The Observation Deck

The whole "death of downtown" routine is yet another cliche I have been hearing for essentially my entire 37 year life.

I recall as a child when the openings of the Coliseum and front row theater meant the death of downtown. How are those places doing now? Hint: the FRT is now a Home Depot.

I have a lot of friends that work downtown, and one that owns a restaurant down there. I tried to stop at my friends restaurant on Euclid yesterday evening and had to park illegally due to all the Cavs and HOB traffic.

Yes, retail shopping is not big down there (I hear that the Galleria is hosting a boxing show next month). And many people like me work in Independence or Mayfield (Progressive). But in terms of good paying jobs (lawyers, bankers, etc) and major civic events, downtown will forever be the hub of the region.

I would guess almost every shopping center requires some kind of public-private partnership.

Joan.

Now I'll ask you - why do you make this statement? Do you have evidence that this is true?

You answer your own question.

Of course, virtually ALL development has some element of public support, if only for things like road repair and water/sewer. The situations like downtown Pittsburgh, where the city basically built or gave buildings to retailers, are quite different.

To which I'll add the obvious maze of regulatory and statutory requirements a developer must negotiate.

Ryan.

Most of my evidence is anecdotal. And from a book I read on suburban sprawl years ago. It described the process whereby massive shopping malls are built: A lot of trick financing is involved.

Alternately, the various financing schemes are simply the conventions of financing.

There is, in the greater picture of how development of a certain scale proceeds the end result. Take the Jacobs/Gund re-development of E.9th/Carnegie. On one hand, it resulted in a fine amenity for Cleveland, on the other hand its mired in unintended (being charitable here,) consequences, many of which have to do with the 'win' on the muny government side not coming up to what was promised. (See Roldo B. on this.) Or, take the Baltimore Harbor re-development. Successful, but...

One thing that is clear, (and clear by way of anecdote although hard figures no doubt reinforce a more concrete view,) is that large scale re-development supposes consequences which cannot be perfectly anticipated and so the purported win/win scenarios used to sell a plan aren't so cherry when the plan is executed. It's complex.

As for anecdotal evidence, it doesn't often serve to support generalizations. Thanks Ryan for being forthright. My only intent here was to, as I usually do, draw the dialog into the complexity of development and away from generalized intuitions.

Lakewood is at its 'scale'. In another thread, it was mentioned that some residents can shoot down just about any development plan whether the plan is good or not. This is a key point in my view.

Jim O. floated the idea of the 'Brand' in our first conversation a year ago.

It's an interesting notion when applied to a circumstance apart from the marketing environment, an environment where it is a technical concept. In that environment, I'm mindful of marketers, brand and product managers and ancilliary personnel working to promote a coherent unique identity for a product and/or company, and am also mindful of the optimal wish to erect an entry barrier against similar products and companies.

But 'brands,' valuable as they are also represent fantasies because when the tread hits the road, the user of the product, the customer of the company, will qualify the fantasy in uncertain ways. This is to say: the brand isn't deterministic and the customer is the controlling factor.

For example, SBC would like its customers to be galvanized by SBC's corporate mission having to do with customer service. Most corporate mission statements are branding statements, and, they're also notoriously known to miss the mark of actual customer experiences. Well, call SBC with a problem and see what I mean.

Another example. I've been both an Apple and Windows user since 1984. I'm a 'Mac' guy in the main and I appreciate the Apple Brand. It's true: better software/operating system integration' plug-and-play, less awful problems, no registries, less de-gradeable, etc. better legacy support (until recently.) I buy the more fantastic parts of the brand too--more elegant, more innovative, hipper, more the Lexus than the Chevy.

3% Market share. Wow! But, the Apple Brand meets the Wintel Brand and dies its eternally returning death. It's one of the most well known brands on the planet and one of the most failed too. Point is: the brand connects up to something(s) far more important.

Joan.

I'm still skeptical of "branding" though. I still think there are too many income levels, lifestyles, socioeconomic groups, etc. to effectively promote a "brand."

This is a great and smart point.

The notion of 'brand' can only be relevant to certain people. It certainly is technically relevant to brand promoters and, hopefully, their efforts are aimed at potential customers.

But, as much as Lakewood can do duty as a 'product' most residents aren't here because they've responded to any brand or purportedly coherent presentation of the Lakewood product. Last summer, when Observer anthropology teams hit the streets to ask 'what landed you in Lakewood' the answers reinforced Joan's critical point. In short, the answers were richly individualized and had little to do with a response to any branding effort.

