August 30, 2024Aug 30 Officials want Burke Airport on the table for Browns By Ken Prendergast / August 30, 2024 Two key public officials have, in recent days, suggested that Burke Lakefront Airport be closed down and replaced by a new Cleveland Browns Stadium and supportive developments, parking and public spaces. But if such an idea evolves into a serious project, it would also likely require making interim repairs to the existing stadium. MORE: https://neo-trans.blog/2024/08/30/officials-want-burke-airport-on-the-table-for-browns/ "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
August 30, 2024Aug 30 I realize it's just to show the scale of Burke, but if the Burke stadium plans end up like the sketched diagram in the article I'd rather the Stadium moved to Brook Park. I'm pro closing Burke, but it's not worth the effort to make it mostly parking for a stadium. There's parking on the muni lot, no need to add more, and the stadium should be located further east if Burke is to be the new location, save the prime western corner for better use. (I personally want to see more parkland if it's closed, I know that's disputed here but I think we can all agree it shouldn't be parking). Also why are certain public officials acting like the best place for a stadium is on the downtown lakefront? It's there now, and there are good economic reasons to leave it where it's at, but if we're going to have a new stadium, why would we want it on the downtown lakefront?
August 30, 2024Aug 30 I’m struggling with the idea of putting 100 acres of parking right on the airport land. I understand the whole property is huge but it hurts my heart. At least in Brook Park that land is all industrial with limited natural amenities. edit: the more I think about this, the less I like it. Why would we go to all the effort of closing the airport to then turn 100 acres into a parking lot. That is stupid. My main beef with Jimmyland is the taxpayers being on the hook for it. But this solution to me is not any better and may be worse because it pigeonholes a very unique property for a generation at least. Edited August 31, 2024Aug 31 by coneflower
August 31, 2024Aug 31 I want the Browns to stay Downtown and i would like a dome. If needed they could stay at CBS until the FAA allows Burke to close and start construction of a dome ( This could be 5-10 years down the road. I have no problem with 100 acres of Burke becoming parking for Jimmy's World. For those people who think that parking is not in the best interest of prime Downtown land they are dreamers and smoking some really good stuff if they think 490 acres would get filled with prime apartments ETC. It will take 2 centuries to infill it. WE have parking craters all over Downtown that need to be filled first. It has taken over 30 years to fill Prime public square land to Sherwin Williams. Also what this also does is that 50 years down the road when they are talking new dome again they can build it on the spot where the 100 acres of parking is. I say go for it.
August 31, 2024Aug 31 Is the solution to Burke to move ownership of the airports, Hopkins and Burke, from city ownership to county ownership? This would put Hopkins, Burke, and Richmond Heights airports under the same ownership allowing the shift of resources from Burke to Richmond Heights until it can replace Burke as Hopkins' reliever.
August 31, 2024Aug 31 51 minutes ago, simplythis said: For those people who think that parking is not in the best interest of prime Downtown land they are dreamers and smoking some really good stuff if they think 490 acres would get filled with prime apartments ETC. I would reserve space near the rock hall for development and make the rest a park. Turning 100 acres of land into a parking lot literally next to the lake is a travesty. Edited August 31, 2024Aug 31 by coneflower
August 31, 2024Aug 31 Closing Burke and using that land for a new stadium, park, other develoment and yes, parking is by far the best solution lMO. This is our chance people. Most of us have been in support of closing Burke for decades now. Here is maybe our best (and only?) chance. What do we get out of it? Prime lakefront land finally getting developed. There is so much land down there it can support ALL of the potential uses. We keep the Browns downtown. We open the lakefront for a huge park. We get a Browns village downtown instead of BP. And yes we turn some of that vast space into surface parking or maybe some covered parking too. It's ok. We can sacrifice some of that land for ugly surface parking. After all, if you think about what does Butke look like most of the time anyway? Why those runways look an awful lot like surface parking. So let the objections go. It's alright. We'll be more than fine. There is no perfect plan. But this a very, very good plan. Let's not kill it because it doesn't give everyone everything they want.
