is that location much of an improvement? still looks very isolated.  

I think it's pretty good based off it's by the other stadiums. If feasible can have rail access, and when designed I'm sure they will design the stadium to be interactive with shops and restaurants when the stadium is not being used. I'm sure they'll build it to have a retractable roof which automatically will make it easier to increase its usage past football. That also can spur other development down the street away from downtown. The freeway Access will make it extremely easy for people to get to it as well.

I think this can spur development further east of downtown.

The only thing that would bother me is First Energy stadium is still a relatively new stadium. Tearing it down would seem odd but understandable based off the location issues.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

48 minutes ago, MyPhoneDead said:

The only thing that would bother me is First Energy stadium is still a relatively new stadium. Tearing it down would seem odd but understandable based off the location issues.

Yes, it is a relatively "new" stadium, but there are about 20 that are newer.

On 12/10/2020 at 3:57 PM, YABO713 said:

 

The Haslam's are infatuated with crowd noise as an advantage (hence the lower bowl increase in capacity, when the rest of the stadium was downsized)... In the next 4-5 years, you will see a proposal that includes a retractable roof and potentially a field dropped by 2-3 feet to add some lower bowl capacity. 

 

I also can’t imagine a dug out field because of the expensive heat tubing and already limited sideline space.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 16, 20204 yr by MrR

16 hours ago, YABO713 said:

Among some people I've talked to, the goal is for Cleveland to have a Super Bowl and a Final 4 by 2040. 

We're going to need "a few more" hotel rooms.  😃

30 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

We're going to need "a few more" hotel rooms.  😃

Perhaps they could resurrect Mayor Perk's idea for "floating hotels".  

The idea of adding a retractable roof to the Browns stadium has been around for a while. Here's a rendering from 2006. 

I hate that our scoreboard is shaped like the state of Tennessee. 🏈 Boo Titans!
How was this lost on planners and folk at the city given the deep Tennessee roots of the Haslams.   - Meh!

Edited December 14, 20204 yr by ExPatClevGuy

17 hours ago, CleveFan said:

True - but. In a crazy way, 2040 is not that far away. How far out in advance does the NFL plan super bowl sites?  @YABO713seems to be breaking some real insider news and it seems the retractable roof and lower bowl expansion would be added to the existing stadium. I wonder how much those costs would be compared to a new stadium build. There’s probably someone on the forum that might have a good idea of that. 

 

There's also been discussions of the Browns playing a season in Akron, Canton, or even Columbus if the renovations are too cumbersome to keep the stadium open. 

 

A lot of what's desired would be for the "overhanging" spaces outside of the stadium to be turned into multi-use, year-round activity spaces (i.e. look to Busch Stadium in St. Louis' adjacent, integrated entertainment spaces as an example) - I know the Haslam's love the idea of integrating a stadium into a "neighborhood" feel (and that's one of the reasons I hold on to any suspicion that they may want a new location). 

 

I'd expect the Haslam's to push this issue as the Browns get better over the next year or two, and the fans and community become more invested in the team. 

 

FWIW - the people involved with this all seem to have genuinely good intentions and want it to be a net positive for NEO

 

 

4 hours ago, skiwest said:

Perhaps they could resurrect Mayor Perk's idea for "floating hotels".  

 

Not a bad idea to use cruise ships--if we had a guarantee of an ice free Lake Erie one winter or someone was willing to pony up to park the boats here from November through April. 

Good point.  Lake could be frozen by February.

And they'd be small cruise ships.  Per Wikipedia: "Channel depths and limited lock sizes meant only 10% of current oceangoing ships, which have been built much larger than in the 1950s, can traverse the entire seaway."   I never knew this, but the freighters are built on the Great Lakes and are too large to leave them. 

How about we put our new retractable roof stadium down on Scranton? Use that as the catalyst to jump start development there, much like Pittsburgh has built a neighborhood around Heinz Field and PNC. Have some cool pedestrian sky bridges over the Cuyahoga tying into Tower City. Rebuild Eagle Ave to help with Traffic. And have it positioned so when the roof is open, your view is dead in line with Terminal Tower. 

Edited December 12, 20204 yr by marty15

10 hours ago, Cleburger said:

 

Not a bad idea to use cruise ships--if we had a guarantee of an ice free Lake Erie one winter or someone was willing to pony up to park the boats here from November through April. 

Lots of ore boats used to lay up in Cleveland for the winter. American Ship and others used to do maintenance on them especially in the Old River channel. Today's Great Lakes cruise ships don't hang around; they work the Caribbean in the winter

It’s a Monday Night Football rivalry game against the Steelers on a beautiful fall evening with the roof open on the Browns new Peninsula Park. Here’s your view from the Dawg Pound. Dreamin.....

