....There are plenty of very intelligent urban planners who can give you a laundry list of reasons why Burke isn’t the “highest and best use”.

 

Spoken like a true graduate student. I reply thusly:

 

There are plenty of very intelligent urban planners who can give you a laundry list of reasons why Burke IS the “highest and best use” at the current time and foreseeable future.

 

There are plenty of not-so-bright urban planners who can give you a laundry list of reasons why Burke isn’t the “highest and best use”.

 

So...such grand statements do little to convince anyone of anything. BKL serves more than the rich. It serves everyone. It minimizes clutter traffic at Hopkins--so if you ever use Hopkins, you benefit. It supports the city as a medical hub as patients are flown in from around the world by the Cleveland Clinic. Those are just a few examples.  I agree that "wasting our lakefront space in downtown isn't viable" but we've been doing that for decades between the Port and E. 9. It makes no sense to have useless concrete there between W3 and E9, only to add to it by tearing down an existing economic asset that is Burke.

 

 

Who’s lining up to develop this site? Has anyone shown any interest?

 

Hopefully as our city continues to develop they’ll realize that we don’t need this airport. All of the lies and excuses for keeping it open are pathetic. The county airport in Richmond Hts can sustain both its traffic and Burke traffic...

 

This is entirely not true. Many of the planes that use BKL could not use CGF. Not all planes are tiny turboprops or small business jets...

 

I’m sure there is a solution. Cuyahoga County Airport runway is nearly as long as BKL and there’s room to extend it. Plus, Hopkins is underutilized and has plenty of room. 

 

“According to the Federal Aviation Administration's Air Traffic Activity Data Base System (ATADS), Burke had 100,321 takeoffs and landings in 2000. By 2010, that number was down to 53,987. Last year, 2017, it had basically dropped off to 38,571. So between 2000 and 2017, Burke's flight numbers have dropped by 62 percent.

 

Those are striking numbers made even more striking by this fact: About a third of those 38,571 takeoffs and landings are for the pilot flight schools located at Burke, which has nothing to do with business, travel or shipping of goods.”

 

Keeping it open for 25,000 flights a year. Hopkins has 122K in 2017 flights down from 332K in 2000. Cuyahoga is down from 65k in 2000 to 20k in 2017. Keeping 450 acres on prime downtown lakefront land reserved for a useless airport is one of the many mistakes Cleveland has made.

 

You clearly haven't met the NIMBY crowd in Richmond Heights and Willoughby Hills, who have already fought any runway expansion for years at CGF.  And in terms of the flight schools at BKL, I'd love to hear you tell the owners that they don't count as "business." 

There are plenty of very intelligent urban planners who can give you a laundry list of reasons why Burke isn’t the “highest and best use”.

 

And a park is?

 

Is Central Park the highest and best use for a huge chunk of uptown Manhattan? I would say so.

 

Cleveland's lakefront should have been reserved as parkland 100 years ago and it should still be reserved as parkland today. It was done in peer Great Lakes cities of Chicago and Milwaukee and it should have been done here and still should be.

 

I'm a little more sympathetic to Burke in general, I recognize the difficulty in closing an airport and the fact that we have other neighborhoods to develop, but at the end of the day, it should have been a park. At least a chunk of it closest to the lake.

Who’s lining up to develop this site? Has anyone shown any interest?

 

It’s a process to close an airport. I think that the developer trying to squeeze in offices and apartments around the stadium and a tiny pier would be interested in Burke land. In my opinion I’d make 1/2-3/4 of it into a park. There would still be a lot of space left for development.

There are plenty of very intelligent urban planners who can give you a laundry list of reasons why Burke isn’t the “highest and best use”.

 

And a park is?

 

What would Chicago be without grant park? That’s over 300 acres. Burke is 450. If we mimicked the size of Grant Park we’d still have 100+ acres for development. A lot of Chicago’s lakefront is park space with intermittent development between. There’s Lincoln Park - 1200 acres. Jackson park - 500 acres. I’d rather have ample green space along our lakefront than an airport. The city would be much more livable with green space. Cleveland’s inner city really lacks large concentrated green space. People wouldn’t live in many big cities if they didn’t have green space.  :-\

 

Edit - sorry for two posts. I’m having issues posting on these forums from my phone.

I'm fine with it either way. Show me that the money and political will is there to shut down Burke as a reliever airport, to relocate its existing businesses at taxpayer expense, to begin to redevelop 300+ acres of land as a park and wildlife refuge, and a ready-and-waiting developer with the juice to develop the balance of the land within a 20- to 30-year time window or the undeveloped land reverts back to the city. Show me those things and I'll support the conversion. Until then, I'll happily keep using Burke for my flights to Cincinnati and my air shows every Labor Day.

