The more time passes, the more the public understands the moving target which is the Ricketts plan for his massive Lakeview real estate development projects. The Cubs play a nominal role in the specter of the latest grand plan - - - the excuse - - - for a more overzoned and higher density use of the space at Clark and Addison.
The Cubs claim their new development project, a $575 million - - - increased by $75 million - - -on will add more signs, seats and lights at Wrigley Field so the team is allowed to “control our ballpark.”
But that brash statement by Crane Kenney is a grenade to say the team will move to the suburbs if they don't get "everything" in the new plan. Whether the threat is real is irrelevant; the idea that the Ricketts family should be exempt from city building, zoning and community safety regulations is what is at issue.
Every business man and property owner in the City has to circumvent a maze of rules and regulations to do anything with their property. Chicago is a difficult place to open and run a business. No other business would get any traction trying to stuff more and more uses into a building than the Cubs latest plan: including a 30,000-square-foot clubhouse in a two-level basement beneath an outdoor plaza; adding seven (7) outfield signs to block all rooftop views; adding outfield light towers; adding a 200-seat restaurant and 200-person auditorium behind the home dugout; adding three or four rows of bleacher seats and claiming even more seats by relocating the home and visiting bullpens from foul territory to a protected area beneath the expanded bleachers that gives relief pitchers a view of the field.
For some delusional reason, Ricketts believes that the neighborhood is "stealing" money from him because they are near Wrigley Field. Ricketts continues to expand year round bars and restaurants inside Wrigley Field to "recapture" dollars spent with local businesses. He will add more bar spaces in the triangle plaza (where he wants an open liquor license) and in the commercial space across from Wrigley. The auditorium has to be a means of taking business away from nearby clubs like the Cubby Bear Lounge. In other words, the new development plan is an all-out assault to create a 24/7 Times Square Ricketts owned entertainment area.
The Sun-Times reported that Kenney said the Cubs have worked hand-in-glove with Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s administration in recent months to develop the scorched earth plan that includes seven outfield signs, including two video scoreboards and literally dares rooftop club owners to sue.
Kenney said city landmarks officials insisted that there be a “65-foot buffer” between the manual scoreboard in centerfield and the video boards in right and left fields. City Hall further demanded that there be “at least 20 feet between each of the seven outfield signs and that each of the four new LED signs added to the two video scoreboards be no more than 650 square feet.
“You wouldn’t just drop this on the city without them seeing it. We started talking about, `What are the important dimensions from the city’s perspective that need to be maintained. That’s where we came up with ideas around 65 feet, shrinking down the video board [already approved in left-field], putting these signs in these spots and creating these envelopes,” Kenney said.
But the mayor's office issued a statement that seemed to pare back Kenney's enthusiasm and spin that the city was on board with the revised plans, which will be submitted to the Landmark Commission on June 5th.
The Sun-Times also reported that "with a straight face," Kenney insisted that he has no idea what impact, if any, the seven outfield signs would have on the view from rooftop clubs that share 17 percent of their revenues with the team. He argued that a “perfect view” may not even be required from rooftop patrons who are more interested in “tailgating” than watching the game.
But that is not what the contract states with the rooftop owners.
Kenney claims the Cubs had made many offers to settle the dispute (which the rooftop owners say is not a dispute but the Cubs unilateral anticipatory breach of contract) but they are at an impasse.
The Cubs claim their new development project, a $575 million - - - increased by $75 million - - -on will add more signs, seats and lights at Wrigley Field so the team is allowed to “control our ballpark.”
But that brash statement by Crane Kenney is a grenade to say the team will move to the suburbs if they don't get "everything" in the new plan. Whether the threat is real is irrelevant; the idea that the Ricketts family should be exempt from city building, zoning and community safety regulations is what is at issue.
Every business man and property owner in the City has to circumvent a maze of rules and regulations to do anything with their property. Chicago is a difficult place to open and run a business. No other business would get any traction trying to stuff more and more uses into a building than the Cubs latest plan: including a 30,000-square-foot clubhouse in a two-level basement beneath an outdoor plaza; adding seven (7) outfield signs to block all rooftop views; adding outfield light towers; adding a 200-seat restaurant and 200-person auditorium behind the home dugout; adding three or four rows of bleacher seats and claiming even more seats by relocating the home and visiting bullpens from foul territory to a protected area beneath the expanded bleachers that gives relief pitchers a view of the field.
For some delusional reason, Ricketts believes that the neighborhood is "stealing" money from him because they are near Wrigley Field. Ricketts continues to expand year round bars and restaurants inside Wrigley Field to "recapture" dollars spent with local businesses. He will add more bar spaces in the triangle plaza (where he wants an open liquor license) and in the commercial space across from Wrigley. The auditorium has to be a means of taking business away from nearby clubs like the Cubby Bear Lounge. In other words, the new development plan is an all-out assault to create a 24/7 Times Square Ricketts owned entertainment area.
