No problemo. We all care about The City deeply. I think just need a little more patience and see where the next few years take us before looking deeply into Burke.

I didn't know they were trying to upgrade BKL and add another runway??? If they do it's a given it's here to stay for a while and not sure I like that idea. My only argument was to wait later on discussing the dismantling of the airport. It does scare me a little having an airport so close to downtown buildings and adding more traffic would so even more. My opinion just keep the airport as is for the moment.

The fact of the matter remains, if Burke was so valuable, developers would be lining up at City Hall (and possibly also lining pockets).  

 

All one needs to do is look at that Scranton Peninsula "Thunderturd" Development and realize that Cleveland still has a long way to go.  

 

In my SIM City Cleveland I'm investing in Burke for the future, when personal aviation takes hold and everyone living in the CBD will love the chance to walk to their Uber drones.  

Edited July 16, 20195 yr by Cleburger

10 minutes ago, WindyBuckeye said:

No problemo. We all care about The City deeply. I think just need a little more patience and see where the next few years take us before looking deeply into Burke.

Thanks. I agree with being patient, but citizens need to advocate for sound policy and do what they can to interupt nascent deals that serve a few before they get off the ground. At some point the bad ideas are impossible to stop. If we want a better Cleveland we need an open marketplace of ideas even if it gets nasty sometimes (no my intention). Maybe Burke is the best we can do and I am completely wrong. I am trying to find out. Thanks for the feedback everyone.

 

28 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

The fact of the matter remains, if Burke was so valuable, developers would be lining up at City Hall (and possibly also lining pockets).  

 

All one needs to do is look at that Scranton Peninsula "Thunderturd" Development and realize that Cleveland still has a long way to go.  

 

In my SIM City Cleveland I'm investing in Burke for the future, when personal aviation takes hold and everyone living in the CPD will love the chance to walk to their Uber drones.  

Bribes? Do you expect developers to bribe city hall? This is part of the problem.

 

The internet is littered with proposals since Voinovich put in North Coast Harbor. Stark and Wolstein wanted to develop the lakefront together since high school. 

Edited July 16, 20195 yr by Cleveland Trust

I have no dog in the fight. I just don’t see the logic in being so passionately against a minor airport that theoretically is providing a good for Cleveland.  To me its like pointing out MetroHealth or Great Lakes Brewing or Great Lakes Towing is on valuable land and they need to go because the real estate they are occupying is way too valuable.  I’ve never been to Burke other than the air show.  If you look back on the thread you can see the various  reasons people came up with closing Burke.  You can also see the various reasons for keeping Burke.  Its complicated and needs a new study in about 5 years. 

   We are living in the middle of a transformation of Cleveland. There have been 3 new buildings added to the skyline in last 3-4 years and it looks likely there will be another 3-4 more in the coming 3-4 years. There will still be plenty to build on throughout downtown, midtown, Scranton, and obviously points east. 

  The airport is an attraction and part of the package that Cleveland can use to entice a company to come here.  I worked for a small company that the owner loved visiting branch offices by air. Transdigm hq is in Cleveland. Would they move their hq if Burke closed?  Would others?

   The focus does not need to be on Burke at this moment.  I would rather it be there and focus on how it might work with ferries on Lake erie or a better Amtrak train station. And see where the Pace/Cumberland project goes. 

5 minutes ago, audidave said:

I have no dog in the fight. I just don’t see the logic in being so passionately against a minor airport that theoretically is providing a good for Cleveland.  To me its like pointing out MetroHealth or Great Lakes Brewing or Great Lakes Towing is on valuable land and they need to go because the real estate they are occupying is way too valuable.  I’ve never been to Burke other than the air show.  If you look back on the thread you can see the various  reasons people came up with closing Burke.  You can also see the various reasons for keeping Burke.  Its complicated and needs a new study in about 5 years. 

   We are living in the middle of a transformation of Cleveland. There have been 3 new buildings added to the skyline in last 3-4 years and it looks likely there will be another 3-4 more in the coming 3-4 years. There will still be plenty to build on throughout downtown, midtown, Scranton, and obviously points east. 