I'm fine with it either way. Show me that the money and political will is there to shut down Burke as a reliever airport, to relocate its existing businesses at taxpayer expense, to begin to redevelop 300+ acres of land as a park and wildlife refuge, and a ready-and-waiting developer with the juice to develop the balance of the land within a 20- to 30-year time window or the undeveloped land reverts back to the city. Show me those things and I'll support the conversion. Until then, I'll happily keep using Burke for my flights to Cincinnati and my air shows every Labor Day.

 

Look at FEB. Wolstein has basically created an entirely new neighborhood downtown in underutilized space. And it’s still growing. Our city is stuck in the past and we have deep scars all over our city. Why keep perpetuating these wounds when we have so much potential? We don’t need Burke as a reliever airport because all airports combined have less traffic than Hopkins fifteen years ago. And we have a completely empty terminal on top of it. It’s a pipe dream for Burke to be re-utilized. Hopefully I’ll see it in my lifetime. But this is one of the many ongoing mistakes our city is making. It makes me not want to stay here. I live downtown and love it. But I’d rather live in more forward thinking city. I’ll stick it out for a few years, but you know. *shrug* just another well educated millennial wanting more from my city.

Cities in America typically do not initiate development without the initiative from a private sector "agitator" influencing a major change.

Cities in America typically do not initiate development without the initiative from a private sector "agitator" influencing a major change.

 

And unfortunately for Cleveland, the planners of yesteryear screwed us over and no we’re left with a city that needs to completely change the way it does and thinks about everything. Plenty of developers showed interest for Cleveland’s [underwhelming] lakefront plan. If Cleveland leadership even remotely considered the thought of alternatives for Burke developers would be all over that. Unfortunately the city maintains that it absolutely needs the airport for a bunch of untrue reasons.

Jackson park - 500 acres.

 

Maybe you will be able to get the mayor's attention with this example.

Jackson park - 500 acres.

 

Maybe you will be able to get the mayor's attention with this example.

 

We could dedicate a namesake for Jackson. I’m sure he’ll serve for another 4 terms at least.

I could see making the future of the airport part of any plan regarding the future of the stadium. It would make sense to consider the options for both of them as part of a single package.

I could see making the future of the airport part of any plan regarding the future of the stadium. It would make sense to consider the options for both of them as part of a single package.

 

Way to bring in another sore subject for the city, haha. Mistakes on the lake. I’m 20 years we could have a really great lakefront. That would take a lot of forward thinking that I’m sure our city isn’t quite capable of right now.

imjustinjk--would you prefer if Burke was expanded--with longer runways and a new terminal--so that it could host more flights and routes?

imjustinjk--would you prefer if Burke was expanded--with longer runways and a new terminal--so that it could host more flights and routes?

 

No. I don’t think that one of our biggest assets should be closed off from being public space/developable space. Can you explain to me why we need this additional airport when Hopkins can easily handle the traffic from the loss of Burke (less than 30,000 commercial flights)? In another thread for the new West Side High people complained that was a waste of prime lakefront space. This is massively larger and doesn’t have a salt mine between it and the lake. There’s numerous better uses for Burke than it being an airport.

^Dude, I was just kidding!

^Dude, I was just kidding!

 

I’m a very serious person, haha. And it’s hard to sense jokes in black and white text. I love Cleveland, and would like to start roots here. I don’t want to live in the suburbs. Other cities along the Great Lakes have large dedicate green space along their lakefronts. Like Lincoln Park has 20+ million visitors a year. For some reason our region can’t see beyond what is currently. Sure we should fill in parking lots downtown. But we should also remove the giant ugly airport from our lake (and probably the stadium too). There’s no real benefit for the region as a whole to maintain Burke as it is now.

^Dude, I was just kidding!

 

I’m a very serious person, haha. And it’s hard to sense jokes in black and white text. I love Cleveland, and would like to start roots here. I don’t want to live in the suburbs. Other cities along the Great Lakes have large dedicate green space along their lakefronts. Like Lincoln Park has 20+ million visitors a year. For some reason our region can’t see beyond what is currently. Sure we should fill in parking lots downtown. But we should also remove the giant ugly airport from our lake (and probably the stadium too). There’s no real benefit for the region as a whole to maintain Burke as it is now.

 

I agree that any future public expenditure that will cost hundreds of millions of dollars needs to be investigated thoroughly before we approve another tax increase or extension. There fact we can only use a $300 million piece of infrastructure (FE Stadium) for 10 days a year +/- 5 for concerts is ridiculous. Imagine only being able to use the Innerbelt Bridge for 10 days a year!

 

Burke Airport plays its role, corporate flights with ease of access to central city and University Circle, and also the Clinic Helicopters transporting ill patients (and body parts for transplant), uses it daily. These uses, help the economy, but have no real benefit to the community at large, so I see your point there.

 

Does anyone know the future layout of the dumping dikes the Army Core will fill with dredged material from the Cuyahoga? Burke Airport and the peninsula on Gordan Park are all essential dredge Cuyahoga muck. Future dikes will only be expansions of the existing ones, so one day could there be a "New" lakefront beyond the airport?

The issue with the high school isn't the water, it's the street frontage.  I agree that Burke should be a park. 

Chicago had a lot going on in the lakefront areas even before Meigs closed. Closing Burke, to me, is not some sort of panacea which will transform Cleveland into Chicago. To create some form of an urban neighborhood attraction it will need to be nurtured well after the airport is closed.

 

The other issue with Burke is the I-90 barrier which separates Burke for the rest of Cleveland. Not quite sure any Burke park will do anything to lift neighborhoods on the other side of S. Marginal.

 

Also, when I talk to most visitors to Cleveland from the Mid-Atlantic they complain about the ugliness of the Cuyahoga valley in Cleveland south of the Innerbelt Bridge and not so much the lack of a lakefront neighborhood or park. I know that's a harder issue to tackle.

While I'm not excited about converting Burke to a park, there is a possibility that making it into a park could create a market for residential and commercial development near it or on part of it. Quality public placemaking has become an economic driver. But so are airports. So someone will have to do an alternatives analysis to show if the economic costs/benefits of the status quo vs. converting the airport to a park are worth it. Has one been done already? If no, I think it would be an interesting analysis.

^Dude, I was just kidding!

 

I’m a very serious person, haha. And it’s hard to sense jokes in black and white text. I love Cleveland, and would like to start roots here. I don’t want to live in the suburbs. Other cities along the Great Lakes have large dedicate green space along their lakefronts. Like Lincoln Park has 20+ million visitors a year. For some reason our region can’t see beyond what is currently. Sure we should fill in parking lots downtown. But we should also remove the giant ugly airport from our lake (and probably the stadium too). There’s no real benefit for the region as a whole to maintain Burke as it is now.

 

I agree that any future public expenditure that will cost hundreds of millions of dollars needs to be investigated thoroughly before we approve another tax increase or extension. There fact we can only use a $300 million piece of infrastructure (FE Stadium) for 10 days a year +/- 5 for concerts is ridiculous. Imagine only being able to use the Innerbelt Bridge for 10 days a year!

 

Burke Airport plays its role, corporate flights with ease of access to central city and University Circle, and also the Clinic Helicopters transporting ill patients (and body parts for transplant), uses it daily. These uses, help the economy, but have no real benefit to the community at large, so I see your point there.

 

Does anyone know the future layout of the dumping dikes the Army Core will fill with dredged material from the Cuyahoga? Burke Airport and the peninsula on Gordan Park are all essential dredge Cuyahoga muck. Future dikes will only be expansions of the existing ones, so one day could there be a "New" lakefront beyond the airport?

 

I wasn’t really “around” for the stadium debacle. To me in retrospect it would have seemingly made more sense to put it closer to the other stadiums or in the flats somewhere.

 

Ive been wondering if the new corridor connecting the area to I-490 and thus Hopkins will make it a more viable option for CC and UH. One of my friends is a transplant pharmacist for UH who uses Burke. However in normal drive time Hopkins currently less than 10 minutes further than Burke. Not sure if that would be any quicker than taking carnegie to the inner belt. Do they use helicopters or ambulances to transport organs?

 

Cleveland.com posted an article yesterday about a new federal spending package that will impact dredging and the army corps. I’m not sure how that will impact on the ongoing lawsuits and such. https://www.cleveland.com/expo/news/erry-2018/09/c83e44be807480/new-federal-spending-bill-cont.html#incart_river_mobile_index

 

“The bill contains money to fund dredging so boats can navigate Cleveland harbor, and language to block the Army Corps of Engineers from dumping the material it dredges from the channel into Lake Erie.”

 

The issue with the high school isn't the water, it's the street frontage.  I agree that Burke should be a park. 

 

There could have been other developments there, yes, but there could have been worse things. Burke would make a great park. The western end could be development where the terminal and hangers are.

