They can shove their TIF up their ***. The plan for it is an isolated hermetically sealed environment with huge parking lots to prevent people from doing anything but entering and leaving the district in their cars. There is no public benefit.

4 hours ago, sizzlinbeef said:

Who would do that though?  That's a very rare and unique traveler who has no need to check into a hotel first and deposit bags and carry-ons before going to the game, and vice-versa after the game.

Truth.  You can't even carry a purse into a NFL game.  You have to have a clear plastic bag.  

 

The Plain Dealer's reporting and editorial articles all appear  to support The Haslam's moving the stadium to Brook Park.  With the track record that Cleveland has developing the lakefront I feel the loss of the stadium will cost the city millions just to tear it down and we will see the site sit empty for a long time. 

1 hour ago, snakebite said:

They can shove their TIF up their ass. The plan for it is an isolated hermetically sealed environment with huge parking lots to prevent people from doing anything but entering and leaving the district in their cars. There is no public benefit.

100%!  

I would support a TIF for a transformative lakefront project, that includes mixed use buildings, the Browns offices/practice facility, and a land bridge.   

At this point, i am fully expecting to read an article about the Browns relocating outside of Ohio completely...again!!  What a cluster this is turning into...

15 minutes ago, OhioFinest said:

At this point, i am fully expecting to read an article about the Browns relocating outside of Ohio completely...again!!  What a cluster this is turning into...

 

A return (of sorts) of the St. Louis Browns perhaps. 

1 hour ago, OhioFinest said:

At this point, i am fully expecting to read an article about the Browns relocating outside of Ohio completely...again!!  What a cluster this is turning into...

I don’t think the browns are gonna move but I agree the messaging is a mess. We are seeing a lot of pro team markets really push back on these new proposed stadium deals. The damage done in the late 90s early 2000s is definitely showing.

 

47 minutes ago, Gordon Bombay said:

 

A return (of sorts) of the St. Louis Browns perhaps. 

oh gosh lol

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by 646empire

^the NFL is so clearly profitable that it's getting harder for owners to cry poor when it comes to building their own facilities.

My willingness to think that Jimmy Haslam may be negotiating in good faith has gone down sharply after this reporting.

 

I understand why Jimmy would want public money for a location on the lakefront, since he wouldn't actually own it and the development around it. But what's his excuse for wanting public contribution for a piece of property in Brook Park that he would own outright?

5 minutes ago, LlamaLawyer said:

My willingness to think that Jimmy Haslam may be negotiating in good faith has gone down sharply after this reporting.

 

I understand why Jimmy would want public money for a location on the lakefront, since he wouldn't actually own it and the development around it. But what's his excuse for wanting public contribution for a piece of property in Brook Park that he would own outright?

 

It could be simple greed of course. Or it's because he knows he won't be able to recoup the costs for building the stadium. In other words it is a bad investment for him to take on. 

Well, the reddit consensus is a big fat NO to the billionaire grifter assholes.

 

"Correct me if I’m wrong but for the Buffalo Bills new stadium I know NYS is footing the bill in return they collect profit on concession sales until the bill is repaid. There’s also a clause that the team must stay in Buffalo for 30 years. Would a plan like that work for Cleveland and the Browns?"

 

Is that true about the BIlls? I did a little digging and didn't see anything to verify that claim.

 

 

 

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by TBideon

I'm wondering if it's worth it for the city/county to independently appraise the cost of renovating the current stadium. I just don't think there's any reasonable way it would/should actually cost 1.2 billion. 

 

I hope the city/county stick to their initially rumored position and cap their support at 300 million regardless of what the Haslams decide to do. The City obviously should not give a cent if it won't be in Cleveland. 

 

I'm less concerned about State money since it's a smaller chunk of the pie, but I still don't want to see the State giving out a billion dollars of tax payer money for a stadium when we have one already. If the state wants to give the City 1.2 billion dollars, I could probably come up with about 100 better uses for those funds. 

 

The City's position should be a minor renovation to the existing stadium. I'm reasonably confident that the minimally necessary renovation can be done for half or less than what the Haslams are suggesting. Do a minor renovation extend the life another 15-20 years and after that maybe we can talk about a more significant renovation or a new stadium. There needs to be more concern about value here. If the Haslams had to spend all their own money there would be. Public funds should be valued just as highly. 