August 31, 2024Aug 31 16 hours ago, Ethan said: I realize it's just to show the scale of Burke, but if the Burke stadium plans end up like the sketched diagram in the article I'd rather the Stadium moved to Brook Park. I'm pro closing Burke, but it's not worth the effort to make it mostly parking for a stadium. There's parking on the muni lot, no need to add more, and the stadium should be located further east if Burke is to be the new location, save the prime western corner for better use. (I personally want to see more parkland if it's closed, I know that's disputed here but I think we can all agree it shouldn't be parking). Also why are certain public officials acting like the best place for a stadium is on the downtown lakefront? It's there now, and there are good economic reasons to leave it where it's at, but if we're going to have a new stadium, why would we want it on the downtown lakefront? A really stupid idea to move the stadium onto Burke Airport land. Like another poster has stated, rebuild it where it is if the lakefront is where the stadium needs to be.
August 31, 2024Aug 31 Burke would need a large anchor tenant if the city pulled off the impossible, and we sure aren't getting a Nordstroms or outlet mall there. Other businesses need that anchor to commit as well. A stadium might be the only realistic possibility.
August 31, 2024Aug 31 8 minutes ago, TBideon said: Burke would need a large anchor tenant if the city pulled off the impossible, and we sure aren't getting a Nordstroms or outlet mall there. Other businesses need that anchor to commit as well. A stadium might be the only realistic possibility. I feel like a stadium on the lakefront is just repeating a past mistake. I could support building it at Burke if the layout is well thought out and maybe they could utilize the mini lot and eliminate the need for parking on the lakefront. Edited August 31, 2024Aug 31 by freefourur
August 31, 2024Aug 31 1 hour ago, cadmen said: Closing Burke and using that land for a new stadium, park, other develoment and yes, parking is by far the best solution lMO. I just can’t agree. But forget my revulsion to giant parking lots, this proposal is half-baked and should have been started a long time ago if it would ever actually be an option. How long would executing this take now? I have critiqued the Haslams plenty but expecting them to put their business on hold for an impossible to guess how long amount of time while the government tries to close an airport and completes all the steps described in @KJP’s article is expecting too much. Also, Ronanye just a couple weeks ago said the county can’t afford Brook Park. How is this any more affordable? Lastly, this concept has surely been discussed with the team privately but it comes out in an article like this. Just looks like the government trying to throw spaghetti at the wall to me. Edited August 31, 2024Aug 31 by coneflower
August 31, 2024Aug 31 The city could lease land at Burke to the Haslams for $1 per year for 99 years. The Haslams would pay no property taxes and generate all of the revenue from whatever is built on it. The existing stadium site could be developed with high rises with the airport gone. Grassy parking lots are common. Here are the outer lots at Patriot Place is Foxborough, MA And at Blossom Music Center And the paved parking lots (in black) at Burke could be broken up with development (in red). Or, with them broken up, each one of those 5,000-space lots could be replaced with two 3,000-space parking garages next to the stadium and surface lots beyond, separated by development. With this much land, anything is possible. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
August 31, 2024Aug 31 I think if the stadium moves to Burke, along with a new aquarium and another larger tenant like a smaller 10k outdoor venue, more athletic facilities for the region to use, IKEA, or even something like a fancy European waterfront opera house to also use that parking would help a lot. Keep the current stadium site, Muni Lot, and the Burke land closest to Downtown for residential and smaller format retail and restaurants. I would love for this to become a place easily accessible from Downtown, and taking ideas from Scandavian old port/waterfront development that has been happening in recent years. The opera house area of Copenhagen, Ijburg or Houthaven in Amsterdam, or Bjorvika in Oslo are some good examples. That way we're building a large new neighborhood from scratch on current parking and other wasted land closest to Downtown, light rail, and the land bridge. This development then connects Downtown to a new dome and a few other large tenants, and 200+ acres of park land. It would be very similar to Chicago's lakefront, but with more residential units. This also would contain a lot of the parking for a dome and larger events to an area away from Downtown. Which would then cut off the need/demand for parking on the Northside of Downtown during these events. So now the Pit, Muni Lot, Warehouse District, and NE side of Downtown all lose the 10-15 days a year their lots are full and in demand, and would likely sell to developers. It has the potential to really transform Downtown and draw a ton of investment to the city if done right. Build the Waterfront Loop as part of this project, and this area could be the most in demand neighborhood with direct connection to PHSQ, riverfront development, existing flats, and UC. Edit: Imagine having the dome next to the Rock Hall. We could have the Rock Hall induction ceremony in it every year and turn it into a massive 6-10 days of music similar to the Montreaux Jazz Festival. 2 or 3 large acts in the dome, another 2 or 3 in RoMoFiHo, and other small and mid sized acts at all of the other venues around town. Make Cleveland the center of the entertainment world for a week every year. Edited August 31, 2024Aug 31 by PlanCleveland
August 31, 2024Aug 31 Closing Burke is the linchpin to all kinds of possibilities because of the huge surface area. And that development doesn't have to be completed all at the same time. The stadium and parking of course is first but then all of the other options from a park, Browns village, lkea or other retail and any other ideas can be built as the idea and money come together. The land is really a blank canvas. It can be developed piecemeal over time. The important thing is once the airport is gone the developers can begin to contemplate. It's not all that different from the Bedrock 20 year plan. Slowly but surely chipping away at fallow ground and creating new life.
