May 22May 22 Dee Haslem and her involvement with the GCP, it is a major conflict of interest and shows how harmful that powerful influence can be. Essentially backing a $2.4 billion reckless investment that doesn't benefit the region is reckless and irresponsible. A very valid point was made when it was stated that this isn't like a new team is coming to the region and ADDING to it, you are shifting it to a suburb, that tbh I feel is in over its head with a project of this scale, from the regions main heartbeat. Who does this benefit outside of a billionaire owner and his influential wife? There was a story published by Crains that interviewed a retail expert that stated unless they have a major draw like an IKEA to the development to draw people out there he doesn't see retail here being successful. He doesn't see people traveling from Pinecrest, Westlake and even Legacy Village to travel to this isolated area if the development contains stores that are already present or aren't a major draw. He mentioned that die hard Browns fans, and the occasional business traveler could frequent this development but that is about it. With Brookpark being the 104th wealthiest suburb in the region I agree with his skepticism because with the type of stores they'd need here it doesn't cater to this blue collar demographic. In the story they also mentioned he doesn't see how they will get people to pay high end rents for apartments here compare to hipper neighborhoods like Downtown, UC etc. There is nothing surrounding the area that is a major attraction outside of a domed stadium and the airport. This level of skepticism aligns with other reports we've seen and with so many professional opinions aligning with each other that is exactly why you see so much anger and volatile language coming from our leaders. It is obvious that backing a development that is a financial risk for the entire county is ridiculous and only happened because of a billionaires wife's influence.
May 22May 22 12 minutes ago, MyPhoneDead said:Dee Haslem and her involvement with the GCP, it is a major conflict of interest and shows how harmful that powerful influence can be. Essentially backing a $2.4 billion reckless investment that doesn't benefit the region is reckless and irresponsible. A very valid point was made when it was stated that this isn't like a new team is coming to the region and ADDING to it, you are shifting it to a suburb, that tbh I feel is in over its head with a project of this scale, from the regions main heartbeat. Who does this benefit outside of a billionaire owner and his influential wife?There was a story published by Crains that interviewed a retail expert that stated unless they have a major draw like an IKEA to the development to draw people out there he doesn't see retail here being successful. He doesn't see people traveling from Pinecrest, Westlake and even Legacy Village to travel to this isolated area if the development contains stores that are already present or aren't a major draw. He mentioned that die hard Browns fans, and the occasional business traveler could frequent this development but that is about it. With Brookpark being the 104th wealthiest suburb in the region I agree with his skepticism because with the type of stores they'd need here it doesn't cater to this blue collar demographic.In the story they also mentioned he doesn't see how they will get people to pay high end rents for apartments here compare to hipper neighborhoods like Downtown, UC etc. There is nothing surrounding the area that is a major attraction outside of a domed stadium and the airport. This level of skepticism aligns with other reports we've seen and with so many professional opinions aligning with each other that is exactly why you see so much anger and volatile language coming from our leaders. It is obvious that backing a development that is a financial risk for the entire county is ridiculous and only happened because of a billionaires wife's influence.So Crain's is reporting the Dee, as well as representatives from the other sports teams, recused themselves from the vote to endorse the move to Brook Park.https://www.crainscleveland.com/politics-policy/bibb-ronayne-break-gcp-over-brook-park-stadiumRepresentatives from Cleveland’s sports teams, including Browns’ owner Dee Haslam, sit on the executive board of GCP, the city and region’s chamber of commerce.Haslam and other team representatives recused themselves from the vote, but their presence and the promise of a total $3.4 billion development investment on vacant Brook Park land mean the GCP leadership has had to balance the priorities of some of the group’s members with its public sector partners. Edited May 22May 22 by Luke_S
May 22May 22 That means very little given that it was in the vested interest of many of the other members to suck up to her.
May 22May 22 26 minutes ago, Luke_S said:So Crain's is reporting the Dee, as well as representatives from the other sports teams, recused themselves from the vote to endorse the move to Brook Park.https://www.crainscleveland.com/politics-policy/bibb-ronayne-break-gcp-over-brook-park-stadiumYou can recuse yourself from a vote while still influencing people enough to pass what you want to pass. That doesn't mean much.
May 22May 22 3 hours ago, KJP said:And things may be getting a little complicated by a Cavalanche...Do tell!!
