Ethan

... Because the City has never thrown away a perfectly good lakefront plan to start again from step 1. Hopefully you're right though. There's no reason the City couldn't/shouldn't keep the existing plan and just fill in the gap.

I'm wondering the same thing, assuming it's a 50/50 split on a billion dollar remodel, who picks up the extra billion dollars if it's instead a new build? The Browns or the taxpayers? Or does the 50/50 split continue?

Yes I suppose it was, and that is clearly some of their jobs at the Ohio City location, but I'm sure it's far from all of them. I guess the question is if they move will they keep their business/headquarters jobs in Ohio City. They may also choose to continue to brew some smaller / seasonal batches at the Ohio City location. My guess is that as long as they retain the Ohio City space, they will continue to use it, and given that they're expanding it, and committed to retaining the brewpub, they will continue to retain and use it. That means that most likely a significant chunk of the non restaurant employees will remain in Ohio City. I don't have any inside information, but that's my read of the situation.

I guess that's fair, it hasn't been clear to what extent they will be moving jobs out of Ohio City. There's a lot of conflicting signals, including buying the W25th frontage of their building last year (which doesn't make sense if they are looking to move jobs out of the area). They've given zero reason to think they're reducing their Ohio City presence outside of looking for new real estate. I'd support them doing what's best for the company regardless, but if people are assuming they are moving everything out of Ohio City besides the brewpub I can understand the concern quite a bit more. From what they've said so far, I just think it's likely unwarranted.

I get the feeling that there's something in the air that's making people look for an excuse to abandon their support of GLBC. Maybe it's being on the cusp of being too big to be primarily a Cleveland thing, not sure. Personally, I'm rooting for GLBC, and want them to do what's best for GLBC. I was skeptical of their Scranton plan from the start for all of the reasons I laid out above (it's too close for a new brewpub, it's an awkward place for a manufacturing). I'm guessing they have started to reevaluate for these same reasons. If they want a combo brewpub and manufacturing facility, moving it far away from downtown makes a lot of sense to avoid cannibalizing the market (and let's be honest, the craft beer market is definitely saturated, there's no more room to grow it, particularly in the Ohio City area). They could split off the new brewpub and manufacturing in order to keep the manufacturing element in Cleveland proper. That is plausible, but it would lose the efficiency you get from combining them. They could maybe look for an East side location for this facility in Cleveland proper, but that is easier said than done (and it still probably canabbalizes their market share a tiny bit). The parts of Cleveland where I would generally think of as a relatively safe bet to open a brewpub (Little Italy, University Circle) don't really have the open land to build a manufacturing faculty. The places that do have this open land generally require a bit more of a bet on their future development, or that you can make people come to you. I'm not saying it can't be done, and I encourage them to continue to try and find somewhere. What I am saying instead, is that I want GLBC to what's best for GLBC, and I don't think it's fair for fans from Cleveland to punish them for growing beyond their original location, or expanding out of Cleveland. If GLBC expand into Avon, I'll understand their decision and still enjoy visiting their Ohio City flagship location. This is all not to mention the possibilities that we could get on this land instead of a manufacturing facility. I'm optimistic that now that we have some minimum density on this peninsula the next developments could be much better and make for a more engaging neighborhood.

This seems like a nothing-burger. The deal "lacks specifics," details will remain fuzzy until "after the TIF district is already established". Griffin even acknowledges that funding in the early years will go towards downtown primarily so that the investment can actually pay off. Basically this seems to have all been a political stunt for Griffin, he'll now declare victory, but nothing whatsoever has actually changed, and I wouldn't be surprised if details don't get worked out until after they're both out of office.

I'm curious how much more of their own money the Haslams are willing to put into the Brook Park location. The overall price tag will be much higher, so even if a lower percentage of the money comes from public funds it could still be more public money overall. Not to mention, which public agencies are footing this bill? Cleveland shouldn't give a cent if it isn't in their jurisdiction, and I'm sure Brook Park doesn't have enough funds to make a dent. Even if the Haslams are paying 100% of the stadium costs, based on @NorthShore647graphic, significant infrastructure changes/upgrades are required. That's additional public cost that needs to be accounted for All that said, if the total amount of money from taxpayers ends up being less for building new at Brook Park I would find it hard to justify opposing the project. I think that is extremely unlikely to be the case though. The cheapest option for the taxpayers will almost certainly be renovation. Perhaps the State and County should just make it clear that they will only contribute x% of the money to Renovate the existing system, any funds beyond that will have be the responsibility of the private sector, and that includes any necessary infrastructure changes.

I had no trouble reading it. It's a good article, no new bombs, but it has some interesting tidbits from anonymous sources, mostly on how the Haslams are thinking. Some good discussion of the (lack of) merits for public funding of stadiums.

I don't think so. Maybe for special games, but they play a lot, and I'm pretty sure Terminal Tower doesn't usually go to Cavs colors when they play.

Cross posting these Metroparks board meeting updates here.

Some updates bike trails updates from the Metroparks board meeting. Nothing major, several trails, Solon to South Chagrin, Raise East Side Trails, and West Park to Kams continue to move forward, receive funding, etc.

Cool nugget in the Metroparks Board Meeting for this month, one that lays the building blocks for something very cool in the future. Tldr: The Metroparks is looking to run utilities to the Old Coast Guard Station.

Soft disagree. There's several parking garages within a fifteen minute walk of the current stadium, and basically none within a fifteen minute range of the Broadway location. There are only a couple within a twenty minute walk. I'm confident the average walk to parking will be at least a few minutes longer. Do I think that should disqualify it, absolutely not! (Most Americans could do with some more walking tbh...) As I said, I think it's the best option. But I do think this will be a problem for others. Great points!

