coneflower

One thing I would draw attention to that I see a lot is the assumption that if the stadium moves, then something else fabulous can move in and take its place. As I mentioned earlier, the potential of the site is immense... But what can we reasonably expect to happen there without a huge anchor and billionaire partner? I can imagine many more amazing things than a seldom-used football stadium and empty parking lots. But are those things realistic? And over what timeframe? Based on history and the timeframe of other regional transformative projects, realizing that vision could be decades to a generation. And, honestly, if we say that's what we're working toward to address the mistakes of past generations, that's fine, but let's just be honest about it.

We assume the Haslams will embrace TOD because it is a no-brainer. But I think it's just as likely a new stadium rapid stop would only operate on game days.

That all sounds good to me, but my concern is that all the public money will get spent in Brook Park and the lakefront will be left with great potential but little resources to act on it.

Civic pride is great but what is the opportunity cost? New Browns stadium for wealthy fans, many of whom do not live in the county bearing the cost... or more money for roads, sewers, schools, parks, etc.? I don't want the team to leave, but if I'm thinking about this like my own family budget, it's really hard to justify. Maybe the Haslam's "innovative" approach to paying for it will address my concerns, which I would love!

Is there any evidence that the Brook Plan stadium is actually financially possible? This whole process has been so bizarre and dysfunctional. Doesn't give me a lot of confidence in providing public funding for either location!

I can't read the whole article but it says CSU is why the station moved. That's too bad because I'd think affordable intercity bus service would actually be perfect for college students. CLEVELAND, Ohio – Cleveland State University rejected a plan to relocate the city’s Greyhound bus terminal on its grounds, saying “the safety and security of the CSU campus, and the strategic and financial priorities of the University, must come first,” according to a spokesperson. The new transit center, instead, will move to suburban Brook Park, about a dozen miles from the central city, on land owned by the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority. https://www.cleveland.com/news/2024/08/cleveland-state-nixed-plans-for-relocated-greyhound-bus-station-near-campus.html

I think city/county officials are doing a good job looking out for taxpayers. But I do think it's important to realistically explore how vulnerable we are to Jimmy taking his football and leaving Northeast Ohio altogether. That would be ugly but the NFL is so big they can just say if you want a team, you gotta pay $2B to build us a dome. And if you don't we'll go where they will. Like the Olympics does.

But that is my point. The Haslams are beating around the bush with the facts and it’s counter-productive for their cause. If they believe the stadium is a money pit that is not worth fixing, they need to say so and show evidence. They may argue $1B gets us only 15 years. But how long would a new stadium itself last—30 years before whoever owns the team wants another new stadium? Or tries to move? Is twice as much time worth almost 3X construction plus competing with public and private investments downtown, as the county letter mentions? It’s worth debating but right now the public doesn’t have that info.

Insiders say the stadium is “decaying rapidly.” What does that mean? If it is taken down to the studs in a $1B renovation, it still won’t last 30 years? The public needs to understand what this means before public money is spent in either location.

They haven’t committed to anything anywhere. They are fickle as hell. But the implication all along has been they wanted to develop around the stadium and reap the profits. I’m not suggesting they would be great to work with. I’m saying that they have the money and capacity (at least on paper) to do something big that Cleveland will be losing, and there doesn’t appear to be an easy way to fill that void anytime soon. We have tons of huge opportunities all over that are not moving simply because we don’t have enough resources. The Bedrock riverfront plan, which seems most realistic right now, spans 45 years.

I say yes. Without the Haslam partnership, Bibb has got a gigantic physical and monetary hole to fill to make his lakefront plan a reality. I would love to be wrong, but where is that partner coming from? We're struggling to get capital for modest projects right now.