May 22May 22 Here ya go. As the stomach turns.....Will a Brook Park stadium hurt efforts to maintain Gateway? Apparently the Cavs think so.By Ken Prendergast / May 22, 2025Support for the planned domed stadium in Brook Park by the Greater Cleveland Partnership (GCP), announced earlier this week, has ruffled a few feathers. And it’s not just those that were expected to be ruffled — Cuyahoga County and City of Cleveland officials, Downtown Cleveland Inc., and others. Now, it’s the parent company of the Cleveland Cavaliers who say pursuing the stadium at this time is a bad idea.MORE:https://neo-trans.blog/2025/05/22/will-a-brook-park-stadium-hurt-efforts-to-maintain-gateway-apparently-the-cavs-think-so/ "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
May 22May 22 48 minutes ago, KJP said:Here ya go. As the stomach turns.....Will a Brook Park stadium hurt efforts to maintain Gateway? Apparently the Cavs think so.By Ken Prendergast / May 22, 2025Support for the planned domed stadium in Brook Park by the Greater Cleveland Partnership (GCP), announced earlier this week, has ruffled a few feathers. And it’s not just those that were expected to be ruffled — Cuyahoga County and City of Cleveland officials, Downtown Cleveland Inc., and others. Now, it’s the parent company of the Cleveland Cavaliers who say pursuing the stadium at this time is a bad idea.MORE:https://neo-trans.blog/2025/05/22/will-a-brook-park-stadium-hurt-efforts-to-maintain-gateway-apparently-the-cavs-think-so/The reaction of Rock Entertainment to the GCP endorsement proves to me why Ronayne hasn't lost any support, his sensible yet strong approach is shared to an extent with a lot of big players.
May 23May 23 21 hours ago, MyPhoneDead said:Dee Haslem and her involvement with the GCP, it is a major conflict of interest and shows how harmful that powerful influence can be. Essentially backing a $2.4 billion reckless investment that doesn't benefit the region is reckless and irresponsible. A very valid point was made when it was stated that this isn't like a new team is coming to the region and ADDING to it, you are shifting it to a suburb, that tbh I feel is in over its head with a project of this scale, from the regions main heartbeat. Who does this benefit outside of a billionaire owner and his influential wife?There was a story published by Crains that interviewed a retail expert that stated unless they have a major draw like an IKEA to the development to draw people out there he doesn't see retail here being successful. He doesn't see people traveling from Pinecrest, Westlake and even Legacy Village to travel to this isolated area if the development contains stores that are already present or aren't a major draw. He mentioned that die hard Browns fans, and the occasional business traveler could frequent this development but that is about it. With Brookpark being the 104th wealthiest suburb in the region I agree with his skepticism because with the type of stores they'd need here it doesn't cater to this blue collar demographic.In the story they also mentioned he doesn't see how they will get people to pay high end rents for apartments here compare to hipper neighborhoods like Downtown, UC etc. There is nothing surrounding the area that is a major attraction outside of a domed stadium and the airport. This level of skepticism aligns with other reports we've seen and with so many professional opinions aligning with each other that is exactly why you see so much anger and volatile language coming from our leaders. It is obvious that backing a development that is a financial risk for the entire county is ridiculous and only happened because of a billionaires wife's influence.These points are so obvious it's almost hysterical. Also, who the hell in their right mind wants to live in such close proximity to an international airport?
May 23May 23 5 minutes ago, surfohio said:who the hell in their right mind wants to live in such close proximity to an international airport?I also wondered why proximity to the airport has been promoted as such a huge benefit for the stadium too. Who is flying into town, heading straight to the game/event, then flying right out? No one. On the other hand, it would be nice though if the professional athletes and performers could fly into town and immediately be adjacent to their hotels and the stadium. It would be super convenient and probably make loading/unloading gear really convenient. Oh wait, come to think of it, that's exactly the setup we already have downtown! All the athletes fly into Burke!Also, if any fans did want direct access from Hopkins, guess what? We already have that too! Just hop on the Rapid and get dropped off at the stadium!
