9 minutes ago, Sapper Daddy said:

 I don’t know how much Brook Park can afford to expand their emergency services for the types of events (i.e. Browns games, Final 4s, Super Bowl, mega concerts) that this venue will undoubtedly draw.

Final 4s, Super Bowl, mega concerts -- boy, those are some major assumptions.

It will be interesting to see how the dome gets built while the airport is also in the middle of its renovation. I would guess that the new/enlarged interchanges will take several years to build. The logistics behind these simultaneous builds will be very complex.

 

 

26 minutes ago, ClevelandNative said:

I just hope for city annexation of the land where the stadium and complex will sit 

Brook Park is a city. You cannot annex it. There would have to be a land swap between the cities.

6 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

I commented on X that it is going to resemble Blossom.

The facilities at Blossom were initially designed to accommodate 8,000 people, which they do beautifully.  In 50 years, there have never been the necessary changes made to move 23,000+ in and out of the property.  Hopefully the Brook Park layout will consider immediate needs and future expansion for traffic flow.

Edited August 6, 2024Aug 6 by Husat77

on a positive note, the city won't have do do business with that greasy crook anymore

My biggest concern though is for $3.6B, couldnt there be parking garages instead of that sea of surface lots?  

2 minutes ago, B767PILOT said:

My biggest concern though is for $3.6B, couldnt there be parking garages instead of that sea of surface lots?  

 

I could see this kind of going the Pittsburgh route - a lot of the surface parking around Heinz Field/PNC Park has slowly been converted into (mostly) restaurants and parking garages going in as the area evolves. Thing is, a lot of the parking garages are privately owned by their parking king, Alco Parking.

i feel bad for all the hotel, bars & restaurants that rely on the game day revenue. 

1 hour ago, dski44 said:

Brook Park is a city. You cannot annex it. There would have to be a land swap between the cities.

Yah I know they’re a city. But do they have the police, fire, ems, etc needed to responsibly hold events there ? 
 

I see potential for them giving it up with profit sharing in the deal  

1 hour ago, TBideon said:

those are some major assumptions.

The concerts aren’t so much an assumption as they are an inevitability.  No guarantees there’s a Final 4 or Super Bowl but a new dome here would put us in the running.
 

My point remains though that Brook Park will have to massively expand their city services to accommodate the events held at a dome in their city limits.

2 hours ago, Oldmanladyluck said:

So I guess I'm saddened by the loss of the Factory of Sadness on the lakefront.  However... how many times in our lives have we gotten the chance to truly reimagine this plot of land on the lakefront?  This could become anything; and if the right amount of housing is there or on the Muny Lot as @KJP mentioned, there won't be a loss on tax revenue for the City.  

 

The possibilities are exciting, and right next to the soon-to-be-gone Burke (which I'm not that big on being developed, but that's just my opinion).  We'll see what comes of this when the time comes.  

 

relocating/closing Burke and demolishing the stadium would open up the largest lakefront development opportunity of any american city since american cities were a thing.

 

there could be a lakefront bike trail all the way from the mouth of the river to gordon park, then down the cultural gardens to the museums, university, and little italy.

13 minutes ago, ClevelandNative said:

Yah I know they’re a city. But do they have the police, fire, ems, etc needed to responsibly hold events there ? 

 

The Bills stadium uses a TON of Sheriff manpower, I'd imagine it'll be a similar case here. 

24 minutes ago, Sapper Daddy said:

The concerts aren’t so much an assumption as they are an inevitability.  No guarantees there’s a Final 4 or Super Bowl but a new dome here would put us in the running.
 

My point remains though that Brook Park will have to massively expand their city services to accommodate the events held at a dome in their city limits.

If Haslem borrows money from the NFL to build this dome, Im sure a future Super Bowl will be at least part of the negotiations.

Edited August 6, 2024Aug 6 by dski44

33 minutes ago, simplythis said:

i feel bad for all the hotel, bars & restaurants that rely on the game day revenue. 

I think downtown will still be plenty busy on game/event days.  Especially when you consider out of towners will still have to stay downtown due to Brookpark not having enough hotels. Also for locals, parking downtown and taking the rapid/uber will be much more convenient and cheaper than trying to cram 20k+ cars into Brookpark paying whatever Jimmy decides he wants to charge on that particular day.

Edited August 6, 2024Aug 6 by TDi

16 hours ago, MyPhoneDead said:

That side had camera's on it and it also served as the side where the fireworks went off, so that can be the reason. But 57,791 is a great number, Downtown Cleveland was GRIDLOCKED, beautiful to see (Mainly because I rode the red line there). Also it amazes me with how grid locked it was when Downtown is technically over built road wise.

