The Observation Deck

Mr. Baker:

What is so terrible about a group of citizens developing a plan to help make its city a better place to live? You seem to belittle the idea that Mark's plan is just about "a coffeeshop." That seems short-sighted to me as many studies have shown that it's just such places that Mark describes for his ParkPlace vision that draw the coveted "brain-gain" demographic of college grads that the region so desperately is courting.

One of Lakewood's many appeals is its citizens' activist spirit and deep commitment to community. It seems to me that the type of thing Mark and others are trying to accomplish embodies the exact spirit of why so many of us love this city.

Richard.

My only interest is that City property and funds are not used for anyone’s vision or an overactive passion.

Never, ever used?

***

My own opinion, and I don't live in Lakewood although I spend much time in Lakewood, is:

Lakewood needs overactive passion more than any other single quality.

Emphasis on overly-active!

I'll go farther: my own over active passion is tightly oriented around helping over-active passions in Lakewood seize, win, and rule the day.

Mark – [if I may be so bold]

In the city I was associated with the cost of plans, studies, reviews, consultants and various other services for the processes of approval of a development, building permit, zoning changes, etc. always fell on the developer or builder including any cost incurred by the city. For the sake of argument lets forget the reality of zoning, master plans, use continuity, and the questionable fiscal success of a stand-alone enterprise in the park. The vision that a public building being used by commercial coffee shop enterprise will always be prodigal use of public property to me. If “North of the tracks, west of 117th, east of Rocky River there is exactly ONE casual place to go if you want to meet friends over a nice hot beverageâ€Â￾ is in such great need, wouldn’t one think that it would commercially feasible and it could be assumed that private enterprise would or could be convinced of this necessity without the involvement of public property in the area. The area described is primarily a residential area with some commercial on the east end and a spattering of restaurants and services in the larger buildings. Therefore the rub, no commercial property is readily available in the area of the park.

I believe the property that is planed as the perfect place for us to enjoy a latte is on the Parks Master Plan for a more deserving use by the Historical Society. You may wish to redirect the Develop Lakewood efforts and investigate the possibilities of incorporating your vision into their plans without any compromise of space, investment or operating expenses by the Historical Society. I am also sure they would be most happy to take donations from Develop Lakewood and supporters of the vision to assist them in getting both projects off the concept level to ground breaking.

There is little land in this city to fritter away since it is a most certainly limited, which Lake Erie is eroding away bit by bit every year. I believe Mark Twain said something about land; they’re not making it anymore.

Don’t misunderstand my intentions; it is admirable you and a group of citizens have taken it upon themselves to promote a better environment for Lakewood. An additional coffee shop in Lakewood is most welcome; God knows we have enough drinking establishments. This disparity may be due to economical reasons when the price of a cup of coffee exceeded the cost of a pint. We all have our opinions and the right to disagree with them, even our own. I would think it would be unusual from my experience, but perhaps putting the cart before the horse is the only way to promote changes in Lakewood. However, the disparity that you and I will never agree on is the use of public property for commercial use.

Richard

Richard Baker wrote:Mark ? ...However, the disparity that you and I will never agree on is the use of public property for commercial use.

Richard

Richard

So what if the profits from the store went to the Historical Society, the schools, H2O or to pave our streets.

I agree with a lot of what you have said in this thread. At the same time I like the vision that Mark has unrolled. It is similar to a plan that was announced by the Historical Society. My understanding was that that was on hold while funds we looked for to finish the Nicholson House. At the same time I know for a fact that Mayor George still has the nightmares of the "Woman's Pavilion" project so that he was not jumping for joy at the Park Place announcement. So if nothing else it helped stir the pot a little and brought some of this to the surface.

But I love the comment about how the city you were associated with left all the costs with the developer. This is only common sense. Lakewood had a self esteem problem for a little while. Especially right after the mall nightmare and war. I see that being washed away as their are people talking about development all over the city. As as long as those developers use the word buy, and leave out the term TIF, the residents seem pretty happy.

Well if you are not going to Mark's program which we hope you do, then you will certainly be stopping by for coffee and talk at Bela I hope. Rumor has it your neighbors will be there.


.

.