May 23May 23 20 hours ago, KJP said:Here ya go. As the stomach turns.....Will a Brook Park stadium hurt efforts to maintain Gateway? Apparently the Cavs think so.By Ken Prendergast / May 22, 2025Support for the planned domed stadium in Brook Park by the Greater Cleveland Partnership (GCP), announced earlier this week, has ruffled a few feathers. And it’s not just those that were expected to be ruffled — Cuyahoga County and City of Cleveland officials, Downtown Cleveland Inc., and others. Now, it’s the parent company of the Cleveland Cavaliers who say pursuing the stadium at this time is a bad idea.MORE:https://neo-trans.blog/2025/05/22/will-a-brook-park-stadium-hurt-efforts-to-maintain-gateway-apparently-the-cavs-think-so/If this was happening to another city, I'd be fascinated by the drama and the back and forth. As a Cleveland lover, I am just horrified.
May 23May 23 3 hours ago, Dino said:Who is flying into town, heading straight to the game/event, then flying right out? No one.And if they do, how would that benefit the city/region?
May 23May 23 1 hour ago, cle_guy90 said:If this was happening to another cityThis isn't unique to Cleveland. The Raiders, Rams and Chargers all seem to relocate every few decades and think of the Oakland A's, and Tampa Bay Rays. Kansas City is now going through a similar saga with the Royals and the Chiefs. The stakes are higher there though, since in KC, a move to the suburbs may mean a move to a different state. And Kansas is not hiding the fact that they are trying to poach the teams from Missouri either. Long story short, we all think Cleveland is dysfunctional (and maybe it is) but it's not just us.
May 23May 23 I truly hope Ohio politicians read our comments and realize the absurdity of granting the $600 million to HSG has little benefit to what we already have. This project is nothing more than a money grab for a billionaire with little regard for the region.
May 23May 23 1 hour ago, Dino said:This isn't unique to Cleveland. The Raiders, Rams and Chargers all seem to relocate every few decades and think of the Oakland A's, and Tampa Bay Rays. Kansas City is now going through a similar saga with the Royals and the Chiefs. The stakes are higher there though, since in KC, a move to the suburbs may mean a move to a different state. And Kansas is not hiding the fact that they are trying to poach the teams from Missouri either. Long story short, we all think Cleveland is dysfunctional (and maybe it is) but it's not just us.Yeah there is definitely things like that but there are certain things happening here that seem pretty unique to Cleveland though I could be wrong1) State actively trying to make it happen while the county does not want it2) A regional partnership come out in favor of it causing the city and county to leave the partnership3) A different local professional sports team come out against the move
May 23May 23 5 minutes ago, cle_guy90 said:Yeah there is definitely things like that but there are certain things happening here that seem pretty unique to Cleveland though I could be wrong1) State actively trying to make it happen while the county does not want it2) A regional partnership come out in favor of it causing the city and county to leave the partnership3) A different local professional sports team come out against the moveDoesn't seem like dysfunction or a negative on Cleveland's part. Everyone see's the issue except the parties that has had some Haslam influence, seems like a county that is in unison with each other.
May 23May 23 8 minutes ago, MyPhoneDead said:Doesn't seem like dysfunction or a negative on Cleveland's part. Everyone see's the issue except the parties that has had some Haslam influence, seems like a county that is in unison with each other.I agree, never said it was. My original post was about if it wasn't happening to Cleveland I'd be fascinated by the drama. I overall like how the city and county are handling it.Edit: My comment on being horrified is more losing the Browns from downtown and the potential consequences of everything going on. Edited May 23May 23 by cle_guy90
May 23May 23 1 minute ago, cle_guy90 said:I agree, never said it was. My original post was about if it wasn't happening to Cleveland I'd be fascinated by the drama. I overall like how the city and county are handling it.When I saw you said you were horrified I mistook it as a negative.
May 23May 23 Cavs, Guardians concerned about sin tax with Browns plan to build domehttps://fox8.com/news/i-team/cavs-guardians-concerned-about-sin-tax-with-browns-plan-to-build-dome/
May 23May 23 10 hours ago, surfohio said:These points are so obvious it's almost hysterical.Also, who the hell in their right mind wants to live in such close proximity to an international airport?It's not about building retail and hotels or housing. The minute Jimmy said this thing will be in phases, and phase 2 (the development part of the plan) will depend on market conditions. Meaning it's not gonna happen. This is all about lining his pocket books with as many events and associated parking revenue as possible.
