February 8, 20241 yr 12 minutes ago, Blimp City said: Pretty impressive @KJP. Look what you have wrought. In addition to the above, and the Brown statement, lots of local media are all of a sudden reporting the alleged sale. Unfortunately, just a bunch of doublespeak from the city. I mean what exactly are they trying to convey other than slapping themselves on the back.
February 8, 20241 yr 16 minutes ago, Blimp City said: Feels like they’re on completely different pages. Browns statement only mentioned NEO as a location the City is saying you’ll have your stadium exactly where it is now and we’re planning for it
February 8, 20241 yr All of this discussion is giving me whiplash and heart palpitations, just like watching a Browns game. I'm only in my 20s y'all my body can't afford this 😭 I want to hear more about the "insider info" that the site was bought for a non-stadium development before we jump to further conclusions - I feel like that crucial information posted by @BelievelandD1, @WindyBuckeye, and @YABO713was unduly overlooked in the midst of everyone panicking and rolling out their pushpin-string crime scene investigation conspiracy theory boards. It could be wrong sure but still... Edited February 8, 20241 yr by Geowizical
February 8, 20241 yr Just now, w28th said: As far as I can tell Cleveland.com still hasn’t reported any of this. Fox and WKYC have online articles.
February 8, 20241 yr 8 minutes ago, BoomerangCleRes said: Feels like they’re on completely different pages. Browns statement only mentioned NEO as a location the City is saying you’ll have your stadium exactly where it is now and we’re planning for it I find it interesting that the city seems intent on keeping the stadium right where it is. Maybe that's where they don't see eye-to-eye.
February 8, 20241 yr Who is ready for the national anthem flyover to be a frontier plane with an Otter on the tail?
February 8, 20241 yr This land purchase butressing the airport sounds like a multi hotel development to coincide with a new terminal layout
February 8, 20241 yr The stadium absolutely does not need tonnes of parking. That's just typical American conditioning that has created this ridiculous over reliance we have on automobiles, particularly caused by civic decisions to position regional assets in suburban areas instead of clustering and complimenting in central areas. Whilst it's naive to completely ignore cars, there's swaths of parking, surface, street and structural all over Downtown that is ordinarily not in use on Sundays when office users are absent for those who want to drive. Developing projects with cars at the forefront has gotten us nowhere but trouble and whilst it should not be ignored it should be a minor point of consideration. A suburban stadium surrounded by 20k parking spaces funded by the tax payer is 1970s antiquated crap and almost gross when you think of how it (indirectly) encourages high levels of pollution, then all the BS like increased levels of drunk driving. Really had to laugh at the 1100 presenter gleefully talking about people would be able to take a skywalk from the airport terminal to the stadium without ever having any interaction with the outside area. Real great urbanism that creating this soulless bubble. Cleveland compared to a lot of its peers has actually been pretty good when it comes to this and even writing previous wrongs like the Cavs playing in Richfield. All our teams play Downtown. We haven't sent our main public further education campuses to the suburbs. Keeping the Police DT. All these things add up to the collective bigger picture. The local civic leaders should not be encouraging a decision like this whether it's at City or County level. They go there they go alone. If they want this then they should be paying for every single penny IMO. Edited February 8, 20241 yr by snakebite
February 8, 20241 yr 31 minutes ago, BoomerangCleRes said: Feels like they’re on completely different pages. Browns statement only mentioned NEO as a location the City is saying you’ll have your stadium exactly where it is now and we’re planning for it "shore-to-core-to-shore." Maybe leave that phrase to die for now.
February 8, 20241 yr I know this is at least in part true with Burke, but anyone think a stadium that close to a high-volume airport is a bad idea? Like 70,000 people congregating in a potential crash landing zone of a commercial airliner doesn't seem great. Or maybe I'm just being unduly cautious and the risk is soooo low it is isn't worth as a consideration
February 8, 20241 yr If you think about it as the owner of the Browns, it makes perfect sense. Own the property, own the stadium, monetize everything, execute the vision in your head without needing to compromise—assuming you have the money. This isn’t going to stop people from going to games and I think a lot of people would love a football themed Crocker Park. The risk for Cleveland, beyond the obvious, is it loses the ability to partner with a billionaire Republican political doner in a state run by Republicans. Will Haslams really invest themselves in Cleveland city stuff if they have no real stake? Getting state money and approval for projects with the Haslams at your side is surely easier than a Democratic Mayor/County Exec., who represent areas that don’t generally vote for Republicans. This is the part the worries me a bit. I have no idea what is really going on, but I hope leaders are thinking about realpolitik. Edited February 8, 20241 yr by coneflower
February 8, 20241 yr 1 hour ago, ryanfrazier said: Because a football stadium is the least-urban type of structure there is. It's huge, needs a lot of surface parking, and is only used 10 days a year. The other 355 days its not an asset its a liability. That lakefront land can be put to a better use, a more lively, urban neighborhood. I didn't say necessarily build it on the present site. I said build it downtown. We should be debating the central location, cost and design. Building it miles from the core is contributing to sprawl which should not be encouraged.
