Obsessive Wrigley Renovation Watch: Neighbors Rallying to Oppose Cubs Plans tonight at 6:30pm CT

respect wrigleyTomorrow, the Plan Commission is expected to pass upon various aspects of the Chicago Cubs’ comprehensive plans to renovate Wrigley Field, build a hotel, and create a plaza area just west of the ballpark. I’ve not read anything yet that indicates that will be anything but perfunctory … but let’s not get cocky. You just never know.

In the interim, tonight, a group of concerned Wrigley neighbors will be gathering at the corner of Clark and Patterson at 6:30pm CT to stage a rally opposing the Cubs’ renovation process. This group of neighbors believes they have been excluded from the process, and want to make sure they are heard before the Plan Commission takes any action tomorrow. You can read more on the rally here (DNAinfo) and here (Crain’s).

A few of you passed along a message from the rally’s organizers, stating their purpose:

YOUR support and your voice are needed to save our streets from being annexed to the Cubs and the area becoming a digital media circus and open container free-for-all.

In other words, it sounds like this rally’s purpose is to focus on the aspects of the renovation plan that are external to Wrigley Field: namely, the hotel and the plaza.

The Cubs plan to include video boards and advertising signage in the plaza and on the hotel, and there has long been a concern in some corners that the area will take on a “Times Square” atmosphere, inconsistent with the neighborhood in which Wrigley sits. From my perspective, the areas we’re talking about – surrounded by Wrigley, bars, shops, and commercial space – don’t really have much of a residential feel in the first place. I understand the concerns, but I see a great deal of upside for the community in having a hotel next to Wrigley, a large athletic club in the hotel, and an open-air plaza for various activities in the heart of Wrigleyville. Maybe that’s Cubs-colored blinders and an outsider’s perspective, but it’s not like I don’t love Wrigleyville. And it’s not like I don’t want to see it unharmed. I just tend to think the Cubs’ proposals for the area are affirmatively good. That they also help the Cubs is a bonus.

I’m told there are pro-renovation group(s) encouraging Cubs supporters to attend the rally and voice their support for the comprehensive renovation plan. I’m not going to encourage you to go or discourage you from going. I’ll only say this: these kinds of situations have a tendency to spiral out of control quickly, and lose sight of the issues. Don’t find yourself on the wrong side of that spiral. If you attend, please consider how your actions and behavior reflect on the issues/entities/people you support. Be respectful. Be positive. Be courteous.

Brett Taylor is the editor and lead writer at Bleacher Nation, and can also be found as Bleacher Nation on Twitter and on Facebook.

179 responses to “Obsessive Wrigley Renovation Watch: Neighbors Rallying to Oppose Cubs Plans tonight at 6:30pm CT”

  1. Myles

    I live in Wrigley 3 blocks away from the field. I knew what I was doing when I moved over there. So did these people. Like you, I don’t understand the uprising here. It’s not like McDonald’s, Taco Bell, and the Cubs Store scream “community.”

    1. Tommy

      +1, but perhaps the most important thing we’re forgetting here, WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE PIECE OF MACARONI?!?!?!

      1. Myles

        I almost included that too. Good call.

    2. Webb

      I agree. To rally against commercializing an area that is already blatantly commercial seems hypocritical. I will say that an over-abundance of video boards could wind up looking tacky. To me, the whole concept of the open-air plaza suggests that the Cubs are still very interest in making this space work within the community, however.

      1. caryatid62

        The open-air plaza is a great way to “make this space work within the community”…as long as the profits come back to the Cubs.

        Like any corporation, the Cubs are only concerned with one thing: profitability. Corporations are (and are SUPPOSED to be) amoral.

        Let’s be clear: regardless of what you think of the Cubs renovation, they are only concerned with making as much money as possible (as they should), and any discussion of tastefulness or concern for the neighborhood is only for the purposes of PR so that they might get more support from the public (so that the corporation can be more profitable).

        (BTW-that’s exactly what the rooftops are doing, too. They’re just really bad at it.)

        1. Hookers or Cake

          I think a sports team, especially one that has a long history is a little different animal in terms of being business as usual.
          Case in point. I live down here in Miami. Believe it or not the Miami Heat lose money and have almost every year. The owner makes his billions owning Carnival. He see’s running the Heat as a business of passion and not money. The heat is is fame and legacy.
          I think Ricketts is probably more interested in being the guy to build a winner than he is at making a big profits, because at the end of the day billions of dollars can’t buy you a moment like Mariano Rivera had last night. Sports and winning transcend dollars. Thats why franchise values keep quadrupling along with salaries and ticket prices.
          If Ricketts doesn’t win and sells the Cubs in 7 years for 2 billion all the while making 25 million a year. He will be seen by some business men as a success. If he wins a world series he will be an eternal god with a statue in front of the field and he’ll have streets and parks named after him.
          There is a huge difference. Especially if you have more money than your great great grand children could ever spend. At some point its about legacy and family and building something larger than yourself. I think thats what Ricketts is setting out to do. Look at the Dominican complex, the spring training complex, all the money in the farm system and IFA’s and hiring the best talent and tripling the size of the front office. Thats says to me that its about more than money. Because the casual fan will never know or care about that stuff.