August 31, 2024Aug 31 On that I disagree. No more "If you built it, they will come" illusions: No more Erieview, Tower City, Galleria, Flats Rapid, Euclid Corridor, Medical Mart, standalone casino, etc, failures. There has to be a master plan and committed tenants before getting rid of Burke. IMO.
August 31, 2024Aug 31 Well then you are in favor of leaving it an airport. The worst case scenario in closing Burke is we keep the Browns downtown and the empty land waiting for development can easily and cheaply be turned into a park. Do you really think there will be zero development besides that? No, things will be added and much of it probably sooner than later. My only real concern with this kind of scenario is something schlocky will get built and then it might be hard to get rid of it. Yeah, we might hit a couple of speedbumps along the way but the alternative is Browns BP and another endless time frame of keeping Burke.
August 31, 2024Aug 31 I know back in June they said a study regarding the long term viability of Burke was completed and they were going over the draft. Looks like the airport lost $600k last year. It's days are numbered IMO and I wonder if the timing of that correlates with this.
August 31, 2024Aug 31 4 hours ago, PlanCleveland said: This also would contain a lot of the parking for a dome and larger events to an area away from Downtown. Which would then cut off the need/demand for parking on the Northside of Downtown during these events. So now the Pit, Muni Lot, Warehouse District, and NE side of Downtown all lose the 10-15 days a year their lots are full and in demand, and would likely sell to developers. That's a very good point. If we want parking lots in the rest of downtown to be developed, we have to get them on the market. Their owners simply aren't going to sell them as long as they're profitable. So make them unprofitable by increasing the supply, keeping the new supply publicly owned (although leased to the Haslams for $1/year), and thus not subject to extra costs like liability insurance and property taxes. Maybe part of the deal would be that on non-stadium event days, parking at the stadium and at undeveloped Muny Lots can be had if you buy an RTA pass. Then you ride the Waterfront Line or a bus to your downtown destination. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
August 31, 2024Aug 31 As long as the dollars and cents add up, putting the stadium and related development on Burke seems to me like a complete no-brainer. The airport currently loses the city something like $10 million a year. So if you amortize over 30 years, the city gets about $250 million of "free" money to contribute to the stadium, assuming Jimmy demands something, which he will. The land is currently mostly pavement that cannot be developed as anything other than pavement due to federal law (e.g. runway). If you turned the entire thing into a parking lot, you would have improved on that, since you now have pavement that isn't losing money and at least could be turned into something else at such time as it's economical to do so. But, the entire thing will not be parking lot. At 450 acres, Burke is almost incomprehensibly big. The entire Cleveland zoo (including the monster parking lots) is roughly 165 acres. If you give 225 acres of Burke to Haslam and the rest to the metroparks, the metroparks would have a new space, 60 acres *bigger* than the zoo, right on the lake. Even if for a long time it's just grass, it would be a big improvement. Go to lower Edgewater by the piers. It's basically just grass, but it's full of people flying kites, events every other weekend, drum circles and dancing, etc. It will take a long time to fully realize Burke's potential, and that's totally okay, because it will still be a big improvement in the meantime. I do get the concern about putting a hundred acres of new parking and a stadium on the lakefront, but you're getting so much in exchange, and as others pointed out above, there is not an infinite demand for parking, and so some lots closer to downtown will be more likely to get developed as a result. I like to play the circumstance switching game with this kind of thing. Let's take the worst case scenario of Haslam developing Burke. If we right now had on Burke: 1. a stadium, 2. a crap ton of parking, 3. some amount of kind of lame development, and 4. a bunch of empty grassy area that the metroparks didn't know how to manage well, would anyone in their right mind suggest getting rid of items 1-4 and replacing it with an airport? I don't think so. And I think in the long term what we end up with will be a lot better than the items 1-4 above. So to me, this is a golden chance to solve two major problems in one fell swoop, and as long as it's economical (which I suspect it is) we should do so.