  The airport is an attraction and part of the package that Cleveland can use to entice a company to come here.  I worked for a small company that the owner loved visiting branch offices by air. Transdigm hq is in Cleveland. Would they move their hq if Burke closed?  Would others?

   The focus does not need to be on Burke at this moment.  I would rather it be there and focus on how it might work with ferries on Lake erie or a better Amtrak train station. And see where the Pace/Cumberland project goes. 

Airports influence is felt beyond the land it sits on. Go to any airport in he county and the land around it is not a hip cosmopolitan urban environment. Our airport is downtown. Sucks for us. 

Edited July 16, 20195 yr by Cleveland Trust

1 minute ago, Cleveland Trust said:

Airports influence is felt beyond the land it sits on. Go to any airport in he county and the land around it is not a cosmopolitan urban environment. Our airport is downtown. Sucks for us. 

Sit at the volleyball courts on E 9th or hang out at the Rock Hall plaza. I think its very cosmopolitan to see the jets fly in and out along with the Coast Guard helicopters.  Are you anti freighter on the river also?

2 minutes ago, audidave said:

Sit at the volleyball courts on E 9th or hang out at the Rock Hall plaza. I think its very cosmopolitan to see the jets fly in and out along with the Coast Guard helicopters.  Are you anti freighter on the river also?

 

On this same note, I've long thought that we should put a greenway around Burke to allow public access to the entire lakefront for walking, bikes and park benches.    I'm not sure the FAA or EPA would feel the same way, but worth a discussion.  

3 minutes ago, audidave said:

Sit at the volleyball courts on E 9th or hang out at the Rock Hall plaza. I think its very cosmopolitan to see the jets fly in and out along with the Coast Guard helicopters.  Are you anti freighter on the river also?

Kinda like being by the Hudson in Manhattan with the helicopters! Hustle bustle uniquely Cleveland!

11 minutes ago, audidave said:

Sit at the volleyball courts on E 9th or hang out at the Rock Hall plaza. I think its very cosmopolitan to see the jets fly in and out along with the Coast Guard helicopters.  Are you anti freighter on the river also?

Is that the best we can do?

2 hours ago, Cleveland Trust said:

Thanks. I agree with being patient, but citizens need to advocate for sound policy and do what they can to interupt nascent deals that serve a few before they get off the ground. At some point the bad ideas are impossible to stop. If we want a better Cleveland we need an open marketplace of ideas even if it gets nasty sometimes (no my intention). Maybe Burke is the best we can do and I am completely wrong. I am trying to find out. Thanks for the feedback everyone.

 

Have you seen the original Geis plan to develop the land adjacent to Burke? I'll look for it. Seeing those renderings made me believe that Burke could have a great deal more value to the city. Since those plans have all but disappeared I'm not so optimistic any more. Shoot, maybe the coolest thing about Burke was the Cleveland Grand Prix. Gone. 

 

Anyhow, after years and years of wishing and hoping (and sometimes even working) for a better, cohesive, first-class waterfront I've lost a great deal of energy for the subject. I'm glad there are still people, presumably younger, that are passionate. But the reality is that the transformational changes we all want to see will take decades. There's just been far too many years of neglect and damage to be undone.  

3 hours ago, surfohio said:

Have you seen the original Geis plan to develop the land adjacent to Burke? I'll look for it. Seeing those renderings made me believe that Burke could have a great deal more value to the city. Since those plans have all but disappeared I'm not so optimistic any more. Shoot, maybe the coolest thing about Burke was the Cleveland Grand Prix. Gone. 

 

Anyhow, after years and years of wishing and hoping (and sometimes even working) for a better, cohesive, first-class waterfront I've lost a great deal of energy for the subject. I'm glad there are still people, presumably younger, that are passionate. But the reality is that the transformational changes we all want to see will take decades. There's just been far too many years of neglect and damage to be undone.  

