PaxtonMarley

To address Cleveland Trust's population loss point, yes, Cleveland has lost people. Here's a depressing thought: Cleveland was larger yesterday than it is today. And tomorrow it will be smaller. But that's different from the market. Healthy markets can correlate with population gain but not always. That's why Cleveland has three major sports teams and some larger cities have fewer.

Agree with audidave. If Cumberland can successfully develop and sell its Dock 30 project, closing Burke could be revisited. Dock 30 has superior connectivity to downtown and attractions, light rail access, and a school as part of its project. So it's more obvious to me that Dock 30 should be the lakefront priority right now. But if it struggles with financing, construction, or occupancy, I think the Burke closers have their answer.

My point isn't that Burke is profitable, it was that should they be? For example, mass transit is not a profitable business, but as a society, we think the positive economic externalities outweigh the financial loss. So we subsidize transit and a whole host of other public works that aren't profitable. But more interestingly, I ask Cleveland Trust, if Burke were profitable--use any definition of the term you like--would you accept it as a fixture on the lakefront? If so, then I understand the conversation on financial loss. But if you'd support closing it even if it were profitable, all this conversation about profitability is sorta irrelevant.

No, I don't think it's realistic the close any of the two smaller airports right now. But I am eager to see if the Dock 30 project pans out and does well in the marketplace. Wouldn't that be the best measure of how a redeveloped Burke would do? Second point, on the financial losses at Burke, those are apparently passed on in the form of landing fees airlines pay at Hopkins. Sure, ultimately, the consumer foots the bill for those fees, but at least it's not the taxpayer.

I don't think so either. IMHO, the fix was in for DC/Northern VA. My point is we should consider the next large business that may appreciate a downtown airport. As for the Burke's financial losses, I cannot confirm or deny them. But I can ask whether airports in general do and should profit. And how is that profit measured? Do we account for positive and negative externalities of the airport and who it serves, or do we just go with annualized cash-in and cash-out?

And Cleveland Clinic is a multi-billion dollar organization employing nearly 50,000 has a strong presence at Burke Airport. Perhaps we may not want to mess with that either.

As for attracting an Amazon or a similar business to downtown Cleveland, consider that being close to Reagan airport was definitely part of Amazon's calculus in choosing Northern Virginia for its second HQ. Just something to keep in mind before we mentally start closing airports. But, considering what Cleveland Trust said, perhaps if we are concerned about overcapacity, instead of closing the lakefront airport, perhaps looking at Cuyahoga County Airport would be worthwhile. To Mov2ohio's point, yes Hopkins flight paths do limit potential building heights, since the NE-SW flight path into Hopkins directly flies over downtown. Of course, it doesn't become an issue unless the proposed building were say 1000 feet or over, but still the limitation exists.

Of course, this isn't our first lakefront redevelopment rodeo. We will see how it pans out.

Speaking of new development at or around NCH: https://fox8.com/2019/07/12/new-development-plans-for-north-coast-harbor-area/

I think when the stadium becomes obsolete and must be torn down, that siting issue may be resolved then. But you are correct, just looking at cold economics, NFL-only venues are always a financial loser for pretty much every stakeholder involved. But just don't mention that on game day. But it's not just the stadium, we've got the Port and several active industrial uses that obviously can't be moved. As with Burke, I think as with any airport closure, you've got regulatory and environmental hurdles to jump through. This isn't to say it can't be done, it's just that doing so could literally take decades. And with all the vacant lots in Cleveland, there is no real purpose in doing that, unless you've got a major singular employer like an Amazon or an Under Armour, that needs a huge blank slate and won't mind the environmental cleanup. Besides, if we want waterfront housing and mixed use, The Flats is on its third or fourth incarnation, and still has a bit of industrial grittiness that gives it some authenticity. That was never quite my scene, but the housing there commands quite a premium.

I don't know if this is the correct thread to discuss Burke or Cargill, but it's not like land in Cleveland is in such short supply that we have to resort to turning otherwise productive land into housing. Now if we had 500K residents again... Besides the Cleveland lakefront takes a real beating from the wind and rain. And with the exception of the land adjacent to FirstEnergy stadium, much of the land is actually pretty isolated from downtown or transit.

When I told my old friends / acquaintances in D.C. I was moving back to Cleveland, many of them asked me why. It wasn't disparaging, but it got pretty annoying. I bet if I said I was moving to a "trendy" city like New York or Denver or Austin, they wouldn't have asked the question. One day I hope that no one would ask because they'd already know that Cleveland's a great place.