          1. Dan Hyde

            100% agreed nice read

    3. Corey

      Want a room mate?



  2. caryatid62

    I don’t have any problem with this whatsoever. If something is happening in your neighborhood that you don’t like, you have every right to make your voice heard. It doesn’t necessarily mean that they should have veto power or anything like that, but they do deserve a voice in the conversation. (btw-yes, yes, they did likely know that Wrigley was going to be there when they moved in. They should still get the chance to at least have a voice, even if it is ultimately decided to go against what they want.)

    To be honest, I’d much rather hear from actual neighbors about their concerns rather than rooftop owners who (a) don’t likely live in the neighborhood, and (b) are just trying to cover their bad investment.

    1. NLIADad

      Anybody find it ironic that the group is really wanting to create a circus in the neighborhood in order to bring negative attention to the circus that might result in the neighborhood?

      1. caryatid62

        I think a one-day, likely sparsely attended rally is far from a “circus.”

  3. Die hard

    Will only work if City condemns Wrigley surrounding streets and makes a mall which would be like Camden Yards … Do a formal taking and compensation instead of this half ass piecemeal crap… If you are going to do something then do it right so will add to City..

  4. Eric

    I will go join these people. And tell them, if you don’t fucking like it please sell me your deed, I will be more than happy to deal with a Circus for prime real estate.

    1. Wrigley Neighbors

      Meet us at the Ernie Banks statue at 6pm tonight if you want to show your support for the Cubs plans to restore and improve Wrigley Field.
      For more information: info@wrigleyneighbors.com

  5. North Side Irish

    Fran Spielman ‏@fspielman 13m
    .@AldTomTunney wants to avoid floor fight with @RahmEmanuel on #Wrigley, but it’ll happen unless #Cubs give in to four remaining demands.

    Fran Spielman ‏@fspielman 12m
    .@Ald.TomTunney demands that #Cubs agree to ten-year moratorium on #Wrigley signage beyond those approved last week by Landmarks Commission

    1. gocatsgo2003

      So… Tunney is a giant A-hole. Nothing new.

    2. Kevin

      Why would the Cubs sign a ten-year moratorium? Don’t give into Tunney!

    3. Kevin

      Thinking outside the box, my guess is Tunney is getting pressure from to rooftops to have the Cubs sign a 10 year moratorium. If things don’t go as planned for the Cubs and they decide to play elsewhere for a couple years while the renovation is being worked, the rooftops would most likely go bankrupt and the Ricketts could go in and buy the buildings for a song and try to add more advertising. This moratorium would handcuff the cubs from making such a move.

      1. baldtaxguy

        Interesting thought on a play to acquire the rooftops. I like.

  6. Kevin


  7. 70'scub

    If the vast majority of the people living around Wrigley appose the Cubs, they should move their business. The business has changed into a “night business” which may not be a fit for the local residents. Chicago should offer some backup sights to keep the business in the city! These are common changes the happen in other cities all the time.

    1. Scotti

      Heaven have mercy! Move somewhere IN THE CITY? Dear Lord Almighty, why would the Ricketts family do THAT? If they’re going to move somewhere move somewhere that is business friendly (where a deal is a deal) like Schaumburg, Arlington Heights, etc.

      1. baldtaxguy

        Agreed. If they move, they move out of Chicago.

      2. Tom A.

        Wrong ! If they move, they move to someplace where they will be loved and there is a city structure to pay the bill/provide continued support. Say, San Antonio or Las Vegas or Indianapolis or Brooklyn or San Jose or Louisville or Portland or Memphis, etc.

        Why move to Schaumburg or Arlington Heights or any Chicago suburb that is too complicated for people traveling from the city or from directions other than such a city ? Every one of the cities listed above runs circles around Schaumburg or Arlington Heights. Maybe those living south of the city could suggest Dolton or Orland Park. Maybe those living North could suggest Deerfield or Gurnee, Maybe fine cities overall, but they can’t support a MLB team like the cities listed above.

        BTW, THEY ARE NOT MOVING ! It just irritates me to read people suggesting cities (heck, lets call them towns) that are not fit for MLB teams, as if they are a magic solution for the Cubs.

  8. Salesguy

    “YOUR support and your voice are needed to save our streets from being annexed to the Cubs and the area becoming a digital media circus and open container free-for-all.”

