The Observation Deck

I would like to know who knew what and when. Local residents have been trying to figure this out since I was first questioned back in mid-August. I'm not sure, but I do not recall if Ryan Demro has weighed in on this issue. To me, this would represent one of the biggest developments in Lakewood; we have been told repeatedly that there is 'no plan', and now we have a 5 million dollar purchase of a plaza next to valuable Lakewood park land. Is this the West End all over again, where the deal is done unless and until citizens are forced to decide via a referendum petition?

Ryan, I know you had a tough mayoral primary race, but this is still your ward, Kaufman Park is in your ward, and I would like to know what is going on.

Also, Mr. Fitzgerald, I don't think the issue is what people have said to you. It is - are you going to be Mayor and you have no idea what is going on here? Please advise.

Dan Shields

Dan Shields wrote:I would like to know who knew what and when. Local residents have been trying to figure this out since I was first questioned back in mid-August.

The only one who knows is the Mayor. Perhaps you should just ask HIM.

Mr. Call -

Good point. I should have added that I was responding to the posts of c. dawson and Bryan Schwegler - it seemed that they were, in a sense, asking the Mayor that very question. Maybe I should re-phrase my question (and my original post) - is there anybody, in or out of government, in or out of Lakewood, who might comment on this potential deal?

Dan Shields

Quote exerpt of Mayor George from PD:

"All the proceeds from the park sale would be used to buy additional park land and make park improvements", George said.

WHAT?...buy additional park land from WHERE? I don't understand that comment. Can anyone enlighten me?

Dee-- I would refer you to Jeff Endress' post on the process of govenment in Lakewood.
Stan Austin

Just read the PD - We can all breathe easy, no need to worry.

"That field is very near and dear to me," George said. "I'm probably the last person in the city who wants the field to go."

I feel so much better

Mayor George - tell us what's going on, straight answer.

Richard--- FYI--- That's why we in Lakewood (many of us going back over a half a century) have in place orderly processes to determine good outcomes. This is to at least put in place procedures to rationally decide outcomes without cheap shot artitists and out of the loop politicians grandstanding to the detriment of public discourse.
Stan Austin

I'm sure I'm gonna take some flak.....but here goes anyway.

The only POTENTIAL plans that ever get discussed are usually the pipe dreams.....people movers, bridges to Canada and the like. Until (and unless) there is a deal...there really is nothing to discuss beyond hopes, dreams and aspirations....

And discussing potential deals, prior to having commitment to a specific plan is never a productive exercise as there is no focus.....nothing on which to pass judgment, to many "what ifs' and "maybes". Even businesses don't discuss POTENTIAL deals until there is something formal to discuss. Then it's off to the shareholders to seek their input and approval.

IF and when there is something concrete on which to hold discussion, then any proposal will have to be addressed by the Council. Any proposal will be vetted in that forum, complete with all the details necessary to determine if the proposal is appropriate and appropriate. Can't be done unilaterally. Completely subject to this approval process. Time to be heard when there's actually something to talk about. But until someone actually presents a concrete proposal, we really don't know what that proposal might be. Hell, maybe someone's going to build the peninsula in exchange for Kaufman? And opening up the discussion, before there is a definite proposal pretty much guarantees that there will never be a proposal.

Once there actually something on the table, I would intend to analyze it and determine if it makes sense. I would intend to attend the public hearings that Council will require.....go to the meetings where any definite proposal is discussed. But until (and unless) that happens we might as well discuss how many angles can fit on the head of a pin.....

Jeff

I think I’m the guy who may have kicked off this thread when Dan Shields visited our street in mid-August. Earlier that week my wife Valerie and Julie Warren had a meeting with Mayor George and Dryck Bennett (Asst Dir. Dept of Planning and Development) regarding the future of Kauffman Park.

Mayor George and Mr. Bennett described a U- shaped mixed retail development between the Masonic Temple and Maxxum’s building. The U-shape would face Detroit Ave, with some parking along the storefronts and a town square green space. The back of the development would extend over the present ball field, possibly with parking on the ground level. Access for customer parking and truck traffic was not determined. Some type of barrier would to be erected to block the view from the north.

The lost multi-purpose green space amounts to about 4 acres. The Mayor stated the ball field, tennis courts and playground would be compensated for at undetermined locations. He also stated that sale of City-owned land would require Council’s approval and the space would have to be rezoned for commercial use.

Now my opinion:
There are many open issues to resolve and many others within City government must be brought up to speed to make an informed decision. My wife and I are not anti-development. Drug Mart is a valuable part of Lakewood’s retail picture. Drug Mart should have the ability to invest and upgrade their store. My beef is that the citizens MUST be given the facts when the sale of a city owned, not easily replaced asset is in play. Who determines the fair selling price, what assurance do we have that the green space will be replaced? Does the Mayor have eyes on the school real estate that will be vacated in the next few years? Has anyone researched whether this decision lies solely with our Board of Education, or might the State also have a say since big bucks were committed to the school building project

A lot of people, including the citizens of Lakewood, would have a part in the decisions.

