The Observation Deck

Again it comes up. The question it would seem Joe, is what is the objective and who is our target audience? There's been a huge push for Lakewood to be a family friendly community but that's so subjective. Is the easier sell being friendly to the single or coupled 20-30 crowd? Don't we already have the market cornered and only need to promote it to realize the benefits? We certainly wouldn't need to build new schools, overhaul the police department, renovate all the parks, and dedicate new rec programs to attract more young adults. We've already got what they want. While I am not suggesting that we scrape what has been done or ignore the needs of families, there is a mix of residents and it would seem to me that this group would make up at least a third of our population. If providing a trolley service paid for by the local businesses to keep them safe and make it more convenient, then by all means it sounds like a great idea.

Jim,
If the bar/restaurant business is not Lakewood's biggest industry what do you suggest is? Is it the schools or the city? Is that really an industry being that both are more of a public service than an income generator. While contributing something to the essence of the community may be a big issue for you, the answer to what is Lakewood's biggest industry is much more objective. What industry employs the greatest number and/or generates the greatest dollar amount. I have yet to see such intangibles be seriously considered in such a ranking and would argue that doing so is way too touchy feely to qualify it as a statistic. Sounds like another attempt to redefine a known term like you had done with what an anchor store is. Maybe there's an industry that has been overlooked, so what is it?

Shawn

Let's be honest all business is good business in Lakewood right now. The area from the Rivera to Around the corner is vibrant most nice night of the week. We know that even with the drunks it is safer than empty streets.

We also know that by the Westend people have actually filled into rentals to make it walkable to the bars so they do not drive wasted.

what we found was that to actually jump into tax dollars for many things mentioned here simple would not pay the for itself. So who should pay for it?

One method would be the Fulfillment Centers that were outlined years ago that had actually found a way to generate money for 2-4 clean air shuttles paid for by the group.

That said, the actual tax revenue from bars is low, as most pay less than minimum wage which is allowed at food establishments because of tips, but most food service people rarely claim more than 10%-15% so the tax is low. I am not saying they should be replaced just that we need to keep so much of this in perspective.

Is it better for the city to chauffeur drinkers, or hire two more building inspectors? Now if the bars pay for it then there are no complaints.

I believe it goes, Hospital, Schools, City, AT&T, Graphtech. I have to think Senior Health Care can give the bars a run for their money for which is bigger. Another one that can never be discounted is the hundreds and hundreds of people working out of their homes. Some big money rumbling around there.

I am not opposed to Entertainment Districts, or whatever, just what the city spends towards that end.

.

who said the city was going to pick up the bill for any of this? Seemed that the suggestions were more directed at either the bars picking up the tab or passing the expense on to the end users.
Senior healthcare I'll buy as a major industry. If we're talking industry though I would think that bars and restaraunts have the others beat. At&t and Graftech are both big companies but we're comparing industries. Maybe they do beat out the sum of 56 establishments single handedly. Some of this is speculation since numbers are not readily available as far as I know. Home based businesess? Is that now considered an industry of it's own or would that be broken up into what they actually do? Is an Avon Lady in the same industry as a website developer? Sorry to get off track. To bring it back to the point, it would seem beneficial to focus some degree of energy on a sector that is so prevalent in the city such as bars/restaraunts.
Just my 2 cents but pull back on the district idea and work towards a collaborative spirit amongst our spirits vendors and the shuttle idea. Those seem to me to be the most bang for the buck.

So how does the whiskey trolley make it so we do not need police?

So why are we shooting for the low hanging fruit again?

.

Ummm, it doesn't eliminate the need for police. It also won't make you run faster, jump higher, help you attract the opposite sex or get you a promotion. Thanks for the example of how to use a strawman argument though. It's great to see how debate works in real life situations.