Yes I’ve seen the Geis plan. There have been many and city hall is not interested. Some of those developers settled for doing infill projects (Stark’s Beacon, and Wolstein’s FEB) after years of getting nowhere. We’re lucky these are home town boys who dream of a better Cleveland and stuck around. Others would have given up years ago and moved on. Many have. 

 

If there is any good news it is that at least one of the presumptive mayoral candidates is silently but strongly Burke-sceptic.

6 hours ago, Mildtraumatic said:

Kinda like being by the Hudson in Manhattan with the helicopters! Hustle bustle uniquely Cleveland!

Go play volleyball under Hopkins runway and you’ll triple that “hustle and bustle.” It will be like you’re playing volleyball in Times Square I’m sure.

 

Seriously, how is sitting in the desolate Rock Hall Plaza anything like being in say Battery Park in lower Manhattan? 

 

BTW: I’m fine with helicopters. It’s AIRPLANES constantly flying over your CBD that is the value killer. 

Edited July 17, 20195 yr by Cleveland Trust

13 hours ago, Cleveland Trust said:

I don’t care about farmland property filling up with McMansions, I want to free up the land north of downtown from the FAA development regulations and use this unique asset as a population magnet. 

 

Want a Boom Town? Shutter Burke and split the traffic between County and Hopkins. 

USE THE LAND THATS AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW ON THE LAKEFRONT

13 hours ago, Cleveland Trust said:

I don’t care about farmland property filling up with McMansions, I want to free up the land north of downtown from the FAA development regulations and use this unique asset as a population magnet. 

 

Want a Boom Town? Shutter Burke and split the traffic between County and Hopkins. 

And by the way, I care about getting the tax dollars of the people who live in those houses. What a silly argument, especially when (I repeat) the land THATS already available on the lakefront isn’t developed. Instead of using what you have, we’re having a stupid argument about shutting an airport down (which will cause us all kinds of issues) for MORE land. If you haven’t done a damn thing with what you got, what makes you think shutting down Burke will be some panacea?

 

The same economic realities exist whether Burke is open or closed. The same difficulties that developers have in getting projects approved and funded exist whether Burke is open or closed. None of that changes. If that wasn’t a problem, the parts of the lakefront that are available NOW would have been developed already. Don’t tell me that all of a sudden if Burke is closed today that tomorrow we’ll have a bunch of towers on the land. The same economic realities still exist, which mean that those big towers will still be just as difficult to finance as they are now, which means that it’s EASIER to get financing for developments at the size that they would currently have to be because of the issues with Burke’s flight patterns. So why are we talking about closing it again?

 

Not to mention it’s built on a damn landfill which means it’s most likely going to have to be parkland anyway. So we got rid of Burke for a park isolated by the highway and it still won’t have much of an impact on what kind of developments that can get financed there because the issue is the damn market, not the airport. You’re acting like “oh we could have amazing developments on the lakefront if that airport wasn’t in the way” when the reality is if it was easy to get new development of any kind financed the land that’s already available would have already have been built on and there would be demand for tearing down Burke based on real economic activity, not just people saying “you know what I think?! We should tear down that airport!” That’s an easy and lazy argument. The lack of development on the lakefront is not because Burke is there. The lack of development on the lakefront is because it’s difficult to get new construction built in Cleveland period, the lakefront property is owned either by the city or by the state (which means they have to approve whatever you do anyway) and because we change our lakefront strategy with every administration. That’s why. Not Burke.

 

My whole point was that you could actually do things to enhance Burke AND still develop the lakefront at the same time because they aren’t mutually exclusive. Close Burke and you’re probably not getting the buildings you want on the property anyway so make Burke work and build on what you have

Edited July 17, 20195 yr by inlovewithCLE

3 hours ago, inlovewithCLE said:

And by the way, I care about getting the tax dollars of the people who live in those houses. What a silly argument, especially when (I repeat) the land THATS already available on the lakefront isn’t developed. Instead of using what you have, we’re having a stupid argument about shutting an airport down (which will cause us all kinds of issues) for MORE land. If you haven’t done a damn thing with what you got, what makes you think shutting down Burke will be some panacea?

