Carnegie picked to develop hospital site

[Kate McCarthy]

No surprise here. Pae just posted this on the city's fake community page and immediate shut down comments. There's so much garbage in this article it will take a while to unpack it but right away it was interesting to learn that CCF "donated its site to the suburb."

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/ ... pital-site

[Mark Kindt]

Oh! Get this-- The Mayor is quoted as saying that they only had to give away the real estate for free or for $1.00 (!)

In my book, that's called adding insult to injury.

We've now basically given away all of the hospital assets including the real estate. Bravo!

[Bridget Conant]

Reminding everyone that former County Exec Ed Fitzgerald was hired by Carnegie shortly before the bid process began.

This is who we want developing the site? The guy who couldn't get a drivers licencmse for over 10 years - but still drove?

And the owner of Carnegie, an Avon resident, donated to Summers' campaign.

This was all in the bag - everyone knew Carnegie would be "selected."

[mjkuhns]

Okay, this is not what I heard on July 25 at City Hall.

I heard that the committee(s) would recommend a developer.

And "At that point" would start "a robust community dialogue."

I did not hear that "this meeting is it, and the next time you hear anything it will be the decision."

It says right on the official schedule on the city's web site, "Fall 2017: Recommendation to Lakewood City Council."

Is there some sort of vote yet to take place? If so, did anyone from the city mention it? If so, does it concern them or anyone else that Crain's has represented this as 100% a settled decision?

[Kate McCarthy]

Okay, this is not what I heard on July 25 at City Hall.

I heard that the committee(s) would recommend a developer.

And "At that point" would start "a robust community dialogue."

I did not hear that "this meeting is it, and the next time you hear anything it will be the decision."

It says right on the official schedule on the city's web site, "Fall 2017: Recommendation to Lakewood City Council."

Is there some sort of vote yet to take place? If so, did anyone from the city mention it? If so, does it concern them or anyone else that Crain's has represented this as 100% a settled decision?

Since Jenn Pae shut down comments as she posted this, it doesn't look good for the "robust community dialogue" that was promised. And since she didn't bother to correct the contention that CCF gifted the property to the city, I would guess this article comports with their point of view. Now will council show any backbone and question this "deal" for the city?

[Stan Austin]

I nominate Charlie to be the greeter at the pet food store

[Brian Essi]

Okay, this is not what I heard on July 25 at City Hall.

I heard that the committee(s) would recommend a developer.

And "At that point" would start "a robust community dialogue."

I did not hear that "this meeting is it, and the next time you hear anything it will be the decision."

It says right on the official schedule on the city's web site, "Fall 2017: Recommendation to Lakewood City Council."

Is there some sort of vote yet to take place? If so, did anyone from the city mention it? If so, does it concern them or anyone else that Crain's has represented this as 100% a settled decision?

Mr. Kuhns,

Surely you jest.

"Voting" by the "7-member communications army" happens after the decisions are made.

Sam O'Leary is on the "committee" that allegedly made this "decision." No surprise that O'Leary has fibbed about the true process--he's not that bright and can't remember his fibs.

But this "decision" was likely made by Fitz, Butler and Summers in 2010 when Fitz anointed Summers as his successor, Butler stepped aside for the more lucrative law director position that allowed Butler to continue other gainful lawyering for clients to be fed to him by CCF aligned operatives. Then Council President Butler approved the CCF decanting plan in mid 2010 after Fitz had secured the County Exec Democrat seat by winning the primary.

I will give anyone $1,000 who can find any public statement by Fitz where he made any clear public statement against the 2010 decant of trauma and pediatrics to Fairview.

The Quid for these Quos is now public.

The rank and file in the FBI must be embarrassed that Fitz was once one of their own.

[jackie f taylor]

Just asking, is tar & feathering still permitted?

[Bridget Conant]

Wise words from former mayor Thomas J George regarding the unique character of Lakewood and how a few prominent people in this city want shiny and new while failing to realize what it will do to the city.

" I grew up about midway between Huron and Vermilion on 2+ acres of lakefront property. Over three years ago my wife and I bought it “back” out of my mom’s estate. When I was very young, like maybe 55 years ago, Huron got all excited about “urban renewal.” That’s when you basically tore out what’s there, say the entirety of downtown Huron, and you build something “modern” in its place. Something planners decide on. Urban renewal was the rage back then. One of my oldest memories of my Dad was his loud objections to what Huron wanted to (and eventually did) undertake. My dad was an architect and he did have a good sense of beauty and historical significance.

