8 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

Half the GCRTA board has to live in Cleveland, but only half.   More often it's 5 to 5, 6-4 at the most.   

 

MBTA's  probably a better scenario than what we have.   That many suburban riders valuing transit.

Ya I only typed out half of my thought like I always do. I just meant with big projects like they listed, I think we'd end up with 3 stadiums/arenas surrounded by 60 acres of parking that would be completely catered to the suburban and rural crowds. Cleveland wouldn't end up with much say or have it be even minimally beneficial to the city, although I guess with this plan it wouldn't end up with us in deep debt from it. I also have hopes that The Jake can still be around in 2094 because it's a great stadium that's look will age well.

 

 

MBTA was probably a bad example to use here, but I was just reading about all of their current issues yesterday so it was fresh on my mind haha. I would absolutely be on board with a multi-county regional rail and transit org here. I have a spreadsheet with .0025, .00375, and .005 % sales taxes for Cuyahoga, Lake, Lorain, Summit, and Stark counties to fund it, hope for a % of fed matching and what I'd build. But that's a topic for a different thread. 

8 hours ago, LlamaLawyer said:

On principle, I strongly, strongly reject the idea of this "special commission." I love voluntary regionalism, e.g. city governments working together. There is also some regionalism that the people want but local government gets in the way of (e.g. East Cleveland merger; I am sure almost all people in EC want it). That kind of regionalism is good too, and we should be willing to take power from ineffective city government and give it to the people.

 

But, on principle, I don't like the idea of forcing exurban and rural communities to join in urban projects. I really doubt that the people of Ashtabula County want to pay extra sales tax for the rest of their lives in order to pay for a stadium and airport in Cleveland. I don't want to have to take into account the preferences of someone in Ashtabula or Lake County about how the Cleveland lakefront is going to be used. They can do whatever they want with their own lakefronts (and pay for it, without asking Cleveland for help), and we can do whatever we want with our own lakefront (and pay for it, without asking the exurbs for help).

Those people in Ashtabula use the same sport stadiums, airport, waterfronts, as everyone else in this region. If you want to consider yourself "greater Cleveland" then you should be participating in the cost of running and maintaining those assets you choose to enjoy 

14 hours ago, PlanCleveland said:

Ya I only typed out half of my thought like I always do. I just meant with big projects like they listed, I think we'd end up with 3 stadiums/arenas surrounded by 60 acres of parking that would be completely catered to the suburban and rural crowds. Cleveland wouldn't end up with much say or have it be even minimally beneficial to the city, although I guess with this plan it wouldn't end up with us in deep debt from it. I also have hopes that The Jake can still be around in 2094 because it's a great stadium that's look will age well.

 

 

MBTA was probably a bad example to use here, but I was just reading about all of their current issues yesterday so it was fresh on my mind haha. I would absolutely be on board with a multi-county regional rail and transit org here. I have a spreadsheet with .0025, .00375, and .005 % sales taxes for Cuyahoga, Lake, Lorain, Summit, and Stark counties to fund it, hope for a % of fed matching and what I'd build. But that's a topic for a different thread. 

 

Let's keep in mind that Cleveland residents are 1/3 of the population of the county and 1/6 the population of the metro.   

Here are four NS track charts -- two for the northernmost eight miles of the Cleveland Line from Yellow Creek, OH through Ravenna and Hudson into Cleveland and two for the first nine miles of the Chicago Line heading west out of Cleveland via West Park and Berea. The two pages of Cleveland Line maps meet the two pages of Chicago Line maps meet at Drawbridge  There's a lot of information in these including south is at the top of the charts, the long vertical lines showing mileposts (RD115-RD123 for the Cleveland Line, CD182-CD190 for the Chicago Line), overpasses/underpasses/at-grade crossings, trackside signal locations and the directions they face for which track, amount of freight tonnage in million gross tons (MGT) for each main track in the prior year, when the rails were last replaced, the degree of track curvature, maximum track speed for freight trains and, across the bottom is a line showing the grade of the trackage including percentage of the gradient (+0.28 percent uphill from the lower milepost, -0.77 percent downhill from the lower milepost, etc). The portion of the NS Chicago Line over Lake Shore Boulevard (West Shoreway) had a gradient of 0.91 percent which is pretty steep for a mainline freight railroad. You can see that most of the grade for the Cleveland Line coming in from the southeast side starts at the Harvard-Broadway area and continues for about seven miles to near the connection (now a continuous track through) to the Chicago Line. From Drawbridge west, shown on the Chicago Line track charts, the tracks go uphill steeply until the West 140th-Lorain area and flatten out a bit, but are still going uphill at 0.13-0.32 percent.