 

The same economic realities exist whether Burke is open or closed. The same difficulties that developers have in getting projects approved and funded exist whether Burke is open or closed. None of that changes. If that wasn’t a problem, the parts of the lakefront that are available NOW would have been developed already. Don’t tell me that all of a sudden if Burke is closed today that tomorrow we’ll have a bunch of towers on the land. The same economic realities still exist, which mean that those big towers will still be just as difficult to finance as they are now, which means that it’s EASIER to get financing for developments at the size that they would currently have to be because of the issues with Burke’s flight patterns. So why are we talking about closing it again?

 

Not to mention it’s built on a damn landfill which means it’s most likely going to have to be parkland anyway. So we got rid of Burke for a park isolated by the highway and it still won’t have much of an impact on what kind of developments that can get financed there because the issue is the damn market, not the airport. You’re acting like “oh we could have amazing developments on the lakefront if that airport wasn’t in the way” when the reality is if it was easy to get new development of any kind financed the land that’s already available would have already have been built on and there would be demand for tearing down Burke based on real economic activity, not just people saying “you know what I think?! We should tear down that airport!” That’s an easy and lazy argument. The lack of development on the lakefront is not because Burke is there. The lack of development on the lakefront is because it’s difficult to get new construction built in Cleveland period, the lakefront property is owned either by the city or by the state (which means they have to approve whatever you do anyway) and because we change our lakefront strategy with every administration. That’s why. Not Burke.

 

My whole point was that you could actually do things to enhance Burke AND still develop the lakefront at the same time because they aren’t mutually exclusive. Close Burke and you’re probably not getting the buildings you want on the property anyway so make Burke work and build on what you have

Nope. 

 

Did you know people in a 10-mile radius of airports have huge health risks? These planes at low altitude put out noise and toxins that people breath in. There are reasons why airports are horrible for real estate value. There are reasons why land around airports is not zoned for housing and usually doesn’t feature high-end housing. No one chooses to live under a flight path for convenient air travel. The market proves it. 

 

This is not arbitrary opinion, this is proven by real estate transactions around the world.

 

https://nqsc.org/downloads/REALESTATE.pdf

 

tl;dr of above report:  look at health risks described stating on page 5!!’ ? It will show you why Burke alone explains Cleveland’s Bizarro World lakefront demand.

 

Again, we have an underused airport that is killing the value and thus the developability of our most valuable real estate (not my opinion, waterfront real estate value is scarce with pent up demand universally). Closing Burke is not a panacea, it is the actual cure to our blight. 

 

Amd sorry, I don’t care about redeveloping land on the outskirts of the county for tax dollars. I just don’t care. I am interested in creating a Cleveland with a dense urban center surrounded by as much green as possible sitting right next to the lake. That’s the dream.

Edited July 17, 20195 yr by Cleveland Trust

^i think you have an irrational fear of airplanes. Its only loud at BKL during the airshow or when the indy cars were in town. Your little study of scary noise was based on living under or by Heathrow, LAX, McCaren, Seatac, and Phoenix.  Also what toxins are coming out of low flying airplanes that aren’t coming out of smokestacks or random Cleveland car exhausts?

  We could very well find with new technology  that Burke could be the hot downtown airport. For example, say technology of flying car drones takes off. Me just wildly speculating that a possible early rule could be to minimize congestion and collisions in the air, a primary land point must be used by all vehicles within a 20 mile area. Burke would be a handy downtown airport and drone base, Cleveland could be the big winners in big drones. 

 

15 minutes ago, audidave said:

^i think you have an irrational fear of airplanes. Its only loud at BKL during the airshow or when the indy cars were in town. Your little study of scary noise was based on living under or by Heathrow, LAX, McCaren, Seatac, and Phoenix.  Also what toxins are coming out of low flying airplanes that aren’t coming out of smokestacks or random Cleveland car exhausts?

