Ballpark Changes in the Majors

Here's our roundup of the big-league ballpark developments from 2004.  And when you're done reading about the Majors here, check out our summary of the Minor League parks that were new in 2004.

The stories from 2004 . . .

THE PHILLIES

It took years, but the seemingly endless conflict over a new park for the Phillies was finally resolved . . . although by no means was it a peaceful resolution.  In a city where politics are every bit as fascinating as Philadelphia's sports teams, proposals, counter-proposals and back-room proposals about a new park had been dragging on for months.  Finally, on December 21, 2000, the City Council seemed to come to an agreement with the Mayor that new stadiums for both the Eagles and Phillies would be constructed in what were then parking lots for Veterans Stadium in South Philadelphia.  The Phils' park, which is called Citizens Bank Park, has 43,500 seats and hosted its first regular-season game on April 12 against Cincinnati.  Designing the ballpark was a collaborative effort between Ewing-Cole-Cherry-Brott in Philadelphia and sports kingpins HOK of Kansas City.  The cost for the two stadiums -- and the demolition of the Vet -- could approach a billion dollars when all is said and done.  The city, through rental-car taxes and other revenues, put up $304 million toward the construction, while the state long ago had pledged $170 million.  The move, though, has left the following groups unhappy:  a number of civic leaders, who felt the last-minute back-room deal making was not in the city's best interests (not to mention that there is still no resolution on where millions of dollars in shortfalls for the project will come from); many residents adjacent to where the new stadiums were built (who fear noisy, drunken crowds); citizen activists in the Northern Liberties neighborhood north of downtown, who felt that the best spot for the new baseball park was in their urban setting, a la Coors Field, Wrigley and Camden Yards (they are right, by the way); and ballpark aficionados who felt that there simply had to be a better place to put the ballpark for a franchise with as much tradition and history as this one.  If you'd like to read BASEBALLPARKS.COM's commentary on the controversy (which was written before the city finalized the South Philly site), click here. 

An op-ed piece by William Becker in the Philadelphia Inquirer put the whole situation best:  "The designers of this building faced an impossible challenge: to compensate with architectural amenities for the ballpark's profoundly wrong location. To walk from your car through a parking lot into a single-purpose building, do your business, walk back through the parking lot and then drive home is a fundamentally suburban experience . . . One of the important measures of a society is its grand public buildings. They endure long after their sponsors stop telling us what to think about them, and they tell their own story. The story of this ballpark will be timidity in the face of challenge, resulting in a huge opportunity squandered. What a shame."  How true!  And in a first in Major League history, the Phillies also inaugurated a new spring-training park in 2004 (see the Clearwater review for a look at that park). Check out our detailed review of Citizens Bank Park.

The seating bowl in Citizens Bank Park has some fascinating angles and gaps, thanks to the stellar design from EwingCole.

THE PADRES

This is certainly one of America's most idyllic cities, but there was a lot of trouble in paradise as their ballpark was being built.  Construction of the Padres' new downtown stadium was suspended in September 2000 when the initial funding was depleted and several legal challenges had made it impossible for the city to issue bonds to pay for the completion of the stadium.  One by one, the legal challenges were resolved, and on January 28, 2002, the 16th and final challenge was thrown out by the court, paving the way for the team and city to re-start construction.  The "re-start" happened on February 18, 2002, after Merrill Lynch agreed to buy $169 million worth of construction bonds being issued for the project.  The team had originally hoped to move into the park at the All Star Break in 2002, but all of the delays meant that the new facility wasn't ready until 2004.  HOK was behind the novel design of the park, and the total cost of the project topped $450 million -- with $146 million coming from the team.  Prior to the impasse that began in 2000, the project was expected to cost $400 million, with $115 million coming from the Padres.  The Padres found a local naming sponsor for the facility, which is why it is called Petco Park, and the first regular-season game in this beautiful ballpark was a 4-3 win over the Giants on April 8.  To find out why Petco was named BASEBALLPARKS.COM's New Park of the Year for 2004, check out our thorough review of this fascinating facility.

The Padres' new home has received rave reviews since it opened -- including the review here on BASEBALLPARKS.COM.

CHICAGO (North Side)

While it's never a good idea to tinker with perfection, the Cubs are willing to risk it.  They want to enlarge and enhance the bleacher sections in the outfield of Wrigley Field, and add three rows of "premium" box seats directly behind home plate.  The team's proposal also requested that they be allowed to play more night games, which the neighbors vehemently oppose.  However, before they could move forward with the construction projects, several entities had to grant permission because, after all, Wrigley is a designated historic landmark.  Since the Cubs couldn't gain approval during the offseason between 2001 and 2002 and again between 2002 and 2003, they had hoped to make all of these changes prior to the 2004 campaign -- but countless legal and neighborhood challenges made that impossible, too.  One problem is that the city of Chicago refused to grant permission to have the necessary supports built for the expanded bleachers. Note that the proposed changes to the ballpark -- while not earth-shattering -- would change the look of (a) the bleachers, especially from the outside and (b) the nearly perfect brick backstop currently in use.  By the way, there was an interesting battle that brewied between the team and the owners of the buildings across Waveland Avenue and Sheffield, which border the back of the bleachers.  Those owners, naturally, wanted to continue the longstanding practice of allowing folks to watch the games from the roofs of those buildings.  The Cubs felt that this practice was tantamount to stealing their "product," and the accusations and legal posturing seemed endless.  Progress was made on two fronts as the Cubs entered the 2004 season:  they obtained the right to play a few more of their home games at night (22 in 2004, 26 in 2005 and 30 in 2006); and they reached a settlement with the majority of the owners of the buildings across Sheffield and Waveland.  No massive rebuilding of the bleachers or backstop has been permitted yet, though.

CHICAGO (South Side)

The northside of the Windy City isn't the only place in town generating ballpark news!  The White Sox undertook yet another renovation to sterile Comiskey Park, with this year's project involved the much-needed revamping of the upper deck.  The top eight rows of the too-tall-and-too-steep upper level have been removed, and an attractive new overhang has been added.  Further, the upper concourse has been enclosed and artwork added.  Additional enhancements to the Fan Deck in center field have also been completed.  On the heels of the beautification projects in 2003, these changes are actually turning this stadium into something aesthetically pleasing! But stay tuned, because even more modifications are contemplated for the 2005 season.

Go to 2004 Ballpark Changes in the Minors