I simply want to say thank you, especially to Mr. Baker and Mr. Schroeder for the bright, active exchange between dream visioning and reality-checking.

The dream/think tank - with enthusiasm, with wisdom is emerging here in a vetting/visioning process on how the city might be improved.

It's a start.

And Mr. Baker has raised very sensible and sound points. I believe his point about the private commercial use of public property is an especially critical one.

Mr. Calhoun's point about passion is well stated. Obviously, the reason portion of civic balance is supplied by Mr. Baker. Mr. O'Bryan supplies an intrepid spirit of hope and belief in the people of our city working together. Ms. Crampton clarifies Lakewood Alive's role and responsibility, setting up a clear sense of limits. Concern for the interests of Lakewood Historical Society is registered. All very positive. Showing the way of alignment through vision, engagement, passion and reason.

We are only now beginning to see how this Board can be used to advance civic engagement in discussion about how a vision for improvement can be improved.

I realize time is a precious resource and that people need to feel that something actual and tangible will emerge from the effort. Again I sincerely appreciate the demonstrations of vision and reality checks.

Kenneth Warren

Just to put my oar in the water here (although those who know me recognize that I actually use a paddle).

Private use of Public property is not necessarily a bad thing. It is certainly not a concept new to the City. OUR hopital is (I believe) leased to the Cleveland Clinic Foundation for a yearly rental. Madison square medical was a city owned office space rented to private businesses until sold a year and a half ago. There has been discussion of contracting for the private management of Winterhurst, another city owned facility. I don't suppose there would be a great uproar if the city decided to contract out the refreshment stand business at Lakewood Park. In fact, that is essentially the case with the stands at Lakewood Stadium which are run by the Athletic Boosters. How is Mark's vision any different? So, let's not get confused by pseudo-eminent domain issues.

Clearly, the ownership issue could be handled on the basis of city ownership with a lease to whatever enterprise eventually occupies the space. The precedent is there. Obviously, the business model and lease structure would have to reflect who bears any developmental costs. Were they to be born by the occupier/business, the rental on the property would be less than if the business was leasing a turn-key operation built by the city.....but in either event, any development could most certainly be structured to retain city ownership as well as control over rents. I can see no particular reason to object to a well thought-out plan that enhances the city, where the city continues to own the asset and generates income by leasing to a business. Otherwise, why the exception for the Hospital?

Jeff

Jeff Endress wrote:...I can see no particular reason to object to a well thought-out plan that enhances the city, where the city continues to own the asset and generates income by leasing to a business. Otherwise, why the exception for the Hospital?

Jeff

Jeff this is exactly how the shops at the Metro Park golf courses are handled, and it seems to work very nicely there.


.

Wow-- miss a few hours, miss a lot.

Thanks to all who have made inputs to this thread.

Richard--

Thanks for your passion, for passion it is that causes you to respond so thoroughly and thoughtfully. There are a number of issues in your last post, most have been addressed by others.

One I'd like to comment on is:

You wrote: "I believe the property that is plan(n)ed as the perfect place for us to enjoy a latte is on the Parks Master Plan for a more deserving use by the Historical Society. You may wish to redirect the Develop Lakewood efforts and investigate the possibilities of incorporating your vision into their plans without any compromise of space, investment or operating expenses by the Historical Society. I am also sure they would be most happy to take donations from Develop Lakewood and supporters of the vision to assist them in getting both projects off the concept level to ground breaking."

I would ask "deserving" in whose judgment? You correctly point out that Lakewood land is extremely limited. What is a better use of public park land, a special purpose building dedicated to a single special purpose entity, Lakewood Historical Society, or a gathering space open to all Lakewood residents to use (including the Historical Society) for informal meetings, etc.?

The Lakewood Park Master Plan was drawn in 2001. Since that time the new Lakewood Public Skatepark has been built right next to the building in question. Our statistical experts have observed a mean number of users of that facility of 48.7. How the 0.7 skates is beyond the scope of this discussion. However, the fact remains, the environment has been dramatically altered. A new plan, a new vision must emerge.

I have invited Paula Reed, President of LHS to my meetings, further I have encouraged her to invite LHS board members to the meeting tonight. LHS is encouraged to vision with us. I do not want this issue to become ParkPlace vs. Historical Society. I wish for active involvement by all interested parties. This is open source economic development, and I believe if people trust the process Lakewood will be richer in the end.