The Sun-Times reported that Kenney said the Cubs have worked hand-in-glove with Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s administration in recent months to develop the scorched earth plan that includes seven outfield signs, including two video scoreboards and literally dares rooftop club owners to sue.
Kenney said city landmarks officials insisted that there be a “65-foot buffer” between the manual scoreboard in centerfield and the video boards in right and left fields. City Hall further demanded that there be “at least 20 feet between each of the seven outfield signs and that each of the four new LED signs added to the two video scoreboards be no more than 650 square feet.
“You wouldn’t just drop this on the city without them seeing it. We started talking about, `What are the important dimensions from the city’s perspective that need to be maintained. That’s where we came up with ideas around 65 feet, shrinking down the video board [already approved in left-field], putting these signs in these spots and creating these envelopes,” Kenney said.
But the mayor's office issued a statement that seemed to pare back Kenney's enthusiasm and spin that the city was on board with the revised plans, which will be submitted to the Landmark Commission on June 5th.
The Sun-Times also reported that "with a straight face," Kenney insisted that he has no idea what impact, if any, the seven outfield signs would have on the view from rooftop clubs that share 17 percent of their revenues with the team. He argued that a “perfect view” may not even be required from rooftop patrons who are more interested in “tailgating” than watching the game.
But that is not what the contract states with the rooftop owners.
Kenney claims the Cubs had made many offers to settle the dispute (which the rooftop owners say is not a dispute but the Cubs unilateral anticipatory breach of contract) but they are at an impasse.
“There’s no animosity. There’s no hard feelings. . . . Sometimes you’d like to see this as a big dramatic gunfight at the O.K. Corral. It’s none of that. It’s simply a math problem. We need to generate revenue inside the ballpark. We’re financing this ourselves. We’re unlike every team building a new facility,” Kenney said.
Right. Rooftop club owners beg to differ. Ryan McLaughlin, a spokesman for the Wrigleyville Rooftops Association, said the lawsuit the Cubs seem determined to provoke will be filed shortly.“A contract is a contract. It’s unclear why the Cubs feel they can break a contract with rooftop owners, but they do not break contracts with vendors, baseball players or whomever,” McLaughlin said.
Noting that the rooftops share $3.5 million-to-$4 million of their annual profits with the Cubs, McLaughlin said, “Why would they do that if they didn’t’ feel they had a contract that protected their rights?"
Kenney said he’s confident the Cubs are on solid legal ground. However, if the Ricketts were so confident in their legal position, they could have gone to court last year and filed for relief and would have received a decision by now!
The public needs to understand that these real estate development projects are rolled into one package, using the Cubs futility as the reason for massive concessions from the city and neighborhood. But Wrigley Field is not "owned" by the Cubs, but a separate legal entity. The Cubs are merely a tenant at the facility. The facility, which Ricketts wants to change into a massive multi-purpose entertainment complex for concerts, other sports, corporate events, movie nights, etc. All the new revenue from signage, advertising and other events does not go to the baseball operations but into Ricketts other pockets. It is a disingenuous argument to make that this revised plan is going to help the Cubs win a championship.
It is also disingenuous to "celebrate" historic Wrigley Field this season in order to sell tickets for games while fielding a woeful team, then at the same time totally gut iconic Wrigley with video signs, advertising marquees and changes that will eliminate the historic look and feel of the park. But the bottom line for this ownership is to make more money; not running a ball club.
Ricketts has spent millions of dollars on lawyers, architects and consultants to plan and revise plans for his Clark and Addison shrine. The one unanswered question is: does he even have the money to fund these grand plans? Or is this another excuse to blame the rooftop, the neighbors, or government officials from blocking his new revenue streams to make the illogical jump that someone else has ruined the Cubs baseball team? Ricketts World is a highly concentrated, overzoned and burdensome development project that needs strict scrutiny from all interested parties because the impact could have long term negative consequences on the community and the city. Because no matter how much more money Ricketts takes in, that is not a guarantee that any of Theo's touted prospects can make it at the major league level. It is this diversion with real estate plans that cloud what fans want to see: improvements in the club and not the grounds the team plays on.
Ricketts has spent millions of dollars on lawyers, architects and consultants to plan and revise plans for his Clark and Addison shrine. The one unanswered question is: does he even have the money to fund these grand plans? Or is this another excuse to blame the rooftop, the neighbors, or government officials from blocking his new revenue streams to make the illogical jump that someone else has ruined the Cubs baseball team? Ricketts World is a highly concentrated, overzoned and burdensome development project that needs strict scrutiny from all interested parties because the impact could have long term negative consequences on the community and the city. Because no matter how much more money Ricketts takes in, that is not a guarantee that any of Theo's touted prospects can make it at the major league level. It is this diversion with real estate plans that cloud what fans want to see: improvements in the club and not the grounds the team plays on.