February 8, 20241 yr I'm somewhat ambivalent to this. While my preference would be for the new stadium to be on the east side of downtown on underutilized land, I'd take a Brook Park stadium if it means development of the existing stadium site into a mixed-use waterfront neighborhood. Although I know that's a hypothetical and we could end up with a suburban stadium and no action on the downtown waterfront - the worst case scenario. As others have alluded to, other NFL teams are embracing these suburban stadium districts so it must be a thing among owners. Chicago is about to lose the Bears to the suburbs, which sounds like a done deal at this point. Edited February 9, 20241 yr by Rustbelter
February 8, 20241 yr 22 minutes ago, YABO713 said: I know this is at least in part true with Burke, but anyone think a stadium that close to a high-volume airport is a bad idea? Like 70,000 people congregating in a potential crash landing zone of a commercial airliner doesn't seem great. Or maybe I'm just being unduly cautious and the risk is soooo low it is isn't worth as a consideration I think you may be a unduly cautious when it comes to crash landings. The FAA would however inevitably want to be involved due to the proximity however. They will want to study things like stadium lighting set that close to a Class B airport, etc.
February 8, 20241 yr 1 hour ago, BelievelandD1 said: Who is ready for the national anthem flyover to be a frontier plane with an Otter on the tail?
February 8, 20241 yr Wow! Lots of passion. I myself am going head over to OpenAI to ask ChatGPT what it thinks will happen next. Oh, but first hit that bar on Grayton Rd where @mrnyc's brother and friends hang out.
February 9, 20241 yr The only thing the Haslem’s know is real estate on freeways at major interchanges. They really suck at the football thing. Bring on the Bucc~ee’s/IKEA MEGAPLEX. Sweedish Beaver Nuggets for everyone!
February 9, 20241 yr City of Cleveland has sent the Browns a strong package. https://www.news5cleveland.com/sports/browns/haslam-sports-group-studying-other-potential-stadium-options-for-browns
February 9, 20241 yr 6 minutes ago, simplythis said: City of Cleveland has sent the Browns a strong package. https://www.news5cleveland.com/sports/browns/haslam-sports-group-studying-other-potential-stadium-options-for-browns I don’t know if the city understands what level of degenerate sleazebags the Haslem’s are. I hope they’re not that naive.
February 9, 20241 yr 5 hours ago, coneflower said: If the team stadium isn't located in Cleveland, then the Haslams don't really have any business interest in the city at all, do they? You'd be a fool if you think they ever intended to in the first place.
February 9, 20241 yr 4 hours ago, snakebite said: The stadium absolutely does not need tonnes of parking. That's just typical American conditioning that has created this ridiculous over reliance we have on automobiles, particularly caused by civic decisions to position regional assets in suburban areas instead of clustering and complimenting in central areas. Whilst it's naive to completely ignore cars, there's swaths of parking, surface, street and structural all over Downtown that is ordinarily not in use on Sundays when office users are absent for those who want to drive. Developing projects with cars at the forefront has gotten us nowhere but trouble and whilst it should not be ignored it should be a minor point of consideration. A suburban stadium surrounded by 20k parking spaces funded by the tax payer is 1970s antiquated crap and almost gross when you think of how it (indirectly) encourages high levels of pollution, then all the BS like increased levels of drunk driving. Really had to laugh at the 1100 presenter gleefully talking about people would be able to take a skywalk from the airport terminal to the stadium without ever having any interaction with the outside area. Real great urbanism that creating this soulless bubble. Cleveland compared to a lot of its peers has actually been pretty good when it comes to this and even writing previous wrongs like the Cavs playing in Richfield. All our teams play Downtown. We haven't sent our main public further education campuses to the suburbs. Keeping the Police DT. All these things add up to the collective bigger picture. The local civic leaders should not be encouraging a decision like this whether it's at City or County level. They go there they go alone. If they want this then they should be paying for every single penny IMO. It almost makes me lose my mind as well when all I heard from the 92.3 callers this pm was how much easier it will be to go to browns games. You seriously have to be conditioned to the American concept of suburbia to think downtown commuting is difficult. God forbid you park in a garage and walk a few blocks to the stadium. God forbid we park in a garage and take the waterfront RTA line to the stadium. I've commuted many a times to Cavs, Guardians, Browns games from Euclid. It's seriously not that hard. These people move into the outer ring and expect all these big city amenities to follow them. It's getting ridiculous the sprawl going on in this region that is no where close to justified. You think traffic is bad downtown on game day? atleast the rapid alleviates some of that. I don't care how many freeways serves BrookPark (Cleveland is served by 3 if we're counting). 70,000 + cars arriving and leaving all at once without support from the rapid into one parking lot is frankly going to be as bad if not worse than commuting to downtown for game day. You could literally look at Blossom as an example of what Brook Park would be like when the game is over.
