Mayor Justin Bibb is taking steps toward closing Burke Lakefront Airport. 

Cleveland City Hall is releasing two studies that lay the groundwork for shutting down the airport, which occupies prime downtown land on the Lake Erie shoreline. 

The administration hasn’t made a final decision, said Jeff Epstein, the city’s chief of integrated development. But he acknowledged that City Hall is leaning toward closure.

“The mayor would like to close Burke if it is feasible,” Epstein said in an interview. “We believe that these reports give us a lot more information to confirm that it is feasible, but we still have additional information before we say, ‘Yes, we’re going.’”

The first study argues the economic hit of closing Burke is small and explores the benefits of redeveloping the land. The second study lays out multiple paths for shuttering the airport.

The city has shared the results of both studies with the Federal Aviation Administration, which has the power to approve or deny an application to close Burke. If the FAA doesn’t bless a closure, Cleveland has another option: ask Congress for the OK to shut down Burke.

The 245-acre Burke serves private aircraft and training flights. Major hospitals use Burke to move patients and organs for transplant. The airport also leases office space to other businesses, including a law firm and a cryptocurrency mining company. 

Most people can enjoy Burke’s lakefront views only once a year, Epstein pointed out – during the Cleveland National Air Show. About a third of the economic hit from closing Burke would come from the loss of the air show, the impact study found.

“This is a, I would say, huge swathe of land that the vast majority of the public can only go there Labor Day weekend,” he said. 

Burke generates $76.6 million a year in direct economic impact, one of the studies found. Epstein characterized the dollar figure as “relatively small.” If Cleveland closed Burke, $45.1 million of that economic activity would remain in the city and more would remain in Cuyahoga County, the study said.

If Burke closed, flights – including medical transport – could relocate to the Cuyahoga County airport in Richmond Heights or to the much larger Cleveland-Hopkins International Airport, the economic impact study said. Even so, the study warned that redeveloping Burke will take time.

“Closing BKL does not present a significant risk to Cleveland’s economy or fiscal standing,” the report said, using the airline industry’s three-letter name for Burke. “However, the medium-term economic upside to closing BKL is modest, and the challenges of developing structures presents significant risks that must be mitigated due to the subsurface conditions of the site.”

Airport could be future site of housing and hotel

The economic impact study gamed out the potential windfalls of three options for Burke’s future. The city could turn the airport into a park and indoor youth sports facility. It could pursue “maximum development” by building housing and retail on the site. The third option is to leave the airport open while developing a hotel on a corner of the property. 

The “maximum development” option could generate $46.9 million for Cleveland’s economy, offsetting the losses of closing the airport. A redeveloped Burke could host 1,200 units of housing, 100,000 square feet of retail, a 100-unit hotel and 200 acres of park space and playing fields.That option could produce $3.2 million in tax revenue for the city, the study said. 

The “minimal development” option – creating a 200-acre park and youth sports facility – would provide $3 million in economic impact, the study said. A hybrid development option of building a hotel near the still-open airport would produce $6.5 million in additional impact. 

As it currently stands, Burke operations are a net fiscal drain on the city. The airport generates $508,000 in tax revenue for the city. But Cleveland subsidizes Burke at a cost of $1.2 million from the city’s airport fund, which makes its revenue from the airlines. 

New Browns stadium not part of Burke equation

Demolishing the airport would cost about $15 million, Epstein said. The study was not a geotechnical analysis of the landfill on which Burke sits. It didn’t look into what sorts of buildings the land could physically support. 

“The complex and varied history of the airport site, characterized by its use as a landfill, military facility, and dredging area, has resulted in a challenging environment for construction,” the study’s authors wrote. “The presence of a wide range of materials, some potentially hazardous, necessitates thorough site investigation and careful planning.”

Despite references to a youth sports facility, Cleveland’s study does not contemplate building a new Browns stadium at Burke. There’s a long way to go before Burke’s future is settled, Epstein said. The city faces a tighter deadline to renegotiate the Browns lease, which expires after the 2028 season.

“This is about Burke and not about the Browns,” he said. 

Finding a way to close down Burke Lakefront Airport

Cleveland officials have met with the FAA about potentially closing Burke. That includes a meeting between Bibb and the agency’s associate administrator of airports in May. So far, the FAA does not sound enthusiastic about the idea. 

“They have reminded us that, while they are not in the business of closing airports, they will continue working with us to evaluate the right path,” Epstein said of the FAA. 

If the airport closed, Cleveland would have to repay about $10 million in federal grant money. Those grants require the city to keep Burke open. 

Should the FAA prove to be a roadblock, Ohio’s Congressional delegation offers a way around. Congress could give the city approval to close Burke and relieve City Hall of its grant repayment obligations. 

If all else fails, the city could wait the federal government out before trying to close Burke, Epstein said. The last of the grants expires in 2036.