May 24May 24 10 hours ago, Dino said:I also wondered why proximity to the airport has been promoted as such a huge benefit for the stadium too. Who is flying into town, heading straight to the game/event, then flying right out? No one.On the other hand, it would be nice though if the professional athletes and performers could fly into town and immediately be adjacent to their hotels and the stadium. It would be super convenient and probably make loading/unloading gear really convenient. Oh wait, come to think of it, that's exactly the setup we already have downtown! All the athletes fly into Burke!Also, if any fans did want direct access from Hopkins, guess what? We already have that too! Just hop on the Rapid and get dropped off at the stadium!I have yet to hear how logistically having a fan fly into Hopkins, walk half a mile (that's a generous half mile) to the proposed site, watch game, then walk half a mile back to Hopkins makes any sense whatsoever. Especially WIHTOUT A HUB. So now all these flights are going to start appearing because a football stadium is across the highway? There aren't going to be any flights right at the tip of 6pm after a Sunday afternoon game that would conveniently fly you home. So you'll likely be sitting in the terminal for a couple hours. And if thaaat's the case, what difference does it make if the stadium is 15 minutes away downtown?????HSG can spin all these positives and these media talking heads eat up it up like Jimmy just invented the wheel. All these benefits of this proposed site are complete BS. And anyone who actually critically thinks regarding these talking points HSG puts out there knows its all BS.
May 24May 24 Nothing you wrote was in response to anything that's been proposed, planned or said. You created things to get upset about. Why? "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
May 24May 24 Judge approves Browns’ federal lawsuit update asking for damages from Cityhttps://www.cleveland19.com/2025/05/24/judge-approves-browns-federal-lawsuit-update-asking-damages-city/
May 24May 24 3 hours ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:It's not about building retail and hotels or housing. The minute Jimmy said this thing will be in phases, and phase 2 (the development part of the plan) will depend on market conditions. Meaning it's not gonna happen. This is all about lining his pocket books with as many events and associated parking revenue as possible.Oh, this will be the airport Brown lot 356 days a year. He will undercut the airport(city) lot rates to take everything that’s not in the garage. 100%. This is an airport parking business plan subsidized by the taxpayers. No offices, retail, or residential will ever be built there.
May 24May 24 8 hours ago, marty15 said:Oh, this will be the airport Brown lot 356 days a year. He will undercut the airport(city) lot rates to take everything that’s not in the garage. 100%. This is an airport parking business plan subsidized by the taxpayers. No offices, retail, or residential will ever be built there.I never thought of that. It makes perfect sense. Makes me hate the Haslams even more if that is possible.
May 24May 24 9 minutes ago, Htsguy said:I never thought of that. It makes perfect sense. Makes me hate the Haslams even more if that is possible.Agreed. Even if it was not their initial plan it gives them something to fall back to and I strongly suspect this is enough for them at this point. It looks like there has been very little demand in the mixed use component of this. Which is sad as I think Downtown there would have been significant interest. Look how many tenants the failed Stark Nucleus project had signed up in advance and that was nowhere near as far along financially nor with the muscle behind it as this.
May 24May 24 Is there that much money in airport parking at a middle of the road airport like Hopkins? The cheapest official lots are what like $16/17 per day(?) and there is going to be another 1500 spaces coming when the old Sheraton lot opens. Sure they could undercut to some extent but is it really that much of a potential cash cow? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the thought that's what they might try to do as I'm really not convinced by the demand for their development and they will see it as a lesser evil to the parking spaces lying completely empty. I just feel a bill of goods has been sold about this whole thing. The airport proximity, the extra events it'll bring, the real estate. I'm not sold on any of it.
May 24May 24 I take the train to and from Hopkins 99% of the time, so I'm not familiar with their parking situation, but it is pretty bad, no? If so, I don't see an issue with Jimmy renting out lots for people who need to get in and out. A true international airport needs capacity parking, and my understanding is we aren't even close.Let Jimmyworld absorb some parking, and the city can focus attention/finances on more pertinent maintenances and capital investments rather than new garages or lots.And city/county isn't backing these bonds - state, another issue sadly - so it seems the taxpayer is mostly off the hook with this fiasco. Bibb needs to drop this nonsense suit next, since those big law bills must be in the 6 or 7 figures range now, and for what?
May 24May 24 There's definitely appetite for more airport parking, within the context of the wealth within the NFL and major mixed use development however the revenues generated from this are a drop in the ocean. Certainly not the generational opportunity that has been touted. I thought they would have announced some smaller retail/bar & restaurant commitals by now as opposed to larger office tenants or something like that, even concepts off their own back like the Browns gym or a bar and grill with some famous players name across the front. Either the demand truly sucks or their public intentions aren't the reality.