 

The point of these maps show that, in order for a rail tunnel to be built, the tracks need to climb from a tunnel floor of about 500- to 510-foot elevation below the Cuyahoga River to an elevation of 775-780 in the vicinity of the West Park RTA station at a 1 percent grade. That's pretty steep. To back it off to 0.75 percent would mean starting the grade just north of Puritas Avenue and excavating a new right of way from there. On the southeast side, the tracks at Harvard/Broadway are at an elevation of 795. To drop from that to 500- to 510-foot elevation below the river in 40,600 feet means a gradient of 0,71 percent which is pretty good. Since the current gradient is uneven, there would still have to be excavating done and probably straightening of the many curves since curves increase the effective gradient and cant deficiency forces on trains.

Not the lakefront development we normally cover in this thread, but nonetheless important....

 

 

just in case this has not been posted...

 

https://lp.constantcontactpages.com/ev/reg/78wz3qa/lp/d05cff20-2efd-4ef4-b085-beba3411cbdd

I have, unfortunately, just become too cynical when it comes to the lakefront after all these years.  How about a "festive" groundbreaking of something.

Honestly, they’ve talked more about this project than….., well, any other thing….ever, in the history of constructing things. 

2 minutes ago, CleveFan said:

Honestly, they’ve talked more about this project than….., well, any other thing….ever, in the history of constructing things. 

At least it seems to be a top focus for them. I'm sure the main obstacle getting in their way right now is the stadium. 

5 hours ago, lockdog said:

just in case this has not been posted...

 

https://lp.constantcontactpages.com/ev/reg/78wz3qa/lp/d05cff20-2efd-4ef4-b085-beba3411cbdd

Dear god, don't let them say "transformative", or this project will be on hold yet another century.

On 6/4/2024 at 2:50 PM, Luke_S said:

Cleveland nearing decision on whether to close Burke Lakefront Airport

by Nick Castele and Mark Naymik

June 4, 2024

 

 

https://signalcleveland.org/cleveland-nearing-decision-on-whether-to-close-burke-lakefront-airport/

So it’s been almost two months… what’s going on with the Burke announcement??

Damn, I forgot to post the article about it closing and Disney World relocating there. My bad.

On 7/27/2024 at 6:18 PM, TBideon said:

Damn, I forgot to post the article about it closing and Disney World relocating there. My bad.

Actually, a mini amusement park might not be a bad idea, maybe similar to San Diego's Belmont Park.

16 minutes ago, LibertyBlvd said:

Actually, a mini amusement park might not be a bad idea, maybe similar to San Diego's Belmont Park.

Not a bad idea but San Diego weather does allow for 365 day amusement park operations. I'd be happy to see a lot of park land (managed by Metorparks) with trails and other recreation, surrounded by housing and retail uses. 

^ True, of course Cedar Point has been quite successful despite < 365 day operations.

On 7/27/2024 at 1:10 PM, TBideon said:

Dear god, don't let them say "transformative", or this project will be on hold yet another century.

At least they didnt say "Iconic" lol

On 7/27/2024 at 5:57 PM, Henke said:

So it’s been almost two months… what’s going on with the Burke announcement??

 

There are massive diggers only 200 yards from the runways. How about we pool our money and pay someone to go Mayor Daly and just dig up the runway a little? Make the city's decision for them 

Just now, YABO713 said:

 

There are massive diggers only 200 yards from the runways. How about we pool our money and pay someone to go Mayor Daly and just dig up the runway a little? Make the city's decision for them 

Nah, we need another consultant to review this for at least 10 more years. 