  We could very well find with new technology  that Burke could be the hot downtown airport. For example, say technology of flying car drones takes off. Me just wildly speculating that a possible early rule could be to minimize congestion and collisions in the air, a primary land point must be used by all vehicles within a 20 mile area. Burke would be a handy downtown airport and drone base, Cleveland could be the big winners in big drones. 

 

No. I love airplanes. I fly out of Hopkins at least once a year. I don’t live near the runway because I can afford not to. According to you and no one else I’m missing out.

 

A new technology tested at Burke? ? Not saying it won’t happen but it sounds like fantasy. I wouldn’t count on it. If only there was an economic money-saving course of action that is proven to work. ? Like closing Burke!

 

Look, drive around the perimeter of Hopkins. Then go and walk around at Burke. The areas around them are identical: they are WASTELANDS! Don’t you get it. We have a wasteland on the property that could finance all of our infill projects. We are doing things backwards because every developer in town has been told, “Burke will not close and that’s final.”

 

Read page 5 of that study! Read about scary cardiovascular problems and suicide rates and you’ll begin to understand why wastelands exist around Cleveland airports, and every airport around the world.

 

Edited July 17, 20195 yr by Cleveland Trust

Damn near everything you say about Burke ranges from either factually inaccurate to downright loony. This is Burke Derangement Syndrome. 

5 hours ago, Cleveland Trust said:

 

Amd sorry, I don’t care about redeveloping land on the outskirts of the county for tax dollars. I just don’t care. I am interested in creating a Cleveland with a dense urban center surrounded by as much green as possible sitting right next to the lake. That’s the dream.

You must’ve missed where I said my idea would be to annex that land to the city. See this is what I’m saying. You don’t listen to anyone’s points, you just sit here and debate with yourself. You either didn’t actually read or actually comprehend what I said and instead decided to go down your own rabbit hole. This isn’t fun anymore lol. 

34 minutes ago, inlovewithCLE said:

You must’ve missed where I said my idea would be to annex that land to the city. See this is what I’m saying. You don’t listen to anyone’s points, you just sit here and debate with yourself. You either didn’t actually read or actually comprehend what I said and instead decided to go down your own rabbit hole. This isn’t fun anymore lol. 

No, I saw that. I don’t care about that county airport land for tax purposes. I care about sound development in the city center. Sorry. 

 

My rabbit hole of evidence? Go have some fun. 

Edited July 17, 20195 yr by Cleveland Trust

59 minutes ago, inlovewithCLE said:

Damn near everything you say about Burke ranges from either factually inaccurate to downright loony. This is Burke Derangement Syndrome. 

Ad hominem. I don’t respond to childish insults after this, I will just ignore you from now on. Get some better arguments or go on to a Suburban Ohio forum echo chamber where you all agree about everything. 

 

I get dogpiled by people posting gotcha links that they haven’t even read and prove just the opposite of what they think they prove and I am deranged? Please. Never seen a such a lazy bunch of know it all urban planners so attached to horrible ideas.

 

I expected push back and name calling from the Burke shills but I thought you guys would at least be informed. 

Edited July 17, 20195 yr by Cleveland Trust

6 hours ago, Cleveland Trust said:

 

Look, drive around the perimeter of Hopkins. Then go and walk around at Burke. The areas around them are identical: they are WASTELANDS! Don’t you get it. We have a wasteland on the property that could finance all of our infill projects. We are doing things backwards because every developer in town has been told, “Burke will not close and that’s final.”

 

 

The crowds of people and gridlocked traffic around the Rock Hall this weekend sure didn't seem like a wasteland.  Neither were the hundreds of people enjoying their boats at Lakeside Yacht Club, or the other marinas and parks further to the east.   

 

23 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

 

The crowds of people and gridlocked traffic around the Rock Hall this weekend sure didn't seem like a wasteland.  Neither were the hundreds of people enjoying their boats at Lakeside Yacht Club, or the other marinas and parks further to the east.   