New SHW tower would be in that view also.

On 12/11/2020 at 10:19 PM, marty15 said:

How about we put our new retractable roof stadium down on Scranton? Use that as the catalyst to jump start development there, much like Pittsburgh has built a neighborhood around Heinz Field and PNC. Have some cool pedestrian sky bridges over the Cuyahoga tying into Tower City. Rebuild Eagle Ave to help with Traffic. And have it positioned so when the roof is open, your view is dead in line with Terminal Tower. 

Would the stadium actually be able to fit there on land not already claimed for another use like the breweries? I actually think having the stadium there would be a great idea. Imagine the barges going by during a game as well!

On 12/11/2020 at 10:19 PM, marty15 said:

How about we put our new retractable roof stadium down on Scranton? Use that as the catalyst to jump start development there, much like Pittsburgh has built a neighborhood around Heinz Field and PNC. Have some cool pedestrian sky bridges over the Cuyahoga tying into Tower City. Rebuild Eagle Ave to help with Traffic. And have it positioned so when the roof is open, your view is dead in line with Terminal Tower. 

I may be in the minority on this but I want our stadium to stay on the lakefront because I think it’s our best chance of eventually getting the front developed. Especially if the stadium becomes one that can be used year round.

On 12/11/2020 at 10:19 PM, marty15 said:

How about we put our new retractable roof stadium down on Scranton? Use that as the catalyst to jump start development there, much like Pittsburgh has built a neighborhood around Heinz Field and PNC. Have some cool pedestrian sky bridges over the Cuyahoga tying into Tower City. Rebuild Eagle Ave to help with Traffic. And have it positioned so when the roof is open, your view is dead in line with Terminal Tower. 

 

Hey I feel you on this. Back when Gateway was being discussed I wanted the baseball stadium to be located on SP. I used to draw images of a new ballpark on maps of SP. I had homeplate looking out on TT and the outfield fence up against the river bank. I would envision baseballs flying on to the deck of a passing freighter. That space deserves something special. Unfortunately because of economics it's probably destined for some scattered 5 over 2 stick construction. But hopefully a neighborhood can develop over time.

Well somewhere in that vicinity would be nice. Maybe near the post office or even Steelyard Commons. The area is a bit of an eyesore currently.

1 hour ago, freethink said:

Hey I feel you on this. Back when Gateway was being discussed I wanted the baseball stadium to be located on SP. I used to draw images of a new ballpark on maps of SP. I had homeplate looking out on TT and the outfield fence up against the river bank. I would envision baseballs flying on to the deck of a passing freighter. That space deserves something special. Unfortunately because of economics it's probably destined for some scattered 5 over 2 stick construction. But hopefully a neighborhood can develop over time.

That’s a great visual. I’d of got behind that.

I've been kicking around this idea with friends for a while too. If the idea is to build a stadium that can host major events (Final Four, Super Bowl, etc), then a new build with a roof is almost a must. And honestly, hosting those events should be the end game, I know there's a ton of debate on the economics of them, but if nothing else, they raise the profile of the city, and what better way to show off the revived downtown then to have tons of people there?

 

Building a roof over the current stadium is going to be a massive undertaking and probably not worth it in the long run cost wise. Besides, the image of a massive freighter going by during the game with the city as a backdrop is uniquely Cleveland and would be really memorable to anyone visiting.

2 hours ago, CLEeng said:

I've been kicking around this idea with friends for a while too. If the idea is to build a stadium that can host major events (Final Four, Super Bowl, etc), then a new build with a roof is almost a must. And honestly, hosting those events should be the end game, I know there's a ton of debate on the economics of them, but if nothing else, they raise the profile of the city, and what better way to show off the revived downtown then to have tons of people there?

 

Building a roof over the current stadium is going to be a massive undertaking and probably not worth it in the long run cost wise. Besides, the image of a massive freighter going by during the game with the city as a backdrop is uniquely Cleveland and would be really memorable to anyone visiting.

Also worth mentioning that we don't need to be building a Cowboys-esque Stadium, it'll still be close to $1BN (!!!) but Lucas Oil Stadium in Indy is pretty nice and it was built in 2005 for ~$850M in today dollars. I think it's definitely wasted real estate on the waterfront but I think a sea of parking garages and lots in SP would be a bigger waste. Sure they'd have ground level retail and RTA access but I'd hope something more inspiring could be built down there. I don't think Tower City/Gateway/Baseball Stadium Overflow parking could handle the amount of cars. Also, it would be 1BN+ after you factor in the infrastructure improvements that would be necessary. Its early, I need more coffee, but I'm not seeing it make sense (as much as it'd be awesome to get it down there).