    Kinda wondering where all the outrage was when the once “apartments” or “rooftops” around wrigley were turned into bars. Also, the residents seemed to largely be in favor of putting advertising on the rooftops. I think the circus atmosphere argument is weak at best, insanely hypocritical at worst. Do they think the rest of us are blind?

    1. Jono

      Good point

  9. Sava

    Being someone who lives in Wrigleyville it already is a circus.

    1. Sava

      I welcome the changes they need more police in that area even though there’s a police station right there. There is still a bunch of nonsense that goes on not saying I don’t partake in the drunken nonsense but still actual criminal nonsense, it would be nice to see more police

      1. gocatsgo2003

        Yeah… I’m going to go ahead and guess that Wrigleyville isn’t terrible high on the list of problem neighborhoods for CPD.

  10. Spencer

    I hope six people go to this thing.

  11. dash

    Hopefully most will decide it’s too hot outside and will just say home.

  12. Wrigley Neighbors

    Meet us at the Ernie Banks statue at 6pm tonight if you want to show your support for the Cubs plans to restore and improve Wrigley Field.
    For more information: info@wrigleyneighbors.com

    1. MichiganGoat

      If you have a twitter I’ll send it out

      1. Cubbie Blues

        It’s linked in the name.

        1. MichiganGoat

          got and sent out thanks

          1. Wrigley Neighbors


    2. caryatid62

      This is going to end up like all the “public forums” on Parks and Recreation.

      1. Vulcan

        What a great show that is.

      2. Cubbie Blues

        Where they only serve Upland beer. I think I’m good with that.

    3. Jono

      Great idea! Go Cubs!

  13. Kevin

    Note to TR: Run away, don’t walk fast, run and get the hell out of Tunneyville! You deserve better, you are surrounded by greedy people who will alway prevent you from doing what is necessary for you to run the Cubs properly. I love Wrigley Field and would hate to see the Cubs leave but to hear all this nonsense on a daily basis is just way over the top. Do what’s right for your family and the organization.

    1. caryatid62

      Do you really think the people around Wrigley are the “greedy” ones and the Ricketts are somehow beneficent lovers of all things good and true?

      Come on–the Cubs want to make as much money as they possibly can. So do the businesses around Wrigley. To paint either as somehow morally superior or inferior completely misreads the entire situation.

      EVERYBODY has a financial reason for what they want in this area. They’re all doing it out of greed of some kind.

      1. CubFan Paul

        “Do you really think the people around Wrigley are the “greedy” ones”

        YES. the unpublicized part of the Renovation Plan is the $5Million the Cubs have to pay to the neighborhood over 10yrs.

        That’s bribe money Ricketts had to agree to, to get *this far* with Tunney. No Tunney wants *more*

        1. caryatid62

          You realize the Cubs are going to make HUNDREDS of millions of dollars on this by using public streets and public space, right?

          That $5 million is a drop in the bucket compared to what they’re actually going to make on this.

          Everybody’s greedy.

          1. hansman1982

            And they will pay their property taxes that will pay for their use of public space.

            1. caryatid62

              That was actually not in the original deal, but negotiated in after community groups made a stink. Which is kinda my whole point.

              1. King Jeff

                So, before the “community” made a stink, the city of Chicago was just going to give the Cubs some public space for free? Yeah, I can buy that one.

                1. caryatid62

                  Feel free to read the transcript.

                  Do you really think the city of Chicago is above giving private businesses public land for cheap/free? If so, I’ve got some parking meters to sell ya. Or a soccer field in Lincoln Park to give ya. Or a bridge to Indiana to hand you.

          2. CubFan Paul

            No..No, I didn’t realize the Cubs are out to make money. How silly of me to be so blind as to how corporations work.

            1. caryatid62

              If you understand how businesses work, why do you think that other businesses are greedy and immoral when they’re doing the same thing?

              1. MichiganGoat

                The difference here is that the Cubs earn their greed, the other business want a piece of the Cubs greed. The Cubs have the product and the business around there want as much of that product they can have without having to invest a dollar into that product.

                1. caryatid62

                  I guess I just disagree with the idea that “greed” can be earned. Greed is greed–negotiate the settlement that gives everyone an appropriate stake in the situation and move on. That’s what’s going to happen anyway.

                  1. Eternal Pessimist

                    An appropriate stake? For the parasites that feed off the hard work of the Cubs organization? For the city that tells the Cubs how lucky they are to be in the neighborhood so they saddle them with an additional tax on their product (essentially stealing their profit margin? For the city that levies special fees on the Cubs for policing the area, while no special fees are assessed to other area bars/restaurants? For Murphy’s bleachers, which has it’s share of drunks with every bit of potential to cause harm in the neighborhood, but don’t pay any proportional fees for the police presence to the neighborhood? Yea, right. Everyone else isn’t getting their fair share of the profit for the Cubs organizations work. Better get out that checkbook again.

