Lakewood's Budget Takes A Big Hit

[Ellen Cormier]

I think Lakewood is in a good position to maintain its advantages. I would look to the outer ring suburbs for people who can't afford that lifestyle anymore to drift back into Lakewood. I think people are already sick and disgusted at the clustered idiotic monstrosity that is now Westgate. It was ugly before but at least you could park and walk around and stay out of the weather. Why did we want to get rid of malls again? For that fake hometown feel? Well, gee we have the real thing right in Lakewood!

[Stan Austin]

LOL--- Ellen---Westgate is the lead dog----

It was the first "Shopping Center" in the mid 1950s. (In America)

When the open mall aspect became problematic with the weather, a roof was put on in early 1970.

Meantime, regional malls like Great Northern with the help of easy access from I 480 took center stage.

So now, as you suggest, Westgate has gone back to its origins, an open air collection of stores.

With such a state of flux in retailing it further emphasizes the absolute lunacy in the so called West Side project.

Stan

[Bryan Schwegler]

LOL--- Ellen---Westgate is the lead dog----

It was the first "Shopping Center" in the mid 1950s. (In America)

Westgate and Eastgate were built around the same time, Eastgate of course never getting a roof.

So now, as you suggest, Westgate has gone back to its origins, an open air collection of stores.

With such a state of flux in retailing it further emphasizes the absolute lunacy in the so called West Side project.

I actually look at it a different way. I think it shows the importance of businesses, especially retail, being flexible. Not only with the products they sell but also the approach they take to how they market and present their business. I think it also speaks volumes to the necessity of retail space being flexible, changeable, and adaptable to contemporary needs and desires.

Business and consumer sentiment are never static.

So this says a few things about Lakewood:

- The store fronts are quaint but woefully outdated for today's shopping environment. There needs to be massive amounts of updating done to bring these spaces up to modern code and business requirements to make them suitable for many types of businesses and long-term use. The city needs to figure out how to make this happen even if it means funding some it themselves through low-interest loans. Until this happens, no one will be beating down the door to get the space when there's more modern, and sometimes cheaper options elsewhere. Oh yeah, and parking...but we all know about that already.

- Lakewood businesses cannot just rely on the "buy local" crowd and do things they way they've done things for the past 30 years and think that's going to work. They need to adapt, they need to figure out the products and services that today's consumers are looking for. They need to not get pissed when people decide to buy on Amazon, that's just life, it's the way things are today so they need to figure out how to do something unique or create a service that has value added they can't find elsewhere. Shopping is global, it's online, unless you give the majority of your shoppers something special they can't get elsewhere. They need to openly accept credit cards and stop whining about fees, they need a website, they need to be internet friendly because guess what...all your competitors do it and consumers expect it.

There are some who will close their eyes and stomp their feet and scream bloody murder that we don't need to change, that instead it's the consumer that needs to go back to the way things were 50 years ago, but the reality is that's not going to happen. Looking back doesn't solve anything, looking forward is what needs to happen.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Bryan

While I generally agree with your post I would bring up a couple points. If you have
something basic that has worked for over 100 years, and is even back in fashion, does it
not pay to look back and look for that foundation to continue strong building on?

Here I would say that is affordable clean homes. While we can chase the trends with homes
and go after the Westlake cluster homes, or the first floor bedrooms for the growing elderly
that NEED homes over apartments. Or we can develop what we have and what we do best
and work to do it better than anyone else. Again, CLEAN SAFE affordable housing. The choice
is always change to "catch up" or develop your product and your brand and market it.

I would also say that "buy local" leads to a potential nightmare, even if we can rebuild our
resident numbers to a healthy 60,000 plus. Buy buy local pride, support locally owned and
teach them to reach out on the web, could provide huge dividends. But again it comes back
to housing our big money maker and our number one industry.

.

[Bryan Schwegler]

Bryan

While I generally agree with your post I would bring up a couple points. If you have
something basic that has worked for over 100 years, and is even back in fashion, does it
not pay to look back and look for that foundation to continue strong building on?

Sure, as long as you put that 100 year-old proposition in perspective with today's priorities and realities. Although I'd challenge you to show me any industry or business that has been untouched or unchanged for the past 100 years.