 

Chicago had a lot going on in the lakefront areas even before Meigs closed. Closing Burke, to me, is not some sort of panacea which will transform Cleveland into Chicago. To create some form of an urban neighborhood attraction it will need to be nurtured well after the airport is closed.

 

The other issue with Burke is the I-90 barrier which separates Burke for the rest of Cleveland. Not quite sure any Burke park will do anything to lift neighborhoods on the other side of S. Marginal.

 

Also, when I talk to most visitors to Cleveland from the Mid-Atlantic they complain about the ugliness of the Cuyahoga valley in Cleveland south of the Innerbelt Bridge not so much the lakefront. I know that's a harder issue to tackle.

 

I don’t think Cleveland should aspire to be Chicago, but they have good examples. Even Buffalo and Miluake have lake front green space. Miluakee has some really great waterfront parks. The I-90 is a huge issue as far as access, but that could be remedied fairly simply. They’re already trying to improve pedestrian access. Along with Burke, parts of the Muni lots could be repurposed as well. I just think that we need to think long term regarding Burke and it’s potential redevelopment.

 

While I'm not excited about converting Burke to a park, there is a possibility that making it into a park could create a market for residential and commercial development near it or on part of it. Quality public placemaking has become an economic driver. But so are airports. So someone will have to do an alternatives analysis to show if the economic costs/benefits of the status quo vs. converting the airport to a park are worth it. Has one been done already? If no, I think it would be an interesting analysis.

 

Do you think that Burke as an airport is the best use for the space as it is? I don’t think that removing an airport with declining use will negatively impact Cleveland’s economy especially when a much larger airport that’s also underutilized is so close.

 

Jackson park - 500 acres.

 

Maybe you will be able to get the mayor's attention with this example.

 

We could dedicate a namesake for Jackson. I’m sure he’ll serve for another 4 terms at least.

 

Jackson Lakefront Dirtbike Park.  Gee I can't wait....

Do you think that Burke as an airport is the best use for the space as it is? I don’t think that removing an airport with declining use will negatively impact Cleveland’s economy especially when a much larger airport that’s also underutilized is so close.

 

 

Like it or not, there are businesses that depend on Burke Lakefront Airport. The city doesn't have to do anything more than what it is already doing to retain those businesses. And cities hate to be bothered with changes unless there's a compelling reason to do so.

 

It will cost a lot of money to deactivate an airport, remove its facilities, remediate it, and develop new park facilities there. If the benefits from removing an airport and creating a park exceed the costs of same, then it might just be worth doing. If I'm a city official, show me economic numbers and the political calculus, not emotional anecdotes.

Look at FEB. Wolstein has basically created an entirely new neighborhood downtown in underutilized space. And it’s still growing. Our city is stuck in the past and we have deep scars all over our city. Why keep perpetuating these wounds when we have so much potential? We don’t need Burke as a reliever airport because all airports combined have less traffic than Hopkins fifteen years ago. And we have a completely empty terminal on top of it. It’s a pipe dream for Burke to be re-utilized. Hopefully I’ll see it in my lifetime. But this is one of the many ongoing mistakes our city is making. It makes me not want to stay here. I live downtown and love it. But I’d rather live in more forward thinking city. I’ll stick it out for a few years, but you know. *shrug* just another well educated millennial wanting more from my city.

 

The region is already investing tens of millions in additional green space -- (1) Towpath and Lake Link trails to Wendy Park, (2) new Irishtown Bend and Canal Basin parks, (3) Red Line Greenway, (4) improvements to Edgewater, Huntington, and Euclid Beach, (5) and a potential massive expansion of Gordon Park east of Burke (if the stars align). And I guess the Metrohealth campus on West 25th, but that's more likely to be a grassy field than a "park". To say you are leaving Cleveland because they won't shut down Burke is just ridiculous. How about focusing that energy to push ODOT to re-align the Shoreway to reconnect Gordon Park.

 

https://www.greenribbonlakefront.org/projects/gordonpark/

 

Hey Mods, is there an "Ideas for Burke" thread? I'd like to contribute without getting the Axe :-)

Look at FEB. Wolstein has basically created an entirely new neighborhood downtown in underutilized space. And it’s still growing. Our city is stuck in the past and we have deep scars all over our city. Why keep perpetuating these wounds when we have so much potential? We don’t need Burke as a reliever airport because all airports combined have less traffic than Hopkins fifteen years ago. And we have a completely empty terminal on top of it. It’s a pipe dream for Burke to be re-utilized. Hopefully I’ll see it in my lifetime. But this is one of the many ongoing mistakes our city is making. It makes me not want to stay here. I live downtown and love it. But I’d rather live in more forward thinking city. I’ll stick it out for a few years, but you know. *shrug* just another well educated millennial wanting more from my city.