16 minutes ago, GISguy said:

Also worth mentioning that we don't need to be building a Cowboys-esque Stadium, it'll still be close to $1BN (!!!) but Lucas Oil Stadium in Indy is pretty nice and it was built in 2005 for ~$850M in today dollars. I think it's definitely wasted real estate on the waterfront but I think a sea of parking garages and lots in SP would be a bigger waste. Sure they'd have ground level retail and RTA access but I'd hope something more inspiring could be built down there. I don't think Tower City/Gateway/Baseball Stadium Overflow parking could handle the amount of cars. Also, it would be 1BN+ after you factor in the infrastructure improvements that would be necessary. Its early, I need more coffee, but I'm not seeing it make sense (as much as it'd be awesome to get it down there).

So, the other side to the coin is that infrastructure is going to need to built anyway to make Scranton a viable neighborhood, so why not get the NFL to pay for part of it? You don't necessarily need the garages and lots if you plan things out carefully. Sure, you'll need some, but if planned properly the area could have a strong link to downtown. Atlanta and Minneapolis are good examples of not having the old school seas of parking around the stadium. They're actually impressively integrated into their neighborhoods, at least from a top down view (never actually been to either). Green Bay as well does a great job of making sure the stadium isn't something that people only go to on game days. As discussed elsewhere too, the NFL wants teams to better integrate their stadiums into cities and make "stadium villages."

 

Having spent some time in the stadium in a professional capacity (I have to be careful about how much I say otherwise I might give myself away and I know people watch this forum), and while the stadium is mostly fine as it is, it's apparent that it was built to get something up quickly instead of planning longer term. If the end goal is to eventually make it a destination for huge events, it's likely not worth the cost to make those updates versus just building a new stadium. Lucas Oil isn't perfect, but the way Indy built their downtown core so they could host those events is something worth at least studying.

It would have been nice if Cleveland Browns stadium would have been designed to accommodate a dome in the future.  But it wasn't.  It was designed for a warm weather city.    🤨

2 minutes ago, CLEeng said:

So, the other side to the coin is that infrastructure is going to need to built anyway to make Scranton a viable neighborhood, so why not get the NFL to pay for part of it? You don't necessarily need the garages and lots if you plan things out carefully. Sure, you'll need some, but if planned properly the area could have a strong link to downtown. Atlanta and Minneapolis are good examples of not having the old school seas of parking around the stadium. They're actually impressively integrated into their neighborhoods, at least from a top down view (never actually been to either). Green Bay as well does a great job of making sure the stadium isn't something that people only go to on game days. As discussed elsewhere too, the NFL wants teams to better integrate their stadiums into cities and make "stadium villages."

 

Having spent some time in the stadium in a professional capacity (I have to be careful about how much I say otherwise I might give myself away and I know people watch this forum), and while the stadium is mostly fine as it is, it's apparent that it was built to get something up quickly instead of planning longer term. If the end goal is to eventually make it a destination for huge events, it's likely not worth the cost to make those updates versus just building a new stadium. Lucas Oil isn't perfect, but the way Indy built their downtown core so they could host those events is something worth at least studying.

Thanks for the perspective, I appreciate it. Skepticism about who pays is nothing new and I'm definitely a huge skeptic of the Haslams (or future owners) eating a chunk of the cost, but I don't want to derail the convo into that. I'll have to look into your examples - it also speaks volumes that ATL and MPS are newer builds and are integrated. Trust me, I think it'd be awesome to have it down there and know there's the room, if done right it'd be fantastic!

Also, there’s currently no parking garages surrounding FES. The Courthouse and City Hall garages are close though. But so is Tower City/Gateway parking facilities to Scranton. Also might motivate Gilbert to finish the back side of Tower City. Especially if he lands the new Justice Center tower for back there. This could turn into one big mega project. And roll Flats South into that as well. 

Edited December 14, 20204 yr by marty15

I wasn't living in the city at the time, but it seemed like FES was hastily built to keep from losing the team.  After Model moved to Baltimore, Municipal Stadium was demolished and JF was built at the old Central Market site, the city needed a football stadium fast or risk losing the franchise permanently.