February 9, 20241 yr 25 minutes ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said: It almost makes me lose my mind as well when all I heard from the 92.3 callers this pm was how much easier it will be to go to browns games. You seriously have to be conditioned to the American concept of suburbia to think downtown commuting is difficult. God forbid you park in a garage and walk a few blocks to the stadium. God forbid we park in a garage and take the waterfront RTA line to the stadium. I've commuted many a times to Cavs, Guardians, Browns games from Euclid. It's seriously not that hard. These people move into the outer ring and expect all these big city amenities to follow them. It's getting ridiculous the sprawl going on in this region that is no where close to justified. You think traffic is bad downtown on game day? atleast the rapid alleviates some of that. I don't care how many freeways serves BrookPark (Cleveland is served by 3 if we're counting). 70,000 + cars arriving and leaving all at once without support from the rapid into one parking lot is frankly going to be as bad if not worse than commuting to downtown for game day. You could literally look at Blossom as an example of what Brook Park would be like when the game is over. I’ve been taking in a lot of local media today and am in the same boat as you. It’s infuriating. It’s also obvious that the people speaking (both local media members and callers) have very little knowledge of downtown Cleveland. And a lot of the people don’t seem like regular attendees. It’s also clear the majority of our region is suburb-based. These people feel more comfortable walking through a huge parking lot and sitting in their car for 90 mins than they do walking a few blocks downtown. One host said “think, you really can’t get a good meal near the current stadium. When they build out Brookpark there will be nice restaurants all over”. Jimmy is already selling crack to addicts, now he will control the whole supply chain.
February 9, 20241 yr It is extremely unlikely that Brook Park and the Browns could ever finance a 1.5+ billion-dollar stadium in that location without the State of Ohio and Cleveland-Cuyahoga Couty Port Authority supporting such a project. That would never happen and there would be way too much political pressure (waste of taxpayer funds, rich NFL owner subsidy whether in Brook Park or Cleveland) not to mention the very bad precedent this would set. Brook Park has limited ability to finance a project on its own and the team ownership wants to contribute as little as possible. Also, the City of Cleveland would nix all the downtown development projects involving Haslam. The odds are higher that an IKEA could be built here than a football stadium.
February 9, 20241 yr 13 minutes ago, Sapientone said: It is extremely unlikely that Brook Park and the Browns could ever finance a 1.5+ billion-dollar stadium in that location without the State of Ohio and Cleveland-Cuyahoga Couty Port Authority supporting such a project. That would never happen and there would be way too much political pressure (waste of taxpayer funds, rich NFL owner subsidy whether in Brook Park or Cleveland) not to mention the very bad precedent this would set. Brook Park has limited ability to finance a project on its own and the team ownership wants to contribute as little as possible. Also, the City of Cleveland would nix all the downtown development projects involving Haslam. The odds are higher that an IKEA could be built here than a football stadium. There are suburban stadiums all over the country where these deals get figured out. I don’t see any reason why the state and county wouldn’t support Brookpark. Rumor is that Jimmy could put up half. Brookpark might not have money but they can still offer all kinds of incentives. I think if things are really moving in this direction and Bibb is getting cut off he should make the case that Jimmy has turned his back on Cleveland. Cleveland has a ton to lose. Make him Modell 2.0. Make the case they would now be the Brookpark Browns.
February 9, 20241 yr Well, two things are certain. A. KJP, hell of a way to start the day. B. At least Jimmy and Dee started the fire on both sides. No more dancing around it, no more utopian presentations, no more non-decisions by all parties. s**t or get off the pot time.