 

Edit: an interesting way to conceptualize 1.2 billion dollars is that divided by the ~12 million people in Ohio that's $100 per person. When you consider many of those people aren't taxpayers (old, young) the amount per taxpayer is probably closer to $200 than $100. Not a trivial sum for most people, most of whom will never go to a Brown's game. Personally I'd take the check. 

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by Ethan

23 minutes ago, Ethan said:

I'm wondering if it's worth it for the city/county to independently appraise the cost of renovating the current stadium. I just don't think there's any reasonable way it would/should actually cost 1.2 billion. 

 

I hope the city/county stick to their initially rumored position and cap their support at 300 million regardless of what the Haslams decide to do. The City obviously should not give a cent if it won't be in Cleveland. 

 

I'm less concerned about State money since it's a smaller chunk of the pie, but I still don't want to see the State giving out a billion dollars of tax payer money for a stadium when we have one already. If the state wants to give the City 1.2 billion dollars, I could probably come up with about 100 better uses for those funds. 

I agree 1.2 billion for a renovation is outrageous, no way no how. In regards to the State I don’t see them doing more than 200 mil or so? And even that is a big maybe especially because both the browns and bengals are both coming due at the same time so it will probably be pretty much matching.

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by 646empire

All of this has left an incredibly sour taste in my mouth regarding the Browns. I am actually glad that Bibb and the city are playing hardball with this organization. Out of all the major league sports teams, the Browns have arguably done the least for the region economically. The Cavs and Guards contribute far more in activity and vitality. Most of the people who go to a Browns game don't even frequent downtown establishments. They just get smashed in the muni lot. On top of that, they have delivered nothing but disappointing seasons except MAYBE last year. Let them go for all I care. Put that money into something much better.

45 minutes ago, 646empire said:

I agree 1.2 billion for a renovation is outrageous, no way no how. In regards to the State I don’t see them doing more than 200 mil or so? And even that is a big maybe especially because both the browns and bengals are both coming due at the same time so it will probably be pretty much matching.

And it would still be an open-air stadium. What is the issue with the current stadium that requires such a costly renovation?  

16 minutes ago, LibertyBlvd said:

And it would still be an open-air stadium. What is the issue with the current stadium that requires such a costly renovation?  

I don’t see the browns stadium needing a billion bucks worth of renovations. I think a nice full renovation would be in line with what the bengals are planning which in total is going to come out to about 700 million or so. I’ve always said once you hit the billion mark it forces you to lean toward building new which may be by design from nfl some owners wink wink. I think the stadium/team in Cleveland is best downtown/lakefront and in that case I would just renovate and build a new venue next round in the 2040s.

Also downtown Cleveland already has built in amenities hotels, restaurants etc. and building mix use/entertainment districts from scratch takes yearssss and tend to be phased over a decade or more especially if your in a mid size market. If they go ahead with the airport site the new stadium will likely sit solo for a while before anything gets going or they will start with a small office/residential piece before pausing for a while. Focus that investment on the lakefront instead.

2 hours ago, 646empire said:

I don’t see the browns stadium needing a billion bucks worth of renovations. I think a nice full renovation would be in line with what the bengals are planning which in total is going to come out to about 700 million or so. I’ve always said once you hit the billion mark it forces you to lean toward building new which may be by design from nfl some owners wink wink. I think the stadium/team in Cleveland is best downtown/lakefront and in that case I would just renovate and build a new venue next round in the 2040s.

700 mill....and its still open air...not just no...but HELL NO!!!  This is why he is moving the team to Brook Park.  This is about building a dome...plain and simple. 

2 hours ago, LibertyBlvd said:

And it would still be an open-air stadium. What is the issue with the current stadium that requires such a costly renovation?  

 

It was built on the foundations (utility poles driven vertically into a garbage landfill) and infrastructure of the 1932-built former stadium and was built as quickly as possible so that Mayor White could bring the Browns back before the end of the 1990s. Many corners were cut to deliver that stadium on time. The paint was still drying by the time the first game was played and still some things were added later like enough escalators to the upper deck. Everyone else wanted that stadium built off the lakefront, preferably on the intermodal yards site south of the Inner Belt. According to Tom Chema, Hunter Morrison and others, only one person wanted the stadium on the same spot as the old one -- Mayor White.

21 minutes ago, OhioFinest said:

700 mill....and its still open air...not just no...but HELL NO!!!  This is why he is moving the team to Brook Park.  This is about building a dome...plain and simple. 