Another issue I have is with your continued definition of ParkPlace as a 'coffeehouse'. It may turn out that way, but I truly envision it as a 'third place' gathering spot. I am not willing to define the vision so narrowly at this time. For a discussion on Third Places see: http://www.walkablestreets.com/third.htm

Finally, while you haven't said it directly, I have the feeling that somehow you think I'm trying to hijack the parkland so that I can become a billionaire. Farthest from the truth. Mr. O'Bryan presages some of my ownership thinking when he infers that the economic benefits from any commercial enterprise may accrue in some manner to the City and/or deserving non-profits including the Lakewood Historical Society.

Mr. Endress--

Thank you for the reality check about legal issues regarding ownership, etc. My vision is aligned with your points.

Mr. Warren--

As always, thank you for your balance and wisdom.


I hope the meeting tonight is as engaging as the dialog here!

Mark,

Don’t mistake conservative determination for passion. I don’t think you can equate the importance of a coffee shop compared to a Historical Society use of public property. I merely suggested the possibilities that a coffee shop could be incorporated in the Historical Society building but at no expense to them. Many government buildings have vendors operating within the facility such as concessions and newspaper stands, lunch counters, and even coffee shops. If planned and managed correctly the designed could allow separate operation hours and would benefit both groups, however, the park closing times will restrict the coffee shops operating hours, zoning and other issues must also be addressed.

You haven’t highjacked any parkland since the citizens of Lakewood own it, nor did I ever think you could. In as much as financial gain, it never crossed my mind. From my past experiences, you can trust me that I learned quite readily that compromise normally makes reality happen.

I think we come full circle and before we discuss issues about the coffee blends, good luck at your meeting tonight and hopefully you get good feedback from both supporters and dissenters.

Richard

Richard--

Again with the coffee shop. You either don't get or don't want to buy into the idea that a gathering place has a much broader social implications than just serving a beverage.

My passion around this issue stems from reading The Great Good Place by Ray Oldenburg, a seminal text on the eroding social fabric of America. What Mr. Oldenburg suggests is that for strong vibrant communities, ones that attract the 'cultural creatives' as Ms. Gordillo pointed out earlier, third places need to be actively created. A park, especially a central park like Lakewood Park which is a walking/biking destination for over half of Lakewood's residents is a natural location for such a gathering place as ParkPlace.

Lakewood is at a tipping point. We must look to the future, not the past plans that have not materialized from lack of funding.

You wrote: "a coffee shop could be incorporated in the Historical Society building but at no expense to them. Many government buildings have vendors operating within the facility." I'm confused, what Historical Society building are you referring to? The planned 2-story barn structure of the 2001 Plan? And then, is it a Historical Society building, or a government building?

My judgment is that there is no capital for such a building. So, there is no building. There are old plans and visions, that are in need of updating to reflect the current economic reality of the city and physical environment of the park. Creating a third place with broad public appeal could attract investment capital for the necessary renovation/rebuilding. Since the structure is next to the Oldest Stone House and Museum, it is a natural to work with LHS as a development partner. They simply have to realize the promises, plans, and building of 2001 are not going to materialize.

Again, the plans you refer to have been in existence since 2001. Until I began the ParkPlace dialog nothing was happening to bring those or other plans to fruition. How much money does LHS have in its Capital Expansion fund?

Mr. Warren rightly spelled out that Lakewood needs action, not simply talk. "...time is a precious resource and that people need to feel that something actual and tangible will emerge from the effort".

I plan on clarifying the vision, generating support, making plans, securing capital and breaking ground early next year.

Not in 2008 after all the studies have been completed.

Mark

Perhaps if you used the term "country store" to evoke a gathering place ala "Petticoat Junction".....or perhaps "Barber Shop" ala "Andy of Mayberry". Both were excellent gathering spots. "Coffee Shop" might be evoking visions of Maynard G. Krebbs and various "beatnik" types.

I think its all a matter of the implications of the terminology....apparently "coffee shop" is a bad rub.

