Is Plover & Robin The Next Site for Summers' Condos?

[Lori Allen _]

The City of Lakewood has acquired three properties in the Birdtown Neighborhood. They “purchased” each property at no cost, according to county records.

See download below for complete details. It is crucial to read the download in order to fully understand the concept of the thread:

Property Transactions Images.pdf

(921.65 KiB) Downloaded 109 times

Is anyone else thinking what I am thinking? All of these properties are directly adjacent to each other on the northeast corner of Robin & Plover. Look at the intersection on Google Maps and you will see what I mean.

Could it be a future site of: expensive condos that do not fit the neighborhood and make the neighborhood an eyesore? Is there any possibility, at all, that this will be sold off to a possible friend of Summers or the Clinic's? Will another part of Lakewood history soon be gone? They already bulldozed the house that was on the Robin property. There appeared to be nothing wrong with it and it appeared to be occupied, according to historic Google Street View imagery.

Just a thought.

[Tim Liston]

I looked at the attachment, but not terribly carefully, after I saw Eric and Anabel's names. One property was an empty lot and was run by them as Bay Branch Farm, an urban farm. Hopefully it still is even if they don't own the property anymore. At one point they bought the adjoining apartment building. I don't know anything about the third property. I used to see Eric and Anabel at LEAF night until the farmers I volunteered for (Covered Bridge Gardens) could no longer service Lakewood when LEAF switched nights. Traded produce with them, if I had too many carrots and they had too many peppers, we swapped. Unless they had too much kale. Then I hung on to my carrots....

Nice people. I guess they moved to Cleveland. Lakewood's loss. Hopefully they are encouraged to manage the empty lot for produce still....

[Lori Allen _]

I saw it was once that farm. I don't think it's there anymore. Too bad they couldn't make a go of it.

FWIW, I don't recall these places ever being put up for public sale.

The whole situation is just rather different.

[Lori Allen _]

Nobody seemed to read the download, so I will copy and paste most of the information here instead:

The city most recently acquired the property at 2107 Robin on May 4th, 2016 from an Eric Stoffer for $0.

Prior to the city's purchase of the property in May, it was owned by Eric Stoffer. Stoffer originally purchased the property from the city of Lakewood in August of 2012, for $0. However, Stoffer apparently sold the property to himself once in February 2013, and gained $0.

The city purchased the property from Fannie Mae for $24,000 in December 2009.

NOTE: There was once a four-suite residential home on this property. It was knocked down and demolished during the City of Lakewood's first ownership between 2009 and 2012. In other words, the city bought it from Fannie Mae for $24,000 in 2009, the city knocks it down and sells it to Stoffer for $0, Stoffer apparently sells it to himself for $0, then Stoffer sells it back to the City of Lakewood for $0.

The city also acquired the properties at 12314 and 12318 Plover in February of 2016. These two properties and the one at 2107 Robin (listed above) are all adjacent to each other.

In April 2016, the property at 12314 Plover transferred from a Ms. Gilles to the City of Lakewood for $0.

Also in April 2016, the property at 12318 Plover transferred from a Ms. Gilles to the City of Lakewood for $0.

[scott gilman]

If you look at the city web site there is an explanation of what is being sought for those parcels. Over the years there have been other proposals but there was an issue with a gas well on the sight

[Dan OMalley]

Could it be a future site of: expensive condos that do not fit the neighborhood and make the neighborhood an eyesore?

No. The new housing will be mixed-income. And Birdtown's designation as a National Historic District precludes development inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood.

[Lori Allen _]

I could not find anything on the city website about this.

However, I did dig through some old council minutes from the era Brian Powers was on council. I did find minutes where some city-owned property was sold. This raises a few questions:

Are these properties put out on the open market in an effort to, you know, be fair? I could be wrong, but I don't ever recall seeing any "for sale" signs on any of these lots when the city sold them. I know that one of them was sold to someone on one of the city's countless "boards/committees/commissions/task forces". To this day, this lot sits empty and is often littered with trash and litter form nearby food establishments. If someone is on one of these "boards/committees/commissions/task forces", there is a good chance that they know someone at City Hall.

Are there any incentives to appeal to those that will actually live at the property (providing there is a house on the property)? One house that the city owned and then sold was sold to an absentee landlord in Florida.

Are there any incentives to attract good-quality residents that will be able to take care of the home/property and not rent out to Section 8 and put a burden on the already troubled neighborhood? This is especially important if these properties will be "mixed-use".

Just wondering.

[Lori Allen _]

I am also going to assume that the reason for the "$0" transfers on all of the titles was because these properties were purchased using federal CDBG, HUD, or other similar funding. I can't think of any other reason for this.

On the 2107 Robin property, the city originally bought it for $24,000 from Fannie Mae. They then sold it to Mr. Stoffer "$0" according to county records, presumably in an attempt to allow Mr. Stoffer to start his farm/produce market there. The city then bought it back however, for $0. What were the original intentions on this? If it really was sold to Mr. Stoffer for $0, wouldn't that be a negative $24,0000 profit? Does anyone know what the original intentions were on this? They aren't exactly clear to me.

[Lori Allen _]

It doesn't look like I will get any answers to my questions. In the meantime however, could someone please cut the grass on the recently "puchased", city-owned lot at 2107 Robin? There are three possible reasons for this:

1. Simple oversight (city-owned properties should be on a maintenance schedule, however)
2. Not enough people (lots of people have been laid off over the past several years)
3. Broken lawn mowers

20160613_125557.jpg (176.62 KiB) Viewed 1832 times

[Dan OMalley]

Hi Lori -

Here are some answers to the best of my understanding.

Are these properties put out on the open market in an effort to, you know, be fair?

The city is seeking qualifications from those who might be interested in developing these properties. Of course the process will be public.

Are there any incentives to attract good-quality residents that will be able to take care of the home/property and not rent out to Section 8 and put a burden on the already troubled neighborhood?

The goal is to have these homes owner-occupied. I must say, that was a quick transition from being worried about "expensive condos" to being worried about poor people placing a "burden" on the "troubled neighborhood!"

This is especially important if these properties will be "mixed-use". Just wondering.

The properties will not be mixed-use. They will remain residential.

Also, thank you for bringing the existing maintenance concerns to my attention.

- Dan

[Lori Allen _]

Dan,

Thanks for your reply. I do appreciate it.

I did not intent to come off as obtuse in regards to Section 8 Housing. On the contrary, there needs to be a community dialogue about Section 8 Housing. While there are some using the program that are truly in need (elderly, disabled, etc.), there are many that make it a way of life.

Specifically, there needs to be a very clear way for citizens to report bad tenants and landlords that are taking a toll on their neighborhood. Likewise, the city should respond to such complaints in a swift and effective manner. Currently, this does not seem to be the case and there does not seem to be much oversight. Laying the hammer down on bad tenants and landlords that do not obey laws is the best way to deal with the issue. I will not thread-drift anymore here. More to come on Section 8 Housing later.

Thanks again.