          3. MichiganGoat

            Thats not in debate here… the issue is that the neighborhood wants the money the Cubs are going to produce. They want the reward of Wrigley with minimal risk, they have gotten use to poaching the Cubs product for years and now Ricketts is stopping that free money train. Thats their right but its a silly argument… they are not spending a dime on the restoration but they want as money as they can from anything about Wrigley.

            1. caryatid62

              Your conflating the rooftops with all the businesses in Wrigleyville. They are very different situations.

              1. MichiganGoat

                They are very connected, they all have a lot to lose if the Cubs aren’t at Wrigley. Yes the rooftops are the most impacted but every business in Wrigleyville projects profits based on Cub traffic.

                1. caryatid62

                  Relying upon foot traffic created by the existence of another business does not equal “Poaching their product,” as you wrote above.

            2. Rebuilding

              The only people “poaching” off the Cubs are the rooftops, unless you want to say every bar and specialty shop in the world is poaching off of something.

              I’m in total agreement with the Cubs about everything INSIDE their own ballpark. To me, the hotel and walkways are a completely different matter as any developer would face the exact same backlash. Putting a hotel in the middle of an already tightly congested area is and should be a major concern to all residents. The walkways to me are not needed, an eyesore and seem to be a direct attempt to hurt specialty shops on the street.

              As to Wrigleyville – if the Cubs moved it would definitely hurt the bars and specialty shops who would likely close. But those spaces would then be refilled by more traditional retailers. Over a 3-5 year period I believe property values would actually be higher than if the Cubs were in the neighborhood for the very reason you suggest – some people will not move there because of Wrigley. You are talking about some of the most desireable real estate on earth – a few miles from downtown, access to all public transportation and blocks from the lake.

              And yes I know Wrigleyville was a shithole before, but urban patterns have changed – so was Wicker Park, Bucktown, River East, the Randolph Corridor, etc…People have moved back to the city from the suburbs over the last 20 years

          4. Jono

            Investments have risk. They’re DEFINITELY creating jobs by putting their money at risk

            1. Jono

              then instead of being appreciative of the risk taking in investing in their community, the people demand more. That’s the badthe kind of greedy. The ricketts’ greed comes in the form of creating jobs by risking their own money. That’s the good kind of greedy bc it helps others while bringing themselves risk

              1. Jono

                that’s the *bad* kind of…..

              2. caryatid62

                So wait, all of the other businesses took no individual risk, got their for free and didn’t invest any of their own money to buy a location, create a product, market that product, hire workers, and provide space?

                If that’s the case, show me where I can get these no-strings-attached business licenses/locations/money for payroll grants for free. I’m in.

                1. caryatid62

                  *”got their businesses for free”

                2. MichiganGoat

                  Yes they took the risk of ownership but their business model is based on receiving a product they don’t own, produce, or invest into. Its almost a parasitic relationship- they need the Cubs to survive, they eat revenue the Cubs could be getting, but the Cubs do not need them to survive.

                  1. caryatid62

                    I think this applies more directly to the rooftops, rather than the other businesses in the area. The other businesses paid a premium for their location, and thus the advantages of their location are built into the cost.

                    Unless anyone creating a business anywhere in prime locations should be considered a parasite upon that location, that is.

                    1. MichiganGoat

                      Yes I agree there are plenty of business that thrive off a parasitic or communistic model but a parasite (or commune) must realize that they can only exist when the host is willing. Right now there are business that are sensing their host is getting rid of them and they are in full panic mode.

                    2. caryatid62

                      I think we’re going in circles now. I think we probably agree that the rooftops have a blatantly parasitic relationship with the Cubs. Beyond that, you think the businesses in the neighborhood do as well, and I disagree. I’m guessing that’s about it.

                    3. MichiganGoat

                      agreed, cheers first one is on me…;)

                    4. caryatid62

                      Sounds good…

                3. Jono

                  that has nothing to do with this. Of course other business owners took risks. But they’re not protesting those other businesses, they’re protesting the Cubs. I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make.

                  1. caryatid62

                    I think the people have a right to have their opinion heard about any and all businesses that make use of the public way. It happens all the time. It doesn’t necessarily mean they should get everything they want, but the idea that any business providing any likely or unlikely economic benefit for the neighborhood should not have the right to make use of the public way without at least allowing public input.

                    1. Jono

                      of couse they have the right to protest, I never said they didn’t. I’m just expressing my opinion of them. The issue is making use of their private property. They’re risking their own money on their own property. The community has the right to protest, of course, it’s the United States of America

                    2. Jono

                      And I strongly believe that an individual or private company does not need public input in order to invest in their own property. The public can give their input and protest all they want. That’s their right. But Ricketts should have NO obligation to listen to them.

