Rooftop signs on buildings around Wrigley pitched in proposed ordinance

The Cubs would get the go-ahead to install two new rooftop signs on buildings owned by the billionaire family that also owns the team under a proposed ordinance that’s sure to rekindle the debate about sign pollution at iconic Wrigley Field.

Former Ald. Tom Tunney battled the Cubs over all things Wrigley during his two decades in office, prompting the Ricketts family to bankroll a challenger against him — an opponent Tunney defeated handily.

Tunney’s successor, Ald. Bennett Lawson (44th), continues to chart a different, more cooperative path with the Cubs.

At Wednesday’s City Council meeting, Lawson and his colleagues authorized the sale of hard liquor at the rooftop clubs surrounding Wrigley — clubs owned primarily by the Cubs.

But Lawson also introduced a new ordinance that would pave the way for additional signs on two Ricketts-owned rooftops that do not include private clubs — and also would allow the Cubs, if they choose, to put signs on top of all 13 buildings they own, including those with clubs now.

If the full City Council approves that ordinance, a Coca-Cola sign would be installed at 1040 W. Waveland Ave. and a Benjamin Moore paint sign at 3623 N. Sheffield Ave.

The Coca-Cola sign would feature the soft drink giant’s script logo along with the familiar Coke bottle. The logo would be 33 feet, 5 inches wide and 10 feet, 6 inches high. The Coke bottle would be 4 feet 9 inches wide and 16 feet high.

Chicago Cubs

The Benjamin Moore sign would feature the paint company’s name in letters 3 feet, 9 inches high, stretching across 38 feet, 8 inches. Above that would be the company logo, a stylized, triangular white M inside a red triangle 7 feet, 4 inches high. The entire sign would be 13 feet, 6 inches high.

The decision to add signs around Wrigley comes more than a decade after the Cubs won hard-fought Council approval of the $575 million plan to renovate Wrigley and develop the land around it.

“Since the renovation, we have been able to strike this balance [by] successfully integrating new signage while protecting the … historic heritage and character of the ballpark so not to be as intrusive with signs,” Cubs spokesman Julian Green told the Sun-Times Wednesday. “But the ability to leverage rooftops that we own for signage purposes creates additional assets for us to offer to our partners.”

Green wouldn’t to say how much revenue the Cubs expect to generate from the new signs, just that they’re “high-value assets.”

Although the ordinance authorizes signs throughout the “rooftop district,” Green said the team doesn’t want to damage the bird’s-eye view of Wrigley for paying customers of its rooftop clubs.

“This is not a race or sprint. This is a very delicate balance. ... We will continue to move very methodically in terms of providing value for our partners while protecting the experience for our fans,” Green said.

“It’s not the goal to put signs on every rooftop. A number of these rooftops still have active spaces that we sell for games. So in some cases, you wouldn’t be able to put up a sign that potentially would block the guest viewing experience. … So it’s not something we’re looking at right now,” he said.

Associated Press

Lawson handed a written statement to reporters at the Council meeting: “In recent weeks, we’ve had community conversations to ensure everyone had the opportunity to make their voice heard on the renewal of the rooftop ordinance. I believe the ordinances related to liquor and signage reflect a solution that works for everyone, including neighbors, rooftop building owners, and the Cubs.”

Tunney was careful not to second-guess his hand-picked successor and former chief of staff, but he urged the Council and the Cubs to be “very cautious about installing signs on these buildings.”

“The sign industry is very competitive. ... It’s obviously a lucrative industry, and it’s a great backdrop for the advertisers. But we’ve got to tread carefully on this issue. ... Once they start, when is it gonna stop?” Tunney asked.

In the sometimes bitter negotiations that culminated in the Wrigley renovation, the Cubs initially demanded an amusement tax subsidy, only to get a hard ‘no’ from Mayor Rahm Emanuel.

The tag team of Emanuel and Tunney then fought the Cubs over virtually every element of the team’s revised plan to bankroll the project with an influx of outfield advertising signs and more night games.

Stefano Esposito/Sun-Times file photo

Ultimately, Wrigleyville residents accused Emanuel of going too far by giving the Cubs the go-ahead to put up two video scoreboards, four other outfield signs, extend the Wrigley footprint onto public streets and sidewalks without compensating Chicago taxpayers and play more night games.

At Emanuel’s behest, the City Council also approved the Cubs’ ambitious plan to develop the land around Wrigley with a hotel, an office building and open-air plaza with even more signs.

“This revenue was part of the negotiations in lieu of any kind of public financing,” Tunney recalled. “As we look at these other stadiums, you can look at all of the work that we did at Wrigley without public financing.”

The tough negotiations over Wrigley renovation are a stark contrast to the massive public subsidies now being pursued by the Bears and White Sox as those teams try to replace their publicly owned stadiums.

Contributing: Sophie Sherry