You may want to add the Red Line / HealthLine expansion to Euclid. I don't know how active RTA is pursuing it right now, though. I am glad folks here are still thinking of rebuilding / expanding the system. I do have a thought. It's kinda the elephant in the room, having only one station in the heart of downtown kills mass transit in Cleveland. This was a problem since the failure of the subway circulator and Halle's was forced to shuttle patrons from Public Square to its store. We've tried band-aids (e.g. loop buses*, Gateway walkway, the HealthLine) but without a single-seat rail option, any transit in Cleveland will always be ineffective. * I totally should have kept those psychedelic color-coded Loop bus schedules. Totally from the 80s.

I'm so glad someone got it!

To clear the record, this wasn't what I thought "right off the bat." I was chiming in response to another commenter who aptly noticed the potential closure of Prospect, which is used by several RTA routes and a significant feeder to the Veterans Memorial Bridge. Second, if you read my other comments, actually my primary concern was that a popular public/gathering space could in essence be privatized. But to your larger point about sabotaging Cleveland, no one has to jump head first into every single development initiative or be seduced by every Lyle Lanley to have strong civic pride.

I know that Prospect has always been Tower City's back alley, but between that and shutting down Superior to E-W traffic, it's gonna be ugly.

So...sorry to sound like an armchair developer, but I wonder why this couldn't be done at the Post Office Plaza. That building is about the same size and the Tower City public space doesn't have to be hacked apart for it. Aside from K&D owning it instead of Bedrock--um, I think I answered my own question.

I agree that the Jersey walls and haphazard planters are very ugly and don't necessarily make the Square safer. However, I also get the need for buses to serve and then flow through the Square and not be bottlenecked. Clearly the Square's peripheral roads were not designed for that much bus traffic. Absent undergrounding the busway like in Seattle or Washington's DuPont Circle, the best we can hope for are some aesthetic changes and better design for what we have.

It's not as much as Cleveland fitting Citymark's investment strategy than Citymark fitting Cleveland's strategy. I am elated that these folks have a local HQ, but basically they flip multifamily projects the same way a small-time investor may flip houses. The properties are larger and the finances are more complex, but basically it's the same thing. And not to knock IRR as a business's key indicator, but in-and-out investors are much more likely to toss the keys and walk when times get tough, leaving empty shells, angry tenants, and a worse community.

Some political will is required for some of these projects to make the numbers work. While there may or may not be abatements depending on the project, one thing to know is that the City of Cleveland and the Port Authority regularly lend directly or guarantee financing for apartment developments. I know for sure that The Athlon and the Euclid Grand are both being financed that way.

After living in D.C. and Northern Virginia where literally entire neighborhoods of rowhouses and light commercial are being replaced with "luxury" housing blocks, it's really hard for me to see Cleveland-area residents having problem with these scattered new developments. I'd think we should build anywhere we can, assuming that the new residents are actually contributing to the tax base. There is so much available land--even in desirable neighborhoods and suburbs--that I almost think gentrification is a nonissue. But like I said, I was living on the east coast where you can't buy a disheveled hovel for less than half-a-mil or rent a 1-br for at least $2K a month. So much so that upon hearing the NYC rejected Amazon HQ2 in part due to housing costs, I completely understood.

I don't think blockchain itself is a scam. But as for Bitcoin...

Interesting that you should mention NYC or LA. In my experience, with only a handful of exceptions, urban malls don't really work so great there either. This is in part Forest City's fault, I agree with the other commenters here on that. But considering Tower City's past use as a passenger rail station, asking what could be done with it is much like saying what could be done with New York's Grand Central Terminal or Washington's Union Station if the trains stopped running. The answer is not much--as far as profit-seekers are concerned.

That's a fair point--it seems like there is some untapped market for outlet shopping in NE Ohio, especially if you don't feel like driving out to Lodi or Aurora. My thought on Tower City--it's always been a mishmash of target demographics and property types--an upscale Ritz hotel, a mid-tier casino (that's being generous), seedy food court, strip mall stores, and possibly now subsidized apts and a tech hub. While I have always enjoyed and promoted mixed use projects, the uses should at least blend well together, and at TC they just don't.

My guess is not enough foot traffic. Or at least the kind of foot traffic retailers want. Personally, I'd love to see some of those stores on Euclid, perhaps if someone ever develops the Hippodrome lot.