May 25May 25 11 hours ago, Texpat said:Is there that much money in airport parking at a middle of the road airport like Hopkins? The cheapest official lots are what like $16/17 per day(?) and there is going to be another 1500 spaces coming when the old Sheraton lot opens. Sure they could undercut to some extent but is it really that much of a potential cash cow? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the thought that's what they might try to do as I'm really not convinced by the demand for their development and they will see it as a lesser evil to the parking spaces lying completely empty. I just feel a bill of goods has been sold about this whole thing. The airport proximity, the extra events it'll bring, the real estate. I'm not sold on any of it.The closest lots are often at capacity. If he offers $10/day with shuttle, he’ll wipe out everything, and that rev stream for the airport. Jimmy would be snagging $80-100 million a year at $10. Or more if he expands parking further.
May 25May 25 39 minutes ago, marty15 said:The closest lots are often at capacity. If he offers $10/day with shuttle, he’ll wipe out everything, and that rev stream for the airport. Jimmy would be snagging $80-100 million a year at $10. Or more if he expands parking further.No, that would not “wipe everything out”. There are several existing off site parking lots with shuttles that charge around that price (e.g. Park n Fly is $12/day) and yet the on site garage still regularly sells out. People who park at the garage prefer the convenience and are often business travelers (ie someone else is paying). While there is no benefit to the stadium being near the airport, I don’t think it’s a negative for the airport either (other than eliminating what is already the smallest of chances that a longer east-west runway could be built in the future).The new on site garage the airport is building will likely reduce the demand for off-site parking lots, which currently benefit when the garage is full. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
May 25May 25 18 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:No, that would not “wipe everything out”. There are several existing off site parking lots with shuttles that charge around that price (e.g. Park n Fly is $12/day) and yet the on site garage still regularly sells out. People who park at the garage prefer the convenience and are often business travelers (ie someone else is paying). While there is no benefit to the stadium being near the airport, I don’t think it’s a negative for the airport either (other than eliminating what is already the smallest of chances that a longer east-west runway could be built in the future).The new on site garage the airport is building will likely reduce the demand for off-site parking lots, which currently benefit when the garage is full.The new garage is just replacing the current garage. When one opens, the other closes. Don’t fool yourself into thinking Jimmy won’t go after all that $$$. He could charge $5/day and still make a fortune just to stick it to the city.
May 25May 25 10 hours ago, marty15 said:The new garage is just replacing the current garage. When one opens, the other closes. Don’t fool yourself into thinking Jimmy won’t go after all that $$$. He could charge $5/day and still make a fortune just to stick it to the city.I do think that if he build in Brook Park he will go after parking revenue from the airport. I just don’t think it will have any meaningful negative impact on airport parking revenues. The new garage will have more capacity than the current garage. If I’m one of the off site parking lot operators, I’m a lot more concerned about the new competition. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
May 26May 26 22 hours ago, marty15 said:The new garage is just replacing the current garage. When one opens, the other closes. Don’t fool yourself into thinking Jimmy won’t go after all that $$$. He could charge $5/day and still make a fortune just to stick it to the city.Not totally true. The new garage will have 2000 more parking spots which is pretty significant.
May 26May 26 IF this project happens in the next five years, I guarantee you Jimmy isn't renting out those spots for $5 a day with shuttles to compete with Hopkins lots. There must be tons of available parcels where he or another developer could without all the headache.
May 27May 27 Browns file new amended complaint in lawsuit over move to dome: I-Teamhttps://fox8.com/news/i-team/browns-file-new-amended-complaint-in-lawsuit-over-move-to-dome-i-team/
May 27May 27 Browns want “Modell Law” thrown out in newest lawsuithttps://www.cleveland19.com/2025/05/27/browns-want-modell-law-thrown-out-newest-lawsuit/
May 27May 27 HSG throwing the kitchen sink at this suggests that desperation has set in on their side?