It's always worse when you have 58,000 people who never, ever come downtown.   WWE Summer Slam is one of those events. 

27 minutes ago, Sapper Daddy said:

The concerts aren’t so much an assumption as they are an inevitability.  No guarantees there’s a Final 4 or Super Bowl but a new dome here would put us in the running

 

Actually the conventional wisdom in the concert industry is that the days of stadium concerts are numbered as the legacy acts retire.   Take the Stones, AC/DC, Motley Crue, Def Leppard, Eagles, Journey, Billy Joel etc etc away and you're left with just a handful of acts who can play stadiums.  So "inevitable" is a strong word. 

 

29 minutes ago, GISguy said:

 

The Bills stadium uses a TON of Sheriff manpower, I'd imagine it'll be a similar case here. 

it would.  It's a great cash grab for those deputies to make some extra $$$ on the side. 

56 minutes ago, GISguy said:

1 hour ago, B767PILOT said:

My biggest concern though is for $3.6B, couldnt there be parking garages instead of that sea of surface lots?  

 

I could see this kind of going the Pittsburgh route - a lot of the surface parking around Heinz Field/PNC Park has slowly been converted into (mostly) restaurants and parking garages going in as the area evolves. Thing is, a lot of the parking garages are privately owned by their parking king, Alco Parking.

 

Some metrics put the average cost of a parking structure at well over $25,000 per spot to build. 

 

For some very rough calculations: If you want to cover the cost of building the parking structure in 20 years for a stadium that sees ~13 events per year, you would need to charge ~$90 per event. This does not factor in parking garage upkeep costs, cost of borrowing, inflation. 

 

Basically for a facility that only needs the parking for less than 0.7% of the year, you can only turn a profit on parking if it is a surface lot. The parking facilities could hypothetically be used as airport parking in the offseason to generate extra revenue, however this could only really work if their are no additional events scheduled when in "airport parking mode." Structured parking for the mixed use development would be difficult to justify when it is surrounded by thousands of empty parking spots for over literally 99% of the year. 

33 minutes ago, daybreaker said:

 

relocating/closing Burke and demolishing the stadium would open up the largest lakefront development opportunity of any american city since american cities were a thing.

 

there could be a lakefront bike trail all the way from the mouth of the river to gordon park, then down the cultural gardens to the museums, university, and little italy.

 

It took 30+ years to redevelop a parking lot on Public Square.   You are being ambitous about thousands of acres on the lakefront. 

And, BTW, there could be a lakefront bike trail next year, if we had the will to make it happen.  Just route it around Burke and it would be one of the cooler lakefront trails in the country with jets landing next to you! 

Guys… they are literally starting the groundbreaking on a trail from East 9th to East 55th on Tuesday. The trail from Cultural Gardens to East 55th already exists, albeit need revamping and to be widened. 

16 minutes ago, NorthShore647 said:

 

Some metrics put the average cost of a parking structure at well over $25,000 per spot to build. 

 

For some very rough calculations: If you want to cover the cost of building the parking structure in 20 years for a stadium that sees ~13 events per year, you would need to charge ~$90 per event. This does not factor in parking garage upkeep costs, cost of borrowing, inflation. 

 

Basically for a facility that only needs the parking for less than 0.7% of the year, you can only turn a profit on parking if it is a surface lot. The parking facilities could hypothetically be used as airport parking in the offseason to generate extra revenue, however this could only really work if their are no additional events scheduled when in "airport parking mode." Structured parking for the mixed use development would be difficult to justify when it is surrounded by thousands of empty parking spots for over literally 99% of the year. 

If the mixed use district actually gets built I could see a parking garage going along with it, since that area will get used more frequently, and shop/restaurant patrons may want a closer/more central parking option. Even in that case I'm not sure, but otherwise totally agree. 

 

In terms of airport parking, I wonder if we'll actually see the opposite, people parking at the airport for Browns games. I assume we will, and the airport probably won't be happy about it. 

1 hour ago, GISguy said:

 

I could see this kind of going the Pittsburgh route - a lot of the surface parking around Heinz Field/PNC Park has slowly been converted into (mostly) restaurants and parking garages going in as the area evolves. Thing is, a lot of the parking garages are privately owned by their parking king, Alco Parking.

Heinz Field (or whatever it’s called now) has a lot more going for it; proximity to Downtown being one of them. There also is PNC Park and a concert venue in walking distance too. 