Yes 700 million. A new enclosed stadium is definitely gonna run you at least double that at 1.4 Billion * AT LEAST but probably hundreds of millions more by the time final plans and construction estimates are finalized. Is this about building a Dome* “plain and simple” or is this about having a modern top notch stadium?? If it’s simply about a dome then the team needs to just say that and pay for it themselves. This comment just shows it’s not about the current stadium being obsolete or beyond renovation like Nashville’s ugly place it’s all about the owner just wanting something completely new and shiny and publicly paid for.

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by 646empire

Our favorite journalist @KJP getting a nice shoutout in the crains article today! CRAIN'S ARTICLE

 

26 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

It was built on the foundations (utility poles driven vertically into a garbage landfill) and infrastructure of the 1932-built former stadium and was built as quickly as possible so that Mayor White could bring the Browns back before the end of the 1990s.

Is there worry that the structure is unsound/unsafe?

 

 

I’d rather spend $1 billion on building out a downtown rail loop than keeping the Browns. And it’s not even close.

@KJP  Reminded me of this famous Italian town that tried the "wooden poles driven into muck trick" - albeit without the sports stadium on top.   😉  https://venicewiki.org/wiki/Fondazioni_degli_edifici_veneziani

 

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by DO_Summers
Added link

11 hours ago, OhioFinest said:

At this point, i am fully expecting to read an article about the Browns relocating outside of Ohio completely...again!!  What a cluster this is turning into...

There is no chance of that happening with the Modell law. SOmeone from the region would buy them the minute they went up for mandatory sale. 

And frankly, screw them. They can leave for all I care. 

9 hours ago, surfohio said:

 

It could be simple greed of course. Or it's because he knows he won't be able to recoup the costs for building the stadium. In other words it is a bad investment for him to take on. 

I don't any tax payer who in their right mind would be ok to contribute their taxes for Jimmy to build is Browns World where he gets all the profits and we get overpriced generic chain food. Atleast downtown I'm supporting "small" business bars and restruarants, like Al's on E9

8 hours ago, YO to the CLE said:

All of this has left an incredibly sour taste in my mouth regarding the Browns. I am actually glad that Bibb and the city are playing hardball with this organization. Out of all the major league sports teams, the Browns have arguably done the least for the region economically. The Cavs and Guards contribute far more in activity and vitality. Most of the people who go to a Browns game don't even frequent downtown establishments. They just get smashed in the muni lot. On top of that, they have delivered nothing but disappointing seasons except MAYBE last year. Let them go for all I care. Put that money into something much better.

Not only do they get smashed in the muni lot, they leave it as a giant trash heap after every game. 

7 hours ago, 646empire said:

Also downtown Cleveland already has built in amenities hotels, restaurants etc. and building mix use/entertainment districts from scratch takes yearssss and tend to be phased over a decade or more especially if your in a mid size market. If they go ahead with the airport site the new stadium will likely sit solo for a while before anything gets going or they will start with a small office/residential piece before pausing for a while. Focus that investment on the lakefront instead.

Frankly, I think this talk of a "Browns World" with restuarants, hotels, housing, shopping is all a ploy to get the suburbanite browns fans on board for this. The true money maker for him will be the giant ass surface parking lot revenue he will get when the only feasible way of getting to the Brook Park site would be by car. Sure may be he will get some restuarants that are some crappy chains, a Kohls or some other run of the mill big box store (patriot place is honestly nothing special if you compare the two.)

The sports talking heads need to start comparing apples to apples. They keep pointing out 12/30 teams play in the burbs. All of them except buffalo are growing and huge metros in this county. Those metros can support multiple "lifestyle centers" with shopping, apartments, hotels in sprawling suburbs. This region with crocker park, legacy, pinecrest can't support more of these shopping lifestyle districts without cannibalizing each other. Pinecrest has already been poaching Legacy over years, there is no point for a Crocker Park in "Jimmy World"

5 hours ago, KJP said:

 

It was built on the foundations (utility poles driven vertically into a garbage landfill) and infrastructure of the 1932-built former stadium and was built as quickly as possible so that Mayor White could bring the Browns back before the end of the 1990s. Many corners were cut to deliver that stadium on time. The paint was still drying by the time the first game was played and still some things were added later like enough escalators to the upper deck. Everyone else wanted that stadium built off the lakefront, preferably on the intermodal yards site south of the Inner Belt. According to Tom Chema, Hunter Morrison and others, only one person wanted the stadium on the same spot as the old one -- Mayor White.