September 1, 2024Sep 1 Regardless of what is theoretically possible, I can’t imagine the Haslams going down this extremely complicated, time-consuming path unless they have no other choice. They are going to want firm commitments, guarantees and realistic timelines that can be priced into the value of the team before they sell a portion to new investors. Brook Park still makes the most sense for their business because they control everything and the government there is always going to cater to their needs and desires. Now, can they pay for it…. Edited September 1, 2024Sep 1 by coneflower
September 1, 2024Sep 1 Forgive me if this was already answered, My question is if Burke is decommissioned can a roof be added to the existing stadium with the height limit removed?
September 1, 2024Sep 1 2 minutes ago, dave2017 said: Forgive me if this was already answered, My question is if Burke is decommissioned can a roof be added to the existing stadium with the height limit removed? Height shouldn't matter now as the stadium is not in the flight path of the runways.
September 1, 2024Sep 1 9 hours ago, coneflower said: Regardless of what is theoretically possible, I can’t imagine the Haslams going down this extremely complicated, time-consuming path unless they have no other choice. They are going to want firm commitments, guarantees and realistic timelines that can be priced into the value of the team before they sell a portion to new investors. Brook Park still makes the most sense for their business because they control everything and the government there is always going to cater to their needs and desires. Now, can they pay for it…. I thought the Mayor of Brookpark was saying they were skeptical about a stadium there. I thought they mentioned speaking to mayor's of cities that house suburban stadiums (outside Buffalo and Boston), who stated their towns actually lost money on stadiums in their limits.
September 1, 2024Sep 1 8 hours ago, dave2017 said: Forgive me if this was already answered, My question is if Burke is decommissioned can a roof be added to the existing stadium with the height limit removed? I think adding a roof to the existing stadium would be very costly and the way it would have to be done would look hideous.
September 1, 2024Sep 1 13 hours ago, coneflower said: Regardless of what is theoretically possible, I can’t imagine the Haslams going down this extremely complicated, time-consuming path unless they have no other choice. They are going to want firm commitments, guarantees and realistic timelines that can be priced into the value of the team before they sell a portion to new investors. Brook Park still makes the most sense for their business because they control everything and the government there is always going to cater to their needs and desires. Now, can they pay for it…. Brookpark can only cater so much. They have very limited resources. Unless the pay surrounding suburbs to help. Im pretty certain Cleveland may snub them.
September 1, 2024Sep 1 53 minutes ago, Jenny said: Brookpark can only cater so much. They have very limited resources. Unless the pay surrounding suburbs to help. Im pretty certain Cleveland may snub them. Cleveland rightfully should snub them. What municipality would help another city poach yet another entity from it
September 1, 2024Sep 1 As @LlamaLawyer said above, the Burke land is way bigger than probably most people understand and the chance to develop the whole parcel once the airport closes is a great opportunity for Cleveland, but also one that would probably take at least a century to realize, given the sheer volume of land. If the new dome and parking is properly located on the plot, you wouldn’t have to have a huge parking lot immediately on the shoreline - that could be a boardwalk, a hiking path, etc. In other words, we have flexibility in the design of the whole parcel because of the immense volume of real estate. A new domed stadium and a Browns village would really kickstart the Burke development process faster than any option. There would be no “time in a substitute stadium location” such as Columbus, since the old stadium would not be substantially renovated - so that’s a thumbs up for fans in Cleveland that don’t want to drive elsewhere to see home games for the several years of the construction process. (Of course, that’s also the case with construction of a dome in BP) And as @KJP and @PlanCleveland pointed out, the economic incentive for a number of existing parking lots would be diminished -which would greatly encourage the sale of and development of those lots. I think the views and general optics of downtown would be quite impressive from Burke’s plot- that northeast of downtown location is very complimentary to our view of downtown. The opportunity to build new high rise residential (or whatever the specific mix would become) are much better suited to developing at the current, much smaller stadium site - as opposed to the huge expanse of Burke. So I’d be pretty pumped about the closure of Burke and a downtown dome happening there. I just wonder if it’s already too late in the game for this all to be pulled together in time. It might mean an extra year or two in the Factory of Sadness but I could live with that if it wasn’t an open-ended delay - and I’m sure it would not be - pretty sure the Haslams are not interested in any substantial delay. Finally, others have suggested possibilities for coordinating programming between big events at a new Burke dome and the neighboring rock hall - that could be a great inducement for major festivals and larger scale events. Last, but not least, the bars, hotels and restaurants would be guaranteed not to lose any business with the team still right downtown. It’ll be interesting to see if there is any substantive movement from the City and the Haslams towards a Burke concept - guess we’ll find out pretty shortly. Edited September 1, 2024Sep 1 by CleveFan
September 1, 2024Sep 1 This Burke plan sounds like a long-term play, not something that meets the immediate needs of the Brown's ownership. Would likely involve the Brown's staying put for another decade before transitioning. I do like the idea of putting the stadium here instead of it being front-and-center of the downtown, but I don't see how this works out logistically as a short-term solution.