I don’t think the Brook Park site has any of that, but I don’t know the full history of developing the North Shore

10 minutes ago, Enginerd said:

Heinz Field (or whatever it’s called now) has a lot more going for it; proximity to Downtown being one of them. There also is PNC Park and a concert venue in walking distance too. 

I don’t think the Brook Park site has any of that, but I don’t know the full history of developing the North Shore

 

I'm sure Jimmy has dreams. Maybe the CLEVELAND (er, Brook Park) LIVE makes it out there.

On Friday I discussed the surface parking needs restricting the size of the mixed use development at the Brookpark site. To create space for a sizable mixed use development I only provided space for roughly 16,000 surface parking spots. Based on the 20,000 parking spot figure from Ken’s article, the mixed use development site will need to shrink considerably on my rough stadium proposal site plans. I had previously thought that an area around ~15 acres would be too small a development to make a Brookpark stadium worthwhile. 

 

For a suburban size comparison, 15 acres is about 75% of Pinecrest in Orange:

 

Here is a look at how the Brookpark site could look with the (necessary) increase in surface parking. This mixed use development proposal has about 400,000 square feet of buildable space. 

 

Realistically the best case for that ~400,000 sqft. of land might look something like; two hotels, a University Hospitals outpatient facility (sports medicine?), a Class A office building and four apartment buildings. Most structures (nothing taller than a 5 over 2) would have ground floor commercial space for restaurants/bars and a limited retail component. Ideally this would all be built between a new RTA infill station at the NW corner of the lot and the stadium, creating the largest TOD development west of Ohio City. There isn't land for additional buildings, and the inner-ring suburb real estate market in Cleveland may not be able to support much more than this.

Oh I'm sure they'll come during Phase Never, with Phase 1 being the new stadium and some infrastructure repair. 

 

And the idiots will eat it alllllll up.

hotel connected to the airport would probably be successful. 

So on game days, would parking at the airport increase to $80 too or can we assume Browns fans will park there instead to save money, thus leaving no parking for actual airport visitors.

4 hours ago, ASP1984 said:

Not gonna lie this move makes me happy because Cleveland is so much more than a football town and a good wake up call for people to reorient their lives around more fulfilling pursuits. For as great as drowning your sorrows in alcohol every Sunday can be, watching a bunch of dudes give each other concussions in tight pants lost its luster for me a long time ago. This is a great time for people to reconsider their life priorities. The City of Cleveland will be just fine - and probably better - with this opportunity to reimagine the lakefront and the opportunities it creates for Clevelanders to enjoy their time. 

 

This will also probably be great for the RTA.

 

5 hours ago, Oldmanladyluck said:

So I guess I'm saddened by the loss of the Factory of Sadness on the lakefront.  However... how many times in our lives have we gotten the chance to truly reimagine this plot of land on the lakefront?  This could become anything; and if the right amount of housing is there or on the Muny Lot as @KJP mentioned, there won't be a loss on tax revenue for the City.  

 

The possibilities are exciting, and right next to the soon-to-be-gone Burke (which I'm not that big on being developed, but that's just my opinion).  We'll see what comes of this when the time comes.  

I second this. This is a HUGE HUGE win for Cleveland. It's going to be exciting to see the coming transformations of our Lakefronts!

I'm happy the city isn't playing ball with the criminal... but let's not act like this is something to celebrate. Given the right leadership, a stadium could have been the impetus or anchor for real development and not some piecemeal, Phase 1-10, multi-decade project. 

 

Now, in all likelihood, that area will be relatively empty for a very long time. Might as well be the midwest Oakland Coliseum.

 

Plus all these resources in Brookpark will just be a waste. Wasted time, wasted materials, wasted hype, wasted discussion, wasted effort, and eventual disappointment.

 

Beats kissing the ring, but it's not good news.

17 minutes ago, TBideon said:

I'm happy the city isn't playing ball with the criminal... but let's not act like this is something to celebrate. Given the right leadership, a stadium could have been the impetus or anchor for real development and not some piecemeal, Phase 1-10, multi-decade project. 

 

 

Plus all these resources in Brookpark will just be a waste. Wasted time, wasted materials, wasted hype, wasted discussion, wasted effort, and eventual disappointment.

 

 

This has nothing to do with leadership, the Owner and NFL are the ones in charge here. Bibb/Cleveland offered $450M and that still wasn't enough.

 

Per Part 2: it's been explored time and time and time again that sports stadiums rarely benefit the places that put up the money. 

 

From https://journalistsresource.org/economics/sports-stadium-public-financing/, which breaks down a 2018 study of stadiums: 

 

>The findings: Average personal income grew about 1.4% per year over the period studied, regardless of whether there was a sports stadium in the area. The economic effects of sports franchises account for less than 1.5% of local economic activity, measured by personal income, wages and salaries, and wages per job.

 

>The author writes: “The results of this exercise are largely consistent with the findings of Coates and Humphreys and of numerous other studies that have found that the effect of sports franchises and stadium and arena construction on local economies is weak or nonexistent. Indeed, franchises, stadiums, and arenas may be harmful rather than beneficial to the local community.”

 

>The authors “find that a median sports facility generates approximately $11.3 million of annual additional spending for food and accommodation and retail businesses, with the aggregate spillovers varying substantially across facilities and sports.”

 

>The findings: Local economic activity is by and large unaffected by sports stadiums, “and the level of venue subsidies typically provided far exceeds any observed economic benefits,” the authors write. There is “deep agreement in research findings” that “sports venues are not an appropriate channel for local development policy,” they add.

 

----

As a Cleveland resident and taxpayer, I hope the Haslams have to substantially open up their pocketbooks vs what Cleveland was offering. 

 

An aside, but downtown Cleveland and the roads around it are extremely dangerous after games, I'm kind of looking forward to not having to worry about being hit by drunk fans. Let them have fun getting home on 71 and 480W.

Edited August 6, 2024Aug 6 by GISguy

I am sincerely glad it’ll be on the red line. RTA can’t mess that part up, right? 🙏🏻

5 minutes ago, Enginerd said:

I am sincerely glad it’ll be on the red line. RTA can’t mess that part up, right? 🙏🏻

 

Sorry all we have are 67R busses!

As I mentioned before, Cleveland's first Renaissance happened after the Browns left the state, not the city or region the STATE. It forced Cleveland to be creative and lean on other areas of entertainment to maintain momentum and visitors. On top of that, we are in a better position leadership wise, growth wise (especially Downtown specifically), and with the Lakefront being in the hands of a Nonprofit we now have access to money and resources that we didn't have before.

 

That piece is major, we have people in place that ACTUALLY want something to happen there and moves have been made for this to happen.

 

Cleveland probably already had a feeling this was going to happen and I'm sure they planned for this in advance.

 

Cleveland was alright then and it will be alright now. 

13 minutes ago, Enginerd said:

I am sincerely glad it’ll be on the red line. RTA can’t mess that part up, right? 🙏🏻

By this time we'll have the new trains and updated stations, tracks, and signaling. With that said we'll be fine (hopefully). I wouldn't know though because I'm not riding 30 minutes on the train, ending at a station that isn't even connected to go to an overpriced football game. 

5 minutes ago, MyPhoneDead said:

By this time we'll have the new trains and updated stations, tracks, and signaling. With that said we'll be fine (hopefully). I wouldn't know though because I'm not riding 30 minutes on the train, ending at a station that isn't even connected to go to an overpriced football game. 

I would hope they’d build a new station for the stadium

Anyone familiar with the Art Model law and how Haslam plans to bypass that ? 
 

I believe the previous owner‘s attempt to move the Columbus Crew out of Columbus actually allowed the Haslams the opportunity to buy the club. 

2 minutes ago, Enginerd said:

I would hope they’d build a new station for the stadium

$3.6 Billion for a development and some how they'll say we don't have the budget to include that. 

5 minutes ago, ClevelandNative said:

Anyone familiar with the Art Model law and how Haslam plans to bypass that ? 
 

I believe the previous owner‘s attempt to move the Columbus Crew out of Columbus actually allowed the Haslams the opportunity to buy the club. 

 

I'm no lawyer, but the  Art Model law feels like it wouldn't hold up on appeal.

18 minutes ago, ClevelandNative said:

Anyone familiar with the Art Model law and how Haslam plans to bypass that ? 
 

I believe the previous owner‘s attempt to move the Columbus Crew out of Columbus actually allowed the Haslams the opportunity to buy the club. 

It has never really been tested but it is probably unconstitutional.

3 hours ago, Cleburger said:

 

It took 30+ years to redevelop a parking lot on Public Square.   You are being ambitous about thousands of acres on the lakefront. 

And, BTW, there could be a lakefront bike trail next year, if we had the will to make it happen.  Just route it around Burke and it would be one of the cooler lakefront trails in the country with jets landing next to you! 

Theres been a walk/bike trail around Lunken airport in cincy for decades. I do believe you'd be closer to the action at Burke.

7 hours ago, Oldmanladyluck said:

So I guess I'm saddened by the loss of the Factory of Sadness on the lakefront.  However... how many times in our lives have we gotten the chance to truly reimagine this plot of land on the lakefront?  This could become anything; and if the right amount of housing is there or on the Muny Lot as @KJP mentioned, there won't be a loss on tax revenue for the City.  

 

The possibilities are exciting, and right next to the soon-to-be-gone Burke (which I'm not that big on being developed, but that's just my opinion).  We'll see what comes of this when the time comes.  

Good grief another post of excitement for more vacant property downtown. How is that Voss property doing? I remember the posters on this forum were so excited when Voss left for the "endless possibilities" only for that property to remain abandoned years later. 

The former CBS will remain a parking lot for the foreseeable future. Lets not kid ourselves. 

7 hours ago, B767PILOT said:

Im ok with this....the move allows the city to truly open up the lakfront. If Burke also closes, imagine the canvas on which to design something meaningful and lasting. 

We had massive parking lots on Public Square for literal decades. This kind of thinking is naive. Businesses and major entities leaving downtown are not and will not be a good thing. How's that Medical Mutual building shaping up? 

Edited August 6, 2024Aug 6 by AsDustinFoxWouldSay

On 8/4/2024 at 11:08 AM, KFM44107 said:

I think the reality is, and why I personally don't care if it's built in BP, is those travelling will still be staying in downtown Cleveland or somewhere Cleveland proper and either uber or take the rail tp the game/event. Cleveland will soak in the dollars without the subsidized tax burden. 

Disagree. Why would they drive into downtown if they are just coming to see a game?. They probably stay in new hotels in Brunswick,strongsville,north Olmsted . 
And as a taxpayer , I am Not subsidizing a billionaire’s new playground.. F the Beverly hillbillies if they move the team to Brooklyn Park.

5 minutes ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

We had massive parking lots on Public Square for literal decades. This kind of thinking is naive. Businesses and major entities leaving downtown are not and will not be a good thing. How's that Medical Mutual building shaping up? 

I overall agree with this take. We have the riverfront and the lakefront. Tons of space to develop. Having a stadium would have been a huge help. Too bad it didn’t seem like the renovation would have worked long term.

5 hours ago, TDi said:

I think downtown will still be plenty busy on game/event days.  Especially when you consider out of towners will still have to stay downtown due to Brookpark not having enough hotels. Also for locals, parking downtown and taking the rapid/uber will be much more convenient and cheaper than trying to cram 20k+ cars into Brookpark paying whatever Jimmy decides he wants to charge on that particular day.

Um did you miss the part that Haslam wants entertainment, hotels, housing in his "Jimmy World?" This whole complex will hurt downtown in more ways then one. Jimmy wants all the cars, people and entertainment dollars in his complex, not one cent to be in a downtown Cleveland bar, hotel or restaurant. 

2 hours ago, jbee1982 said:

I second this. This is a HUGE HUGE win for Cleveland. It's going to be exciting to see the coming transformations of our Lakefronts!

There is no such thing as a huge win when you are losing YET ANOTHER major downtown entity. 

You people act like this city is banging on the door with population growth and a tower crane is building a skyscraper on every surface lot. It took 30 years just to fill the Public Square surface lots, and it's the result of Sherwin moving a couple blocks, the literal definition of shuffling the deck. 

Downtown needs all the visitors it can get. Jimmy having his little playground with the intended hotels and entertainment options hurts downtown even further. While we wait through multiple mayors to finally build more than a taco restaurant on the lake 

21 minutes ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

Um did you miss the part that Haslam wants entertainment, hotels, housing in his "Jimmy World?" This whole complex will hurt downtown in more ways then one. Jimmy wants all the cars, people and entertainment dollars in his complex, not one cent to be in a downtown Cleveland bar, hotel or restaurant. 

I saw it. I just don't believe hotels, retail, entertainment and residents will want to be in Brookpark Ohio wedged in between an airport and a Ford plant no matter how much Jimmy wishes for it.

27 minutes ago, Justbuildit said:

Disagree. Why would they drive into downtown if they are just coming to see a game?. They probably stay in new hotels in Brunswick,strongsville,north Olmsted . 
And as a taxpayer , I am Not subsidizing a billionaire’s new playground.. F the Beverly hillbillies if they move the team to Brooklyn Park.

Because people don't travel to games to see suburbs. They travel to explore the amenities of cities. 

Downtown wasn't exactly booming during Browns home games. Why would it in Brookpark.

 

Jiimmy isn't building s**t beyond the stadium, even if the stadium financing lines up. At least in Ohio.