God. From practically giving Brook Park NASA for pretty much nothing in return, to now indirectly being a big reason why the browns are likely to leave downtown, Mayor White has really screwed this city. 

4 hours ago, coneflower said:

Is there worry that the structure is unsound/unsafe?

 

 

 

Unknown. The Browns never shared their latest structural assessment of the stadium. But an assessment conducted 10 years ago by Osborn and Osports showed...

 

"The framing system is exposed to environmental conditions like freeze/thaw cycles and large temperature fluctuations, which can accelerate the structure's deterioration over time."

 

That's something that wouldn't happen in a climate-controlled, domed stadium.

10 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Unknown. The Browns never shared their latest structural assessment of the stadium. But an assessment conducted 10 years ago by Osborn and Osports showed...

 

"The framing system is exposed to environmental conditions like freeze/thaw cycles and large temperature fluctuations, which can accelerate the structure's deterioration over time."

 

That's something that wouldn't happen in a climate-controlled, domed stadium.

Progressive Field’s framing system is also exposed to those very similar conditions. 

9 hours ago, YO to the CLE said:

All of this has left an incredibly sour taste in my mouth regarding the Browns. I am actually glad that Bibb and the city are playing hardball with this organization. Out of all the major league sports teams, the Browns have arguably done the least for the region economically. The Cavs and Guards contribute far more in activity and vitality. Most of the people who go to a Browns game don't even frequent downtown establishments. They just get smashed in the muni lot. On top of that, they have delivered nothing but disappointing seasons except MAYBE last year. Let them go for all I care. Put that money into something much better.

This is a terrible take. 

Chiefs plans for a domed stadium in Kansas surrounded by tonnes of parking and mixed use development leaked tonight. I'm sure comparisons will be made in Cleveland. Difference is however the Chiefs are already playing in a rundown suburb and the Village West area of Kansas City KS is already well established with the Kansas Speedway, MLS stadium, a casino, large retail area and a minor league baseball stadium. 

1 hour ago, marty15 said:

Progressive Field’s framing system is also exposed to those very similar conditions. 

 

Browns stadium is 200 meters without obstruction from the onslaught of a Great Lake. And I'm willing to bet that Progressive Field was built more carefully than Browns stadium.

17 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Browns stadium is 200 meters without obstruction from the onslaught of a Great Lake. And I'm willing to bet that Progressive Field was built more carefully than Browns stadium.

I understand that. But steel is steel. And it’s only 25 years old. Muni Stadium held up for 60+ years. It’s not that dramatic of a climate difference. It’s windy everywhere downtown in the winter. If the temperature is 0 at Progressive Field, what’s it at CBS? -3? It’s negligible imo.
 

Main Avenue bridge is probably a better example. 85 years old. Completely exposed to the worst of Cleveland weather, onslaught of salt for 4 months, and massive live loads. As with anything, if it’s maintained properly it can last for a long time. There’s nothing structurally wrong or in danger at CBS. 

 

This is a Haslem’s keeping up with the NFL Jones’s ordeal.

3 hours ago, DO_Summers said:

@KJP  Reminded me of this famous Italian town that tried the "wooden poles driven into muck trick" - albeit without the sports stadium on top.   😉  https://venicewiki.org/wiki/Fondazioni_degli_edifici_veneziani

 

Submerged wood piles can last many hundreds of years in a a low oxygen environment. 

^^Agreed . This fallacy that CBS was built quickly and cheaply is not based in facts. I looked at NFL stadiums built within that time frame and they were all built within 24 to 28 months, same as CBS. I dont think the Osborne company would have been a part of anything sub-standard.  Do I want a new fixed roof stadium, of course and I would prefer it is built in the city.  This narrative that in a city of 75 square miles there is no other place to build it is comical. You dont need 150 acres to build it either. The Vikings stadium was built on 38 acres and is a great example of how this could work.  I would be ok with a renovation if it would include a roof. The technology has changed, roofs are lighter weight now SoFi has proven that. And the weather is changing its not 1983 anymore the lake barley freezes over now. Chicago pier, Boston harbor, Toronto all are colder and just as windy.

Good points. Just quoting the last public facility assessment. Interesting that the last one has not been made public.