September 2, 2024Sep 2 8 hours ago, Jenny said: Brookpark can only cater so much. They have very limited resources. Unless the pay surrounding suburbs to help. Im pretty certain Cleveland may snub them. What I meant is they will likely face fewer obstacles and bureaucratic hoops to jump through. Big fish, little pond. In terms of policing/security, that seems solvable with a mixture of private security, local, county and state highway patrol. 12 hours ago, Mov2Ohio said: I thought the Mayor of Brookpark was saying they were skeptical about a stadium there. I thought they mentioned speaking to mayor's of cities that house suburban stadiums (outside Buffalo and Boston), who stated their towns actually lost money on stadiums in their limits. The mayor was on the radio a couple of weeks ago and he sounded pretty supportive of the project, pointing out this property has been vacant for 12 years and they want to see it get used and this sounds like a good use for it. https://www.brownsnation.com/brook-park-mayor-rejects-1-offer-for-browns-to-build-domed-stadium/ Here is another one where he says he and Ronanye are on “different sidelines” right now. https://www.cleveland19.com/2024/08/14/mayor-brook-park-says-desired-new-stadium-is-not-priority-right-now/?outputType=amp
September 3, 2024Sep 3 Cleveland Browns, Haslam Sports Group to make 'special announcement': Watch live at 11 a.m. https://www.wkyc.com/article/sports/nfl/browns/cleveland-browns-haslam-sports-group-special-announcement/95-76eb350d-af1a-421a-812b-87cd80583a0a Could this be stadium news???? Edited September 3, 2024Sep 3 by scb0525
September 3, 2024Sep 3 My money is on some team-up with a non-profit as a way of ingratiating themselves to the Northeast Ohio community. Hopefully not a woman's shelter. Edited September 3, 2024Sep 3 by TBideon
September 3, 2024Sep 3 22 minutes ago, scb0525 said: Cleveland Browns, Haslam Sports Group to make 'special announcement': Watch live at 11 a.m. https://www.wkyc.com/article/sports/nfl/browns/cleveland-browns-haslam-sports-group-special-announcement/95-76eb350d-af1a-421a-812b-87cd80583a0a Could this be stadium news???? “The I-Team has learned the announcement is not about the stadium decision.“ https://fox8.com/news/special-announcement-at-cleveland-browns-stadium/
September 3, 2024Sep 3 Or possibly something related to Jim Donovan. Edited September 3, 2024Sep 3 by TBideon
September 3, 2024Sep 3 10 minutes ago, BoomerangCleRes said: Maybe they got someone to buy the naming rights for the next few years Yuck. I know I never called it F**** E*****. Maybe they decided to name the broadcast booths or something like that after Jim Donovan. Yeah, I know that's a stretch.
September 3, 2024Sep 3 They probably have a buyer for 10% of the team, which will give them equity to build BP
September 3, 2024Sep 3 38 minutes ago, ogibbigo said: They probably have a buyer for 10% of the team, which will give them equity to build BP I wouldn't be surprised. Honestly I am not expecting this to be exciting news for City of Cleveland fans.