I think it was sort of ambiguous in early reporting. In any case, the most recent Crains article made it clear they are not abandoning their Ohio City presence. "Whatever happens next, there are zero plans for the Ohio City brewpub to go away. The company publicly reinforced its commitment to that neighborhood this winter."

I don't know about only, but those do seem to be the two most likely options. I haven't seen this in as many words, but WOW! This is a fantastic post! Bravo! I appreciate your graphics and your insistence about the reality of surface parking. Continuing on the above, Highland doesn't seem likely because it isn't that near a highway, would require replacing current green space, and basically requires extending a train line. That's a lot of political will, moving parts, and a possible Nimby nightmare, it's just too much work for the potential benefit. Rockside is plausible. I've said before, and I'd stick to it, the independence area is as accessible to suburban commuters as downtown. The location is good. I appreciate the site layout, and if business are willing to sell their parking spaces, parking won't be an issue. (though that's definitely an if). Personally, I think the Broadway proposal is the best location, but I don't think it's particularly likely. It just also has a lot of moving parts. It requires moving a road (and likely a trail), the post office, adding in infill rail stations, and while there's a lot of parking nearish, it still leaves most people walking quite a distance from most of the parking in the downtown core. (Not an issue for me, but I'm sure it will be for some). That leaves Brook Park and downtown. There's not much space downtown, so the only options are the current location, knocking some stuff down (perhaps in the vicinity of Noble Beast), the location I suggested a bit upthread, and (I don't like this idea, nor am I sure if it's even possible, just throwing it out for completeness) north of Burke in that open space (it also probably can't be domed). I don't think any location in the downtown core is at all likely outside of where it is currently. I am increasingly feeling that if the Browns move the lakefront land bridge and any development to go with it is likely dead. If that feeling is correct, than I am 100% in favor of renovating the current location. Sure it would be better without a stadium there, but I'm concerned that if we let the perfect be the enemy of the good we'll just get nothing.

I think their concern is different, not more. Whether or not they're calling it that, another brewpub would be functionally similar to franchising. I don't think anyone would ever recommend someone open up a new franchise location within walking distance of the old one unless you plan on closing the old one. It risks cannibalizing your existing location.

I'm not saying it couldn't be nice. To state my point differently, I'm guessing that facility is less efficient from a pure production standpoint than one without all the bells and whistles. I could be wrong, but I'd bet I'm not. If GLBC opts for the Scranton location they'd probably be pressured into building something like that. Doing so might be in tension with their stated goal, which is to improve production. Conversely, they don't need to add all the bells and whistles off the highway in a suburban environment, they can build their facility purely focused on the production, and have a brewpub on the side of they so choose. They also don't have two brewpubs within walking distance of each other fighting for the same customers.

Yup, it would, but my understanding of their plans was to have the brewpub by the water on the other side of Carter road, and the production facility by itself on the inland portion. I also just get the impression from the Crain's article is that what they're looking for is a true production facility, one where they can really focus on efficiency and high production. It sounds like they are trying to grow. My guess is the facility they want is going to look like an industrial facility, and maybe won't be a good fit for what we'd like to see on Scranton. To the extent that they could make it work it would probably come as a result of compromising on their efficiency and production goals which won't be good for GLBC. Of course I don't know any of this, I'm just guessing.

Looks like the City is considering permanently closing W29th street to cars. Actually, they just got the grant, so it looks like they're doing it barring any major pushback! https://www.pps.org/projects/w-29th-street-open-street

That's really interesting and good to know! Looking at the satellite imagery it looked really tight, but after you point this out, I see what you're saying. Do you know how far south the quadruple tracking went?

While I'd like to see GLBC keep its operations in Cleveland proper, I sort of agree that Scranton isn't really a good choice of location for them or the city... For one, I agree with @RMB I don't think industrial activity is the best use of half of the peninsula. We could have some great mixed use development fronting the centennial lake link trail instead, hopefully with some preserved green space. It could be really nice! Also I can't be the only one who was wondering if a brewpub on Scranton would just be cannibalizing their own demand. It's so close to their Ohio City location. They would definitely run the risk of just splitting their existing customers, as opposed to growing the pie. They don't run that risk in Avon. I'm sure they will have fewer space constraints there as well. Regardless of whether or not I like it, it does seem to make more sense.

At which point it could just be an extension of the red line.

^ It's kind of ridiculous that a rail line running along the lake wouldn't have many ridership generators, but in our present state it's true (to my eye at least). There's some jobs along that stretch, but that's about it. It would run too far north to be useful for Asiatown, and on the wrong side of the highway to serve the Waterloo Arts district. Serving parks would be cool, but probably not actually good ridership generators. Personally I think following the other freight line would be a more useful extension (the one that turns south), but it's an active freight line, and it would be non trivial to expand the right of way for passenger tracks. Which is to say it's (probably) not a realistic solution. Unfortunately, it sort of seems (to me at least) like attempts to extend the waterfront line are a bit of a sunk cost fallacy issue. We want to make the waterfront line useful since we spent money to build it, but if we are going to build new rail lines other places would probably be a better use of those resources.

I think this might have a lot of utility for cyclists and discussing bike routes, it has a lot of utility largely just by compiling several resources into one place, such as Cuyahoga Greenways plan, road stress analysis by Noaca, cyclist fatalities, and more. Though the Cuyahoga County Bike Facilities option is almost comical in how optimistic it is with future routes, and many actual future routes are listed as complete. I would be interested in which of those overly optimistic routes you'd be most interested in seeing come to fruition.

Cool new Cuyahoga County mapping website,it has a lot of of overlay options. Tree canopy, ground cover, demographic info, and some interesting biking info (packing to cross post). As an aside, doesn't work well on Mobile. https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/70b82141d3fb4b9e84057a482362fe7b/page/Application-Home/