                    3. caryatid62

                      I’m not sure what you mean by “public opinion.” Everything is public opinion. Both the Cubs and the local businesses are doing everything they can to influence public opinion.

                      There are specific legal and governmental channels designed for the public to voice their opinions about things, and, failing those, the citizens also have a right to state their opinions through non-violent public protest.

                      Seems to me that’s what’s been happening here. It’s just the way it goes.

                  2. Rebuilding

                    I very much doubt that any true residents protesting give a damn about the jumbotron, the new player facilities or any of that stuff. My guess is that they are much more concerned about the hotel, walkways and parking. And I can’t blame them – if someone was going to build a hotel down the street from me I would have the same concerns no matter the developer

                    1. Jono

                      And it’s your right to give your opinion and protest. That’s great. But by no means should the Cubs have any obligation to listen to you

                    2. caryatid62

                      …unless your private business encroaches on the public way. Defining “the public way” is where it gets tricky.

                      I’ve seen this happen a lot with businesses who want to put large LCD signs on the sides of their buildings. Technically, they are using their own property, but the light emitted (and the messages contained therein) technically encroaches on the public streets. Community groups get real unhappy when a business proposes them, and there have been a lot of fights over whether they should be allowed.

                      I don’t claim to know the answer, and I imagine it’s different for everyone. However, I tend to err on the side of slow and deliberate at the expense of businesses, just because once it’s there, you can’t go back (see Chicago Parking Meters).

                    3. Jono

                      Dealing with “public way” then becomes a legal matter. Of course they have to follow the laws.

                    4. Jono

                      Theres a difference between handling something through the legal system and through public opinion

                    5. caryatid62

                      Sorry, this belongs down here:

                      I’m not sure what you mean by “public opinion.” Everything is public opinion. Both the Cubs and the local businesses are doing everything they can to influence public opinion.

                      There are specific legal and governmental channels designed for the public to voice their opinions about things, and, failing those, the citizens also have a right to state their opinions through non-violent public protest.

                      Seems to me that’s what’s been happening here. It’s just the way it goes.

                    6. Internet Random

                      “Theres a difference between handling something through the legal system and through public opinion”

                      Yes: There is some certainty in the realm of public opinion.

                    7. Jono

                      Wrong. Everything is not public opinion. There’s a difference between our legal system and public opinion. This is not a true democracy. The cubs have to listen to the government, not the public. And yes, there is a difference in our type of society. The city of chicago doesn’t take an up and down vote to approve the jumbotron. Government officials elected by hem decide that. Big difference. So there is a huge difference between our legal system and.public opinion.opinion. you may love your opinion and think its so great, but the cubs don’t have to listen to you. That’s just the way it is.

                    8. Jono

                      Bottom line is that people need to humble themselves and realize that their opinions are not so important that the cubs are obligated to obey them. It’s not the obligation of a business to act in the public’s interest. That’s the government’s job. If you want to force your opinion onto the cubs, make them follow public opinion, you should be criticizing rahm for not giving them (or helping them get) public funding. In that case, the government could have attached their strings which would’ve represented public opinion. But no, people want to.have their cake and eat it, too.

                4. Jono

                  so because other business owners also took risks, the community can control the way the ricketts invest their money? I just don’t understand that thought process. If the city wanted more control, they should’ve given them the funding. But instead, they made the ricketts risk their own money, so they should get the freedom to invest it how they want to like every other business in the city

      2. MichiganGoat

        Morality as an issue no… but EVERY business in WRIGLEYvlle is profitable because of WRIGLEY! There is a greed factor with the “neighborhood” because they want all the charm and benefits of having a MLB baseball team in their backyard without the business the benefit from trying to increase their business. At the heart of this is greed and not issues of “safety,” “beauty,” or “tradition.” Follow the money- the neighborhood business owner fear they will lose money so they are hiding under landmark and purity issues.

        1. caryatid62

          20 years ago, I think this would be more valid. These days, I think the bars are MORE profitable because of Wrigley, but the neighborhood has become such a destination for 20-somethings just out of college that most would remain profitable after Wrigley left.

          The number of bars would definitely drop in the area if Wrigley left, but let’s be real here: Wrigleyville isn’t turning into Englewood if the Cubs were gone.

          Besides, how do all of your arguments not also apply to the Cubs? The Cubs want all of the advantages of the neighborhood feel, history, a tourism dollars that come from a neighborhood park, but also want to be able to make any change and use public areas to make that profit.

          Don’t get me wrong–I don’t begrudge the Cubs for wanting both. But I also don’t begrudge the neighborhood for wanting both, either. As I wrote above, this is a business dispute and morality plays just confuse the real issues at hand.

          1. MichiganGoat

            Wrigleyville is because of WRIGLEY… it might not become a ghetto but it will no longer become a destination and rooftops, memorabilia stores, and bars will be diminished by over 50% if the Cubs go away. Lets not kid ourselves that it can survive and prosper as it is now without the Cubs. Maybe it becomes a great neighborhood but he dollars coming into that neighborhood will vanish quickly.

            1. caryatid62

              50%? Did you commission a study that identifies the economic impact of Wrigley field on the neighborhood? If not, let’s avoid using stats here.

              First of all, let’s be clear about the area we’re talking about: “Wrigleyville” is not Lakeview. Wrigleyville consists of a roughly 1 square mile segment of Lakeview, ranging from Cornelia (3500 N) and Sheffield (1000 W), North on Clark to about 3800 N., West on Grace back to Sheffield, and back south to Cornelia. The “Wrigleyville bars” (i.e. bars that cater extensively to Cubs fans coming in for games) exist almost exclusively within this region. This are might be hit somewhat hard, however, the economic impact of no Wrigley outside this relatively small area would be minimal.

              1. Cubbie Blues

                “the economic impact of no Wrigley outside this relatively small area would be minimal.”

                You mean beside the extra police patrolling and money that the Club pumps directly into the area?

                1. caryatid62

                  The police station already exists on Clark just east of Fremont. The extra policing occurs only during Cubs’ games anyway, so non-Cubs games would not be impacted.

                2. CubFan Paul

                  Caryatid doesn’t live in Chicago so what would he know?

                  1. caryatid62

                    Ummm…really? Is my view of the Sears tower right now an optical illusion?

                    1. King Jeff

                      Yes, or a picture in a book or magazine. It’s been the Willis Tower for 4 years now.

                    2. caryatid62

                      And if you knew anything about Chicagoans, you’d know that we don’t call it Willis Tower.

                    3. CubFan Paul

                      If you were a resident Mr.”sears tower”, you would of mentioned it a long time ago while arguing about the “community”.

                    4. Hansman1982

                      Dang it, caryatid,I was just going to post that.

                    5. King Jeff

                      “If you knew anything about Chicagoans”
                      Going by what you have to say, I know something about at least one Chicagoan.

                    6. caryatid62

                      “If you were a resident Mr.”sears tower”, you would of mentioned it a long time ago while arguing about the “community”.”

                      Wait, why the hell do I need to tell you where I live? Why do I have to announce my location, and furthermore, why does my specific location have any bearing on the rightness or wrongness of my opinion?

                      You want proof? Look up my IP address, chief. It doesn’t take Edward Snowden to figure out where people live (in general) these days.

                    7. King Jeff

                      You don’t have to announce where you live, you do a good job of trying to throw that in everyone’s face without anyone asking.

                    8. caryatid62

                      Yep, that’s my thing.






                      I’m not sure what issues you have with living where you live, but I don’t think that my proximity to Wrigley Field has much of any bearing on the validity of my opinion of the situation with the rooftops. Hell, other than my property tax bill (and even the relationship between that and Wrigley is minimal), I don’t have much skin in the game.

                      If you want to make it a thing, go ahead. I’m just confused.

                    9. Jp3

                      It’s Sandiegons-Ron Burgandy

              2. MichiganGoat

                Okay I’ll give you that when I’m speaking of Wrigleyville I’m talking about all the economic engines (bars, shops, rooftops) that are profiting directly from the Cubs… they will completely die without the Cubs. All those living in the area will be fine I guess since they don’t work directly for the Cubs but the destination of “Wrigleyville” will be gone. Maybe that’s what many home owners want… but I’d still say this is all about people fearful of losing money.

                1. caryatid62

                  “but I’d still say this is all about people fearful of losing money.”

                  I agree totally. The whole thing is about people (a) not wanting to lose money, or (b) trying to gain as much money as possible.

                  I’m not judging it at all.

                  I also agree that the rooftops should have less of a voice in this process, specifically because they ARE, in fact, poaching another product and bring little of value on their own. They made the choice to create a business around a product they didn’t control and have no ownership rights over that product.

                  1. Whiteflag

                    Does anyone know of any research done on Wrigley’s effect on home values in Lakeview? I tend to think it has to increase them but to what extent. Also, Lakeview maybe be fine without Wrigley in terms of home prices because of the lakefront. However, the city of Chicago would likely feel a pretty big hit.

                    1. caryatid62

                      I think it would be hard to say, mostly because I think it might be hard to quantify where “Wrigleyville” ends. In my own experience, I tend to think of houses west of Racine and east of Halsted, north of Grace and South of Roscoe as being far enough away to be less connected to Wrigley, but that might be too small of an area. I would certainly think of Southport as having prices distinct from Wrigley, and Boys’ Town will maintain it’s prices no matter what. Overall, though, it would be an interesting study.

