Jim O'Bryan wrote: Is the Drug Mart Plaza worth saving? That said I am not sure we will get anything better. However now is the chance to push for better.
You bring up good points, green space and a park directly opposite of the library would be a dream. some of us have asked for a walking park, with maybe a small stage like Cain Park.
.
Jim, I think you may have misunderstood what I was trying to say in regards to putting a park across the street from the library. I am opposed to such an action, and find it foolish at best that anyone would decide to build a new library with the idea that such a thing would occur. Especially when there is already a fully occupied commercial building already present.
I was also trying to agree with the person who mentioned the lack of landscaping in front of the library. If you look at the renderings, you will note that there is space for grass and trees right out the front door of the library. Now, I am not so naive as to believe that what is rendered is what you get, but at the same time, the space it there. Why was it not used? Grass, trees, shrubs, sculptural planters, anything in terms of landscaping would more than contribute to the grandiose facade of the building.
As for the Drug Mart building, I would certainly hope with its full occupancy, and nothing physically wrong with it, that it would be worth saving! In a time when this city is trying to be green, tearing down functional buildings is not a good way to show other communities how "green" we are.
That being said, what ever happens to the building now that it has been bought, I would hope that we do not lose the businesses already there. Especially since three of them are locally owned. While Drug Mart is in a better position to open a new location financially, I'm not sure that Sakura (which has only two locations) or Dots is. It would be a shame if these businesses left.
The only reason perceived by me to tear the building down is aesthetics. That can be changed as I pointed out in my earlier post. If that is the reason it becomes missing in the future, then I propose we do the same with the INA building. I don't find it attractive at all, and it is losing occupancy. If I get enough of the right people to think that it is an eye sore, can we tear it down as well, and in place put a gothic clock tower?
Now on to the park. I'm not sure what appeal having a park in front of a shopping center is other than it will look pretty from the windows of the new library. When I go to a park, I don't want to watch traffic. Detroit is a highly traveled stop and go street in Lakewood, and I'm sure being as such, people won't want to stay in a park that faces it. Not just seeing the traffic, but the noise from it as well. Not to mention any noise that comes from the shopping center as well.
If there is any reason to doubt something better going in, then we should do all in our power to keep it as is. More transparency would help out a great deal to ease some of the concerns raised on this thread, either from the city, or from the company that purchased the property.