Here I would say that is affordable clean homes. While we can chase the trends with homes
and go after the Westlake cluster homes, or the first floor bedrooms for the growing elderly
that NEED homes over apartments. Or we can develop what we have and what we do best
and work to do it better than anyone else. Again, CLEAN SAFE affordable housing. The choice
is always change to "catch up" or develop your product and your brand and market it.

Oh I don't disagree and I think you are right on with this. Most of my comments above are related specifically to business and retail, not housing.

I would also say that "buy local" leads to a potential nightmare, even if we can rebuild our
resident numbers to a healthy 60,000 plus. Buy buy local pride, support locally owned and
teach them to reach out on the web, could provide huge dividends. But again it comes back
to housing our big money maker and our number one industry.

I agree. And quite honestly, we need to stop thinking we'll ever be at 60,000 people again. The high populations of the past were not necessarily a function of more families in the city, but rather larger families. People today do not live with large extended families and don't have anywhere near the same number of children. Those were the driving factors behind higher population.

[Jim O'Bryan]

I agree. And quite honestly, we need to stop thinking we'll ever be at 60,000 people again. The high populations of the past were not necessarily a function of more families in the city, but rather larger families. People today do not live with large extended families and don't have anywhere near the same number of children. Those were the driving factors behind higher population.

Bryan

Highwater mark was 76,000+, while I think that is out of our immediate goals, though
more and or renovated larger gold coast would help. I do think 60,000 is an easy mark to
aim for. We have affordable housing, great schools, great libraries, great parks and good
bars. This should help to attract younger people and new families. It is the city that has
worked in conjunction with others to fill our affordable rentals with heavily medicated vets
and criminals.

Of course these are also the people young families would hate to live next to. This is what
I am getting at in the "Are we bringing the problems on ourselves?" thread. The city on the
whole has very little vision and reminds me of the French in WW2. Eager to take whatever
we can get. The city, and many of the leaders have never believed in Lakewood, they only
see Lakewood as something they can change into wherever they happen to want to live.

Typically Cleveland low self esteem.

FWIW


.

[Bryan Schwegler]

I guess what I think is that it would be a better number to focus on increasing the number of households in Lakewood rather than raw population numbers. Families are just smaller now, or don't have any children so chasing a population figure that was based on large families with lots of kids in the past is just not feasible.

It's not about low self-esteem, and it's certainly not thinking that Lakewood can't attract more people, it's just looking at the realities of the demographic changes in family size over the last 50 years.

[Jim O'Bryan]

I guess what I think is that it would be a better number to focus on increasing the number of households in Lakewood rather than raw population numbers. Families are just smaller now, or don't have any children so chasing a population figure that was based on large families with lots of kids in the past is just not feasible.

It's not about low self-esteem, and it's certainly not thinking that Lakewood can't attract more people, it's just looking at the realities of the demographic changes in family size over the last 50 years.

Bryan

Not to get in a full blown debate over this but I am finally generally seeing 3-5 children families popping up around town, though 2 would seem like the norm. Still, I think everything
we have truly accomplished worth crowing about, schools and libraries lead us to families,
not another place selling ground beef.

When you look at a city like Lakewood and see its biggest problem as needing "shopping,
shopping, shopping," and yearn to change it because of the negatives seen, to me it falls
on self esteem, and a general unhappiness.

FWIW

.

[Jim O'Bryan]

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/increbile-shrinking-city-detroit-becoming-ghost-town-20110323-095202-383.html

Interesting video, not sure i agree with all aspects but certainly food for thought.


.

[Betsy Voinovich]

Bryan

I would also say that "buy local" leads to a potential nightmare, even if we can rebuild our
resident numbers to a healthy 60,000 plus. Buy buy local pride, support locally owned and
teach them to reach out on the web, could provide huge dividends. But again it comes back
to housing our big money maker and our number one industry.

.

Hi Jim--

I don't get what you mean about "buying local" leading to a potential nightmare. I thought buying local was a good thing. You are saying that "buy local" is different than "buying local pride"? I'm very interested in avoiding nightmares in Lakewood, please elaborate.

Thanks.

Betsy Voinovich