                      There I go implicitly declaring my geographic dominance again. My humble apologies.

                2. Pat

                  Why would all of the bars die if the Cubs leave Wrigley? I’m pretty sure I’ve seen some other bars (whole strips of them even) elsewhere in Chicago.

                  Some might die due to competition if the Cubs left, but to say all of them would is simply wrong. They actually do a fair amount of business even on non-game days.

  14. steveo

    Just let them move please then nobody will have to waste their time worrying about the Ricket’s money spends their money. And Ald Tunney can explain to people come next election how he did great things and drove the Cubs out. Besides Rosemont would be so uch easier to get to and better parking.

  15. mush

    These stupid SOB’s should be saying prayers thanking the Cubs’ and the Tribune company for saving the neighborhood. This was a hellhole like the westside is now. I cannot believe how short sighted people have become.

    1. Rebuilding

      As I said in a previous post the only people being shortsighted are those that think Wrigleyville/Lakeview would turn into a ghetto if Wrigley was gone. That is some of the best real estate in the world now – anything that close to the lake is. Every urban neighborhood was basically a shithole in the 80′s. Take a stroll down my street Division/Ashland sometime – just in 2000 there was nothing but Polish bars and boarded up buildings. Now there are upscale bars, boutiques, a million dog and baby shops, restaurants, etc… That goes also for the South Loop, Bucktown, Wicker Park and on and on. The urban neighborhoods have seen an amazing renessaince over the last 15-20 years

  16. King Jeff


    More on the level of hypocrisy of this outcry from Tunney and his buddies. They seemed to be on the exact opposite side of this debate when they were tearing down old businesses that had been in Wrigleyville for generations, in order to build more modern structures to attract more big name commercial companies to the area.

    1. cubchymyst

      Reading that did not make me happy. That project is literally less than a block south from Wrigley Field. I can see why Tunney is against Wrigley Field renovations if he is for that. Wrigley would promote that area more by bringing in tourist where he wants to build a damn shopping mall.

      1. MichiganGoat

        BINGO… Follow the money.

      2. King Jeff

        I also noticed that that project has been in “planning” for almost 4 years, and still isn’t started.

        1. aCubsFan

          The Cubs don’t have the time to put up with 4 years of planning commission. In that amount of time they could build a new park elsewhere and not invest a penny to renovate Wrigley.

  17. CubbieBubba

    can fans have another rally in support of the changes? i kinda like the sound of open container free-for-all… didnt know that was part of the renovation plan, but I like it!

  18. Bfm

    You knew Wrigley Field was there when you moved into the area. It didn’t just appear out of nowhere. IF YOU DON’T LIKE IT…..MOVE!

  19. Mr. B. Patient

    A question for you folks. Do Beth Murphy and the Wrigleyville residents know how a democratic government works? They always complain about not being involved in the process. Well folks, in a representative government, you vote for your representative and he/she is then trusted to legislate in your interest. You have a recourse, if you don’t like what’s happening, elect someone else.

  20. North Side Irish

    Competitive Balance Lottery is today…Cubs are the only team in the NL Central not eligible for the additional picks. Because clearly the Cardinals, Reds, and Pirates need an advantage…


    1. King Jeff

      This is the most ridiculous crap I’ve ever seen in pro sports. I really see no value to this system at all, other than to help teams that are already receiving revenue sharing. Especially the Marlins, who now receive more in revenue sharing than they spend on their payroll. Pure garbage.

    2. cubchymyst

      The competitive balance serves no purpose at this point. It needs to be gotten rid of.

  21. AD

    I do not believe that anyone truly knows where Garza will land. This speaks to the tight-lipped nature of the front office. I do wish we would hear more names of player involved in potential deals though!

    1. CubFan Paul

      Tight lipped like the Dempster and Marmol deals?

      1. Kyle

        Or when everybody knew that Almora would be our pick?

        Or when our attempts to sign Anibal Sanchez were widely (and sometimes incorrectly) reported?

      2. AD

        I am talking about this particular situation. Furthermore, one could argue that the Dempster and Marmol trades were unique situations. Plus, this regime is more tight-lipped than that Jim Hendry guy.

        1. CubFan Paul

          There’s a new Garza rumor/leak EVERYDAY from the Cubs’ side.

          Read any Obsessive Matt Garza Trade Watches lately?

          1. AD

            Yes, and I love them, but I am referring to references about certain players. Players have been speculated, but other than Mike Olt, few names have actually been solidly connected to Garza. I’m not arguing that things dont get leaked, just observing that I haven’t heard very many names in Garza trades.