Leaked rendering 

 

 

9 hours ago, freethink said:

^^Agreed . This fallacy that CBS was built quickly and cheaply is not based in facts. I looked at NFL stadiums built within that time frame and they were all built within 24 to 28 months, same as CBS. I dont think the Osborne company would have been a part of anything sub-standard.  Do I want a new fixed roof stadium, of course and I would prefer it is built in the city.  This narrative that in a city of 75 square miles there is no other place to build it is comical. You dont need 150 acres to build it either. The Vikings stadium was built on 38 acres and is a great example of how this could work.  I would be ok with a renovation if it would include a roof. The technology has changed, roofs are lighter weight now SoFi has proven that. And the weather is changing its not 1983 anymore the lake barley freezes over now. Chicago pier, Boston harbor, Toronto all are colder and just as windy.

 

Cleveland has always had a concrete problem.   The lowest bidder here reportedly waters down concrete and supplies a sub-standard product.  

12 hours ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

Frankly, I think this talk of a "Browns World" with restuarants, hotels, housing, shopping is all a ploy to get the suburbanite browns fans on board for this.

I think Berea would be a better place for "Browns World".

18 minutes ago, CbusG said:

Leaked rendering 

 

 

 

The stadium dome design looks like it is *almost* paying tribute to Cleveland's industrial past with the triangle roofline, but I think it would have been better executed if they went with a sawtooth roof. 

10 hours ago, G00pie said:

This is a terrible take. 

Why? I lived downtown for 12 years. Attended many Browns games, went to the muni lot many times, the bars/restaurants around the stadium many times. Walked the streets most Browns home games. The economic benefits are wildly overblown on the surface. Outside of W 6th, the bars and restaurants were rarely busier than any given Sunday afternoon in summer. The fan base largely wants nothing to do with downtown. Most people drive in, do not use the hotels and bring their own food/alcohol for tailgating. W 6th is mostly younger folks who live in or near downtown already who are just out with friends partying. After the game is over, the streets are dead within an hour. To add, this only happens 8 times a year...I'll give you tax collections for ticket sales and employee income tax, but again, 8 times a year?

 

Conversely let's look at the Cavs and Guards. Both have many games played at home, attract more families and a crowd who is more willing to frequent the bars/restaurants downtown. More income taxes collected, more ticket sales taxes. It is not even a close comparison.

 

Again, I lived downtown for 12 years. These are first hand observations. I guess I do not have hard numbers to validate these claims but until someone provides these numbers to refute my observations, I will continue to think this way.

 

 

26 minutes ago, CbusG said:

Leaked rendering 

 

 

Always gotta have the fireworks lol

31 minutes ago, CbusG said:

Brook Park vs Lakefront aside, I could get down with this concept. Sure it would need refinement but the bones are there. I also agree with @Luke_S about the industrial heritage influences and think that would be a very unique take on a modern NFL stadium, especially compared to the AI-generated-looking designs of other recent teams. Also pleasantly surprised by the number of trees shown. Almost hides all of the parking lots in the background, which I certainly wouldn't complain about. We are the Forest City after all lol

Edited May 1, 20241 yr by Geowizical

9 minutes ago, YO to the CLE said:

The fan base largely wants nothing to do with downtown. Most people drive in, do not use the hotels and bring their own food/alcohol for tailgating.

This is wildly untrue.  Hotels on game weekends are almost always nearly sold out if not over sold, depending on the opponent.   I encountered one particular weekend last fall trying to book for a client where most everything was sold out, and the Drury had rooms for $450 rack rate.  

It would be great to see any renderings for the proposed design at the lakefront location.  The comparison would be helpful 

3 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

This is wildly untrue.  Hotels on game weekends are almost always nearly sold out if not over sold, depending on the opponent.   I encountered one particular weekend last fall trying to book for a client where most everything was sold out, and the Drury had rooms for $450 rack rate.  

That's fine. I am going off of observations, so this may very well be true. I'd like to see those statistics if someone has them, but even so...8 days a year. And I would argue that a lot (not all) of those rooms would still be booked even if the stadium were in Brook Park for obvious reasons. 

Stadium rendering looks gorgeous. Anyone able to do a quick mock-up that removes all the surrounding development and replaces it with parking lots?

3 minutes ago, YO to the CLE said:

That's fine. I am going off of observations, so this may very well be true. I'd like to see those statistics if someone has them, but even so...8 days a year. And I would argue that a lot (not all) of those rooms would still be booked even if the stadium were in Brook Park for obvious reasons. 

This move to Brook Park would have a much larger effect than around 8 Browns' games per year. The goal is to make this a facility that is an entertainment/sports district year round.  Think of how many lost opportunities the downtown hotels and restaurants would lose.