September 3, 2024Sep 3 My guess? A naming rights deal. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
September 3, 2024Sep 3 1 hour ago, TBideon said: Or possibly something related to Jim Donovan. If the public gives them money, they promise to name the Brook Park playing surface "Jim Donovan Field" and call the games played there Donny-Brooks.
September 3, 2024Sep 3 My preference at this point is to renovate the current stadium, but for the fact that the team would have to play elsewhere for a couple of years. I dont want to travel to Columbus and watch in a college stadium. My back hurts just thinking about those bleachers. If this happens, "could" football be played in Progressive Field if neccessary? I think I remeber that the park was orignally desinged and configured to accomodate a footbal field. Obviously, Brook Park and Burke options would solve this issue.
September 3, 2024Sep 3 2 hours ago, scb0525 said: Cleveland Browns, Haslam Sports Group to make 'special announcement': Watch live at 11 a.m. https://www.wkyc.com/article/sports/nfl/browns/cleveland-browns-haslam-sports-group-special-announcement/95-76eb350d-af1a-421a-812b-87cd80583a0a Could this be stadium news???? KJP was correct...New name on the Stadium. Huntington Bank Field.
September 3, 2024Sep 3 4 minutes ago, scb0525 said: KJP was correct...New name on the Stadium. Huntington Bank Field. With how many things Huntington Bank has naming rights on you'd think Huntington Bank is the Cleveland Based bank and not Key Bank.
September 3, 2024Sep 3 The city should really look at moving the port facilities to the very eastern edge of Burke. Then the dome stadium can be built where the port is now. I'm sure they can infill the dock spaces that currently exist and demo the current stadium which could give them plenty of prime lakefront real estate for commercial & recreational development. Closing Burke would probably take at least 5 years to complete. But constructing a port on all the new landfill at the eastern end of the airport could probably be accomplished much faster. Once Burke is closed then the City & County officials can have a blank slate to properly develop our lakefront that the whole region could have access to and enjoy.
September 3, 2024Sep 3 On 8/31/2024 at 6:27 PM, LlamaLawyer said: As long as the dollars and cents add up, putting the stadium and related development on Burke seems to me like a complete no-brainer. A ton of good points made here in the past few pages, but let's remember that Hopkins needs a reliever airport and that's currently Burke. Before Burke can be closed, a new reliever needs to be found -- and that will require some significant investment in upgrades to said airport. Would love to see the details of that report on Burke.
September 3, 2024Sep 3 So we have a field, another field, and a field house. Huntington Bank stadium already exists in Minnesota but should note there’s not a Huntington Bank Dome also must be fairly long term deal as they basically said they’ll be on the new stadium Edited September 3, 2024Sep 3 by BoomerangCleRes
September 3, 2024Sep 3 52 minutes ago, dski44 said: My preference at this point is to renovate the current stadium, but for the fact that the team would have to play elsewhere for a couple of years. I dont want to travel to Columbus and watch in a college stadium. My back hurts just thinking about those bleachers. If this happens, "could" football be played in Progressive Field if neccessary? I think I remeber that the park was orignally desinged and configured to accomodate a footbal field. Obviously, Brook Park and Burke options would solve this issue. I was thinking about the Hall of Fame Stadium in Canton, but the capacity is only 23,000. I believe Jacobs Field aka Progressive Field was designed to accommodate football, but the capacity has been downsized over the years. I think it is now about 35K for baseball, not sure what it would be for football.
September 3, 2024Sep 3 23 minutes ago, BoomerangCleRes said: also must be fairly long term deal as they basically said they’ll be on the new stadium 20 year deal
September 3, 2024Sep 3 1 hour ago, dski44 said: My preference at this point is to renovate the current stadium, but for the fact that the team would have to play elsewhere for a couple of years. I dont want to travel to Columbus and watch in a college stadium. My back hurts just thinking about those bleachers. If this happens, "could" football be played in Progressive Field if neccessary? I think I remeber that the park was orignally desinged and configured to accomodate a footbal field. Obviously, Brook Park and Burke options would solve this issue. I don't see the Browns temporary relocating to Columbus because they don't have a stadium large enough to support a football team. Jimmy would lose a ton of revenue on ticket sales alone. And there is a zero percent chance that the Browns would play at Ohio Stadium. I can't see OSU agreeing to allowing the Browns to play there for 3-5 years depending on demo/construction timeline.
Create an account or sign in to comment