      3. Hansman1982

        Dempster was broke from the Atlanta side and Marmol bungled the Haren trade. The second Marmol trade popped out of nowhere.

        The big name stuff has had a lot of stuff circulating but it seems the leaks have been coming from the other teams sources. Even Brett has commented about how his sources have dried up.

        1. Rebuilding

          “Dempster was broke from the Atlanta side…” Not saying you are definitely wrong, but how do we know that? Although it was seemingly reported by an Atlanta beat writer first I can see why both sides had an incentive to publically leak it in order to put public pressure on Dempster

  22. Rich

    I really don’t see how anybody could be against the development of the building and plaza on the triangle property – currently that area is a blight of cracked concrete and asphalt. It looks horrible.

  23. Indy57

    In any organization, the leadership must concern themselves with 4 important constituents: their customers, their employees, their shareholders/owners and the community in which they work. For a company to be a great (winning) company, these four elements have to work in harmony and balance. So often reference is made to the fact that the ownership is interested in profitability. Profitability is a by-product of satisfying the previously mentioned stakeholders. Get any of those stakeholders’ requirements out of balance and any organization will have problems that can lead to the failure of achieving their objectives.

    Likewise, all of those stakeholders have a responsibility to the organization. Being an outspoken voice that would only have their needs fulfilled at the expense of the other constituents is like-wise a prelude to failure.

    After reading Chris Neitzel’s book (if you haven’t read it, you owe it to yourself), it is apparent (amongst the 104 reasons) that the main reason for the Cubs’ years of futility has been terrible ownership and leadership. A clear lack of understanding of what it takes to win. There have been lots of spirited debates here about the motives of the Ricketts family. I’m convinced by their words and actions that they are totally committed to winning and know what it takes, but not in a way that creates unbalanced satisfaction for any one of their stakeholders.

    The Lakeview/Wrigleyville residents have their rights, to be sure. However, if those rights destroy balance for the other stakeholders, then the Ricketts will have to make decisions about the best way to regain balance. If the community blocks the plans the Cubs have to raise revenue, the result may not be beneficial to that community. Hopefully, those that are opposed to the Cubs’ plans are in a minority. And those who are in the majority have their rights heard as well, in reasoned rational argument. To paraphrase Harry, “Let’s. Get. This. Done!”

  24. cubzforlife

    Tunney can not, will not win a city council “floor fight”. Rahm has the votes he needs for this to proceed. And I will always dislike the name Wrigleyville. It’s Lakeview. Crafty realtors came up with the W name and when asked where I was born and raised I will always say Lakeview. We Chicagoans are well know for always asking “where you from” and it’s either a Parish or neighborhood.

    1. Internet Random

      “We Chicagoans are well know for always asking “where you from” and it’s either a Parish or neighborhood.”

      Or the ‘burbs, or Downstate, or another state, city, or country.

  25. Die hard

    Additionally City should allow a Red Light district on the streets condemned and stop lights removed– replace stop lights with Red Light

    1. MichiganGoat

      You want whores in Wrigleyville? You sly fox you.

      1. gocatsgo2003

        They’re not there already (at least in the less literal no-exchange-of-money sense)? Then what was I up to in my early-20s?

      2. Die hard

        Good enuf for other countries

    2. Mr. B. Patient

      Roxanne? Is that you? You don’t need to turn on the red lights.

  26. Adam

    Turn Wrigleyville into a circus? Have they walked the streets at 2 am on Friday night?

    My guess is most of the people who will be “rallying” against the Cubs A. Don’t live in the Neighborhood, and B. Protest many different things.

    Astroturf, Astroturf!

  27. aCubsFan

    Damn Tunney. Chicago Tribune is reporting that Tunney is threatening to block the renovation approval if changes are made.

  28. Wrigley Neighbors

    Meet us at the Ernie Banks statue at 6pm tonight if you want to show your support for the Cubs plans to restore and improve Wrigley Field.
    For more information: info@wrigleyneighbors.com

  29. cubs2003

    There’s an absolute dearth of hotels in Chicago outside of downtown. This would serve a purpose beyond the Cubs in the offseason. The only one I can think of is the Best Western on Diversey if it’s still there. There are some way up north in Lincoln Village, but that’s barely in the city.

  30. aCubsFan

    Tunney wants a 10 year moratorium on signs that rise above the outfield wall. Sounds like crap from the rooftop owners.

    Does anyone know if the bridge is open air or enclosed? Tunney’s trying to claim the bridge is a safety issue because someone could drop a beer on a passing car. I got the impression this bridge, like most outdoor pedestrian bridges, would be enclosed glass, so how could someone drop a beer on a passing car?

    1. HackAttack

      I personally have better results when I throw my beer at cars from the sidewalk anyway. The timing is so much easier. Maybe that’s just me.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.