participated in the creation of the content at this site, or in the creation of the site itself. It's just a media site that happens to cover the Chicago Cubs.

Bleacher Nation is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

Google+