 

Tall ships were in town. See what kind of demand there is for lake access? Clevelanders are starved for it. Wouldn’t it be nice to have that kind of activity down there all the time?

Here is that hustle and bustle of Lower Manhattan you think exists down there. Reality check: our lakefront is pathetic, it is a wasteland. 

 

Argue aethetics for for a minute. Name one public space down there where people want to hang out without an attached festival?  The whole thing is a forbidding cluster of mistake by the lake.

 

Edited July 17, 20195 yr by Cleveland Trust

You're acting like a know it all again Cleveland Trust and your tone again is why some can't take your argument serious. You have a strong bias here and it shows. If you show some wiggle room with your arguments, when others have when they respond to you, then there can be a solid productive discussion. 

I also really enjoyed how you were upset by someone insulting you and then you proceed to insult the whole forum board. Good work there.

Edited July 17, 20195 yr by WindyBuckeye

4 minutes ago, WindyBuckeye said:

You're acting like a know it all again Cleveland Trust and your tone again is why some can't take your argument serious. You have a strong bias here and it shows. If you show some wiggle room with your arguments, when others have when they respond to you, then there can be a solid productive discussion. 

I also really enjoyed how you were upset by someone insulting you and then you proceed to insult the whole forum board. Good work there.

No, I am giving back in kind. I am not insulting, I am calling him and others on their logical fallilacies. That is what is unproductive, not talking about reality.

So calling people uninformed and lazy is just in kind? Whatever. Your reality currently is no one else’s. Best of luck to you in your Burke closing endeavor. We will enjoy Dock 30 and the future other great developments being done to the lake and river front before Burke is talked about more. The area around browns stadium is about to look a lot different.

 

Name one public place people hang out by the lake? How about edgewater?

 

One thing I would like answered is how would closing Burke finance all the infill projects?

 

Edited July 17, 20195 yr by WindyBuckeye

59 minutes ago, WindyBuckeye said:

You're acting like a know it all again Cleveland Trust and your tone again is why some can't take your argument serious. You have a strong bias here and it shows. If you show some wiggle room with your arguments, when others have when they respond to you, then there can be a solid productive discussion. 

I also really enjoyed how you were upset by someone insulting you and then you proceed to insult the whole forum board. Good work there.

On second thought, I’m not comfortable with you policing my tone and language, especially since it was you who called me a “know it all,” first and now you scold me for having a focused argument for which I haven’t seen any refutation. 

 

You are in this forum voluntarily. You don’t like my tone you can ignore me or this discussion. I am not here to write posts in an echo chamber. I am seeking information about a problem that is not being addressed because maybe [redacted]. That is all.

 

If you don’t have anything to add that’s fine. If you have a counter opinion, that’s fine too. You want to insult me, fire away. You don’t like the way I post. Well, maybe the internet isn’t the place for you. And an online forum talking about closing Burke airport should be avoided if you have thin skin. 

Edited July 17, 20195 yr by Cleveland Trust

1 hour ago, Cleveland Trust said:

Here is that hustle and bustle of Lower Manhattan you think exists down there. Reality check: our lakefront is pathetic, it is a wasteland. 

 

Argue aethetics for for a minute. Name one public space down there where people want to hang out without an attached festival?  The whole thing is a forbidding cluster of mistake by the lake.

 

 

You'll get no argument from me that the Stadium creates a dead zone.    But here you are again, switching your focus from Burke to the Stadium.   That site has been a stadium since well before Burke was built!  

 

If you ask me, the stadium can be remedied through clever additions of restaurant and retail space attached to the outside.  

 

As far as the "wasteland,"  The Science Center, Rock Hall and E 9th pier are busy every weekend.  The tall ships made it especially busy, but most of the summer the area is quite active.    

 

 

3 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

 

You'll get no argument from me that the Stadium creates a dead zone.    But here you are again, switching your focus from Burke to the Stadium.   That site has been a stadium since well before Burke was built!  