1 hour ago, freefourur said:

Not a bad idea but San Diego weather does allow for 365 day amusement park operations. I'd be happy to see a lot of park land (managed by Metorparks) with trails and other recreation, surrounded by housing and retail uses. 

 

If the Browns move to the Burke land or Brook Park, what would be the thoughts on the old Browns Stadium becoming a large Convention Center resort like Kalahari or Gaylord as the anchor to the lakefront plan, connecting to the convention center on the other end of the land bridge? These resorts do usually have a large indoor amusement or water park aspect. 

 

Too big and garish for the lakefront? Would something like that fit better on the Burke land next to a new domed stadium, allowing the current Browns stadium to be all public amenities/retail?

Edited July 29, 2024Jul 29 by daybreaker

2 hours ago, daybreaker said:

 

If the Browns move to the Burke land or Brook Park, what would be the thoughts on the old Browns Stadium becoming a large Convention Center resort like Kalahari or Gaylord as the anchor to the lakefront plan, connecting to the convention center on the other end of the land bridge? These resorts do usually have a large indoor amusement or water park aspect. 

 

Too big and garish for the lakefront? Would something like that fit better on the Burke land next to a new domed stadium, allowing the current Browns stadium to be all public amenities/retail?

Now I'm thinking about being able to get to an indoor waterpark on the rapid during the winter. This idea wins, and I won't listen to any more ideas. 

 

Although too big for Cleveland, a smaller version of the Gaylord National with it's giant atrium would be amazing on the lakefront. 

Edited July 29, 2024Jul 29 by PlanCleveland

2 hours ago, daybreaker said:

 

If the Browns move to the Burke land or Brook Park, what would be the thoughts on the old Browns Stadium becoming a large Convention Center resort like Kalahari or Gaylord as the anchor to the lakefront plan, connecting to the convention center on the other end of the land bridge? These resorts do usually have a large indoor amusement or water park aspect. 

 

Too big and garish for the lakefront? Would something like that fit better on the Burke land next to a new domed stadium, allowing the current Browns stadium to be all public amenities/retail?

This seems like swinging for a home run. I'd personally rather have multiple doubles in that space. I understand the urge to fill a big open space with a single use because it's so hard to assemble this much contiguous land in the downtown core, but in this instance I'd argue a more organic feeling mix of smaller uses will be better. 

 

If the Browns are definitely moving, I'd say the best thing is to tweak the lakefront plan accounting for the new real estate. With more land we can have both more development and more public space. I'd like to see the area transition from mostly public space to mostly development as you move away from the lake. Ideally building heights would match creating a nice descending effect and maximizing lake views. 

 

Cleveland hosting lakefront Future Forum Aug. 5
By Ken Prendergast / July 30, 2024

 

Mayor Justin Bibb and his lakefront development team are inviting the community to a Lakefront Future Forum scheduled for from 4-7 p.m. Aug. 5, on Mall C in Downtown Cleveland. The site is located between City Hall, 601 Lakeside Ave. and the old Cuyahoga County Courthouse, across from the entrance of the Huntington Convention Center of Cleveland.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2024/07/30/cleveland-hosting-lakefront-future-forum-aug-5/

I'm just really tired at this point. All the studies, forums, surveys, visions, public input has still led to zero. I'll always keep one eye on this development but my interest has been greatly reduced and definitely shifted to the more promising and ready Riverfront. 

And just think, the Empire State building was built in 9 months. The Erie Canal took 8 years. The Hoover Dam 5 years. 4.5 years for the Golden Gate bridge.

 

Meanwhile we're in decade 4 or 5 (6? 7?) with the lakefront plans, and there has been NOTHING.

And whatever comes from these meetings will be impacted by whatever the Browns decide. So what exactly is the point of holding public meetings now when the stadium may or may not be on the lakefront in the future? 

 

Citizen engagement?

Any chance this includes an update on the Burke study? 

2 hours ago, TBideon said:

And just think, the Empire State building was built in 9 months. The Erie Canal took 8 years. The Hoover Dam 5 years. 4.5 years for the Golden Gate bridge.