February 9, 20241 yr 1 hour ago, CLEmuppet said: I’ve been taking in a lot of local media today and am in the same boat as you. It’s infuriating. It’s also obvious that the people speaking (both local media members and callers) have very little knowledge of downtown Cleveland. And a lot of the people don’t seem like regular attendees. Oh like the guy on WTAM who said "I don't go to Browns games because of a certain bad element downtown" hahaha. Or the guy who said he'd go to more games if the stadium were closer to Medina.
February 9, 20241 yr 7 hours ago, TBideon said: Well, two things are certain. A. KJP, hell of a way to start the day. B. At least Jimmy and Dee started the fire on both sides. No more dancing around it, no more utopian presentations, no more non-decisions by all parties. s**t or get off the pot time. I'm not sure B comes out if not for A. Meanwhile Ken's blog is all over my FB Browns group. I'm not sure what the over-under is on the number of separate posts, but it's at least in the double digits. Oh yeah, it's all over the local MSM and he's on WTAM a couple times over. Bomb?
February 9, 20241 yr 10 hours ago, marty15 said: I don’t know if the city understands what level of degenerate sleazebags the Haslem’s are. I hope they’re not that naive. I hate so so so so so so so much that the Haslams will have this much influence over so much public money and development. They are like the very worst aspects of American capitalism made incarnate.
February 9, 20241 yr 1 hour ago, E Rocc said: I'm not sure B comes out if not for A. Meanwhile Ken's blog is all over my FB Browns group. I'm not sure what the over-under is on the number of separate posts, but it's at least in the double digits. Oh yeah, it's all over the local MSM and he's on WTAM a couple times over. Bomb? I knew him when ...
February 9, 20241 yr 13 hours ago, Rustbelter said: I'm somewhat ambivalent to this. While my preference would be for the new stadium to be on the east side of downtown on underutilized land, I'd take a Brook Park stadium if it means development of the existing stadium site into a mixed-use waterfront neighborhood. Although I know that's a hypothetical and we could end up with a suburban stadium and no action on the downtown waterfront - the worst case scenario. As others have alluded to, other NFL teams are embracing these suburban stadium districts so it must be a thing among owners. Chicago is about to lose the Bears to the suburbs, which sounds like a done deal at this point. At this point, the Brookpark stadium is only speculation, but can you imagine this happening in Pittsburgh? I can't.
February 9, 20241 yr I noticed that, in the Hopkins Master Plan, the proposed, (elevated?) connector road linking the airport with I-71 passes just north of Snow Rd, along the southern edge of this Brookpark property.
February 9, 20241 yr 10 hours ago, Sapientone said: It is extremely unlikely that Brook Park and the Browns could ever finance a 1.5+ billion-dollar stadium in that location unless the Haslams just sold their remaining shartes of Pilot for $3.2B cash https://www.knoxnews.com/story/money/business/2024/01/16/berkshire-hathaway-buys-haslam-family-out-of-pilot-travel-centers/72242882007/
February 9, 20241 yr What I learned most from KJP’s latest is that the “trans” in NEOtransblog stands for “transformation” and not what I assumed (transportation)…
February 9, 20241 yr Say the Haslam's do build at the Brookpark site, could the lakefront stadium be converted to the soccer stadium if Cleveland is awarded a team? Edited February 9, 20241 yr by dave2017
February 9, 20241 yr 10 hours ago, CLEmuppet said: There are suburban stadiums all over the country where these deals get figured out. I don’t see any reason why the state and county wouldn’t support Brookpark. Rumor is that Jimmy could put up half. Brookpark might not have money but they can still offer all kinds of incentives. Most of the suburban stadiums are in far larger markets than Cleveland. There is much more money to go around, and the land is more valuable in the CBD. In the smaller markets, a stadium in the CBD makes much more sense (Pittsburgh, Cinci, Indianapolis). Of course there are some exceptions to this. In our case, we have much more to lose. The lakefront stadium and Haslam partnership is our best opportunity to get a dense, walkable district on the lakefront. If the Browns move to Brookpark, the entire scope of the project will end up on a far lesser scale.
February 9, 20241 yr I have always wondered this but have never seen it brought up as an option on the forum or anywhere else. Can't a stadium fit on the Lakefront Muny lot? Is it too tight. It doesn't seem so to me but I have to admit it is not like I hang out there. And please don't say it is impossible because of all the tailgaters.