A project like this would have to go through a few boards and commissions and there would be public input before it even gets to council. The Zoning Board and the Planning Commission have resident input.

And as Jeff said,

Once there actually something on the table, I would intend to analyze it and determine if it makes sense. I would intend to attend the public hearings that Council will require.....go to the meetings where any definite proposal is discussed. But until (and unless) that happens we might as well discuss how many angles can fit on the head of a pin.....

There have been a lot of people that have come to the city with ideas, but that doesn't mean that the ideas turn into a reality.

If the past few years, when groups come to Lakewood and see everything that is going on, they are attracted to the place and they want to be part of what's going on. The question becomes, do any of these ideas make sense for Lakewood? How do these ideas benefit our citizens?

We have seen a lot of public development and we're going to see continued private development. I'd guess there are going to be a lot of changes along our main streets. All of the work on the infrastructure helps stimulate other investment.

Whatever happens or doesn't happen, I'm going to be very interested in that parks study.

Stan Austin wrote:Richard--- FYI--- That's why we in Lakewood (many of us going back over a half a century) have in place orderly processes to determine good outcomes. This is to at least put in place procedures to rationally decide outcomes without cheap shot artitists and out of the loop politicians grandstanding to the detriment of public discourse.
Stan Austin

So, is the Mayor going to give some straight answers then?

Straight answers? I thought he just did?

Did not someone just quote him above?

"That field is very near and dear to me," George said. "I'm probably the last person in the city who wants the field to go."

In fact, wasn't that person er....you?

Seriously, All these thoughts and plans and proposals are probably merely preliminary at this time. When the i's are dotted and the t's are crossed on something truly viable, I'm sure we'll be brought into the loop for our public response and reaction.

One thing our community has learned is to expect and demand engagement in the process. I think the successful planning process of both the Clifton Blvd project and the Detroit Avenue Streetscape Design are not the result of any one individual, or organization, but the result of a community that requires accountability and a voice in its future.

I hope that we will trust ourselves enough to listen and evaluate with open hearts and minds the options that may be presented for the area across from the library. We may have the opportunity to facilitate something truly wonderful and creative that reflects the desires of the community.

FWIW...During the Detroit Avenue public meetings (referenced in my post on Detroit re-striping) the following "themes for enhancing development" were generated by the resident discussion:

* Better/more interesting signage would be nice
* A marketing plan for the district would improve the mix of commercial businesses
* Additional anchor stores would draw more shoppers to the downtown
* Kauffman Park should be better integrated into the district
* An increase in quality residential uses on upper floors will add more street life
* The variety of architectural styles adds interest to the district
* Pedestrian accessibility enables easier use of the street and its storefronts
*The mixture of uses makes downtown a more lively place.


In the public meetings, there was unanimous dislike for the current Drug Mart strip (as indicated by red vs green dots placed on current Detroit Ave schematics).

In the design proposal stage, a commercial development option that brought green space to Detroit Avenue across from the library got the most favorable endorsement.

When discussing potential development in the Drug Mart strip/Kaufmann Park area, it was not suggested that keeping the baseball diamond in its current location should supersede every other potential use for the area. Residents were very concerned that recreation options be maintained in the city, and expressed clearly that green space in general is precious and should be treasured, developed and maintained. Abutting neighbors voiced their concerns about losing park space behind/next to their properties. They also expressed disappointment about security concerns and lack of maintenance in Kaufmann Park today.

There was general consensus that green space is vital in the downtown district and must be incorporated into any development project. A significant number indicated a desire for play space for children.

No one suggested that green space and development are mutually exclusive.

As a whole it was agreed residents want green spaces throughout the downtown district that are accessible, well designed , and well maintained.

I have a copy of the charts (red and green dots) and schematics that were generated at the meetings in my office. Bring your reading glasses because the 3x4 ft posters are reduced to about 2x2 inches!...but you can still make them out.

Just give me a call. 521-0655

Mary Anne

I hope the park goes, because I KNOW that Kaufmann Park is where all the druggies, thugs and brawlers like to hang out.

After Little Links closed down, there's nothing there anymore. The LHS stadium (the multi-million dollar turf field that's probably one of the top 3 in the state) has been used by the Rec for games during this past summer and the number of games on that field will increase.
We also have a field at Madison Park, at Lakewood Park, and Harding that will be up.

that's 4 fields that can be used.

I would love to see some storefronts opening up and more out of towners being drawn into lakewood to spend their money here.

Kaufmann Park has always been and will always be an eye sore. It's a place where crime is known to happen, even if we have the "S.W.A.T" rolling around and patrolling the area.

Gary Rice wrote:Straight answers? I thought he just did?

Did not someone just quote him above?

"That field is very near and dear to me," George said. "I'm probably the last person in the city who wants the field to go."

In fact, wasn't that person er....you?.

Yes Gary, that was me - pointing that the Mayor has publicly gone on the record "last person etc" while at the same time accepting money from developers, and as it appears, talking to residents about "U Shaped plans".

Mere platitudes will not suffice.