This isn't to say a branding effort isn't worthwhile, yet it is to note the obvious, it's not a widely relevant effort. In effect, it can't be because the whole notion of a coherent civic identity runs up against the reality of the complexities of the good/bad civic actuality.

Nevertheless, it is interesting to learn about what constitutes the 'brand' when you ask individuals. Certain aspects do come through, so Lakewood is walkable, it is compact, it is on the lake, it possesses many housing options, it is somewhat self-contained, good schools, it can be affordable, etc.

There is also a negative brand: Lakewood has parking problems, the tax rates are high, shopping is mediocre, there isn't a first run movie theatre, it's too working class, its not Floridian (in the Richard 'cultural creative' Florida sense,) hip, and, in many ways, you have to drive out of Lakewood to get certain 'experiences'.

When I turn to the affectual ecology, to the ways Lakewood is aroused and aimed as a matter of 'feeling' toward it being, in the future, a better place, I note how the Lakewood brand is 'versioned' in different, even disparate ways. Again, my consideration proceeds from Joan's point, that, per force, different people have different views about what is best, better for Lakewood.

Because collaboration proceeds from cooperation, there are lots of questions begged about who is powerful, influential, engaged and aroused enough to take part in a collective conversation about Lakewood's future.

After living the better part of 8 years in another suburb, I can tell you that the Lakewood Brand outside of our little collective is certainly a real phenomenon - just as is the Hinkley brand, the Cleveland brand, the Cleveland Heights brand, etc...

Suppose you are looking for a new home is NE Ohio. Well - Cleveland is out - the schools suck, emergency response sucks, etc... or so the 'brand image' will say. In fact, I have friends that live in parts of Cleveland that are simply wonderful in ALL respects. But that image remains.. the "brand" if you will.

Then again, there is Beachwood - land of doctors, lawyers, and desperate housewives that do nothing but shop all day. Is THAT true? Nahh.. but it is their "brand".

See the idea?

So if we are truly wanting to understand our "brand" we should really be talking to people outside of Lakewood. Asking them, "What is Lakewood like?" What are its best points?" What are its worst points?"

Used to be that the Lakewood brand was uber-safe streets for walking 24/7, perfect snow removal, lots of trees, fantastic schools, and backyard trash collection.

Now it is largely - 'Blight', lousy streets, school system with violence & discipline problems, financial despair...

(Did I say a nice warm "THANKS MADELINE?" yet??)

That is what our brand is and what we need to change. Now the discussion should really be 'how' do we change this?

JMO

Peace,
~Charyn

There has been a lot of discussion on various threads about the “Lakewood Brandâ€Â￾, without any real consensus as to whether there exists such a thing, and if it does, what it is. The purpose of the discussion is, I suppose, to develop a word association for Lakewood, which would immediately evoke some positive aspect of this community. I would submit that this has already taken place. We have a brand, just don’t know what it is. We’re to close to see it. There are a number of communities with “brandsâ€Â￾, either by way of active marketing, or by default. Clearly a “brandâ€Â￾ assigned by default is less likely to portray a positive image. As an example of well recognized “brandsâ€Â￾, I offer the following test. Simply match the “brandâ€Â￾ with the city.

A) MacMansions
B) Speed Trap
C) Nuveau Riche
D) Pink Flamingos
E) Old Money
F) Lifestyle Community
G) Trendy


1) Parma
2) Shaker Heights
3) Crocker Park
4) Tremount
5) Westlake
6) Lindale
7) Bay Village

My point is, and I agree with Charyn, we are already “brandedâ€Â￾. I don’t necessarily agree that the term is “blightedâ€Â￾….it might well be “bar cityâ€Â￾. I submit, that the exercise is twofold:
1) Find out what our current brand is and then,
2) Either build on it, or take steps to change it.


Ans. to the above A5, B6, C7, D1, E2, F3, G4

I stubbornly stick to the idea that 'branding' a city of nearly 60,000, with at least half a dozen distinct areas, will only be a frustrating exercise. Lakewood means one thing when you look out of your lakefront living room on Edgewater, something else when the living room is on a street like Dowd, one thing for the Gold Coast, another thing for a double on Elmwood,
The danger of 'branding' of course, is that some folks will want to make decisions to protect THEIR view of the 'brand', whether or not others will be affected by it. We saw noses turn up ever so slightly last week about the Dollar Tree. Do any of us over the "Williams Sonoma line" (I do like that phrase, even though I'm the north side of the line and have more IKEA than WS) have the right to keep Rent-a-Center or Save-a-Lot foods out of Birdtown?
It's one thing to brand Brecksville, a small city of almost exclusively wealthy white folks. But Lakewood?
My advice. Let's spend our energies making our streets safe, our schools superb, and our housing solid and desirable. The marketplace will follow. Liveability is its own brand.

