Wrigley Renovation Thread

[BeerHere]

This is Tunney pining for an envelope stuffed with cash. Nothing more. Nothing less.

[Soul]

I don't know. I want to understand Tunneys POV but I just can't. Complaining about most of this stuff is silly. Fine, no pedestrian bridge, I understand the gripe there. Moving the hotel entrance to Clark or Addison is going to make an already cramped intersection worse. If you survey every resident that lives on that little stretch of Patterson and you can find 5 that have lived there since 1984, then fine move the entrance somewhere else. If not, you are talking about a street full of residents who consciously chose to pay more to live in a neighborhood full of bars and a professional sports team that plays 81 teams a year roughly 1000 feet from their homes.

 

Pretending like he's protecting the residents from the big bad Cub imperialists is getting tiresome.

 

I don't understand any of his gripes, including the pedestrian bridge. Plenty of hotels and businesses have those in place. It's about adding convenience, and hence value, to the property and the people who will spend money staying there.

 

He's either trying to save face, or he's just crazy and should be steamrolled. It's time for a smackdown. And then let's all move on.

[SouthSideRyan]

What I would give for an actual good relocation site to pop-up. What about that huge plot of land south of Roosevelt over by the rail yard? I know that was a potential stadium location for the Fire. Where's the ward from that area to roll out the red carpet and at the very least put the screws to Tunney if not make the whole thing work?

 

I don't see why Tunney should/would even be an obstacle if the mayor if supportive.

 

Maybe, and maybe this is all just a tantrum Tunney's trying to throw to save face before the Cubs get their way. On the other hand though, the process has already missed multiple deadlines by months that are now pushing the project and its revenues full seasons further out than originally thought. At a certain point I'd have to think they'd be justified in going to Rahm and pointing out what a lunatic Tunney is being, and trying to work with him on an alternate city location, lest they take the Wrigley experience to one of the willing suburbs. Maybe Rahm tells them it's Wrigleyville or bust, but it'd be nice if even a fake rumor floated that possibility, if only for my own sanity.

 

Well, there was the Tinley Park story, if that helps you.

 

Their mayor was a counselor at my high school. Kind of an idiot.

[GammonsPocketTweets]

I got to ask, why would he have a gripe over a pedestrian bridge? He isn't paying for it. I really see this nothing more as him being a toddler.

[jersey cubs fan]

I got to ask, why would he have a gripe over a pedestrian bridge? He isn't paying for it. I really see this nothing more as him being a toddler.

 

Pedestrian bridges cut into public property, which is the air rights above the street. They are controversial wherever they come. And he has a point about it only serving a select few who would be staying at the hotel. It would be akin to those motes at newer stadiums that separate the hoi polloi from the important people.

 

I think it is an easy thing for them to give up.

[Banedon]

I got to ask, why would he have a gripe over a pedestrian bridge? He isn't paying for it. I really see this nothing more as him being a toddler.

 

Pedestrian bridges cut into public property, which is the air rights above the street. They are controversial wherever they come. And he has a point about it only serving a select few who would be staying at the hotel. It would be akin to those motes at newer stadiums that separate the hoi polloi from the important people.

 

I think it is an easy thing for them to give up.

 

They'd likely have put ads on it though, so it just depends on how much they lose from that.

[treebird]

kind of going off of what tt was saying, but i don't understand the quick dismissal of tunney at this point. everyone keeps saying "oh the mayor is on our side, this alderman doesn't matter," but if that's all it takes, why isn't this done yet? we've been calling tunney a powerless nothing for months now, but we still haven't just stepped over him and gotten things done. i think we may be overselling our relative positions.

[Splendid Splinter]

I got to ask, why would he have a gripe over a pedestrian bridge? He isn't paying for it. I really see this nothing more as him being a toddler.

 

Pedestrian bridges cut into public property, which is the air rights above the street. They are controversial wherever they come. And he has a point about it only serving a select few who would be staying at the hotel. It would be akin to those motes at newer stadiums that separate the hoi polloi from the important people.

 

I think it is an easy thing for them to give up.

 

They'd likely have put ads on it though, so it just depends on how much they lose from that.

