CLEVELAND — Destination Cleveland, the local convention and visitors’ bureau, says it isn’t taking a stance on where the Cleveland Browns should play starting in 2029.
But the group recently commissioned a study to imagine how a new Cleveland stadium district might look on part of Burke Lakefront Airport and the sprawling Muni Lot.
Conceptual renderings leaked to the media and subsequently released Monday show a domed stadium where the airport now stands, flanked by apartments, two hotels, retail and roughly 11,000 parking spaces. The preliminary images don’t include any information about the cost or timeline of such a project.
The Browns said months ago that they had ruled out Burke as a prospective stadium site. But in late summer, as it became clear that owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam preferred a ground-up project in Brook Park to renovating the existing, city-owned stadium Downtown, Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb pitched a portion of Burke as an alternative.
The Haslams considered the possibility but ultimately didn’t change their stance. In an Oct. 17 statement, they said the hurdles at Burke are too high to overcome.
“Building a stadium on the Burke property is cost prohibitive and not feasible,” they wrote, “especially with no certainty regarding potential timing of closure of the airport.”
The Haslams are focused on trying to pull together public and private financing for their Brook Park proposal, which includes a $2.4 billion stadium and more than $1 billion worth of private development on 176 acres near Cleveland Hopkins International Airport.
Their lease at the existing lakefront stadium ends after the 2028 season. The Browns never released renderings of what that renovated stadium could look like as an anchor for broader lakefront development.
The city-owned site that Destination Cleveland pitched spans 158 acres at the west end of Burke. That includes 130 acres of the airport, including the area where the terminal now stands, and 28 acres on the south side of the Shoreway. The sketches show a park on the remaining airport land.
A spokeswoman said Destination Cleveland provided the images to the city and Cuyahoga County but did not share them directly with the Haslams. In an emailed statement, she said the renderings were created to show what might be possible.
“In anticipation of requests for support regarding the future home of the Cleveland Browns, Destination Cleveland’s board of directors voted to remain neutral,” Emily Lauer, the spokeswoman, wrote. “No matter where the team plays, the organization’s job is to promote the Cleveland football experience.
“The board also concluded that the only way Destination Cleveland could provide value to the negotiations would be – if needed – to conduct research to inform decision-making,” Lauer added. “Given the unanswered questions about the viability of Burke Lakefront Airport as a development site, Destination Cleveland engaged relevant partners to specifically determine if the airport land could accommodate the program the Browns had proposed in Brook Park. The city and county were informed of the project at its onset.”
In September, the Bibb administration released two long-gestating studies that examined the process and potential economic impact of closing Burke. Consultants found that most of the businesses and flights at Burke would stay in the region – and there are a few possible paths to a shutdown.
“Can we close Burke? We think we can,” Jeff Epstein, the mayor’s chief of integrated development, said during an interview with News 5 in September. “We’re going to work as quickly as we can to get to that final answer. I don’t have a timeline.”
The studies show it could take more than a decade to close Burke if the city waits for federal grant-repayment obligations to burn off and avoids borrowing any more federal money. To move faster, the city would have to strike a deal with the Federal Aviation Administration or ask Congress to pass legislation to approve a shutdown.
Destination Cleveland’s renderings were produced separately from the Burke studies, which did not delve deeply into the development potential of the 250-acre airport and neighboring land where the Port of Cleveland and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers store sediment dredged from the Cuyahoga River.
Bibb has said he’s leaving the door open to resume discussions with the Browns if their Brook Park plans fall through.
“Should the Haslams reconsider, we are ready to return to the table and continue working toward a solution that keeps the Browns in the city that has stood by them for decades,” the mayor said in mid-October.
County Executive Chris Ronayne, meanwhile, told News 5 last week that he doesn’t believe the Brook Park move is a done deal.
The Haslams are looking for taxpayers to cover half of the bill for a new stadium—their pitch centers on borrowing against new tax revenues created by the stadium and the surrounding district.
“We think the conversation regarding the Browns’ location is far from over,” Ronayne said last week. “It’s one thing to say you’re going somewhere. It’s another thing to have people with you. We’ve got state considerations. We’ve got county considerations. And, frankly, I have considerations for all the citizens of Cuyahoga County.”
On Monday, a county spokeswoman reiterated his position.
“The county executive believes the Cleveland Browns should remain Downtown and is supportive of exploring Burke Lakefront Airport as an option,” she wrote in an email.