I stubbornly stick to the idea that 'branding' a city of nearly 60,000, with at least half a dozen distinct areas, will only be a frustrating exercise.

But I still will stubbornly stick to my point. Lakewood IS ALREADY branded. We must determine how the outside world perceives us, and either build on that perception or determine how to change it.

Trying to come up with a "catch phrase", motto or "brand" will indeed be a frustrating exercise if one imposed from the outside already exists. Cleveland trumpeted "Best location in the Nation" with millions for PR, etc. People still called it the mistake on the Lake.

How are we known? Is it acceptable...then build on it. If not, work to change the perception. But, first of all, recognize that a perception does exist, then identify it.

Jeff

And I would add to that the need to be brave enough to realize which "bad" perceptions are based in reality.
Brand away, but it gets busted on a drive starting at Franklin & 117th.
I agree, some perceptions are erroneous. Especially as they relate to schools

Lakewood comes in many flavors. It will be impossible to capture Lakewood’s multi-verse in a one word poem.

The perceptions will sort differently for low rent slackers and upscale squares.

In following Ms. Roberts' lead, I will underscore an aspect some might regard as somewhat undesirable, yet others somewhat appealing.

Like it or not there is a slack factor to life in our holler.

Lakewood has places for those who, like Saint Francis, have fallen out of the competition.

Having lived on the east coast, I have no interest in communities where lawns are an obsession. In my thirties, newly arrived, I would tell friends back east Lakewood is great; people here rarely obsess over their lawns.

I did eventualy get a neighbor who did care a great deal about his lawn and and dandilions growing in mine. I learned to step it up a bit.

I have learned from the manic activation of the Lakewood Observer’s civic dreamscape among the named few reveals at the same time an indolent recoil from the call to community work among the nameless many.

To achieve a comparative advantage for our slack holler, my sense is that any pitch we make must go beyond region toward those seeking to flee the bustle and nestle with lassitude in a lake community that doesn’t press too hard.

The college drop-out town without a college.

In conversation with Dr. Calhoun, a comparison between Dionysian/Lakewood and Apollonian/ the Cleveland Heights seemed to hold water.

Lakewood – Where Time Is On Your Side.

Not quite.

This is, nonetheless, an interesting and useful exercise, to register among our named selves those qualities - good, bad and indifferent- that somehow qualify us together in this place.

We can learn with the help of each other to perfect our own Lakewood narratives. We can seed as we can our Lakewood idea viruses with those with ears to hear.

I believe that some hazardous texture for the Lakewood brand can be found in these words of Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, who Paul Lafargue cites in The Right To Be Lazy (http://mia.marxists.org/archive/lafargu ... y/ch04.htm).
Thus Lessing:

“Let us be lazy in everything, except in loving and drinking, except in being lazy.â€Â￾


Kenneth Warren

Kenneth Warren wrote:\

...Lake community that doesn’t press too hard.

I think you've got it!
For me, the appeal of Lakewood, beyond the bottom-line monthly payment, was always its sense of "come as you are." As long as you respected the folks next door and didn't act like a jerk, you didn't have to worry (too much) about crabgrass, what you wore to church, or the size of your Weber grill.
When my kids would occasionally badger me about moving to Bay or somewhere like that, I would always counter with, "Why would you want to be the worst-dressed kid at Bay High?"
That's MY Lakewood.
But can that square with those who get nervous tics at the thought of Dollar Trees, Applebee's, or (horrors!) even Wal-Mart?
"The City Without Pretense" sounds good to me. But is it true?

"The City Without Pretense" sounds good to me. But is it true?

I guess it depends on which side of the Williams-Sonnoma line your house is located.

But....just in case I wasn't clear, I'll give it one more shot. It doesn't really matter what label WE choose to use. It only matters what label OTHERS choose to use.

How is Lakewood viewed by outsiders ( maybe Mr. Boron could put an oar in here) and why? How do you either capitalize on that view or correct/change it, if that is what is called for?

So, pick a brand if you must. Unless it matches outside perception, we'll be able to keep it as our own little secret.

Jeff

I think that Jeff is in agreement with Joan. Matters not what we brand ourselves, it is the perception of others on the whole. Of course this is true, perception is everything. But can that perception be changed, or if good amplified? I say yes, not easy, but very doable.

