![]() The existing structure easily allows for upgraded amenities and renovations. It has a wraparound concourse with berms. I looked at the blue print: It has suites. I knew spring training ballparks had a historically short lifespan, but these new 90s ballparks were meant to be more economically sustainable and attractive. Replacing a ballpark built in 1997!?!? Why? (some claim it’s technically a renovated version of the old one, but that’s not really true). Unless there’s significant historical attachment, give me a new ballpark!īut even I found this one ridiculous. That’s not my game (I usually fall for the civic pride argument). I’m not one to complain about wasteful spending on new, unnecessarily ballparks, that in all honesty, likely won’t jumpstart significant economic development in the area. But Hohokam Park, and the situation the city of Mesa was going through, was something I had to see. I usually don’t review (or go out of my way to see) ballparks that are about to close, unless there is some sort of historical significance obviously. Because of the peculiarity of one team’s old spring training home undergoing renovations for a new team, I have decided to keep this page under “Chicago Cubs”, and create a new page for the Athletics’s HohoKam Stadium under “Oakland Athletics”, even though it is the same park as this one. ![]() The Oakland Athletics moved into this facility, now formally called HohoKam Stadium, in 2015. ![]() ***IMPORTANT NOTE: The Cubs trained at HohoKam Park from 1997 to 2013. The New Comiskey of Spring Training While I originally thought replacing a facility that opened in 1997 was absurd, the Cubs may actually have a point, as the bland and sterile HoHoKam simply doesn’t measure up to other parks of it’s time ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |