19 hours ago, LlamaLawyer said:

Wow, the comments from HSG are really petty and sophomoric. It would be hilarious if the county responded with a letter that had a bunch of bullet points about how terrible the Browns team is and how bad a decision Deshaun Watson was.

I actually think this is kind of good news. If HSG wants to build a stadium in Brook Park without county funding, they should do that. It's his money. And if the General Assembly wants to issue a bunch of bonds that are eventually going to require general fund disbursements not to default, well that's their problem.

Except it's not their problem. There are a lot of social organizations that are being cut out of the budget right now to clear the way for this boondoggle. Food banks, libraries, education for both children and adults, all are seeing their budgets cut back or eliminated. There is a straight line between this BS and the gutting of our social infrastructure, which hurts the clients served, the people working there, and the communities in which these orgs are located.

18 hours ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

Fat chance man. Outside of Guardians and Cavs games, Gateway is going to start appearing a hell of alot more desolate once 2029 roles around. You can probably say the same for E4 as well.

The browns bring so much business that several of the restaurants are closed on Sundays.

Have you ever spent any time down there? Hilarities and which ever comedian is performing that night has a far bigger impact on business than a 2-8 browns game at 1 pm could ever dream of.

19 hours ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

Fat chance man. Outside of Guardians and Cavs games, Gateway is going to start appearing a hell of alot more desolate once 2029 roles around. You can probably say the same for E4 as well.

The Browns stimulus package can be seen as a crutch. Once that crutch is gone now you pivot to things that replace that. Build up the lakefront with a navy pier, navy yards or Wharf type of experience and now you have a year round influx of visitors that makes you forget about the Browns impact. They did it in the 90s and they can do it again.

6 hours ago, KJP said:

There is a $20 million cushion in the Sin Tax funding that could be used for demolition of the lakefront stadium. It's probably not enough money, so that's where a Haslam contribution could come in to fill the gap.

Partial demolition could let the city promote it as a Colosseum clone.

20 hours ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

Fat chance man. Outside of Guardians and Cavs games, Gateway is going to start appearing a hell of alot more desolate once 2029 roles around. You can probably say the same for E4 as well.

Oh I feel really bad for the businesses on W 6th and the hotels at the north end of Downtown. They definitely are going to feel a pinch. Despite the way NFL stadiums get s**t on in terms of their economic spin off, there is research that shows on the weekend of games hotels in close proxmity to stadiums tend to see their occupancy surge, but south of Euclid, I think that area will be alright for the most part and won't suffer too much.

Downtown and Cleveland as a whole though is approaching a real fork in the road. The approach to development in this city over the next few years is going to define whether we continue to drop in the sphere of national importance or instead give ourselves a fighters chance to compete, we are not a megalopolis or a booming sun belt city, so when we do stupid stuff like this it infuriates me as its so self defeating and if this becomes the path we continue on we are in deep trouble. I can't believe the audacity of HSG to ask for public assistance for a project which plans to dump another 500k sq feet of office space and another 300k of retail into a stagnant market. Thankfully I sense a lot of people in local government are as bitter about this as I am, and you can channel that anger the right way. This circus with the Browns has taken up far too much focus and when it is put to bed it should allow full attention to go to the likes of the Gateway District, the river and lakefront (getting rid of Burke), actually putting more focus into filling in the Warehouse District lots and so on, but we need to proactive from the second they say cheerio.

And whilst I'm thumping my keyboard, tell them to get stuffed when they come begging for stadium maintenance and improvement cash.

Edited May 16May 16 by snakebite

Why would hotels and restaurants suffer even if this ridiculous dome is built? Visitors would still need to eat, sleep and recreate somewhere, and we all know Brookpark can only provide a fraction of that even if a hotel or two are built.

As for Jimmyworld cannibalizing other events that would ordinarily occur downtown, that is a fair concern. Those revenue losses balanced against the potential ancillary Cleveland benefits as well as tax paid billion(s?) spared = who knows. Probably none of us until 2040 when proper analysis can begin.

As for Gateway and E4 becoming wastelands, don't be daft Dustin. They'll be fine even if there are some revenue losses.

Cleveland's best years in my lifetime were the last 90s. I'm not worried.

Edited May 16May 16 by TBideon

37 minutes ago, TBideon said:

Why would hotels and restaurants suffer even if this ridiculous dome is built? Visitors would still need to eat, sleep and recreate somewhere, and we all know Brookpark can only provide a fraction of that even if a hotel or two are built.

As for Jimmyworld cannibalizing other events that would ordinarily occur downtown, that is a fair concern. Those revenue losses balanced against the potential ancillary Cleveland benefits as well as tax paid billion(s?) spared = who knows. Probably none of us until 2040 when proper analysis can begin.

As for Gateway and E4 becoming wastelands, don't be daft Dustin. They'll be fine even if there are some revenue losses.

Cleveland's best years in my lifetime were the last 90s. I'm not worried.

Common sense would have you think a sizable portion of visitors are going to instead choose hotels or bars which aren't 13-14 miles from the venue especially if it provides the convenience of being close to the airport, and if you have ever visited places like Barley House or Dive Bar before a Browns game where people cram in like sardines, you would see that sadly there are going to be some establishments who are going to seriously suffer from this move. This is not going to be a death sentence for Downtown, but this is also not going to be a business as usual situation for everyone and the region is not in a position to add another major node which dilutes what already exists. Chris Ronayne is completely right in that the stadium and surrounding development pose a serious threat. The region does not have the growth to support these Atlanta Battery style suburban developments.

What’s next for lakefront with Browns leaving?

https://fox8.com/news/i-team/i-team-whats-next-for-lakefront-with-browns-leaving/

45 minutes ago, CLE2BAL said:

Common sense would have you think a sizable portion of visitors are going to instead choose hotels or bars which aren't 13-14 miles from the venue especially if it provides the convenience of being close to the airport, and if you have ever visited places like Barley House or Dive Bar before a Browns game where people cram in like sardines, you would see that sadly there are going to be some establishments who are going to seriously suffer from this move. This is not going to be a death sentence for Downtown, but this is also not going to be a business as usual situation for everyone and the region is not in a position to add another major node which dilutes what already exists. Chris Ronayne is completely right in that the stadium and surrounding development pose a serious threat. The region does not have the growth to support these Atlanta Battery style suburban developments.

Agreed, but if we do land a WNBA team (somewhat likely) that will greatly mitigate the loss of the Browns leaving. Not necessarily overnight hotel rooms just activity downtown. Overall, if the county does not have to pay anything, they will be freed to have extra money to invest in places like the downtown lakefront.

14 hours ago, CLE2BAL said:

Common sense would have you think a sizable portion of visitors are going to instead choose hotels or bars which aren't 13-14 miles from the venue especially if it provides the convenience of being close to the airport, and if you have ever visited places like Barley House or Dive Bar before a Browns game where people cram in like sardines, you would see that sadly there are going to be some establishments who are going to seriously suffer from this move. This is not going to be a death sentence for Downtown, but this is also not going to be a business as usual situation for everyone and the region is not in a position to add another major node which dilutes what already exists. Chris Ronayne is completely right in that the stadium and surrounding development pose a serious threat. The region does not have the growth to support these Atlanta Battery style suburban developments.

I doubt that the residential and hotel portion is going to start anytime soon. My guess would be 2032-2033 at the earliest depending on where this country is. That gives Cleveland and the County at least 5 years from now to plan and 2 years to build to counter the loss felt. We will be okay.

I don't see this being a big threat to downtown, either. I might change my tune if they added a smaller theater in this complex like what is available at Playhouse Square. I saw SoFi stadium has a smaller theater in it. But absent that, it's not like a performer on the level of John Mayer is going to switch from the arena to the football stadium. That's a 100% increase in the supply of tickets. Our population is too small for that kind of demand. Even Beyonce is having trouble selling tickets to her big shows.

1 hour ago, coneflower said:

I don't see this being a big threat to downtown, either. I might change my tune if they added a smaller theater in this complex like what is available at Playhouse Square. I saw SoFi stadium has a smaller theater in it. But absent that, it's not like a performer on the level of John Mayer is going to switch from the arena to the football stadium. That's a 100% increase in the supply of tickets. Our population is too small for that kind of demand. Even Beyonce is having trouble selling tickets to her big shows.

Which is why Jimmy will be going after events already being held at the convention center and Rocket Mortgage arena to beef up his revenue streams. You can always close seating off for small concerts. This whole thing is about massive revenue from parking on Jimmy's isolated complex. How do you get those streams? Holding as many events, no matter the size, as possible.

We're almost at June 2025, and it's very unlikely there will be a ribbon-cutting ceremony in 2029. Just think of all the environmental studies, NFL approval, multi-year road expansions, additional land purchases, land-use permits and approvals, updated renderings, re-budgeting, re-financing, lawsuit appeals and resolutions, etc, that need to occur before the drunk idiots head down to Jimmyworld in 2029.

Never mind the three years needed to build the albatross.

Meanwhile Jimmy is 71 years old and will be, at best, 75 by the time this stadium opens.

A 75-year-old multi-billionaire whose income derives mostly from Tennessee will not care about outbidding Rocket Mortgage for the next Eric Clapton or Keyshia Cole 2030 performance. These events are pennies to Jimmy's actual worth.

Also, again, 2029 is a ludicrously optimistic time frame, and Jimmy isn't getting younger. Despite all the financial and geographical advantages in the world, Las Vegas still needed two years to prepare for groundbreaking for the A's stadium, with another 3 years of construction required. We think the Browns will achieve that in a vastly shorter time frame?

Jimmy, the only person who actively gives a s**t about this project, would be 76 or 77 by the time this kicks off - which I still don't think will happen. Cannibalizing the next Matt Rife performance will not be a priority at that stage.

Edited May 17May 17 by TBideon

if he cares about it now, he'll care about it when he's 75

Edited May 17May 17 by Whipjacka

This will be fun to go through all over again in 20 years when the Browns new owner complains how the Brook Park football village is a desolate concrete wasteland hostile to game day activities because theres no active retail or decent public access, and wants city funds to build a new stadium in the city or else he's leaving

Another thing I want to bring up from this recent news. despite the very bullish public statement, are HSG actually going to cover the county funding gap? Or are they instead going to lean on things such as PSL's? The sense I get is they would be reluctant to announce this until the state guarantees their chunk of funding as its likely to bring negative press at a crucial time.

The Bills stadium, 60,000 capacity open air venue is hoping to generate 225m in PSL sales, currently the lowest priced is $2,500 and it seems like they are struggling to sell. Allegiant in Vegas seems more comparable in design (indoor and similar capacity) raised 549m ranging from $500 for the cheapest seats to $75,000 for top end corporate tickets, the Raiders had targeted 750m. Sofi Stadium attempted to raise 800 million in PSL sales between both teams although I believe the Chargers did not hold up their end of the bargain and fell short by $300m with the shortfall having to be made up by Stan Kroenke.

Then there is the NFL G4 loan programme for stadium funds.

I am sensing the 600 million gap from the County/Brook Park may not have much cover from the Haslam's. Any sense of the plans at all @KJP ?

Edited May 18May 18 by CLE2BAL

County, aside, why isn't Cleveland at least working to annex that sliver of Cleveland-adjacent Brook Park stadium land into Cleveland, proper, to at least save face to a degree? Cleveland could share some revenue with Brook Park and take the burden off Brook Park services, etc.. while not allowing the stadium to move to a suburb on what amounts to a geographic border technicality... (Because if Brook Park thinks this is putting their suburb on any kind of desirable, meaningful suburb map, with all due respect, they're wrong ..)

Edited May 18May 18 by eyehrtfood

If Cleveland partially annexes an independent city, it needs to be for a good reason, not just so the Browns potentially play in the city proper for a few more decades.

And why would Brookpark agree to it and lose their sovereignty? Some people would lose access to the Berea school system, which is pretty solid.

^I mean really, they owe it to Cleveland after swapping for all those suweeet strip clubs...

2 hours ago, TBideon said:

If Cleveland partially annexes an independent city, it needs to be for a good reason, not just so the Browns potentially play in the city proper for a few more decades.

And why would Brookpark agree to it and lose their sovereignty? Some people would lose access to the Berea school system, which is pretty solid.

Point of order: School system borders don't change with annexations (or municipal border changes as far as I know)

15 hours ago, eyehrtfood said:

County, aside, why isn't Cleveland at least working to annex that sliver of Cleveland-adjacent Brook Park stadium land into Cleveland, proper, to at least save face to a degree? Cleveland could share some revenue with Brook Park and take the burden off Brook Park services, etc.. while not allowing the stadium to move to a suburb on what amounts to a geographic border technicality... (Because if Brook Park thinks this is putting their suburb on any kind of desirable, meaningful suburb map, with all due respect, they're wrong ..)

Won't happen. In 2001 the city had to swap Glenn Research Center to Brookpark to get the IX Center (the intent was to tear it down to add a third runway).

23 hours ago, CLE2BAL said:

Another thing I want to bring up from this recent news. despite the very bullish public statement, are HSG actually going to cover the county funding gap? Or are they instead going to lean on things such as PSL's? The sense I get is they would be reluctant to announce this until the state guarantees their chunk of funding as its likely to bring negative press at a crucial time.

If HSG can pin the shortfall on the county, they can cry poor and suggest it's not their fault they had to do the thing they were planning to do all along. The Bills sold 11,000 PSLs for their new stadium. All that said, they are making a big deal for a reason. If they had funding in place, they would just announce it is a done deal. They are still negotiating with the county, and the promised walkaway is just a tactic.

17 hours ago, cfdwarrior said:

^I mean really, they owe it to Cleveland after swapping for all those suweeet strip clubs...

Did Cleveland get anything in return from Brook Park for swapping the property north of Brookpark Rd with all the strip clubs/adult bookstores?

1 hour ago, LibertyBlvd said:

Did Cleveland get anything in return from Brook Park for swapping the property north of Brookpark Rd with all the strip clubs/adult bookstores?

Yes, some land they needed for airport expansion. A few years later the IX-Glenn swap happened.

21 hours ago, eyehrtfood said:

County, aside, why isn't Cleveland at least working to annex that sliver of Cleveland-adjacent Brook Park stadium land into Cleveland, proper, to at least save face to a degree? Cleveland could share some revenue with Brook Park and take the burden off Brook Park services, etc.. while not allowing the stadium to move to a suburb on what amounts to a geographic border technicality... (Because if Brook Park thinks this is putting their suburb on any kind of desirable, meaningful suburb map, with all due respect, they're wrong ..)

Why would Cleveland do this if they don't believe the revenue projections or want the stadium there? The city doesn't need to save face here.

Haslam's won't be covering any gaps. They'll just scale back the project.

10 minutes ago, MostlyThere14 said:

Haslam's won't be covering any gaps. They'll just scale back the project.

Yeah, I'm still half expecting them to reduce the stadium to basically a clone of the new Buffalo Bills one. Listening to "Browns backers" who want tailgating space and the tradition of outdoor football or something, however they spin it.

Most PSL projections do not seem to live up their expectations. Even in the trendy cities. However I don't doubt they'll still do it as opposed to just putting more of their own money in if they can avoid it. The average person will almost certainly be priced out unless they are willing to make some sacrifices, nevermind for their season tickets.

County executive calls Browns dome plan a ‘boondoggle’

we now clearly see that you have spent the last two years attempting to bully the public and fleece county taxpayers for HSG’s private gain.”

https://fox8.com/news/i-team-county-executive-calls-browns-dome-plan-a-boondoggle/

https://www.crainscleveland.com/sports-recreation/chris-ronayne-slams-browns-brook-park-plan-boondoggle

It's hard to follow all the details but it's not a question of Chris Ronayne forking over $200M even if he wanted to--the Browns want to increase the bed tax, which requires votes in Columbus and the county council. The local hotel association opposes this because they say their taxes are already too high nationally and there isn't a groundswell of resident support and the Haslams saying they'll do it no matter, which gives the county an easy out to not contribute. That said, I'm not sure how tenable it is to have such a tense relationship between the team and local government but if they do end up building a new stadium, they aren't going anywhere for several decades so maybe it doesn't matter.

Has the city begun to look at costs to remove the existing stadium from the lakefront or at least negotiate with HSG to contribute to the cost to do that? Any estimates so far?

If it isn't removed can the stadium be reconfigured or reduced in size to accommodate ot our team ther sport's needs? I still hold hope that this stadium can be the home for the Browns

As a side note, I live in Los Angeles and ran into a gentleman wearing a Browns hoodie and asked if he was from Cleveland. He was from Columbus. I asked him his thoughts on the proposed enclosed stadium in Brook Park. He stated that was a horrible idea and football in Cleveland was meant to be played in the elements. Somehow the Haslams and HSG have forgotten what and how the majority feel about our team. It has never been about fancy and new. The NFL owners have lost touch with their fans

Edited May 19May 19 by dave2017

Unfortunately the NFL is now an arms race. Beyond a few of the "poorer" legacy owners, most are pushing for literal theme parks and that does not lend well to existing urban environments as it requires A LOT of vacant land to achieve this. A domed stadium, thousands of parking spaces, mixed use development and it's all only for a guaranteed 10 events per year.

11 hours ago, E Rocc said:

Won't happen. In 2001 the city had to swap Glenn Research Center to Brookpark to get the IX Center (the intent was to tear it down to add a third runway).

Goodness gracious what a stupid trade, that only a moron like Mike White could make

Well, this is interesting:

cleveland

Greater Cleveland Partnership endorses Browns’ Brook Park...

The Greater Cleveland Partnership is backing the Browns' Brook Park idea, rather than back public officials efforts to keep the team downtown.

TL;DR

• “While a downtown dome is ideal, financial and development constraints have been challenging; the Brook Park option is more practical to move forward,” the letter said. “The additional events, and expected growth in live entertainment, are an economic opportunity for the entire region.”

• GCP has, at the same time, called upon the Haslams to provide more than 150 million for lakefront development

• "GCP has made extensive efforts to bring stakeholders together as in other complex civic initiatives, and we do not take lightly that our positions diverge from some of our key partners,” the letter said.

Edited May 20May 20 by Geowizical

My thing with this has always been, if they can finance it and maintain the complex themselves with no public money, more power to them.

Because at the end of the day, regardless of who is for or against the Haslam's plan, the Haslam's need to come up with the money to build and maintain this. The state may come through with some of the funds, but with the county against it, Im not sure if this gets done unless the Haslam's put in basically all the money themselves.

If built in Brookpark, Cleveland and the county could then focus on turning the current stadium site and surrounding areas into a World class waterfront that would likely compete with whatever retail village the Haslams currently have planned.

I still think the stadium belongs downtown... somewhere, even if not its current site, but if the Haslam's want to pay for it all, let them do what they want with THEIR money.

“The additional events, and expected growth in live entertainment, are an economic opportunity for the entire region.”

Imagine believing that.

"the Browns should find a way to send “more than $150 million” to Cleveland to help develop the lakefront."

And why on earth should they? If Haslam were to volunteer an abitrary amount like that, I imagine there are endless better options. The city and county have had almost a century to develop the lakefront, and have done nothing outside several underperforming museums and very recent housing. Some pie-in-the-sky donation from the Browns is pennies for any significant development and is completely performative.

"GCP called this Browns’ stadium debate a pivotal moment"

It really isn't despite catching a lot of attention. This isn't 1995.

 

Edited May 20May 20 by TBideon

Obviously the cost of being on the executive committee of the GCP provides Dee Haslem with a return on investment. This was mentioned earlier, and is unsurprising.

Completely unsurprising from GCP.

5 hours ago, Mov2Ohio said:

I still think the stadium belongs downtown... somewhere, even if not its current site, but if the Haslam's want to pay for it all, let them do what they want with THEIR money.

Spending more money is their last resort lol. They are going to foot fans with the bill in the name of PSLs and maybe try to stinge a loan from the NFL stadium improvement program. And I say f*ck em, many of the fans cheering for this are the same ones going to be complaining when they are asked to fork out four to five figures for the right to buy a season ticket. They will just hang off post June 30 to avoid jeopardising this.

Regional chamber of commerce likes Browns’ move

By Ken Prendergast / May 20, 2025

Downtown Cleveland’s lakefront has had a stadium on it for 91 of the last 93 years. But that should come to an end for the betterment of the lakefront and its replacement stadium, according to the Greater Cleveland Partnership (GCP) — the metro area’s chamber of commerce. GCP also urged the closure of Burke Lakefront Airport.

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2025/05/20/regional-chamber-of-commerce-likes-browns-move/

On 5/16/2025 at 3:38 PM, TBideon said:

Why would hotels and restaurants suffer even if this ridiculous dome is built? Visitors would still need to eat, sleep and recreate somewhere, and we all know Brookpark can only provide a fraction of that even if a hotel or two are built.

As for Jimmyworld cannibalizing other events that would ordinarily occur downtown, that is a fair concern. Those revenue losses balanced against the potential ancillary Cleveland benefits as well as tax paid billion(s?) spared = who knows. Probably none of us until 2040 when proper analysis can begin.

As for Gateway and E4 becoming wastelands, don't be daft Dustin. They'll be fine even if there are some revenue losses.

Cleveland's best years in my lifetime were the last 90s. I'm not worried.

Supply and Demand

If tax money is being used to build an NFL JImmyworld with hotels and restaurants, the supply goes up, and unless there is a corresponding increase in tourist dollars to absorb the new venues, existing businesses and neighborhoods suffer.

It would be one thing if it was a private development, but the fact that it will be public dollars that primarily benefits the Haslams while pretty much everyone else loses a little does not sit with me right.

It's another Pontiac SIlverdome

Can we talk about how ugly this thing is? Will it look like that for sure? Why does it have to look like a data center mixed with a mega church?

1 hour ago, 3 Dog Pat said:

Supply and Demand

If tax money is being used to build an NFL JImmyworld with hotels and restaurants, the supply goes up, and unless there is a corresponding increase in tourist dollars to absorb the new venues, existing businesses and neighborhoods suffer.

It would be one thing if it was a private development, but the fact that it will be public dollars that primarily benefits the Haslams while pretty much everyone else loses a little does not sit with me right.

It's another Pontiac SIlverdome

Don't know what State will decide, but local money is looking less and less likely. That's a big win for the city.

And Jimmyworld will have a negligible number of hotels and restaurants -- if any. I don't see a 200-room hotel and several eateries /sports bars having much an impact on existing hotels and restaurants.

The only real concern is how many, if any, downtown events this fantasy dome MIGHT cannibalize.

Edited May 20May 20 by TBideon

31 minutes ago, TBideon said:

Don't know what State will decide, but local money is looking less and less likely. That's a big win for the city.

And Jimmyworld will have a negligible number of hotels and restaurants -- if any. I don't see a 200-room hotel and several eateries /sports bars having much an impact on existing hotels and restaurants.

The only real concern is how many, if any, downtown events this fantasy dome MIGHT cannibalize.

I am somewhat shocked they haven't announced commercial tenants to add weight to their position with d-day approaching.. Maybe there just isn't the interest?

I would not be shocked if the office component does not go forward without letters of intent. They are attempting to lease a lot of space in a very slow growth market. This is a suburban Dallas development in a rust belt town.

1 hour ago, Texpat said:

I am somewhat shocked they haven't announced commercial tenants to add weight to their position with d-day approaching.. Maybe there just isn't the interest?

I would not be shocked if the office component does not go forward without letters of intent. They are attempting to lease a lot of space in a very slow growth market. This is a suburban Dallas development in a rust belt town.

It reminds me a bit of Gillette in Foxborough. Similar concept. Hotels, restaurants, some stores and a large team shop surrounding a stadium.

1 hour ago, Jenny said:

It reminds me a bit of Gillette in Foxborough. Similar concept. Hotels, restaurants, some stores and a large team shop surrounding a stadium.

And it took Gillette Stadium, in relatively prosperous Massachusetts, two decades to get that state and it still looks like a glorified strip mall next to stadium stuck in a sea of parking and isn’t very busy 350+ days of the year.

Incoming

17 minutes ago, KJP said:

Incoming

Like atomic bomb or a grenade?

17 hours ago, coneflower said:

Can we talk about how ugly this thing is? Will it look like that for sure? Why does it have to look like a data center mixed with a mega church?

I think it looks more like an early 20th century forge or factory machine shop. You could say it's an ode to our manufacturing history but...whatever.

This whole thing is one massive disappointment from the design to the location. Instead of a huge positive shot in the arm for sports/lakefront development we get diluted energy in the form of sprawl. Nice job all in favor.

It was just a Gemini placeholder. No architects would be connected to that baloney as a final version.