The Observation Deck

Hi,
Mr. OB, you said,

"I agree with the heart of your post, but have to ask. 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."

Please everyone remember, someone or group of people have invested in Lakewood to own this property. They work hard to pay their property taxes and maintain their buildings. I'm certain to them, it is important and worth saving. We (fellow Lakewood property owners) need to remember to respect each others property. Right now there are a number of real businesses on this property all contributing to Lakewood's economy. Let not be too hasty to destroy them.

Perhaps, I missed in the discussion where all of these plans are being presented to the owners of the property and the idea is to help them renovate. That would be a win-win situation.

I agree with Don here.

The faulty premise, in my opinion here, is that some "well-meaning" groups of people can suddenly start snooping around our town and then decide that "this should go here" and "that should go there", as if Lakewood was a game board.

Gimme a break.

It is about private ownership and public interest as well, of course.

That strip of shops across from the library happens to be both old, and historic, but it is also occupied and well-utilized by private interests who have invested in our city, and whose voices need to be in the mix.

I'm not sure what, if anything, is, or has been done or planned officially regarding the Kaufman/Fox/Andrews field.

Oldsters might remember what used to be "Wilson field", where the post office is right now....

Sometimes we need to examine potential improvements, but sometimes we need to leave well enough alone.

That Foxx/Andrews area has a miniature golf course, tennis courts, a children's playground, and a great full-sized ballfield, none of which might bring in much money, but the area has brought a great deal of very needed recreation to our city.

If we would have exercised down there more, other than exercising with our mouths, we might not be talking about tearing it all out.

According to the county website, the ONE LAKEWOOD COMPANY LLC purchased the Drug Mart plaza for $5,750,000 on September 20.

Kate McCarthy wrote:According to the county website, the ONE LAKEWOOD COMPANY LLC purchased the Drug Mart plaza for $5,750,000 on September 20.

I wonder if this is a phantom purchase? I wonder if the ownership of Lakewood Company LLC is the same as the previous ownership?

Just by memory: The last time I looked at the county web site the property was valued at less than $2 million.

Full amortization with taxes and insurance would require payments of $70,000 per month. Maybe more with various expenses. Is the property going to generate that type of return? Is the sub shop going to pay that kind of rent.

And just to stir things up: Why is the rental value of this strip mall almost as much as the rental value of Lakewood Hospital?

This appears to be a different company. From the recorder's site it seems this is an LLC of Giltz and Associates Inc. The deed is for parcels 312-14-106 to 312-14-112.

Could the inflated sales price be related to a promise of cheap adjacent public lands? If the city is willing to give away Kaufmann Park to a developer then the value of the plaza and parking lot increases greatly.

I don't know if this question goes here, but one that has bugged me from the Ryan Demro camp relates a bit to the Kaufman park. I know with this last week he probably won't be able to answer but maybe someone familiar with his thinking on this might.

He has stated numerous times that he wants to somehow reduce the number of parks for more efficient use of park staff and crime prevention but somehow will maintain the same level of green space overall. Since we don't have any unclaimed empty spaces throughout town this means expanding one by purchasing private property and selling off public property somewhere else for private use. What order would this be done? Where would the funds come to do this, especially with a proposed "tax cut?"

This new information, as noted above, makes it look like we will be losing some public space first with maybe the option to use these funds some day to expand another park? What is interesting about this Kaufman park deal is that it really could potentially taint all current Mayoral candidates as it seems unlikely that plans to do what some have guessed (trading public space for a few extra bucks, at the very least) could have been done without Council knowledge. And if it was, it says something about the current Council member's ability to keep an eye on the city from that position. I think this will be something that will only be put out publicly after the elections when it is far too late to use this information to help decide who to support with our vote.

Phil Florian wrote: Since we don't have any unclaimed empty spaces throughout town this means expanding one by purchasing private property and selling off public property somewhere else for private use.