Suggesting that bar owners get together and provide a service that will address the ever present complaint of lack of parking while providing a safe ride option for those who frequent their establishments sounds like a good plan. To put it in perspective, think of how much is spent on specials and sponsoring teams in an effort to attract someone to drink a beer. How much more would it be if the cost is spread across even half our Lakewood's establishments to have a circuit shuttle run from 8-3am? Now I'm sure that those opposed to such a plan will paint it as a whiskey trolley or a drunk bus so it gets dragged through the mud of public opinion and we'll continue to be a city that has 56 bars that are frequented by those who live a short drive away and will continue to take unnecessary risks because of their proximity. Why? Because it's not worth picking low hanging fruit or doing things that are logical when there is a larger agenda at work. Do these individual have accountability? Absolutely. That's why this would be a service business owners could provide to their customers and not an obligation of either their's or especially the city (meaning a tax expense).

I don't mean to sound like a prude but I would rather see more restaurants that do not center around alcohol. I would like to take my children out to dinner and there is just not a lot to choose from. My children are middle school and high school.

I like the idea of bussing the drunks around so they do not hit someone. Like my daughter who was driving home from babysitting on a Wednesday at 11 pm.

Bryan Schwegler wrote:

john crino wrote: Also, within this district are slightly different nuisance laws. Maybe the decibel level is permitted to be elevated for bars and bands within the district. Meaning if the noise bothers you then you don't live within the district.

So are you going to be the one to tell those in the poorest neighborhood in Lakewood they need to move if they don't like the noise? Doesn't really seem fair to them and it's not like they have the money to easily move "if they don't like it".

Why not lift the nuisance law on the West End first and see how that goes over? Or in Clifton Park?

Oh please. No wonder nothing changes and things continue to go down the tubes in Cleveland and its inner ring.
Why not try something different? If it doesn't work then change it back.
Yes, I am biased. It does bother me that the person who continues to call the LPD on my establishment on a Saturday night when a jazz band is playing at 11pm with the doors shut,evidently would rather have an empty storefront across the street than some life. If you want that existence then move to Lake ave or Clifton or Strongsville. Why would you chose to live on a street full of bars and restaurants and then complain about it?
The seven tenants in my building are all aware of the noise in the area and most chose to live there because they like the night life.

Back to your comments....,why do you think people living in the few hundred apartments on a section of Madison are the poorest in Lakewood? I'm not talking about telling people in Birdtown to get out. I am talking about the person who moved to an apartment above a bar and who continues to complain about the bars that have been on the street for the last 100 years.
I am also not talking about doing away with nuisance laws, I am talking about having a different level of laws in the district. If you live within these blocks then the noise level is maybe permitted to be a little higher.
As for the "drunk bus" What about the family who parks in the muni lot and takes the trolley down to Mahalls and then to Angelos and back to the lot? And yes I said a muni lot. There are so many empty,crappy building and house that could go to provide a needed money making lot for the city.

I live across the street from bela. Not once have I called LPD regarding noise coming from there.

I do have a problem with hoodlum neighbors moving next door and causing trouble, when it hasn't been like that in the 3 years I've been here.

john crino wrote:If you want that existence then move to Lake ave or Clifton or Strongsville.

I'm just saying that those in the "entertainment" district you are proposing don't often have the luxury of moving to Lake, Clifton, or Strongsville.

Why would you chose to live on a street full of bars and restaurants and then complain about it?

I completely agree. However when you're talking about altering existing noise law levels, that goes back to the fairness principle of the people who already live there.

Back to your comments....,why do you think people living in the few hundred apartments on a section of Madison are the poorest in Lakewood?

Demographic and census data tell me that.

I'm not talking about telling people in Birdtown to get out. I am talking about the person who moved to an apartment above a bar and who continues to complain about the bars that have been on the street for the last 100 years.

I agree, but what about the person who is ok with the current noise level, but would be bothered by increasing what's permissible. Again, those in the birdtown area often don't have the luxury of just moving.

I lived in an "Entertainment District" once that had bars and buses. It was called High Street -- near the campus of Ohio State University. It was fun when I was in school (even though my apartment was broken into 3 times), I really don't want to live there again.