Cleveland Trust

Yes. The city has to fulfill the terms of the grant or give back a prorated portion, show a decline in traffic and have alternative reliever airports available.

If we need to return money to the FAA then we have to return money to the FAA. If we agreed to terms for grant money we have to live by those terms. Put it on ice. Don’t use it. Like Aviation High School is just sitting empty, let Burke sit empty. See if it is missed. See if it shakes up our (comparatively) sleepy market. If it does we win without a penny spent. Even if I was posting for County Airport how would that change the the economic data at Burke?

I agree. Most of the proponents of closing Burke have safety and ease of travel their primary concerns. What if closing Burke meant better service at Hopkins, a windfall for the County Airport and a spike in development downtown? That is the vision. I’m looking at it as a big win-win-win for the region and Cleveland. If a case can be made that Burke is better for Cleveland than high rise housing, corporate jobs, a hospital, restaurants and hotels, I will concede. Deal?

On page 24 of that 2002 study it states that “the FAA is not wedded to Burke as a reliever airport.” This is based on the healthier numbers from almost 20 years ago. The plan consolidates operations from 3 airports to 2 to increase efficiency and also brings Akron and Lost Nation airports into the mix. I think Lorain was mentioned somewhere as a potential reliever as well. There are plans to expand Hopkins if Cleveland ever begins to add population and sees a demand for air travel. But with Hopkins operating at almost 1/3capacity expansion plans shouldn’t be a pressing concern in 2019.

Yes, these capacity concerns are addressed in a 2002 GCBL study. It is one of the only studies funded to underscore Burke’s negative impact on the local economy. Despite this bias it is pretty balanced in pointing out the difficulties with shifting traffic to Hopkins and County and (I think) Lost Nation. We would need some degree of Regionalism in place to close Burke. I think the lack of cooperation is our greatest weakness. A reliever airport was closed in Cincinnati that is more analogous to Burke. I talked to the people on the Cincinnati thread about its closing and most thought it had a net benefit and made air service in the region better. That’s the goal.

Sorry, I was just pointing out that even if you didn’t spend a dime after closing Burke there would be an economic benefit north of downtown. The newest proposal is for the western edge to be sold to developers for housing and Burke to be a city park created by a public/private partnership. Here is a link: https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2019/08/should-burke-lakefront-airport-close-coalition-keeps-important-question-alive-steven-litt.html Operations at Burke have fallen 66% since 2000 (also above article). This trend is not a good indication for revenue of any kind.

Thanks, good points to consider. Let’s return the money to the FAA. Even if we mothball Burke and don’t touch it we free up land north of downtown. See what happens. What if we close Burke and those 13 cents remained at Hopkins? Do you have numbers on “income and sales tax”? That money would still go to city coffers if those jobs and sales moved over to Hopkins wouldn’t they? I do have an agenda and I am pushing a narrative, I don’t deny that. I think we should close the airport.

Thoughts on this: 1) If we keep Burke Lakefront Airport and go Big League with it, should we give TSA complete oversight now, spending an additional $5 million per year to screen all passengers and all luggage and provide 24/7 security? 2) What airline should we try to hub there? 3) Is everyone happy with the present level of service offered by Burke? 4) What is the Keep the Airport Open vision for Burke? 5) What is the minimum number of flights at Burke before we should consider closing? 30,000? 20,000? 10,000?

Do you have an argument to keep Burke in operation based on the facts, statistics, market projections or data? Post it. Me: 2+2= 4 You: 4!!??? Who is paying you to say that? You must work for someone who wants it to be 4!

Suit yourself. You take care of the vacant lots downtown, that will be your role. Let me worry about Burke. If we don’t make Cleveland a magnet for talent and have a plan for growth, all those developments downtown will wither on the vine. The Lakefront is our magnet.

Burke will lose $30 million over the next decade. https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2014/03/burke_lakefront_seen_through_n.html This is all pro bono. Even if I was being paid by Mike White to post here the argument remains the argument. The facts remain the facts. Full disclosure so you are not confused: I WANT TO CLOSE BURKE.

Too expensive. Your turn...

I’ll repost this to keep this thread focused. Seriously cannot find a single debunked argument to keep Burke an “airport.” Take a shot at answering: What is the best reason to keep Burke Lakefront Airport open?

Dream small but stay out of the way. Go to Millennium Park in Chicago, Battery Park in NYC, Balboa Park in San Diego, Boston Common. That’s what we’re talkin’ about. Next level MetroPark stuff.

^^^^^ This is not an argument. This is a rant from someone who has lost the argument. I have talked to people IRL. When talking they realize that we are arguing with phantoms, debunked arguments, non-arguments, ad homs, and no-data assertions like you offer here. That’s why City Hall can’t talk about it: public scrutiny would expose that Cleveland has been played. Burke will be a park.