Jeff

Mr. Endress--

I bow before your TV trivia knowledge, but you are correct. They were good gathering spots. The original name for my project was MainStreet, which I changed to ParkPlace to avoid confusion with the Downtown Lakewood folks. Main Street was another great gathering spot. So were the taverns in Colonial times. The taverns were where sedition flourished, now its at Starbucks. Different times, different places.

Fact remains, Lakewood needs a third place in her jewel, Lakewood Park!

Maynard G. Krebs, indeed!

Mark, I'm sorry I can't be at the meeting. Things are very hectic, my youngest has her class play tonight, and I have an afternoon meeting in Minneapolis tomorrow.

I'm an entrepreneur and I have a bias. I like to see things happen. I appreciate that you are bringing people together to work something out. Right now the building is not being used, has no solid plans for being used, and is an eyesore. I think your vision is what's needed. Listen to the naysayers because they can help identify obstacles that need to be overcome, then carry on.

Good luck my friend.

Mark,

How did the meeting go? This is the school concert season, and we couldn't miss the Middle School Strings performance at the Civic that night. The Lakewood schools music programs are jewels as well - but that is a topic for another thread. (I can envision the Chamber Choir or a Strings Ensemble performing at Our Gathering Place...)

I thought this quote from your Third Place link was inspiring:

[Third Places] are distinctive informal gathering places, they make the citizen feel at home, they nourish relationships and a diversity of human contact, they help create a sense of place and community, they invoke a sense of civic pride, they provide numerous opportunities for serendipity, they promote companionship, they allow people to relax and unwind after a long day at work, they are socially binding, they encourage sociability instead of isolation, they make life more colorful, and they enrich public life and democracy.

I see the Observation Deck as sort of a "virtual Third Place". A real bricks and mortar, flesh and blood place can be easily extrapolated from what goes on here.

Ken Warren wrote: "...time is a precious resource and that people need to feel that something actual and tangible will emerge from the effort".

I agree that time is a precious resource, but I have had it drummed into my little brain that there is a value in the process as well as in the product of our actions. The actual and tangible results may not be something we live to see, so for me there is a new motivation to find meaning in the journey each step of the way, not just the destination. Not easy to do in our "production oriented" culture.

Ellen:

I arrived late for the meeting, because I had an engagement at the Lakewood Christian Service Potluck Farewell to Steve Greenwell.

From the perspective of community engagement in a visioning process that Mark has called Open Source Economic Development, I thought the meeting was very enjoyable and quite productive of possibilities that suggested common ground between interested players and citizens.

There was, at least to my eye, a very good flow of ideas, honest articulations of stakes in dreams, and straight-forward responses to various possibilities expressed concerning the dreams of Mark and the Lakewood Historical Society.

How Mark and the Historical Society negotiate their respective plans and dreamscapes is for them to decide.

I expect they will let us know what's best and next for them.

I left feeling that each player had ideas to consider and will engage at some point in further discussions.

I can't speak for anyone, but myself, and what I observed.

I'd say there were 20 - 25 people attending. Conversation and quality of engagement was very high. Levels of determination to make something happen among all there seemed high. Level of open-mindedness to new ideas seemed high. Various avenues to dreams were discussed amicably.

I had fun with the company in process. I think others did as well. These are the intangibles of community life and personal encounter that I love about Lakewood, which is the point you seemed to be getting at. My point about time was simply to be respectful of others in their efforts to manage a scarce resource, and to focus on primes.

I think Lakewood Park is a prime, a hot spot in our city, which has many people excited.

I was very excited to see Tim Carroll, who ran for council, Kevin Butler, newly elected, and Councilwoman Mary Louise Madigan involved in a meeting that, for me, stands as one of the three civic engagments in 2005.

With this meeting, the concert you mentioned, a hundred plus at the Christian Service event, and an incredible Lakewood Observer gathering at bella duby, with Kate Parker and David Boron getting to meet Stephen Calhoun, I'd say Thursday was quite a night for many of us in Lakewood.

Lakewood is filled with incredible people. We are coming out to dream and play, and I would hope to do something productive. As we step away from our keyboards, playstations and remotes, we are realizing that we really enjoy the embodied and intelligent company that grows our civic capacity and nurtures our community spirit.

Kenneth Warren