So yes, Huron tore out its downtown and began “modernizing.” Vermilion did not go the “urban renewal” route. They kept their quaint little downtown, which remains to this day. And it’s crystal clear that Huron made a big mistake and will live with it forever. Vermilion is something of a destination. Huron has nothing, it is completely inauspicious. Lots of boating, but they always had that."

Tim Liston posted this on another topic, but In my view this is one of the most important and posts I've seen on the deck.

Reflecting back on about 30 years elected or appointed service with the city, I can recall in the late 70s through the mid-90st Mayors Lawther, Sinagra and later Harbarger implemented and nourished our store front renovation program. This program basically boarded up existing store fronts and forced businesses to install uniform signage and design. This was the state of the art in city scape design and in urban planning. This program, rightly so, won many awards and served us well at the time.

Then in the mid-90s a group of officials from the US Dept. of Interior visited Lakewood. They were in awe of the city, so much so they wanted to designate the entire city as a National Historic district.
Lakewood, they said, was among the last pristine turn of the century street car suburbs. A few neighborhoods in Philadelphia and Brooklyn retained the turn of the century charm and character, but none the size and condition of Lakewood.

For a number of reasons, we declined to proceed with the designation, but many of us at city hall, based on ongoing feedback from the residents, got to thinking that maybe our city's future lay more in restoration rather in demolition and destroying the original charm of our architecture.

This notion was further enforced by our city participation in the National League of Cities First Tier Suburbs committee and the Greater Cleveland First Tier Suburbs Committee. Both award winning groups actively sought input and ideas as to how to create a more green and sustainable quality of life in our cities. In the mid-2000s we were awarded the MainStreet program, a program designed by the National Historic Trust that emphasizes and supports refurbishing, sustainability, green energy and restoration over alternative demolition and reconstruction.

Long story short, our growing desire to restore and refurbish, as Tim Liston's post indicates Vermillion has done, has resulted in Lakewood continuing to be one of the most desirable places to live in greater Cleveland. Our appreciation in housing values is the envy of most other cities our region.

I was in Solon recently. A growing city with a strong economic base and a city some consider one of the most desirable in greater Cleveland. You cannot find an uglier city. Economic development mayhem. Literally impossible for a pedestrian to walk in the main commercial area.

What makes Tim Liston's post so important is that there remain a few residents who haven't lost the 70s mentality. I recently bumped into a prominent Lakewood friend. And as I mentioned how great the city looked, he opined that if he had his way, he would plow under about 1/2 Lakewood. And replace with what I thought? McMansions, McDoubles, McBungalows? Clear evidence the 70s mentality remains.



FWIW.

From here:

http://lakewoodobserver.com/forum/viewt ... 50#p174350

[Meg Ostrowski]

Can anyone report on Summers', O'Leary's & Sylvester's comments from tonight's City Council Meeting on the recommended developer for "the heart of Lakewood?"

[mjkuhns]

So this came up at City Council tonight.

I think that, in some sense at least, the salient remarks were those of Mayor Summers:
"There is no agreement [right now]."
"This recommendation is to council to begin evaluating this developer."
"There is no deadline."

Also, Mr. Bryce Sylvester said that if council did not favor pursuing a partnership with Carnegie, both "start over from the beginning" and "go back to the other developers considered to date" would be valid options.

I post this here to relay what was said publicly, on the record, at this evening's city council meeting. Beyond this, my personal overall impression was one of confusion. I can also add for the record that this evening I learned of a One Lakewood Place facebook account which posted earlier today the Crain's article introduced at the beginning of this thread, accompanied by the comment "It's official!"

Stay tuned, there's more to come.

[Brian Essi]

So this came up at City Council tonight.

I think that, in some sense at least, the salient remarks were those of Mayor Summers:
"There is no agreement [right now]."
"This recommendation is to council to begin evaluating this developer."
"There is no deadline."

Also, Mr. Bryce Sylvester said that if council did not favor pursuing a partnership with Carnegie, both "start over from the beginning" and "go back to the other developers considered to date" would be valid options.

I post this here to relay what was said publicly, on the record, at this evening's city council meeting. Beyond this, my personal overall impression was one of confusion. I can also add for the record that this evening I learned of a One Lakewood Place facebook account which posted earlier today the Crain's article introduced at the beginning of this thread, accompanied by the comment "It's official!"

Stay tuned, there's more to come.

Mr. Kuhns,

Thank you for your crystal clear picture of how dark it was in Lakewood last night at 7:00 pm--it is still pitch black at 5:00 am this morning---and while the forecast for the rest of Northeast Ohio is Sunshine today---it seems the sun won't really come out at 7:26 am or the rest of the day in Lakewood---crystal clear darkness.

The O'Leary "led" Council treats Lakewood residents like mushrooms, keeps them in the dark and feeds them......