 

The region is already investing tens of millions in additional green space -- (1) Towpath and Lake Link trails to Wendy Park, (2) new Irishtown Bend and Canal Basin parks, (3) Red Line Greenway, (4) improvements to Edgewater, Huntington, and Euclid Beach, (5) and a potential massive expansion of Gordon Park east of Burke (if the stars align). And I guess the Metrohealth campus on West 25th, but that's more likely to be a grassy field than a "park". To say you are leaving Cleveland because they won't shut down Burke is just ridiculous. How about focusing that energy to push ODOT to re-align the Shoreway to reconnect Gordon Park.

 

https://www.greenribbonlakefront.org/projects/gordonpark/

 

I’m not leaving the city because of Burke. Burke is just one of countless mistakes the city has made (including the Shoreway mentioned) that has no viable or working solution so the city will just remain substandard.

Is Central Park the highest and best use for a huge chunk of uptown Manhattan? I would say so.

 

Cleveland's lakefront should have been reserved as parkland 100 years ago and it should still be reserved as parkland today. It was done in peer Great Lakes cities of Chicago and Milwaukee and it should have been done here and still should be.

 

I'm a little more sympathetic to Burke in general, I recognize the difficulty in closing an airport and the fact that we have other neighborhoods to develop, but at the end of the day, it should have been a park. At least a chunk of it closest to the lake.

 

Did the land Burke sits on even exist 100 years ago?

 

The question is not whether a park can be considered the highest and best use of urban space. You are right, Central Park is proof that it can.:) But is it the best use for Burke. Central Park is surrounded on all sides by millions of people within walking, biking, and transit distance. Tell me what similarities you see with it and Burke, which is bounded by the lake to the North and 1000 feet of highway and rail to the south. Maybe if we see the political will to downgrade to the Shoreway to an at-grade road, create a street grid to improve access and allow significant development, I'd be all for it.

Hey Mods, is there an "Ideas for Burke" thread? I'd like to contribute without getting the Axe :-)

 

Done.

Is Central Park the highest and best use for a huge chunk of uptown Manhattan? I would say so.

 

Cleveland's lakefront should have been reserved as parkland 100 years ago and it should still be reserved as parkland today. It was done in peer Great Lakes cities of Chicago and Milwaukee and it should have been done here and still should be.

 

I'm a little more sympathetic to Burke in general, I recognize the difficulty in closing an airport and the fact that we have other neighborhoods to develop, but at the end of the day, it should have been a park. At least a chunk of it closest to the lake.

 

Did the land Burke sits on even exist 100 years ago?

 

The question is not whether a park can be considered the highest and best use of urban space. You are right, Central Park is proof that it can.:) But is it the best use for Burke. Central Park is surrounded on all sides by millions of people within walking, biking, and transit distance. Tell me what similarities you see with it and Burke, which is bounded by the lake to the North and 1000 feet of highway and rail to the south. Maybe if we see the political will to downgrade to the Shoreway to an at-grade road, create a street grid to improve access and allow significant development, I'd be all for it.

 

The first elements of Central Park in NYC were built before the city had surrounded it. One can argue that the existence of Central Park caused the highest-value, highest-density residential development to rise around it. Here's a very cool, interactive map comparing Manhattan of 1836 to today.....

 

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/interactive-map-compares-new-york-city-1836-today-180947939/

 

 

Burke land didn't exist 80 years ago. This was shot during the Great Lakes Exposition of 1936-37....

 

I'd be glad to see Burke become a great small airport with spin-off development [see Geis's original proposals] with public access trails along the periphery. We could still have the air show and hopefully even the IndyCar race again.

 

But as a blank slate it's really exciting to imagine what can be accomplished.

 

At its heart, I would redevelop Burke as the largest wetland reclamation project in the state of Ohio. Ohio has lost something like 97 percent of its wetlands along the lake which has been disastrous for water quality. This mitigation would be dramatically symbolic of righting past wrongs, illuminating how we can move forward with more sustainable development practices and values. 

 

Now the exciting part. I'd reserve 25-30 percent of the site for "islands" of development with as much public access as possible, maybe mid rise residential and retail on the western part to compliment North Coast Harbor.

 

Maybe some high rise residential sprinkled throughout too, connected by a limited amount of raised streets and boardwalks.