 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but isn't the first 2 levels of the hotel building on the outside is basically retail store spaces? If true, then it's open to the public on the first 2 levels on the outside. Then the hotel is on the inside of it and goes all the way up. If I'm right, then the bridge doesn't go "directly" to the hotel. I mean if it's just strictly for people who stays at the hotel then they gotta put a gate up somewhere on that bridge or the entrance of it on the other side of the street to stop from anyone to go there. Also... if that's true, do you basically use your hotel key to get through? I'm not buying it. You can't see it in any renderings yet, but I'm betting that there's a stairs and elevator that goes to ground level on the other side of the hotel for people to use the bridge. I can't see it being like an actual "private" pedestrian bridge. Now if it was going from the hotel to the new triangle building on the plaza, then I can see the gripe.

 

Tunney is probably griping about that bridge thinking it's ONLY for people who stays at the hotel when in reality, it's open to the public to use. Would Tunney have access to the blueprints of the whole renovation where he gets to see the floor plans/elevation views/etc...? Even then, it's a weird thing to gripe about. Same way with the hotel patio. The outside patio will most likely be closed by 10 or 11 at night at the latest so they wouldn't disrupt the neighbors. He can't support for the outside patio, but he can for the rooftops? What a douchebag. He's just pissed that he won't get any $$$ out of this like he does with the rooftops.

[jersey cubs fan]

kind of going off of what tt was saying, but i don't understand the quick dismissal of tunney at this point. everyone keeps saying "oh the mayor is on our side, this alderman doesn't matter," but if that's all it takes, why isn't this done yet? we've been calling tunney a powerless nothing for months now, but we still haven't just stepped over him and gotten things done. i think we may be overselling our relative positions.

 

I am of the opinion that Tunney is saving face for his "constituents" who line his campaign pockets and will ultimately get a few givebacks from the Cubs to appease them. And the Cubs will be fine with that.

[Guest]

kind of going off of what tt was saying, but i don't understand the quick dismissal of tunney at this point. everyone keeps saying "oh the mayor is on our side, this alderman doesn't matter," but if that's all it takes, why isn't this done yet? we've been calling tunney a powerless nothing for months now, but we still haven't just stepped over him and gotten things done. i think we may be overselling our relative positions.

 

I am of the opinion that Tunney is saving face for his "constituents" who line his campaign pockets and will ultimately get a few givebacks from the Cubs to appease them. And the Cubs will be fine with that.

I agree. It's mostly all show. He doesn't want to be seen as a neutered pup. He'll get some concessions and everything will move ahead. It has to be frustrating for th Ricketts though.

[Guest]

There have gotta be dartboards in Ricketts' office with Tunney and Beth Murphy's faces on them

[Derwood]

The thing I don't understand about Tunney is that Wrigley Field is ALSO in his jurisdiction, so why is he picking one side over the other?

[Guest]

Because everyone likes rooting against Goliath. Mostly because he thinks there's little to no chance the Cubs will do anything damaging to him as a consequence.

[Cubswin11]

The thing I don't understand about Tunney is that Wrigley Field is ALSO in his jurisdiction, so why is he picking one side over the other?

Probably because number of potential voters in his jurisdiction >>>>>>>>>>> Wrigley Field. He's a career politician, he will do whatever it takes to appeal to the majority to get their votes to stay in office.

[jersey cubs fan]

The thing I don't understand about Tunney is that Wrigley Field is ALSO in his jurisdiction, so why is he picking one side over the other?

Probably because number of potential voters in his jurisdiction >>>>>>>>>>> Wrigley Field. He's a career politician, he will do whatever it takes to appeal to the majority to get their votes to stay in office.

 

Yeah, nobody lives in Wrigley. Ricketts isn't voting for or against him. And the Cubs aren't lining his pockets like the bar owners are.

[GammonsPocketTweets]

I know he has the power to, I just don't understand why Rahm won't just squash this little prick. The Cubs are begging to drop half a billion dollars in his city.

[Ryne Ween]

Its incredible that you guys arer so sure that there is zero nuance here and that Tunney is getting kickbacks to stop a pedestrian bridge that harms no one.

[jersey cubs fan]

Its incredible that you guys arer so sure that there is zero nuance here and that Tunney is getting kickbacks to stop a pedestrian bridge that harms no one.

 

What does that mean?