 

Meanwhile we're in decade 4 or 5 (6? 7?) with the lakefront plans, and there has been NOTHING.

 

5 men died building the ESB.   1,000 building the Erie Canal.  Hoover Dam took 96, the Golden Gate Bridge 11.

 

Things don't happen that quickly anymore, especially in this regulatory environment.

Cities are tombs, I get that. But these endlessly delayed projects and decades of stagnations make it very hard to be optimistic about progress. Especially as it pertains to Lake Erie.

23 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

5 men died building the ESB.   1,000 building the Erie Canal.  Hoover Dam took 96, the Golden Gate Bridge 11.

 

Things don't happen that quickly anymore, especially in this regulatory environment.

Wow, I didn't realize Erie Canal had such a high death toll. I assume it was a lot of disease. 

 

I am glad we do have regulations in place which makes construction projects safer. I say that as the child of a retired Laborer. 

7 hours ago, cadmen said:

And whatever comes from these meetings will be impacted by whatever the Browns decide. So what exactly is the point of holding public meetings now when the stadium may or may not be on the lakefront in the future? 

 

Citizen engagement?

 

They've applied for federal funding, which is where the money is, for elements of the project that don't depend on the stadium being there. The trade off is that it's very time-consuming and feds require lots of public meetings, public engagement, stakeholder reviews, etc. Remember that the AVERAGE time it takes for a federally funded transportation project to go from idea to ribbon cutting is 10 years. That's the average. Opportunity Corridor took longer (15 years). So did the HealthLine (23 years). 

2 hours ago, TBideon said:

And just think, the Empire State building was built in 9 months. The Erie Canal took 8 years. The Hoover Dam 5 years. 4.5 years for the Golden Gate bridge.

 

Meanwhile we're in decade 4 or 5 (6? 7?) with the lakefront plans, and there has been NOTHING.

I feel the frustration, but this is pretty disingenuous. Things like the Rock Hall, Voinovich Park, and the Science Center came out of those earlier lakefront plans. 

 

For example, I have a physical copy of the Mayor Voinovich plan from 1987 and the entire plan is to create North Coast Harbor. We have that now, that plan was completed. 
 

I think the biggest issue was the slowdown in momentum after Mayor Campbell and Chris Ronayne left office in 2006.

Frank Jackson didn’t really accomplish very much on the lakefront following that, despite releasing a plan of his own in 2011. 
 

The 2011 plan actually shares a decent amount with Bibb’s, although it has more of a focus on residential development north of the stadium (to the tune of 2.2 Mil sq Ft)
 

Frank Jackson Plan

 

Jane Campbell Plan

 

The fact is, these plans do produce results, even if Jackson’s most recent plan was disappointing. I’m optimistic we will see some big changes if Bibb wins another term. 

 

"Things like the Rock Hall, Voinovich Park, and the Science Center came out of those earlier lakefront plans." 

 

Fair point. 

 

19 minutes ago, Henke said:

 

The fact is, these plans do produce results, even if Jackson’s most recent plan was disappointing. I’m optimistic we will see some big changes if Bibb wins another term. 

 

 

The smart part about what they're doing includes the creation of the North Coast Waterfront Development Authority to provide continuity of work from one administration to the next. 

1 hour ago, freefourur said:

Wow, I didn't realize Erie Canal had such a high death toll. I assume it was a lot of disease. 

From Google search:

 "The majority of these deaths were attributed to frequent canal collapses, drowning, careless use of gunpowder and diseases from the swampy place."

1 hour ago, freefourur said:

Wow, I didn't realize Erie Canal had such a high death toll. I assume it was a lot of disease. 

 

I am glad we do have regulations in place which makes construction projects safer. I say that as the child of a retired Laborer. 

 

My dad was one of the first full time environmental/safety managers (for Ferro).   He was informally offered a high position at OSHA late in the Carter Administration when they were trying to clean up their act (he might have replaced one of the Chicago 7).  The rules then were often ridiculous and self contradictory, but neither he nor I (I've mostly been in quality but have done enviro and safety part time) would say they are unnecessary.   I'm not a purist libertarian.