 

Then at the eastern portion a low rise residential neighborhood. Think beach houses connected by a series of boardwalks.

 

It's fun to dream.

 

 

"Just turn Burke into a park"

 

Because every morning when the Mayor goes to work he stops off at the City of Cleveland Treasury Vault and does something like this:

 

 

We've got numerous park projects that are straining to find funds, but we keep harping on about this enormous swatch of land that (as KJP points out) did not even exist 80 years ago and what an enormous mistake it is to not put a beautiful park there. 

 

"Burke is prime land for development"

 

More or less prime than the Public Square lot or the WHD parking lots?  More or less prime thanIs it more or less prime than the land north of Cleveland Browns stadium, which is still completely unused?  Is it more or less prime than the Muni lots, which are 1,000 feet south of the airport, owned by the city, located directly on a transit line and are currently used for the incredibly high urban use of....parking and tailgating.

I'd be glad to see Burke become a great small airport with spin-off development [see Geis's original proposals] with public access trails along the periphery. We could still have the air show and hopefully even the IndyCar race again.

 

But as a blank slate it's really exciting to imagine what can be accomplished.

 

At its heart, I would redevelop Burke as the largest wetland reclamation project in the state of Ohio. Ohio has lost something like 97 percent of its wetlands along the lake which has been disastrous for water quality. This mitigation would be dramatically symbolic of righting past wrongs, illuminating how we can move forward with more sustainable development practices and values. 

 

Now the exciting part. I'd reserve 25-30 percent of the site for "islands" of development with as much public access as possible, maybe mid rise residential and retail on the western part to compliment North Coast Harbor.

 

Maybe some high rise residential sprinkled throughout too, connected by a limited amount of raised streets and boardwalks.

 

Then at the eastern portion a low rise residential neighborhood. Think beach houses connected by a series of boardwalks.

 

It's fun to dream.

 

This is fairly similar to how I've thought to re-develop it. People don't realize how important green space is beyond them just being "parks". Public space, but there's numerous other benefits especially as we've had issues with our Lake and rivers. Our tree canopy in Cleveland is around 20%, half of the minimum recommended for a city. Cinci is 40%. Pittsburgh is 40% with a goal of 60%. We have a lot of impervious surface issues and run-off issues. There's so many factors that go into having park spaces other than just having a place for people to go (although public space is great).

 

https://www.siemens.com/entry/cc/features/greencityindex_international/all/en/pdf/gci_report_summary.pdf

 

Cleveland is ranked one of the worst cities for green space. Bizarre to see so much hate on this forum from people about "useless green space".

 

Is Central Park the highest and best use for a huge chunk of uptown Manhattan? I would say so.

 

Cleveland's lakefront should have been reserved as parkland 100 years ago and it should still be reserved as parkland today. It was done in peer Great Lakes cities of Chicago and Milwaukee and it should have been done here and still should be.

 

I'm a little more sympathetic to Burke in general, I recognize the difficulty in closing an airport and the fact that we have other neighborhoods to develop, but at the end of the day, it should have been a park. At least a chunk of it closest to the lake.

 

Did the land Burke sits on even exist 100 years ago?

 

The question is not whether a park can be considered the highest and best use of urban space. You are right, Central Park is proof that it can.:) But is it the best use for Burke. Central Park is surrounded on all sides by millions of people within walking, biking, and transit distance. Tell me what similarities you see with it and Burke, which is bounded by the lake to the North and 1000 feet of highway and rail to the south. Maybe if we see the political will to downgrade to the Shoreway to an at-grade road, create a street grid to improve access and allow significant development, I'd be all for it.

 

When I say that Burke should have been park, I don't mean necessarily that specific piece of reclaimed land - what I mean is that the lakefront in Cleveland, from east to west, should have been reserved as parkland. You don't need NYC densities to get a good use of a park. Many low density oceanfront, riverfront, lakefront places reserve the waterfront for nature and parkland.

 

I mentioned Chicago and Milwaukee as examples, but you don't even have to go that far to see a successful lakefront park in a city with a lower density than NYC. All you have to do is look a few miles away, at about W. 78th St.

 

I agree with others who have said existing neighborhoods should be the priority. I recognize that this is no easy project nor is it an overnight project, but it should absolutely be the long-term vision, IMO.

When I say that Burke should have been park, I don't mean necessarily that specific piece of reclaimed land - what I mean is that the lakefront in Cleveland, from east to west, should have been reserved as parkland. You don't need NYC densities to get a good use of a park. Many low density oceanfront, riverfront, lakefront places reserve the waterfront for nature and parkland.