[MSG T]

Its incredible that you guys arer so sure that there is zero nuance here and that Tunney is getting kickbacks to stop a pedestrian bridge that harms no one.

 

What does that mean?

 

 

I think he might be saying that nobody here realizes it's normal Chicago politics. If he's not...then I have no clue what he might be saying.

[Cubswin11]

Its incredible that you guys arer so sure that there is zero nuance here and that Tunney is getting kickbacks to stop a pedestrian bridge that harms no one.

 

What does that mean?

 

 

I think he might be saying that nobody here realizes it's normal Chicago politics. If he's not...then I have no clue what he might be saying.

I think everyone here has acknowledged Tunney is doing what he's doing to serve what's perceived to be the best interest of his electors. And a lot of what he's doing is bargaining and being a whiny bitch. Whether or not stopping the pedestrian bridge is something they directly want or a side act to get something else done is yet to be made clear. So yes that post makes no sense.

Edited June 28, 2013 by Cubswin11

[jersey cubs fan]

Its incredible that you guys arer so sure that there is zero nuance here and that Tunney is getting kickbacks to stop a pedestrian bridge that harms no one.

 

What does that mean?

 

 

I think he might be saying that nobody here realizes it's normal Chicago politics. If he's not...then I have no clue what he might be saying.

 

I don't understand how he could think that, or what nuance has to do with anything, or why the bridge is the only focus.

[MSG T]

Its incredible that you guys arer so sure that there is zero nuance here and that Tunney is getting kickbacks to stop a pedestrian bridge that harms no one.

 

What does that mean?

 

 

I think he might be saying that nobody here realizes it's normal Chicago politics. If he's not...then I have no clue what he might be saying.

 

I don't understand how he could think that, or what nuance has to do with anything, or why the bridge is the only focus.

 

 

Yeah, me either. I'm thinking Tunney is purely trying to play up to his constituents to be able to tell them that he stood up to the big bad Cubs and did everything he could to be a pain in the ass.

[Ryne Ween]

Its incredible that you guys arer so sure that there is zero nuance here and that Tunney is getting kickbacks to stop a pedestrian bridge that harms no one.

 

What does that mean?

 

 

I think he might be saying that nobody here realizes it's normal Chicago politics. If he's not...then I have no clue what he might be saying.

 

I don't understand how he could think that, or what nuance has to do with anything, or why the bridge is the only focus.

 

 

Yeah, me either. I'm thinking Tunney is purely trying to play up to his constituents to be able to tell them that he stood up to the big bad Cubs and did everything he could to be a pain in the ass.

 

I was just rejecting "tunney is the sole bad guy and he is accepting bribes from a couple people who steal from the cubs" as the basis for everything that has gone on for the last 6 months. As far as campaign funds, these campaigns are so granular that the amount of funds he could raise from a few people benefiting from stopping the cubs plans couldnt change the narrative when his seat is up. Right or wrong, Tunney is known by basically everybody as the guy who was bribed to try to destroy the cubs. Either tunney made a horrendous political calculation, or the voters of his ward (because id imagine the legions of recent state school grads who roll in and roll out every Sept 1 dont vote for city council, so lets say voters not residents and constituents) arent comfortable with this stuff. If the latter is true tunney being a pain in the cubs ass is what he should be doing. I dont think its as black and white as people want it to be, thus the lack of nuance of a post like "this is tunney stuffing cash in his pocket nothing more or less" and many others like it.

 

Some people in that area (whether right or wrong and you can make the case that their property values are tied to team and that the amenities they enjoy are the direct result of the increased economic activity due to what the team does for the neighborhood) dont want even more of an amusement park atmosphere in their neighborhood.

 

Imagine living outside soldier field when the thousands of [expletive] head bears fans come rolling in and pee on everything. Thats kinda like what living near wrigley is like for a good portion of the spring-summer. If the prevailing view of the people who elect the councilman want to fight the cubs tooth and nail than i understand what Tunney is doing. Also it seems like papers what to skewer tunney whenever possible and some of the stuff is overblown.

[Guest]

Maybe those residents should be protesting against the bars where people get drunk before and after the games instead of Wrigley.

[SouthSideRyan]

Maybe Tunney should be fighting the rooftops that provide unlimited booze for people to pee on lawns.