Kaufman/Foxx survey

[Shawn Juris]

I would think that this kind of discussion and civic involvement would be a dream come true for the Lakewood Observer Project. Odd time to encourage silence and divert discussions with sarcasm, don't cha think? While there may not be anything finalized there is definitely something going on and unless there is some hidden benefit to closing our eyes and hoping for the best, I still do not see the harm in framing a discussion constructively and trying to build consensus.
I'm disappointed Jeff, I've come to expect more from your posts.

[chris richards]

I would think that this kind of discussion and civic involvement would be a dream come true for the Lakewood Observer Project. Odd time to encourage silence and divert discussions with sarcasm, don't cha think?

I was actually thinking last night after my post that perhaps a perfect plan for all this discussion about development in Lakewood could be better served and sorted out if the Observation Deck had a specific forum created for this sole purpose. I don't know, just an idea to throw out there.

As far as kids playing on the train track, isn't there a fence back there? Don't tell me, oh, but the can go around, i know kids can do such things, but fences do deter people by creating an obstacle they would rather not deal with.

Now thinking about the safety of children in the park when it comes to trains versus cars. I was told by a realtor that there are only 2.something trains per day. If/when the park space is moved up to Detroit, you will have an all day flow of traffic. Perhaps we should think about the unsupervised kid at the library who walks out the door and sees his or her friend playing in the park and starts to run with excitement...

[Vince Frantz]

But as long as we're talking about unformulated plans for Kaufman, we might as well expand the discussion to include the others. Jeff

Good point. Will the Mayor and his Administration make a statement, as they have done in a public forums concerning Streetscape improvements and changing land use on presented maps?

Has the Administration any short/medium/long range plans or visions for the use of vacated school property?

The risk, of course, of widening the discussion, is that the specific questions regarding the future of Kaufmann/Foxx get lost in a broad theroretical discussion of future land use.

What seems to be missing is a framework through which the community could understand the benefits of certain development opportunities and/or solutions to sick areas of the city.

Before I made this post - I drove to the Kaufman Park/Drug Mart area and had one more look.

All I can say is - What have people been thinking for the past 40 years?! The area is a schizophrenic mess of architecture and planning. I will leave it at that.

So I wonder what (if any) is the vision for the next 40 years? Not for "Kaufmann Park" or "Drug Mart" - but for the entire Warren Detroit Corridor? If this is written down somewhere, I suggest someone post a rendering of it on here so we could see what suggested improvements could be made to lean the area towards the 40 year goal.

Mayoral Administrations do not decide these plans. They follow these plans. Without a long term plan - the Mayor has only near-term, political, statistical outlooks on each decision. In fact - the words "long term" and "mayoral" should not be used in the same context. Mayors are short term stewards of the plan.

I can tell from driving up and down Detroit that this has been the status quo for who-knows-how-long. I would not expect either of the mayoral candidates to serve up the 40 year vision. However - I would support the one who strives not to supply this but instead points us to the body that does and recognizes it's importance.

Any plan that addresses this kind of scope would need to secure Lakewood's assets and develop new ones over time. Mayor George's website lists the SS office and Beck Center as assets. But we're talking about assets that can't be moved or closed. These are parks, downtowns, historical landmarks and that large body of water to our north. Kaufmann Park can't be "moved". The new location would be redeveloped into something that we agree to name "Kaufmann Park". Will this new thing repeat the problems of the past? Will it cause new ones? Will it become a new asset?

In the 1970s, the architect Christopher Alexander wrote a book called "The Timeless Way of Building". It described an approach to planning and developing architecture to nurture healthy communities. This book is well known among architects - but architects were not the intended audience. It is written so that the people on this message board could understand (or more explicitly "rediscover") the way healthy communities are designed and developed. It would be a great read for any city official or concerned citizen. I think it would help people see Lakewood's true assets for what they really are and not what is most marketable for political and short term financial gain. People should go check this out of the LPL (if they have it), read it, then come back to this problem with a fresh perspective.

[dl meckes]

Chris, we can make a special forum, but the way conversation on the Deck has worked is that as soon as we do that, the conversation dies.

Better to just continue talking in a thread that is getting reads, IMO.

This is a good place to begin a conversation. Citizens are going to have to be part of the process as soon as the study comes back. Until then, it's my opinion that we don't have anything real to talk about.

[Bryan Schwegler]

Chris, we can make a special forum, but the way conversation on the Deck has worked is that as soon as we do that, the conversation dies.

I have to agree. I think there are already waaaay too many forums here. Less is more in this case.

[chris richards]

Chris, we can make a special forum, but the way conversation on the Deck has worked is that as soon as we do that, the conversation dies.

Better to just continue talking in a thread that is getting reads, IMO.

This is a good place to begin a conversation. Citizens are going to have to be part of the process as soon as the study comes back. Until then, it's my opinion that we don't have anything real to talk about.

