Wrigley Field Restoration Update: Cubs Apply for Permit, Rooftops Tell Lawyers to Proceed Accordingly

According to multiple reports, the Cubs applied for a building permit to begin construction on the 650-square foot see-through sign in right field late last Friday. The application was submitted online after talks between the team and the rooftop club owners stalled last Wednesday.

Cubs’ spokesman, Julian Green said Monday, “We were hopeful we could come to some resolution. But given last week’s action, it appears that our proposal was rejected. They’ve decided to go forward with this legal action. We’re going forward with our right to put up the sign. This decision should not be construed as an indication that we’re moving forward with the entire construction project.”

The Wrigleyville Rooftop Association issued a statement and said the Cubs’ permit application means ‘Game On’ according to the Sun-Times.

Rooftop spokesman Ryan McLaughlin said, “This is an unfortunate turn of events because our hope was to find a solution to this matter. Rooftop owners believe any blockage of our views violates the contract we have with the owner of the Cubs. We have instructed our legal team to proceed accordingly.”

The Sun-Times reported “the rooftop club owners assembled a legal team quite some time ago in preparation for a court fight.”

According to the Sun-Times, both the Cubs and the rooftops know the sign in right field will block the views on Sheffield Avenue. The Cubs felt they had to proceed and Julian Green addressed the team’s decision to apply for a permit.

“Since Day One, we have reduced the number of signs, the size of those signs and changed the location of signs. We have done everything we can to help alleviate the concerns of the rooftop partners. We’re now moving forward with signs that are to help benefit this baseball club and this construction project. This was always about putting up signs in the business interests of this baseball team to put money back into the ballclub.”

The team and the rooftop club owners were thought to be close to a deal last week, with one proposal shifting the right field sign to the top of one of the buildings. The Sun-Times reported the deal “fell apart when rooftop owners got a clearer picture of the impact of the massive video scoreboard planned for left field.”

Danny Ecker reported negotiations “are not dead yet.” The Cubs and the rooftop owners are scheduled to meet again this week to continue talks to find a resolution.

The Cubs’ current contract with the rooftop club owners expires on Dec. 31, 2023.

Follow ChicagoCubsOnline on Twitter: @TheCCO and @TheCCO_Minors

Quote of the Day

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anais Nin
Share on Fancred
  • Pingback: Wrigley Field Restoration Update: Cubs Apply for Permit, Rooftops Tell Lawyers to Proceed Accordingly - Cubs Chronicles

  • raymondrobertkoenig

    This might get more interesting than the product the Cubs put on the field.

    • Eugene Debs

      It kinda already is….

  • Swish23

    Kaplan on CSN SportsTalk Live tonite’s show had copy of Cubs-rooftop contract. It states if government body approves an expansion of park; Cubs can make improvements. Question is a jumbotron, large OF sign, and expanding OF walls onto sidewalk an expansion? Kap had attorney’s read it; no slam dunk; but they thought team would win. Contract calls for arbitration not actual courts to determine right to add signage, jumbotron.

    • GaryLeeT

      This is what I said a while back. Go forward with the plans, and let the chips fall where they may. Especially since it appears that an injunction can’t be issued.

    • CubbyDenCritic

      In Section six, saw it the other day……City gave approval as part of the renovation project……..never know what a jury would think & decide when all is said and done.

  • CubbyDenCritic

    I wonder if the Rickett’s can get a hold of that “Mission Accomplish” banner from the US Navy…..
    “Game On”…….I don’t think the Roof Top Owners have any idea what type of Corporate Law Firm they will be going against…….I wonder if the Roof Top pony tail lawyers will be pad by the pint for their legal services……….
    Arbitration will come first……if the Cubs do lose out in the courts for some reason……then the Ricketts will have to look to scrape the entire renovation project and seek a new stadium location……..Ricketts can tell the Mayor of Chicago he can keep his Wrigleyville voters ……..Rosemont, Arlington Heights or some NW suburb will love the Cubs and all that sales tax money that will comes with them ……..
    Should the Cubs win big, many Roof Top owners will soon be out of business………..
    Game On….So is BOYCOTT THE ROOF TOP OWNERS AND THEIR SUPPORTERS !

    • Eugene Debs

      That binding contract is going to look like a pretty convincing “EXHIBIT A” during arbitration.

      That being said, I think the rooftop owners will eventually have to settle.

  • Ripsnorter1

    Whatever it takes to get a new, modern stadium.

  • Henry

    How many people are in the Wrigleyville Rooftop Association? I know Loukas the owner of the Cubby Bear owns 3 rooftops. Beth Murphy of Murphy’s Bleachers owns at least 1 rooftop. Both have to be in the Association. The Ricketts have purchased 2 rooftops but they obviously are not part of the Association. Are we just battling 2 people?

  • http://chicagocubsonline.com/ Neil

    Details of the contract with the rooftops from Kaplan

    http://www.csnchicago.com/cubs/exclusive-look-inside-cubs-rooftop-contract

    • Dorasaga

      The legal analysis was written and thought out. By the way, I got your reply. I’ll work on a revised draft. Thanks for the encouragement, and sharing with us all, the Cubbie Faithfuls.

  • J Daniel

    One thing is sure, and in my opinion is a mistake, the Cubs will stay at Wrigley.

    • jiba11

      The Cubs made a huge mistake by stating that they wouldn’t leave Wrigley. They needed to play hard ball, like Riensdorf did to get his stadium.

  • 07GreyDigger

    Isn’t the gist of the contract that the rooftops give the Cubs 17% of their profits from their views? If they have zero views, the Cubs get no money from them. I doubt they would care less about that.

  • SuzyS

    I’m looking forward to the day that this is no longer an issue and the Cubs have actually redone Wrigley in whatever manner they wish.

    • John_CC

      Me too Suzy. Unfortunately it could be 9 more years!