1 hour ago, Henke said:

I feel the frustration, but this is pretty disingenuous. Things like the Rock Hall, Voinovich Park, and the Science Center came out of those earlier lakefront plans. 

 

For example, I have a physical copy of the Mayor Voinovich plan from 1987 and the entire plan is to create North Coast Harbor. We have that now, that plan was completed. 
 

I think the biggest issue was the slowdown in momentum after Mayor Campbell and Chris Ronayne left office in 2006.

Frank Jackson didn’t really accomplish very much on the lakefront following that, despite releasing a plan of his own in 2011. 
 

The 2011 plan actually shares a decent amount with Bibb’s, although it has more of a focus on residential development north of the stadium (to the tune of 2.2 Mil sq Ft)
 

Frank Jackson Plan

 

Jane Campbell Plan

 

The fact is, these plans do produce results, even if Jackson’s most recent plan was disappointing. I’m optimistic we will see some big changes if Bibb wins another term. 

 

 

At the risk of getting in more trouble around here, Bibb's struck me as the kind of politician that can plan up a storm but isn't much for implementation.

52 minutes ago, LibertyBlvd said:

From Google search:

 "The majority of these deaths were attributed to frequent canal collapses, drowning, careless use of gunpowder and diseases from the swampy place."

 

25,000 died building the Panama Canal.

2 hours ago, E Rocc said:

 

5 men died building the ESB.   1,000 building the Erie Canal.  Hoover Dam took 96, the Golden Gate Bridge 11.

 

Things don't happen that quickly anymore, especially in this regulatory environment.

 

I saw folk singer Lee Murdock perform this song on the William Mather many many lakefront plans ago. I'll never forget the experience. 

 

The Illinois and Michigan Canal

On the hill behind the chapel, in the perish of Saint James
Lies weathered, worn, and tangled graves of mostly Irish names
The faded flagstone monuments bare witness to a dream
That a hundred fifty years ago, no one could have foreseen

In the young town of Chicago, on the plains of Illinois
The I&M commission brought in desperate men and boys
To have them build a great canal, and change the river's flow
To wed the great lakes water with the Gulf of Mexico

They came from ports in Galway, from Cork, and Baltimore
On the promise of more money than they’d ever known before
To carve a new beginning in the land of liberty
They waved goodbye and sailed across the sea

[Chorus]
So bid farewell to famine, it's off to Amerikay
To work as a navigator for ninety cents a day
And hope to dig a fortune by the time they reach La Salle,
On the Illinois and Michigan Canal

Ten thousand Irish navvies spread out across the land
And they picked their way through the mud and clay, and they moved it all by hand
Well the tyrant canal foreman worked poor Patty without pay
As he dreamed about his family in a country far away

 

But empty handed promises were all he came to know
With food and tools in short supply and money running low
Though many tried, thousands died longing to be free
Where the wild blue stemmed grasses grew as far as you could see

And the coming of the railway made their efforts obsolete
For it ran along the banks before the digging was complete
But the locks were finally opened and they tallied up the cost
With no mention of how many lives were lost

 

And now the locks and boatyards, the barges and the scows
And the clabbered shacks of Corktown where the Navvys used to house
From Bridgeport to Le Salle and every town along the way
Only remnants of that great canal can still be seen today

Neglected through the ages, her water will not flow
Where mule teams hauled the river boats, now wild poplar grow
Where canaling was a way of life that I might have tried myself
It’s now buried in the pages of some book upon the shelf

 

And in the corner of the graveyard, in the parish of Saint James
Lies a poor old Irish navvy who helped buy into these claims
Who fled the great oppression just to build himself a home
Now it's the only piece of sod he'll ever own

4 hours ago, KJP said:

 

They've applied for federal funding, which is where the money is, for elements of the project that don't depend on the stadium being there. The trade off is that it's very time-consuming and feds require lots of public meetings, public engagement, stakeholder reviews, etc. Remember that the AVERAVE time it takes for a federally funded transportation project to go from idea to ribbon cutting is 10 years. That's the average. Opportunity Corridor took longer (15 years). So did the HealthLine (23 years). 

