PDA

View Full Version : Intersting Chicago Journal article


PalehosePlanet
03-29-2008, 10:15 PM
Alot of us have been talking about this for years. It's a pretty good read.http://www.chicagojournal.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=234&SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&S=1

MCHSoxFan
03-29-2008, 10:30 PM
I HATE, just HATE that article. I live next to those "32 acres of asphalt" on 36th street. When there is a game, day or night, my family and I are NOT bothered by the game and the parking lots. The only thing I hear is the fireworks. Then, when I am out, I hear Gene Honda, the music, and the crowd. Not too loud, however. Now, if you go to Halstead street, you CANNOT hear or see anything. I just happen to live as close as you can get to the ballpark.

I DO NOT WANT BRIDGEPORT TO BE WRIGLEYVILLE SOUTH OF MADISON AVENUE!!!

robertks61
03-29-2008, 11:02 PM
Junk!

thedudeabides
03-29-2008, 11:16 PM
That article makes my blood boil. Not everything has to be wrigleyville. :angry:

Let's just conjest and commercialize everything.

Bill Naharodny
03-29-2008, 11:25 PM
That article makes my blood boil. Not everything has to be wrigleyville. :angry:

Let's just conjest and commercialize everything.

Count me on the other side of this one. Put aside the Wrigleyville stuff in the article. That's almost guaranteed to set most of us off. And put aside the idea that the park's changes were only, according to the piece, "cosmetic." That characterization totally minimizes the magnitude of the results of the renovations for fans. I now think that the Cell is a marvelous place to watch a game.

HOWEVER, having said that, I've felt that some development near the park would be excellent for fans coming to the game. It would enhance the experience of attending games, from my perspective. It would reduce many of the traffic problems in exiting the park. And it would probably be a net positive for the area, though I can certainly understand how some living there might see it otherwise. (I lived one block from Wrigley for 2 years, so I understand concerns about traffic and noise. For the record, I always felt that the park in the neighborhood was a net positive, but I can see the other side, too.)

Just my two cents.

PalehosePlanet
03-29-2008, 11:38 PM
Count me on the other side of this one. Put aside the Wrigleyville stuff in the article. That's almost guaranteed to set most of us off. And put aside the idea that the park's changes were only, according to the piece, "cosmetic." That characterization totally minimizes the magnitude of the results of the renovations for fans. I now think that the Cell is a marvelous place to watch a game.

HOWEVER, having said that, I've felt that some development near the park would be excellent for fans coming to the game. It would enhance the experience of attending games, from my perspective. It would reduce many of the traffic problems in exiting the park. And it would probably be a net positive for the area, though I can certainly understand how some living there might see it otherwise. (I lived one block from Wrigley for 2 years, so I understand concerns about traffic and noise. For the record, I always felt that the park in the neighborhood was a net positive, but I can see the other side, too.)

Just my two cents.

I agree. I bet you the new Wings and Rings that's opening up at 35th & Halsted will be a big hit, especially during baseball season. The neighborhood needs a place like that. But if there were a couple places right by the park, instead of a 5+ block walk it would be alot better. I don't think the neighborhood would have to worry about too much congestion either as most of the traffic will go back east to the Dan Ryan or LSD. The stadium is already in a nice neighborhood in my opinion; there is no need for it to be "Comiskeyville," but there is certanly room for a few places right by the park.Although the one truly bull**** aspect of the article was the "conspiracy theory" that JR wants to hog all of the food/beer money in the stadium itself. If this were true he would not have allowed tailgaiting which I'm sure has taken some money away from concessions inside the park.

chisoxfanatic
03-29-2008, 11:39 PM
Count me in the "I like Bridgeport the way it is" club. Sure, Halsted can spruce up a bit; but, that's it.

I love living here and can't see myself leaving this neighborhood unless I get a new job in DuPage or Will county.

WhiteSox5187
03-30-2008, 12:05 AM
I have no desire to Bridgeport become yuppiefied. I'm unnerved by the fact that there's even a Starbucks there. What I love about Halsted is from about Schaller's (which is like, 39th, right?) to about 31st, there are so few (if any) chain stores (outside of like, Dunkin Donuts...it's been awhile since I've been walking down that end of Halsted as I haven't been to a Sox game since September, so my memory is a bit fuzzy!). But I'd hate to see Halsted become loaded with Southside versions of Sluggers, Hi-Tops and the Cubbie Bear...granted there are a few bars on Halsted (there's one at like 34th, I think) but I don't want to see the neighborhood change. Even though the area around Bridgeport has become a bit, what's the word I'm looking for here, higher end real estate side, the neighborhood has maintained its blue collar roots and it's still possible to walk around there and see the guy who's been living there since the '30s listening to the game on the radio on his front steps. I don't want to see Bridgeport lose that and become awash in twenty-something year old kids (not that I have anything against twenty year old kids! I'm one myself, and granted there are a lot of them in Bridgeport these days).

chisoxfanatic
03-30-2008, 12:11 AM
More and more of those places in that stretch of Halsted are closing, unfortunately. I was going to check out the small furniture shop on 34th and Halsted this summer for a new dinning room table set; but, as of Monday, I noticed it empty and chained-off.