It is rather disappointing that when forums are created for topics the conversation dies. From what you've said, I gather this has been tried before and failed. I would hope that a topic such as the continued development of Lakewood would not lose interest, but agree that if past experience has shown a drop off of interest then continuing threads would be the way to go.

The one thing that is real to talk about is the purchase of the Drug Mart strip. Something will be done there whether or not the park is involved, otherwise, the developer would not have spent so much money on it. I would hope that the developer would read what citizens of Lakewood think about it and take that into considerations when making their plans.

But maybe I hope too much?

[Jeff Endress]

While there may not be anything finalized there is definitely something going on and unless there is some hidden benefit to closing our eyes and hoping for the best, I still do not see the harm in framing a discussion constructively and trying to build consensus.

And until there is a finalized proposal that will have to pass through all of the Council and comittee and board approvals, there is nothing framed over which to hold a discussion......What consensus would you build, when there are no details over financing, replacement green space, fit with the Masonic temple, possible axcquisition of other property, projected uses, tennants. Only that some don't want to lose Kaufman, some favor developing it, and otheres don't care.

I'm waiting, with my eyes wide open, for a definite proposal (one that has more than a trial balloon sketch). One that includes possible tennants, financing, replacement green space. Then the issue will be framed and a logical and rational discussion can proceed. Otherwise, it is very much like the discussion of the pennisula....

Jeff

[Bryan Schwegler]

While I understand there's nothing definitive yet, what harm is there in engaging on the concept at this point. Sort of a "what if" situation to help determine what would be acceptable to people.

This I would think could help frame any dealing or planning that might be going on. I'd hate to see another West End fiasco if we're able to avoid it earlier by bringing in public comment at the beginning stage instead of the end.

This is public land we're talking about here, not solely private development. This should include the public right from the beginning. IMHO, Council's needed approval doesn't equal public support. Remember, Council also voted to blight the West End and use Eminent Domain. The public didn't like that much given the vote.

[Brad Hutchison]

Responses to a few recent posts...

Vince - You're a poet. I thought that your post brought a well-crafted and reasoned point of view to the thread. I get the sense that for a lot of people, the Kauffman Park Situation is a proxy for a larger issue -- the broader, long-term development of Lakewood. It's not just about Kauffman (I know for some it is, just bear with me), it's about the use of space, particularly in the city center, and anxiety over the availability and accessibility of green space. I understand that people are concerned, and they should be, because green space lost cannot easily be regained. However, that brings me to...

Jeff - Your "cyber-grabbing-us-by-the-shoulders-and-shaking" is healthy. We're all getting worked up over a lot of speculation. If the West End taught us anything, it's that WE can have the final say. No one is going to wake up in the morning to find a Gap and a Best Cuts on Foxx Field. But this public discourse is important. When and if the time for action/discussion comes, we want a well-informed citizenry. So hats off to...

Chris - I appreciate you wanting to start a new forum, because a lot of people have strong feeling about an important topic. But it's OK to defer to the experts (dl) on this. Chin up... we're talking about it here. So pat yourselves on the back...

Observers - way to work the Deck. This is what it's all about.

[Bill Call]

Before I made this post - I drove to the Kaufman Park/Drug Mart area and had one more look.

All I can say is - What have people been thinking for the past 40 years?! The area is a schizophrenic mess of architecture and planning.

I agree.

The question I have for all is: If the City could raise $30 million by selling Kaufman Park and if the green space can be recreated at another location in Lakewood would you still be opposed to the sale?

[Shawn Juris]

Jeff,
You suggested that this was akin to discussing the Penninsula, but the difference is that the Peninsula is only an idea, while this development is gaining momentum. In less than a year, it has gone from comments about it being an eyesore to someone buying the parcel. The eyesore comments were heard the same night as some tried to convince us that Foxx field is not needed because it is only used by out of towners and even that is rare and that there are plenty of other field to use. If this site is anything, I think it is a place to have your voice heard. When idiotic statements are made with the intent of misleading the public someone should speak up.
I think that this discussion has been very beneficial for several reasons;
1. Like it or not many who read and post here miss council and main street meetings. This is their chance to comment and hopefully get further engaged. How many more will be prepared to attend and comment on this topic at a council meeting when it comes around?
2. I felt like the lone voice saying that Foxx field should be protected (either in it's current location or being moved to a better place). Now it seems that many others agree.
3. The shock of the suggestion of paving over Kaufman park has been lessened when it's clarified that there will be space returned in the same area.
4. We've gotten some idea of resident's perspective on safety and maintance of the current setting and know a bit more about what they expect.