The more I think about it, the more I think the public at any level should not shoulder any part of building in Brook Park. The team is asking taxpayers to pay for them to duplicate everything that already exists downtown -- hotels, restaurants and bars, entertainment, parking and other amenities. Why the heck would we pay $1.2B to rebuild and compete with what already exists that we have already paid for with tax money? If the Haslams would like to do it their way, I believe in capitalism and they have a right to bring a new product to the market. But why should taxpayers fund it? The only actual argument you can make is that if we make 'em too mad, they'll move the team to another city. And that's a reasonable worry to consider. But all the other stuff to me is not compelling.

The city is paying, like all of us, if the state and county fill in the gaps for Jimmy. That's just dumb expecting the city of Cleveland to pay more. I can't listen to talk radio around here it's painful.

This is clearly a PR play to get fans to put pressure on the government at the state and local level to fund this thing. The fact that they haven't shared how they would pay for it STILL to me indicates they haven't figured out how to land the plane. So, lakefront is still there if they can't pull it off. Would be curious what the Bengals ownership has to say about this in Columbus.

This is outside my lane, so I'll gladly be schooled, but it seems to me if our local developers had the capacity, we'd be further along in many locations. That is not to disparage anyone but just to say their resources may be limited compared to peers in bigger cities. To @E Rocc's point about the environment being rough in the winter. Again, not an engineer or architect, but this seems like something that can be improved through design.

I think it's fair to be skeptical because the city's billionaire development partner, who also happens to have deep political connections to the statehouse, is walking away. From my light research, all projects like this need some private investment. Our problem isn't demand or lack of ideas, it's access to capital. But at the heart of this challenge is a philosophical difference between what Bibb thinks the land should be used for vs. what someone looking to make a profitable return thinks.

I keep seeing the argument that the stadium, even if properly maintained, will only last another 15 years. But there is never any evidence. Is it going to fall down on people in 15 years? The recent public reports say the building is in “good condition considering its age.” Even that is unclear, though. What is an acceptable age for a stadium? The Lions played in the Silverdome 26 years and the Vikings played in the Metrodome around 31 years, so if the Browns make it to 2028 on the lakefront, then that actually would be in the same range. But the decision for the Haslams is a no brainer. How it is funded is the key thing and what financial obligation we are shouldering to benefit a family business.

That is a fair point. I'm not an engineer, but it seems like there has to be a way to plan development and design buildings that mitigate some of that wind. The city's plan doesn't really seem to contemplate the wind, which would prevent it from being an all-season destination.

This works better without the stadium and more housing, imho. Couldn’t they adopt the DC approach and allow market rate with a certain percentage of affordable house required to ensure it is not just an exclusive enclave?

I'm pretty sure they nixed the idea because the city didn't want to go around eminent domaining everyone in the neighborhood or fighting with someone who believes their dilappedated garage is worth $10M.

I am curious where the money will come from but if this is just a fancy strip mall, it doesn't seem that unrealistic to get off the ground. I imagine having an NFL stadium as an anchor brings some advantages just in terms of people wanting to associate themselves with the league. The idea that this will transform the region is hogwash but just having a few basic things will be enough for some people to call it a success. Especially if Browns can watch them lose in comfort 😆

Props to Bibb. It looks like a fair deal for his residents. I don't understand any of the quotes I'm reading from Ronayne, though. He seems wishy-washy.

I could be wrong but I thought Haslam proposed stadium redevelopment before Jackson left office. Then Bibb started lakefront planning and airport research when he got in. Either way, how does anything happen without those billionaire bucks?

Does Cleveland even have any money to do anything if the stadium moves? This whole conversation started anew because of Jimmy the billionaire, right? But now that he wants to spend his money elsewhere, I am unclear on how anything gets done. Is there enough money with the TIF to pay for the riverfront and a TBD lakefront project? And over what time frame?

Exactly. People who host events—especially national events—want the city they pick to help them sell their event. The city itself is part of the product. It’s not like if they pick a city everyone shows up (unless it’s something very exclusive like a political convention). If you host a run of the mill event, you run the risk of having low attendance if people don’t find the location compelling and it’s hard to get there for people who don’t live nearby.