 

I mentioned Chicago and Milwaukee as examples, but you don't even have to go that far to see a successful lakefront park in a city with a lower density than NYC. All you have to do is look a few miles away, at about W. 78th St.

 

I agree with others who have said existing neighborhoods should be the priority. I recognize that this is no easy project nor is it an overnight project, but it should absolutely be the long-term vision, IMO.

 

Exactly. An airport should never have been placed on the Lakefront, regardless if land was existing or manufactured. We have swaths of parking lots, a highway, and an airport that has suffered from major decline along our lakefront.

 

https://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/433

 

“All of the vegetation and wildlife now present has occurred naturally, including more than 280 species of birds and several varieties of butterflies. Revitalization of the area occurred after the last fill deposit without human intervention (planting, seeding, or stocking). However, some grooming activity has enhanced the site for birding walks. Dike 14 is held under public trust by the State of Ohio, and is currently under lease to Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority. The Cleveland Lakefront Nature Preserve formally opened to the public on a daily basis in February 2012.“

 

 

 

"*shrug* just another well educated millennial wanting more from my city."

 

There's nothing wrong with wanting more, and Cleveland can certainly use fresh blood and new ideas, however:

 

1. Millennials aren't the first ever (or only) group to point out flawed developments and policies or that Burke could possibly be put to better use.

 

2. It's one thing to "want" something, but whenever I see posts like this (not just about Burke) - I rarely see any detailed and thoughtful plans of paying, implementing, executing, *or* understanding of the context and history of "why things are the way they are". Take a look at some of the more detailed transit posts by KJP[/member] and how he goes into detail about funding, implementation, etc.

 

3. As others have stated, Cuyahoga County airport in no way matches the capacity or role that Burke has (size of planes, proximity to downtown corporate interests, etc.)

 

4. Any suggestion of expanding Cuyahoga County airport would be shot down by the deep-pocketed and well connected surrounding communities.

 

Who knows - maybe eventually something better will come along at Burke, but it won't just happen because "we don't want it enough". 

When I say that Burke should have been park, I don't mean necessarily that specific piece of reclaimed land - what I mean is that the lakefront in Cleveland, from east to west, should have been reserved as parkland. You don't need NYC densities to get a good use of a park. Many low density oceanfront, riverfront, lakefront places reserve the waterfront for nature and parkland.

 

I mentioned Chicago and Milwaukee as examples, but you don't even have to go that far to see a successful lakefront park in a city with a lower density than NYC. All you have to do is look a few miles away, at about W. 78th St.

 

I agree with others who have said existing neighborhoods should be the priority. I recognize that this is no easy project nor is it an overnight project, but it should absolutely be the long-term vision, IMO.

 

Exactly. An airport should never have been placed on the Lakefront, regardless if land was existing or manufactured. We have swaths of parking lots, a highway, and an airport that has suffered from major decline along our lakefront.

 

https://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/433

 

“All of the vegetation and wildlife now present has occurred naturally, including more than 280 species of birds and several varieties of butterflies. Revitalization of the area occurred after the last fill deposit without human intervention (planting, seeding, or stocking). However, some grooming activity has enhanced the site for birding walks. Dike 14 is held under public trust by the State of Ohio, and is currently under lease to Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority. The Cleveland Lakefront Nature Preserve formally opened to the public on a daily basis in February 2012.“

 

Burke was built in '47. Cleveland was a dynamic and growing area at the time. There was a vision which Hopkins would reach capacity and Burke would be a reliever. Obviously things changed but to say leaders back then had no future vision is wrong. Cleveland was a different place then.

 

Not go to off subject but people complain and complain about Burke yet don't blink an eye that Cleveland used to have a beautiful river valley which was essentially destroyed for steel mills. Yet those mills made Cleveland. At the time it was cost effective to use the river as a resource so good-bye forested valley.

 

Without a proper context, second guessing past decisions is easy.

Burke was built in '47. Cleveland was a dynamic and growing area at the time. There was a vision which Hopkins would reach capacity and Burke would be a reliever. Obviously things changed but to say leaders back then had no vision is wrong. Cleveland was a different place then.

 

100% correct.  Aviation was also in it's mid-century golden age.  People were fascinated by airplanes and the possibilities they held.  The Cleveland National Air Races (held at then Cleveland Municipal-now Hopkins) were some of the largest in the world.  Aviation buffs from around the world attended, and the international press descended on Cleveland.  Years later when the races stopped and replaced by the Cleveland National Airshow, the decision to use Burke had some roots in safety, as air race participants had crashed into populated areas in the past. 