February 9, 20241 yr Very odd to me that not only has The Plain Dealer NOT reported on it, they also deleted the only article that referenced it, which was a Hey Terry column: https://www.cleveland.com/browns/2024/02/whats-with-haslams-new-land-deal-did-browns-make-a-mistake-right-before-playoffs-hey-terry.html Wonder why
February 9, 20241 yr 4 minutes ago, Htsguy said: I have always wondered this but have never seen it brought up as an option on the forum or anywhere else. Can't a stadium fit on the Lakefront Muny lot? Is it too tight. It doesn't seem so to me but I have to admit it is not like I hang out there. And please don't say it is impossible because of all the tailgaters. Any future stadium would need about 1000'x1000' of lot to fit in, which is roughly what the current stadium sits on. The Muni Lot is only 200' at its WIDEST, immediately bounded by train tracks and then the grade change of the terrain after that. Near impossible.
February 9, 20241 yr 1 hour ago, urb-a-saurus said: I noticed that, in the Hopkins Master Plan, the proposed, (elevated?) connector road linking the airport with I-71 passes just north of Snow Rd, along the southern edge of this Brookpark property. I'm going to throw something together on this.
February 9, 20241 yr 3 minutes ago, Geowizical said: Any future stadium would need about 1000'x1000' of lot to fit in, which is roughly what the current stadium sits on. The Muni Lot is only 200' at its WIDEST, immediately bounded by train tracks and then the grade change of the terrain after that. Near impossible. unless(!!!) its built on stilts
February 9, 20241 yr 8 minutes ago, brownsfan1226 said: Very odd to me that not only has The Plain Dealer NOT reported on it, they also deleted the only article that referenced it, which was a Hey Terry column: https://www.cleveland.com/browns/2024/02/whats-with-haslams-new-land-deal-did-browns-make-a-mistake-right-before-playoffs-hey-terry.html Wonder why I would guess that they have not been able to independently confirm the details.
February 9, 20241 yr 26 minutes ago, Cleburger said: The lakefront stadium and Haslam partnership is our best opportunity to get a dense, Also would lose another billionaire’s interest, feels slightly similar to what we lost with Peter B. Lewis
February 9, 20241 yr 21 minutes ago, brownsfan1226 said: Very odd to me that not only has The Plain Dealer NOT reported on it, they also deleted the only article that referenced it, which was a Hey Terry column: https://www.cleveland.com/browns/2024/02/whats-with-haslams-new-land-deal-did-browns-make-a-mistake-right-before-playoffs-hey-terry.html Wonder why 12 minutes ago, freefourur said: I would guess that they have not been able to independently confirm the details. There is an online article in Crains today. Just saw the headline. For some strange reason, the past few days I have been unable to read the articles, like usual, through my Cuyahoga County library membership so I don't know what it states.
February 9, 20241 yr 15 minutes ago, freefourur said: I would guess that they have not been able to independently confirm the details. Probably because they barely have any reporters working for them any more. At least experienced reporters.
February 9, 20241 yr 7 minutes ago, Htsguy said: There is an online article in Crains today. Just saw the headline. For some strange reason, the past few days I have been unable to read the articles, like usual, through my Cuyahoga County library membership so I don't know what it states. It's just a summary of what is going on, nothing new is being reported.
February 9, 20241 yr again i ask, what is wrong with the tri-c rapid station site below the ballpark? or elsewhere along the opportunity corridor? why is the city stuck so hard on keeping the mistake on the lake and not offering these or other alternative sites (assuming muni is not workable)? thats what puzzles me.
February 9, 20241 yr 1 hour ago, HGRHS said: What I learned most from KJP’s latest is that the “trans” in NEOtransblog stands for “transformation” and not what I assumed (transportation)… It used to be "transportation" when it was an All Aboard Ohio tradename and it summarized TOD projects in NE Ohio. But it now refers to all projects contributing to the region's ongoing transformation. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
February 9, 20241 yr 26 minutes ago, Htsguy said: Probably because they barely have any reporters working for them any more. At least experienced reporters. It has definitely become disheartening to see. While I get the need to independently verify, if every news outlet and several other papers, business journals, and even the AP are reporting a story, it's strange to me why the PD is either this late to the party, or are actively avoiding the story.
February 9, 20241 yr 43 minutes ago, GISguy said: unless(!!!) its built on stilts I took this as a joke (which I think is how you meant it?) Nevertheless, I was kind of curious, about this probably too expensive solution. It doesn't work at the start of the muni lot, but if you push it east (~E20) until after the shoreway curves you could have a somewhat practical stadium placement without even capping the shoreway, and it's almost entirely unoccupied land.
Create an account or sign in to comment