Edited December 15, 20204 yr by Frmr CLEder

Jacobs Field opened in 1994. During the 1995 football season, Modell announced agreement to move the Browns to Baltimore.  Cleveland city officials tried to block the move, but failed.  They did however get the NFL to award Cleveland an expansion franchise to start play in 1999.  But I think the deal was based on Cleveland building a new stadium.  So yes, it was rushed.  In fact, the new Browns did not yet have an owner when construction on the new stadium was started.

2 hours ago, skiwest said:

Jacobs Field opened in 1994. During the 1995 football season, Modell announced agreement to move the Browns to Baltimore.  Cleveland city officials tried to block the move, but failed.  They did however get the NFL to award Cleveland an expansion franchise to start play in 1999.  But I think the deal was based on Cleveland building a new stadium.  So yes, it was rushed.  In fact, the new Browns did not yet have an owner when construction on the new stadium was started.

 

Such bad memories!

 

Nobody can convince me that three year layoff was nothing more than the league punishing and making an example out of the City of Cleveland. 

Cross posted from the Lakefront Development Thread. Not renovations to the stadium, but to the land surrounding the stadium. 

 

For those of you who don't follow Columbus development, there is a proposal by the Columbus Crew soccer team and the Haslams for a neighborhood called Astor Park which will be completely built around the new Crew soccer stadium in the Arena District.

 

It's a really nice plan and perhaps a template of what the Haslam's could do with the land surrounding First Energy Stadium.  I recommend clicking on the below bold type "Columbus: Downtown: Columbus Crew Stadium/Astor Park" and it will take you to the renderings.

 

 

1 hour ago, ryanfrazier said:

@KJP if the stadium were built on this site, do you think the Rapid would be out of commission for an extended period of time during construction?

 

Redirected from the Lakefront thread....

 

Depends on how the stadium is designed and built. The massive Hudson Yards development on Manhattan was built over the Northeast Corridor which sees 200+ trains a day. Service continued without interruption by building a concrete casing over the many railroad tracks. The same could be done here -- building a subway tunnel casing over the two-track rail lines (or four tracks total if Amtrak's mini-hub is located at Tower City).

 

BTW, the combined Red/Blue/Green Lines host about 300 trains a day through this site. Add 10 Amtrak trains a day -- more if Amtrak puts a layover/light maintenance/storage yard at East 55th.

The other huge benefit to moving the stadium is that it allows the Browns to continue playing at FES throughout construction.  

Encouraging quote from Dee Haslam. Love that they want to keep the stadium on the lake. This is her talking about the future plans for the lakefront bridge.
 

https://www.cleveland.com/browns/2021/07/paul-depodesta-andrew-berry-and-kevin-stefanskis-contracts-are-aligned-and-more-of-what-we-learned-from-browns-owners-dee-and-jimmy-haslam.html

 

 

“We’re on the waterfront, we plan to be there, we love where our stadium is and we think once it gets connected it’s going to be a great experience for not just our fans but anyone that lives and works in Cleveland,” she said. “It creates this neighborhood that is so important to the vitality of downtown. So that’s why we’re excited about it.”

 

Seems appropriate.

While this could also go in the Progressive Field thread, those in the debate felt that FES is the stadium most likely to be moved. Unfortunately, the article is password-protected....

 

Routes, retail and revenue: Debating the merits of new stadium locations in Cleveland

Dec. 9, 2021

By Zack Meisel and Jason Lloyd

 

When negotiating a new lease for Progressive Field, city officials, representatives from Gateway Corp. and members of the Guardians’ front office assessed the areas surrounding the ballpark.

A budding trend with sports venues is to build mixed-use blocks of bars, restaurants and shops nearby. There’s a reason dialogue about the Browns’ future includes visions of an enhanced lakefront. Glendale, Ariz., is perhaps the prime example, with the Westgate Entertainment District enveloping the Coyotes’ and Cardinals’ stadiums.

 

Those mediating the Progressive Field deal ultimately tabled such talks for the distant future. Instead, the Guardians will receive $435 million to upgrade the ballpark, with almost half of that sum covering capital repairs, such as concrete, plumbing and electrical restoration. The rest will fund renovations, including a social hub down the left-field line, a gathering space in the right-field upper deck, reworked dugout suites, reconstructed clubhouses and an expanded administrative building.