May 27May 27 Brook Park Mayor on 92.3 right now. Every point brought up by the mayor about logistics with RTA already exists downtown. New development replicating what we have in the county with no population growth. None of the radio hosts are asking good questions…. Only mentioning the suberbowl as the best to come from this (a one-freaking time event IF Cleveland is chosen). The radio hosts are clueless. Edited May 27May 27 by Oldmanladyluck
May 27May 27 17 minutes ago, Oldmanladyluck said:Brook Park Mayor on 92.3 right now. Every point brought up by the mayor about logistics with RTA already exists downtown. New development replicating what we have in the county with no population growth. None of the radio hosts are asking good questions…. Only mentioning the suberbowl as the best to come from this (a one-freaking time event IF Cleveland is chosen). The radio hosts are clueless.Clueless…no? They’re just pushing an agenda. Paid off like the Ohio State Legislature. Makes me sick.
May 27May 27 Ronayne was on 92.3 on Sunday also. He is of the view that if Brook Park happens it'll just be the stadium and some surface lots which will double as overspill airport parking. There has been very little asked of the Haslams how they plan to lease 1,000 apartments and 500,000 square feet of class A office space in an industrial part of town. Edited May 27May 27 by CLE2BAL
May 28May 28 5 hours ago, CLE2BAL said:Ronayne was on 92.3 on Sunday also. He is of the view that if Brook Park happens it'll just be the stadium and some surface lots which will double as overspill airport parking. There has been very little asked of the Haslams how they plan to lease 1,000 apartments and 500,000 square feet of class A office space in an industrial part of town.I'm glad Ronayne, as well as Harsh, were on 92.3 on Sunday, but frankly disappointed in their answers on why this BP thing is bad for Cleveland. Way to much emphasis on "tradition" and not the actual drain it will have on downtown visitors
May 28May 28 I'll go back several months and bring up a basic point. It's shocking to me that the City of Cleveland isn't ecstatic they have the potential to reclaim premium lakefront property for year round revenue generating developments, and sought out a viable option within the City of Cleveland through the land bank, or some othere group to move them to. The fact they want them to remain in place makes very little sense to me. Unless they have zero trust in private development actually occurring due to an extreme lack of interest. If that's the case, that's unfortunate.
May 28May 28 25 minutes ago, Jenny said:I'll go back several months and bring up a basic point. It's shocking to me that the City of Cleveland isn't ecstatic they have the potential to reclaim premium lakefront property for year round revenue generating developments, and sought out a viable option within the City of Cleveland through the land bank, or some othere group to move them to. The fact they want them to remain in place makes very little sense to me. Unless they have zero trust in private development actually occurring due to an extreme lack of interest. If that's the case, that's unfortunate.If I had to guess, privately, they are happy, but publicly they need to keep up the appearances of the fight. Can't be the administration that "lost" the Browns to Brook Park. When Jimmah packs his toys and goes to the suburbs, they fought to keep the team in downtown as hard as they could and the statehouse stabbed the region in the back. Purely speculating on this, but it's a narrative that plays well.
May 28May 28 While they might not be ecstatic, they have already begun the RFP process to fill that void, so that shows they're being proactive in coming up with future uses rather than just waiting until a final decision is made on the Browns and then it sits vacant even longer if they leave. At least there's that
May 28May 28 13 hours ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:I'm glad Ronayne, as well as Harsh, were on 92.3 on Sunday, but frankly disappointed in their answers on why this BP thing is bad for Cleveland. Way to much emphasis on "tradition" and not the actual drain it will have on downtown visitorsMaybe he is targeting his argument to his audience. Not sure the median listener is going to be very persuaded by arguments about good urbanism.
May 28May 28 I can see the silver lining of getting rid of the huge parking demand on the lakefront. But Cleveland sees it as a competing venue outside city limits that will draw events and dollars from downtown. Long term they should also see it as competition when the Cavs and Guardians ask for a new stadium and see an ocean of parking and related infrastructure in Brook Park.
May 28May 28 1 hour ago, Mendo said:I can see the silver lining of getting rid of the huge parking demand on the lakefront. But Cleveland sees it as a competing venue outside city limits that will draw events and dollars from downtown. Long term they should also see it as competition when the Cavs and Guardians ask for a new stadium and see an ocean of parking and related infrastructure in Brook Park.That was somewhat my point. I don't think the City had to lose them. It seemed the focus was too centered on them staying put at their current location, which didn't work with Haslam's vision. My initial thought at the beginning was relocating them to the Wolstein Center site, which allows Haslam to acquire properties around it for redevelopment. Or the St Vincent Hospital site.
Create an account or sign in to comment