 

If you ask me, the stadium can be remedied through clever additions of restaurant and retail space attached to the outside.  

 

As far as the "wasteland,"  The Science Center, Rock Hall and E 9th pier are busy every weekend.  The tall ships made it especially busy, but most of the summer the area is quite active.    

 

 

I didn’t  mention the stadium. But look at what Burke’s flight path has gifted us. A wasteland! 

 

Wouldn’t some housing be nice down there? Is that part of the mix or just restaurant and retail space in Browns Stadium?—that won’t work in my opinion.

Does anyone know if planes can takeoff and land at Burke during Browns games? 

Cleveland trust. I have provided counter points on why Burke isn’t a focus currently. It just instantly goes back to Burke Burke Burke must go. And yes if you want to see the lakefron development planned around browns stadium see the recent few pages on the proposed developments around the stadium including several housing units in the Lakefront Developments post.

 

And if you think that is me scolding you then good luck with your own thin skin. You have a focused opinion that many have countered with their own points first it was population loss which was countered and then it was investment which was countered. I think we all agree Burke would eventually be better as something else. However, it is down in the priorities list with all

of the current projects in the more near pipeline that are going to vastly improve the lake and river access before Burke.

 

The dead area around browns stadium is not due to Burke but luckily that’s about the change.

 

i want to have a productive discussion so I’ll be more relaxed and keep to myself but you have to admit the other developments happening around the river and lake are gonna be great for the area.

 

Edited July 17, 20195 yr by WindyBuckeye

1 hour ago, Cleburger said:

If you ask me, the stadium can be remedied through clever additions of restaurant and retail space attached to the outside.  

 

As far as the "wasteland,"  The Science Center, Rock Hall and E 9th pier are busy every weekend.  The tall ships made it especially busy, but most of the summer the area is quite active.    

 

 

But you have to admit that the Rock Hall and Science Center are not at all well integrated. They were constructed with no thoughts of connectivity. It's just really bad urban design. 

 

Agree with your point re: the stadium. The lack of connectivity and bad planning can be surely be remedied, but I'm skeptical it will happen. 

As more wealthy individuals live in downtown Cleveland the convenience of having your own private jet nearby becomes greater. Not to mention all the wealthy out of state visitors who come for business or pleasure (like a Cavs game for example). I'm sure people like Jimmy Haslam or Dan Gilbert love the convenience of Burke. Even now I see plenty of corporate jets landing and taking off every ten to fifteen minutes whenever I visit the area. 

29 minutes ago, WindyBuckeye said:

Cleveland trust. I have provided counter points on why Burke isn’t a focus currently. It just instantly goes back to Burke Burke Burke must go. And yes if you want to see the lakefron development planned around browns stadium see the recent few pages on the proposed developments around the stadium including several housing units in the Lakefront Developments post.

 

And if you think that is me scolding you then good luck with your own thin skin. You have a focused opinion that many have countered with their own points first it was population loss which was countered and then it was investment which was countered. I think we all agree Burke would eventually be better as something else. However, it is down in the priorities list with all

of the current projects in the more near pipeline that are going to vastly improve the lake and river access before Burke.

Then we agree Burke must close or you have a wasteland?

 

The process to close Burke is at zero. It will take lots of time to get rid of this boondoggle so the sooner we can start public discourse the better. Developers have been lined up to put something there since the 80s but get stonewalled and settle for (I think) lesser projects. Stark’s projects take years to get off the ground because he is not favored. His sole investment in Cleveland proper is Beacon. Politics. Look what he did in Westlake. He wanted that same thing downtown with Eaton and American Greetings and housing and upscale retail. Burke was a big issue. Land in a flight path is not attractive to corporate clients or shoppers or condo owners (noise, hazard, toxins). We lost out because things were not in place. City hall was too flat-footed to make any moves in the short timeframe that Stark needed for his tenants. 