 

https://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/151

Until all of the parking lots downtown, the flats, the north coast harbor area, the Superior Arts District, and Asiantown are all filled in, I can't believe that repurposing Burke is a good idea.  I think public greenspace is fantastic, but a park would not have the same economic impact as the airport.  According to the Ohio DOT, Burke had an economic impact of $106.9MM and supported 953 full-time jobs.  I just don't think a park would produce the same benefits.  Eventually, sure.  But, just not yet. 

 

I guess I can't post external links on here yet, but just search "economic impact of Burke Lakefront airport" and it's the first link to come up.

Once downtown and its surrounding neighborhoods are bursting at the seams with high-rises and it becomes cost-effective to shut down Burke and convert even a portion of it to development, it's going to be a lot cheaper and quicker to develop the parking craters downtown and nearby. And doing that is no easy task by itself, as we all know. Development is a mine field. Take it one step at a time or you'll get a stopped by a nasty surprise.

Exactly. An airport should never have been placed on the Lakefront,

 

When BKL was dreamed up, Cleveland was home to almost 30 of the Fortune 500, five Fortune financials and 3 Fortune Transports and they were mostly headquartered downtown. Corporate flying was particularly important to the railroads (C&O, Nickel Plate, and Erie), whose biz development people needed to visit lots of places with no airline service. In the 50s and 60s there was also a good bit of commercial airline service, enough that Continental wanted it barred before they would open a hub at CLE.  Additionally, before the Interstates came along, getting to CLE or CGF from downtown was not nearly as easy as it is today.

 

So let's not assume Burke never made sense. It wasn't an 'if you build it, they will come' project.

14 hours ago, Cleburger said:

Must have been a great trip.  How long did it take you? 

It was pretty awesome, granted the Canadian side is a bit more boring than I had hoped lol (they're smart in their road design and actually plan for erosion/don't build along the lake that much, so it's a lot of riding through fields and wind turbines). Irregardless, I'd still totally recommend it just to see what the other side of the lake is all about.

 

It took about 8 days (and full disclosure, I went across through the islands [Pelee-Leamington] to save some time and headache at the Detroit-Windsor crossing.

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.

13 hours ago, MyTwoSense said:

Only if it's packaged with a new commuter rail terminal. 

If driving by car on a ferry one wouldn't need rail.

50 minutes ago, PaxtonMarley said:

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.

The most valuable land in Cleveland:

1) a stadium used 10 days per year

2) piles of limestone

3) an airport used mostly for flight lessons

4) commercial train tracks for trains that could easily be rerouted

 

I agree that the lakefront is isolated but I think we need to undo the mistakes of the past at some point. To me the lakefront is like the Cavaliers having LeBron James and making him sit on the bench. Our greatest asset that we could build upon is being held hostage by limited use infrastructure.

Mods, isn’t there already a ferry thread in the transportation section and isn’t there a fantasy/SIM city development thread to move all of this discussion to? None of it is about current Cleveland development, but has a place in other threads. 

49 minutes ago, jeremyck01 said:

Mods, isn’t there already a ferry thread in the transportation section and isn’t there a fantasy/SIM city development thread to move all of this discussion to? None of it is about current Cleveland development, but has a place in other threads. 

 

Here:

 

On 7/9/2019 at 1:21 PM, GISguy said:

Parade route from my office roof

I've never seen 9th street look so good!

8 hours ago, Cleveland Trust said:

In re: Ferry proposal

 

New Cleveland Neighborhood, North Burke or NoBu

 

1) get new Mayor

2) close Burke Airport 

3) use Fred Toguchi designed MCM terminal for Ferry terminal

4) start small, 2 round trips a day on weekends

5) develop planned community around Burke old runway with link to Blue Line transit 

6) Gold Rush!

Why is closing Burke so important considering, when there is still a lot of UNDEVELOPED land south of Marginal/Lakeside??

If Burke is closed, what can be built on it?

What can be built without major investment, considering the history of the airport land?

The number of flights must then be absorbed into Hopkins.  Although Hopkins, at the current time, isn't operating at capacity, these smaller jets do have affects on commercial flights and operations.

No "Fake/Faux neighborhood names"

 

Close muni and the covered lot, yes.

Close the FBI Office and relocate, yes

Close the PD Building and relocated in office Bldg. with ground level integrations.

Relocated the County Office

Relocate Cleveland Water works

Relocated WKYC.  Put the TV and PD in a "international media center building"

Extend train to east 55th.

 

That entire area from north of Lakeside to St. Clair and from 9th to 18th is ripe for residential development.