For this we will use this example: Tremont.
A friend of mine Steve Garee was one of the first "semi cool bars" in Tremont, The Literary Cafe. Steve and I were involved in a lawsuit together, and my lawyer hooked him up with the place in about 1985 I believe.Treemont was a ghetto, but had some nice homes, and some artist on the fringes. Joe Warren was another person I grew up with who grabbed a house on Sranton about 1980. They set out to "draft in" "good" neighbors that fit with what they thought was right. Lemko Hall became a haven for bands, then apartments and offices. This small crew of under twenty continued to draft and build the brand as the art colony of Cleveland's West Side. Today it is know as "The Artsy" part of the city. In reality people in Tremont still live in a rough neighborhood. It is all perception.

What have we talked about on this board, in-line with the Visionary Alignment for Lakewood. Draft in good neighbors, amplify civic and artistic intelligence, safe, clean. Putting more of the energy into the people not city hall. More street fairs, concerts and activities, and push the boundaries of ho-hum malls to peninsulas and more. Business groups working together on events, while using the paper, and our relationship with Google to broadcast a thin band out into the world, that grows with every post, every paper.

The cool thing about Lakewood, we do not need the smoke and mirrors of Tremont, Ohio City, Warehouse district etc. We start with a clean safe town, on the water, with a huge park, and a very energized group of citizens.

This week Ken, Steve and I have spent time in Birdtown. the potential there is staggering. Eating dinner at Mahall's was great. 3 burgers, fries, drinks 2 pops and a beer $16.00. The bar was filled with locals, and the alleys were filled with bowlers. Locals piling in for drinks and Weekend fun. People on the street walking and talking.

So do we need to debate or can we get busy?

Gosh I think you are all right. My suggestion (or reiteration) of branding really was more as Jeff and Jim have described it, as an after-the-fact reality or reflection of the sum of all parts. This together creates the affect that outsiders perceive. In a City, of course there will people who never get off the island or out of their neighborhood for that matter. But a holistic view of the greater combination of amenities is what it sounds like Jim is talking about. The traditional packaging view of branding was not quite what I was talking about and I apologize if people understood it as such. Catchy phrases and all of that just rings hollow. It’s more of an essence thing and home grown by the people as OB indicated happened in Tremont somewhat organically.

I really didn’t see this as a debate either (at least from afar), but rather a very healthy exploration of some of the larger challenges that have naturally bubbled up during discussion. Yeah, it may seem daunting if you try to tackle all of it at the same time, but I submit that you have some workable projects ahead and some very motivated, energized participants. I can only applaud. Bravo Lakewood!

Personally, I like the term IMAGE. "What others see."

Brand is too encumbered by its origins in marketing, and, furthermore, it's a term even some marketers are cynical about, and a term some marketers disparage. I once had a colleague refer to the 'Brand' being "necessary bullsh*t."

***

So, for me, the image of Lakewood does better duty.

Also, it's a deeper term for me because it peels back to reveal psychological layers to: imagined, imagination, and, one the anthro team likes to play with, imago.

For example, whatever an outsider's impression (via partly perception,) is of Lakewood, and to the extent this supplies their 'image' of Lakewood, we learn also sometimes that folded into this also is what such a person imagines Lakewood to be.

Needless to say, this suddenly two-fold concept, what is truly in the image, and what is imagined to be in the image, provides a simple structure for also unpacking what the image of Lakewood is to Lakewoodites.

Construct. the image of a place is always partly true and partly necessary bullsh*t.

I do think that everyone is in some form of agreement - just looking at the situation through their own looking glass.

Brand... Image... Reputation... they are all kissing cousins and could likely be used interchangeably in this discussion.

My personal perception is that Joan is pushing for the actual changes that will effect a change in the _________ (fill in your personally preferred word) by dealing with the issues that cause Lakewood residents to be unhappy. This is exactly how we can make the changes in perceptions that we may wish to make.

Where I think there is some confusion is in the fact that because there is no widely known or recognized strategic development plan for the city, we don't know *what* to fix first. Or *where* to invest our money. Or *how* to mend the schools... etc, etc, etc. This is where my reflection on the Lakewood ________ comes in.

I think about the city I was born in, the city where I went to school, worked, had my children and I reflect on why I love this city. Why I came back. Why I left. What is different and why. The term brand? Just a catchy phrase to pique people's interest and get the discussions flowing.

Long story short:

Yes, we must change that which is flawed in order to change the _______

but... we must identify what is flawed in order to create a plan to change it.

JMO

Peace,
~Charyn