EndemicSox
03-30-2008, 12:31 AM
I know many feel the neighborhood is perfectly fine the way it is, and I respect that opinion, but imo, some major changes need to take place. I'm not sure if Reinsdorf and company want such changes, as I've read they want all $ being spent inside the park, but it is what it is, the area could use some sprucing, for the lack of better term. Then again, I don't live there, and I do spend all my $ inside the park, so my opinion really doesn't matter...

thedudeabides
03-30-2008, 12:54 AM
I think tailgating has become part of the experience, which personally I love. People eat and drink out there. Nobody is stopping that. My contention with the article is every successful franchise in sports doesn't have to be like wrigley. The Bulls did pretty well in the west loop. Most parks in sports aren't like wrigley. It's a unique experience, but it doesn't personify success as this article insinuates.

Flight #24
03-30-2008, 01:03 AM
IMO it's a simple equation: More to do before/after games for the casual fan = more casual fans = more $$$$ for the team to use in it's budgeting.

That last point is what I care about the most, so I'm all for it. Does that make Wrigleyville the be-all/end-all? Nope. But like it or not, it's arguably one of the best revenue generatora in sports. So from that perspective, I would like the Sox to emulate it.

LITTLE NELL
03-30-2008, 06:06 AM
A ballpark surrounded by parking lots has never hurt the Dodgers, Mets and Angels just to name a few. The Yankees draw over 4 million while playing in the South Bronx which is not the greatest area of NYC. The main reason to go to USCF or any other park is to see a MLB game, I could care less how many saloons there are in the neighborhood. A Ballpark should be clean, have plenty of parking and be easy to get to, in that respect you cant get much better than USCF.

raven1
03-30-2008, 06:58 AM
The article misses the whole point of the park's best feature - because of those parking lots it is very quick & easy to get to & from. My door to seat time from the Northwest suburbs is only about an hour. In contrast, due to the lack of freeway access and parking Wrigley Field is both a headache to get to & from & a ripoff once you get there (2 hours fighting traffic, iffy street parking or ripoff private garages). Ironically, I can get to Miller Park in Milwaukee (another stadium by a freeway surrounded by parking lots) in the about same time it takes to go to Wrigley Field.

The last thing I want to do before or after a game is sit in bumper to bumper traffic on side streets.

thomas35forever
03-30-2008, 12:25 PM
That article sucks and blows at the same time. I didn't even bother to finish reading it. I know it's from three years ago, but would you really want to give up convenience for atmosphere? Apparently, some fans in this town would.

I_Liked_Manuel
03-30-2008, 01:06 PM
ive never understood the (old) bridgeport residents' point in which they moved to a neighborhood that attracts 30,000+ additional people 80 times a year but don't want to be affected in the slightest by the additional people.

chicago neighborhoods change and evolve over time, it's just the nature of living in an urban area. bridgeport, by and large, has been able to circumvent this for generations - and i don't think it would be within the rules of this board to discuss the ways in which the neighborhood got away with it.

i think it'd only be fair to let the market dictate what happens to those parking lots - if it's better for them to be condos/houses/restaurants - so be it. it's not in the best interest of the city for neighborhoods to remain static over time.

SOXSINCE'70
03-30-2008, 02:27 PM
This White Sox fan doesn't want or need "yuppie"
bars and restaurants to make my experience at
Comiskey Park worth while.

LEAVE THE DAMN NEIGHBORHOOD ALONE!!

Chicken Dinner
03-30-2008, 02:43 PM
If you build it, they will come.

Parrothead
03-30-2008, 03:42 PM
Personally, I would like the Sox or someone to buy that yellow building on the south side of the stadium (I think it is a school) and make it into a building with restaraunts / bars or something like that. That way there is an option for fans to go pre and post game, it does not "change" the neighborhood much and with the construction of all the housing around there now it would give neighborhood people a place to go.

Elephant
03-30-2008, 04:12 PM
IMO it's a simple equation: More to do before/after games for the casual fan = more casual fans = more $$$$ for the team to use in it's budgeting.


But no, we're blue collar and like to FOCUS on the GAME. We'd rather retain our no frills image than see the team ultimately make more money. :rolleyes:

Of course by no means should all 32 acres be developed, but how about just one? Create an atmosphere instead of a rush to the parking lot to get back to Orland and Beverly.

Chicken Dinner
03-30-2008, 04:16 PM
I usually take the Red Line to the game so I can't have a cooler or tailgate without a car. A couple of bars/restaurants would be a welcome addition.

spiffie
03-31-2008, 01:30 AM
But no, we're blue collar and like to FOCUS on the GAME. We'd rather retain our no frills image than see the team ultimately make more money. :rolleyes:

Of course by no means should all 32 acres be developed, but how about just one? Create an atmosphere instead of a rush to the parking lot to get back to Orland and Beverly.
Just remember, being drunk on beer bought in a bar means you don't care about baseball. Being hammered off of beer procured from the back of a car and pounded in a parking lot means you bleed the silver and black.

I just wonder when people will turn on cornhole now that lots of yuppie (read: northside) bars are having tournaments for it.