 

As someone who spent a lifetime working within the world of FDA rules and regulations l can appreciate(?) the necessity of compliance in dealing with federal agencies. Ft l So we are required to have public engagement among other things. The process will be so long whatever comes out of these meetings will mostly be irrelevant by the time a plan is formulated. That's the government for you. 

 

Democracy is REALLY messy.

42 minutes ago, cadmen said:

 

As someone who spent a lifetime working within the world of FDA rules and regulations l can appreciate(?) the necessity of compliance in dealing with federal agencies. Ft l So we are required to have public engagement among other things. The process will be so long whatever comes out of these meetings will mostly be irrelevant by the time a plan is formulated. That's the government for you. 

 

Democracy is REALLY messy.

And in the case of Cleveland, the addition of many other government and private entities makes it even more messy in trying to correct 100 years of Lakefront mistakes (depending on who you ask).   There's the Feds, the FAA, the county, the port, the city, the Browns, Haslam, etc etc etc.   

Plus the scale of it is fairly massive.   Meigs field in Chicago was roughly 80 acres.  Burke Lakefront is 450!   Plus all the additional acreage of the port and the stadium site.   It's no small undertaking. 

13 hours ago, Cleburger said:

And in the case of Cleveland, the addition of many other government and private entities makes it even more messy in trying to correct 100 years of Lakefront mistakes (depending on who you ask).   There's the Feds, the FAA, the county, the port, the city, the Browns, Haslam, etc etc etc.   

Plus the scale of it is fairly massive.   Meigs field in Chicago was roughly 80 acres.  Burke Lakefront is 450!   Plus all the additional acreage of the port and the stadium site.   It's no small undertaking. 

 

IIRC the FAA gave birth to porcupines (breech presentation) over Daley's grossly illegal vandalism of Meigs.    I felt then he should have done prison time and still do.   I believe the rules changed dramatically to make is more difficult to take fields out of service.

I just watched a video on Meigs and Daley destroying it (ITSHISTORY channel) and the similarities to both airports in terms of usage is strikingly similar. As far a Daley he essentially leveraged the 9/11 terrorism attacks as his reasoning for closing, which soften the blow when it came to public reaction. He also took an ask for forgiveness later approach. The FAA fined them $1 Million(?) and a couple of other penalties but nothing extremely serious (According to the video). 

21 minutes ago, MyPhoneDead said:

I just watched a video on Meigs and Daley destroying it (ITSHISTORY channel) and the similarities to both airports in terms of usage is strikingly similar. As far a Daley he essentially leveraged the 9/11 terrorism attacks as his reasoning for closing, which soften the blow when it came to public reaction. He also took an ask for forgiveness later approach. The FAA fined them $1 Million(?) and a couple of other penalties but nothing extremely serious (According to the video). 

They also had to fly a Boeing 727 (and many other aircraft) off the field from a taxiway.    The owners of the aircraft should have all filed a class action suit against the city for putting their aircraft in jeopardy by stranding them there. 

 

It's also very much apples to oranges.   Chicago had very little buildable or public space in the central business district.   Cleveland has a sea of surface lots and vacant, weed-strewn land.  

Cleveland needs to maximize Burke while it can and focus on getting the rest of the waterfront land filled up (Scranton, Bedrock Tower City etc).  Once everything is exhausted, we can turn our attention to Burke.  I don't see that happening for 100+ years.  

32 minutes ago, MyPhoneDead said:

I just watched a video on Meigs and Daley destroying it (ITSHISTORY channel) and the similarities to both airports in terms of usage is strikingly similar. As far a Daley he essentially leveraged the 9/11 terrorism attacks as his reasoning for closing, which soften the blow when it came to public reaction. He also took an ask for forgiveness later approach. The FAA fined them $1 Million(?) and a couple of other penalties but nothing extremely serious (According to the video). 

And god bless Daley for it, though the park is highly underutilized and there are significant erosion issues. That aside, it's worth a day visit and picnic, even has a restaurant by a little beach. That penninsula is a big chunk of land along the lake that people can enjoy.