Phil - at the 3rd Main Street public meeting, it was made abundently clear that the numerous planting boxes equalled the square footage of the Park/Foxx Field that was clearly labelled as "Mixed Use Development"

Trying to connect the dots, connect recent purchases of land, asking about the study and its findings, investigating the new owners, wondering about the silence of the current administration, the silence of the current mayor, the silence of Main Street and its paid employees I just can't help but feel that there's a lot more going on than is immediately discernable. And what's going on is not for the benefit of Lakewood residents. Something stinks to the core in this whole process.

Richard Cole wrote:I just can't help but feel that there's a lot more going on than is immediately discernable. And what's going on is not for the benefit of Lakewood residents. Something stinks to the core in this whole process.

I would support the right kind of development at Kaufman Park, it makes sense on many levels.

However, there is something not quite right. The recent purchase at 270% of appraised value, large campaign contributions from outside the City with misspelled names and more.

To Kate McCarthy:

I would like to add a little information, and than quickly respond to your earlier posts. I must say you did and excellent job as an Observer, you are exactly correct as to the company that purchased the Drug Mart strip, the date and the price. FYI, I did some checking down at the County recorder's office - Glitz & Associates is located at 4835 Munson Street, NW, Canton, Ohio 44718. They are new to this area, as they have no record of other real estate purchases and/or mortgages in Cuyahoga County.

Pursuant to the UCC Financing statement filed September 20, 2007, the mortgage here is held by LaSalle Bank National Association, 135 South LaSalle Street, Suite 1225, Chicago, Illinois 60603.

The purchase covers all of the buildings between the old Christian Science building and the Masonic Hall, and the parking lot behind and back to the fence.

Also, I did not close my post and ignore the eminent domain question. As of September 19, I set forth (and questioned) all of the information regarding this project. Up to September 19, I was given no answer by council, any candidates, neighbors, or community leaders.

Finally, sure we can go back to the eminent domain question, and we can go through another 5,000 posts, as we did four years ago. However, I choose not to do that, as I don't see that as a pressing issue here in THIS election. I think the problem here and now in regards to real estate is the foreclosure crisis hitting northeast Ohio, and I am putting forth my energies there.

Once again, good job.

Dan Shields

Dan Shields wrote:recorder's office - Glitz & Associates is located at 4835 Munson Street, NW, Canton, Ohio 44718.

Someone with a very similar name made a substantial contribution to the Mayor's campaign. Any thoughts?

Bill Call wrote: I would support the right kind of development at Kaufman Park, it makes sense on many levels.

However, there is something not quite right. The recent purchase at 270% of appraised value, large campaign contributions from outside the City with misspelled names and more.

Bill, we might have different visions for the Park, but I think we both would like to see a lot more transparency in the process.

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.

This just in:

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2007/10 ... _lake.html

I'm mostly concerned about this paragraph:

Giltz's two principals contributed a total of $4,500 to George's campaign. George said contributions from developers is not unusual for candidates and the Giltz money will not influence the development's future.

I get the fact that developers can give political donations, but given the fact of their near-term desire to buy public land, George could have returned the contribution to avoid the appearance of impropriety. Candidates do that all the time.

I just wonder if there's more to this deal than we know right now.

Don't know about Sakura, but Dots is a major nationwide chain based here in Cleveland, and has the deep pockets to move elsewhere.

As for contributions influencing an elected official ... anyone who DOESN'T believe they do is living on a different planet. It's no longer a government 'by the people, for the people, and of the people' but rather 'by the special interests, for the special interests, and of the special interests.' The politicians only pretend to care about us at election time, when they role up their sleeves and act like they're just regular folks ... but once in office, they listen to the folks with the money, not the unwashed masses like us!

As much as I'd hate to see any green space go, I will say that Drug Mart Plaza is not particularly aesthetically appealing in any way, shape, or form. Perhaps something could be better done there ... but in the same vein, the Park could also be redone and relandscaped into something a bit more user-friendly and a bit less of a concrete jungle.