 

MORE

https://theathletic.com/3003388/2021/12/09/routes-retail-and-revenue-debating-the-merits-of-new-stadium-locations-in-cleveland/

Just some thoughts on First Energy stadium. I am one who believes that the best location for First Energy stadium is right where it is. I just think it works there I like the flow of people arriving and leaving the stadium as their route takes them through the heart of the city.  And I want it to be there when the bridge and the land around the stadium is activated. It will be awesome. The stadium itself is in great shape as hundreds of millions have been invested in it over the years. But it needs a roof. Not retractable but a fixed roof. A retractable roof to me is just not necessary and way overpriced.  A roof over an existing structure is now possible. The top image is of SoFi stadium. This could not have been done 5 years ago. The roof is independent of the superstructure. It is held up by 36 columns that surround the stadium. Kept in place by a network of light weight steel, tensioned cable and a material that is a tenth of the weight of glass that makes up the clear panels. It is all counter balanced by the massive scoreboard that hangs from it. In the second image I placed the SoFi roof over First Energy to illustrate how it could look.  In the last image I wanted to show how it might look from the inside as it frames the city with large panels that could open in nice weather. In doing some research one engineer said he believes this roof can and will be placed over existing venues over 2-3 years in the off season and non event days.

^ I dunno. That would be an expensive project.  It would make that large, hulking facility even larger. I assume it would need artificial grass. 

It could work and would look pretty cool but it might have to be taller than SoFi's structure. Also, the fact that the Browns still play on grass is surprising. Most NFL teams prefer artificial surfaces.

16 minutes ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

It could work and would look pretty cool but it might have to be taller than SoFi's structure. Also, the fact that the Browns still play on grass is surprising. Most NFL teams prefer artificial surfaces.

 

Most NFL players strongly prefer grass.

45 minutes ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

It could work and would look pretty cool but it might have to be taller than SoFi's structure. Also, the fact that the Browns still play on grass is surprising. Most NFL teams prefer artificial surfaces.

SoFi is such a low structure because of the airport nearby and there were height restrictions that necessitated it dug into the ground the way it was. Cleveland does not need to be concerned with that issue. 
 
A roof in Cleveland would open it up to potential Super Bowls, BIG Championship games, Final 4, etc. It could be a great addition to the area. 

13 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

SoFi is such a low structure because of the airport nearby and there were height restrictions that necessitated it dug into the ground the way it was. Cleveland does not need to be concerned with that issue. 

 

Burke? 

20 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

A roof in Cleveland would open it up to potential Super Bowls...

The NFL might throw us a bone (no pun intended) and do ONE Super Bowl here, but that would be it. The NFL and the fans prefer warm weather cities for the Super Bowl.

12 minutes ago, surfohio said:

 

Burke? 

Good point. Not sure how Burke plays into it since they are more of a limited service airport and where the Browns stadium lines up with the runway glidepath. That is the reasoning that I heard behind SoFi's low profile to the ground.

12 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Good point. Not sure how Burke plays into it since they are more of a limited service airport and where the Browns stadium lines up with the runway glidepath. That is the reasoning that I heard behind SoFi's low profile to the ground.

First energy stadium is not in the glide path of either runway at Burke.   It is close to the path of 6R, but not in the path.  

40 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

A roof in Cleveland would open it up to potential Super Bowls, BIG Championship games, Final 4, etc. It could be a great addition to the area. 

We probably need to add 1500 more hotel rooms to the market before any of these events are even a consideration.   

While a domed/roofed stadium is clearly non-negotiable, there are a lot of requirements for a city to host a Superbowl, especially with hotel room numbers within 60 minutes that would need to be rectified.

 

Beyond that, my cynical belief is the odds are just not in cold climate cities in general. Detroit in 06, Indianapolis 2012, and Minneapolis 2018 are cold cities that hosted the Superbowl recently; otherwise, the Bowls almost always go to warmer cities.

 

February in Cleveland is just not fun weather for those kinds of festivities. Late April NFL draft is one thing, but early February? I don't know...

37 minutes ago, TBideon said:

While a domed/roofed stadium is clearly non-negotiable, there are a lot of requirements for a city to host a Superbowl, especially with hotel room numbers within 60 minutes that would need to be rectified.

 

Beyond that, my cynical belief is the odds are just not in cold climate cities in general. Detroit in 06, Indianapolis 2012, and Minneapolis 2018 are cold cities that hosted the Superbowl recently; otherwise, the Bowls almost always go to warmer cities.

 

February in Cleveland is just not fun weather for those kinds of festivities. Late April NFL draft is one thing, but early February? I don't know...

 

agreed -- but don't forget the 2014 meadowlands sb!

6 minutes ago, mrnyc said:

 

agreed -- but don't forget the 2014 meadowlands sb!

True but New York is… New York. Also I haven’t seen any chatter whatsoever of sending it back to NYC.

@freethink From what I've heard, FES is not in great shape. It was built very quickly and is not aging well.