 

8 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

It's also very much apples to oranges.   Chicago had very little buildable or public space in the central business district.   Cleveland has a sea of surface lots and vacant, weed-strewn land.  

I don't know if it qualifies as CBD, but there is a vacant 78 acres parcel connecting Chicago's South Loop to Chinatown. Might as well be another Warehouse District Project with that project's stagnation despite all the bulls**t presentations in the world. Huzzah, a road no one can use has been built!

9 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

They also had to fly a Boeing 727 (and many other aircraft) off the field from a taxiway.    The owners of the aircraft should have all filed a class action suit against the city for putting their aircraft in jeopardy by stranding them there. 

 

It's also very much apples to oranges.   Chicago had very little buildable or public space in the central business district.   Cleveland has a sea of surface lots and vacant, weed-strewn land.  

Cleveland needs to maximize Burke while it can and focus on getting the rest of the waterfront land filled up (Scranton, Bedrock Tower City etc).  Once everything is exhausted, we can turn our attention to Burke.  I don't see that happening for 100+ years.  

This is a great analysis, but there's one problem with it, Chicago didn't tear up the runway to develop it. That land was turned into a park. I actually fully agree with your argument if the assumption is that Burke would be primarily used for development. We have too much vacant land to bother developing Burke. What we don't have, and probably will never see another opportunity for again is a Metroparks Reservation sized park in a walk/bike able distance from downtown. Would it be perfect, no, but to me, that's the real argument for closing Burke. Development can happen anywhere, and infill should be prioritized anyway. We won't find another opportunity for a lakefront destination park. 

Gordon Park is barely a mile east of Burke and there are plans to expand and update it. If we have to spend political capital somewhere I'd rather it go to realigning the Shoreway to make Gordon Park a better space than shutting Burke for more greenspace.

22 minutes ago, Mendo said:

Gordon Park is barely a mile east of Burke and there are plans to expand and update it. If we have to spend political capital somewhere I'd rather it go to realigning the Shoreway to make Gordon Park a better space than shutting Burke for more greenspace.

This is a very misleading way to parse the data. Burke is 3/4 mile from public square Gordon Park is 3 3/4 mile from public square. (Both as the crow flies.) One is accessible from downtown the other isn't. 

I'd argue the city would benefit a great deal more from a proper Burke park/complex than Gordon. I-90 and CSX just butchered the poor park, and it's so far away from downtown and inaccessible without a car that it would only benefit the locals and boaters a little, not region. That $8 million bandaid is a pittance.

 

Mind you, I don't think Burke is going anywhere in our lifetimes, and even if it miraculously did, it isn't like funding and tenants would line up to any degree unless we start getting enormous international capital from Saudis, Russians, Chinese, etc. Billions. Maybe tens of billions.

1 hour ago, Cleburger said:

They also had to fly a Boeing 727 (and many other aircraft) off the field from a taxiway.    The owners of the aircraft should have all filed a class action suit against the city for putting their aircraft in jeopardy by stranding them there. 

 

It's also very much apples to oranges.   Chicago had very little buildable or public space in the central business district.   Cleveland has a sea of surface lots and vacant, weed-strewn land.  

Cleveland needs to maximize Burke while it can and focus on getting the rest of the waterfront land filled up (Scranton, Bedrock Tower City etc).  Once everything is exhausted, we can turn our attention to Burke.  I don't see that happening for 100+ years.  

With people saying that it takes 20+ years for it to fully close an airport (properly) I feel that we need to start the process as soon as we can. 

Say we did though. What on earth would Cleveland even do with those 450 acres? We can't even fill out the Flats to any significant degree, so I question how badly people really want to live, work, and recreate by water in this region.

 

There would have to be a billionaires' consortium in place with concrete plans -- hell, with actual concrete -- with longterm, mutli-generational funding and tenant committments, and we all know that isn't happening. Hell, the Saudis have unlimited money and even they're vastly scaling back the Line project. 

 

Really, realistically, unfortunately, lakefront development just isn't happening at Burke. This whole discussion is fun, but we might as well be arguing if the earth is flat. 

 

 

Edited July 31, 2024Jul 31 by TBideon