 

We need to get a least a vision  to coalesce around and work toward so that the next opportunity will not be lost. The city just makes he same stupid mistakes over and over. If we keep putting it off we are bound to lose out to some of the predatory cities that gobble up jobs and companies.

Edited July 17, 20195 yr by Cleveland Trust

Burke is making us lose jobs. Got it ??‍♂️?

Burke can close but in due time. I also think Stark tends to ask for too much a lot of times and that’s why he isn’t favored too highly.

8 minutes ago, inlovewithCLE said:

Burke is making us lose jobs. Got it ??‍♂️?

Good, finally. 

8 minutes ago, WindyBuckeye said:

Burke can close but in due time. I also think Stark tends to ask for too much a lot of times and that’s why he isn’t favored too highly.

When?

The idea that a chunk of land 1500 feet by 500 feet in area being limited to 5 stories due to an airport's flight path is somehow the one thing stopping Cleveland becoming a boomtown is laughable. 

 

I didn't include the other part of the "wasteland" you keep showing pictures of in that measurement above, because that's also known as the Port of Cleveland, has nothing to do with Burke's flight path, and is a major driver of the city's economy. We've been through this before; there were discussions about moving it east. Cost: $500 million.

 

 

22 minutes ago, shack said:

As more wealthy individuals live in downtown Cleveland the convenience of having your own private jet nearby becomes greater. Not to mention all the wealthy out of state visitors who come for business or pleasure (like a Cavs game for example). I'm sure people like Jimmy Haslam or Dan Gilbert love the convenience of Burke. Even now I see plenty of corporate jets landing and taking off every ten to fifteen minutes whenever I visit the area. 

Anecdotal evidence. I’m not debating whether people land planes there. Is it the best use of the space? How little traffic there necessitates it’s existence?

 

Let’s turn Cleveland over to the billionaires? Why not build a city for us? You’ve got this all backwards.

6 minutes ago, PittsburgoDelendaEst said:

The idea that a chunk of land 1500 feet by 500 feet in area being limited to 5 stories due to an airport's flight path is somehow the one thing stopping Cleveland becoming a boomtown is laughable. 

 

I didn't include the other part of the "wasteland" you keep showing pictures of in that measurement above, because that's also known as the Port of Cleveland, has nothing to do with Burke's flight path, and is a major driver of the city's economy. We've been through this before; there were discussions about moving it east. Cost: $500 million.

 

 

Nah. I’m against moving it east. Keep it there, develop the land around it. Close the airport and watch value soar. That parcel you describe is a diamond in he rough.  

Edited July 17, 20195 yr by Cleveland Trust

13 minutes ago, Cleveland Trust said:

When?

Once the lakefront has some proven success by Browns Stadium and the river front projects are wrapped up in the next 5ish years hopefully.

14 minutes ago, Cleveland Trust said:

Good, finally. 

If you really believe this....then I don’t know what to say.

6 minutes ago, Cleveland Trust said:

Anecdotal evidence. I’m not debating whether people land planes there. Is it the best use of the space? How little traffic there necessitates it’s existence?

 

Let’s turn Cleveland over to the billionaires? Why not build a city for us? You’ve got this all backwards.

Yeah, who needs their tax dollars?! ??‍♂️??‍♂️??‍♂️

3 minutes ago, inlovewithCLE said:

Yeah, who needs their tax dollars?! ??‍♂️??‍♂️??‍♂️

They need our money. We have the power.

5 minutes ago, inlovewithCLE said:

If you really believe this....then I don’t know what to say.

Count up those Eaton jobs. American Greetings jobs that left town. Could have been on that lakefront where your precious limestone piles sit.

2 minutes ago, Cleveland Trust said:

They need our money. We have the power.

You do realize they can just vote with their feet and leave right? Taking tax dollars with them. WE (assuming you mean the city) don’t have any money. The money that city government (any government really) has comes from taxpayers. So it’s a simple equation: more taxpayers, more tax dollars. Less taxpayers, less tax dollars. Not rocket science, but I digress because I’m not going down another rabbit hole with you