I guess I think of this like a parent getting ready to announce that the family is moving. Maybe it has to happen one way or the other but if the information is allowed to soak in a bit and the reactions can be anticipated and addressed appropriately there will be far less outbursts then if you just spring it on them.
Momentum has started and I have a stinking suspicion that if we wait until the full plan with tenants and everything else, the presentation will be something like this. "We have commitment and we need to move now even if we're not prepared for what we're going to do about losing 10,000 sq ft of green that the diamond sat on. We lost the west end and if we lose these retailers then no one will want to bring a business here again." Should we not expect these types of dramatics and a high pressure sales pitch? Should I have more confidence that this $30,000 study has found an answer? Has city hall in general improved so much that they will be able to renegotiate and accomplish what they failed to do in the West End project? Did they have access to this much discussion that could have prepared them for the public response in the West End. Information that could have led them to having a plan B ready to go. A plan B that in this case could be prepared to keep things moving and deliver a project that would meet the least resistance.

[Richard Cole]

Before I made this post - I drove to the Kaufman Park/Drug Mart area and had one more look.

All I can say is - What have people been thinking for the past 40 years?! The area is a schizophrenic mess of architecture and planning.

I agree.

The question I have for all is: If the City could raise $30 million by selling Kaufman Park and if the green space can be recreated at another location in Lakewood would you still be opposed to the sale?

IF...the green space can not be recreated, I am opposed to the sale. In order for me to reassess my position, I would want to know that a replacement for Kaufmann/Foxx, with all its amenities (sledding hill, tennis courts, playground equipmet, full size baseball field etc etc), is in place. A promise will not suffice.

[Joe Whisman]

I went to Kaufman Park early Sunday morning. I will tried to take pictures, but there was a technical problem. However, I am going to be taking a survey of large trees in the park. I recommend everyone posting to go to the park and take a look. There is some work needed, but this park is a gem. We are talking about a large area. There is not many open areas like this in Lakewood. I will repeat this is a land grab, please stop it.
My next challenge for posters, go ask the next ten teenagers you see about Kaufman Park. I did and they were opposed to the destruction. Go ask a ten year old, These kids are our future. They are more important than a bunch of condos and shopping. Now ask yourself, why to young people leave Ohio in droves for brighter pastures?

[John Guscott]

Shawn, thanks for asking these great questions!

Joe, I wholeheartedly agree - more time and public involvement/input is needed. Whoever has a say in this, please slow down this development process!

I have used the city parking lot at Kauffmann Park nearly every day for the better part of the past 14 years. As a result, I’ve seen all sorts of good behavior in the park (such as the evening baseball games, and Little Links when it was open), and some bad behavior (teens using vulgar language, car vandalism, the occasional fight, and once watching an out-of-control driver run over a girl only to crash into the fence by the stands).

Anyway, here are my answers:

1. Do you think that this park is currently safe?
a. Yes, more or less. Something needs to be done about lighting at night though. I’ve spoken with some friends who felt uncomfortable with parking there during winter months when it would get dark early. There are a LOT of ways for a would-be criminal to do their damage and get away, scot-free. Some security cameras couldn’t hurt – does anyone know if there are already some cameras in place?

2. Do you think that this park is currently well maintained?
a. It’s not too bad during the summer/fall months when baseball is going on.

3. Would Kaufman Park would be improved if it were moved to the forefront, adjacent to Detroit Ave?
a. Yes, I think it would be more accessible for residents and maintenance crews as well as be more visible for security purposes. Aesthetically, I think it would look appealing flanked by the two neo-Classical buildings to the west & east. Right now the park looks thrown together and could be redesigned for better use.

4. Have you or your family members used this park in the past 3 months?
a. We have never brought our kids to use this park, mainly because we frequently use the one by Madison/Hilliard Triangle.

5. Does a park require playground equipment?
a. Not necessarily, but it would be nice. Next year the library will have HUGELY expanded children’s section and, with a stellar park across the street, I think this part of Lakewood has the potential to become a major family destination. On the other hand, I can also envision the park in that space to be more like NY’s Central Park, with landscaping and scenic areas for relaxation, etc.

6. Do planters qualify as green space?
a. Lol, no, but that doesn’t mean planters can’t be included in the plan!


I really like the idea of Jimmy Foxx field (FWIW, here is some historical background information on the field: http://www.lkwdpl.org/paths/foxxfield/index.html), but I think it should be moved from the Kauffmann area and developed further. This field could be another jewel for Lakewood. Jeff, your location alternatives are great!

Why don’t we Lakewood residents use this opportunity to shoot for two new parks instead of a (reduced) one, or none?

[Vince Frantz]

Before I made this post - I drove to the Kaufman Park/Drug Mart area and had one more look.

All I can say is - What have people been thinking for the past 40 years?! The area is a schizophrenic mess of architecture and planning.

I agree.

The question I have for all is: If the City could raise $30 million by selling Kaufman Park and if the green space can be recreated at another location in Lakewood would you still be opposed to the sale?

Bill -
I would need more understanding to answer that. My first question would be how to repair this area in respect to the natural flow of events and uses in the Warren/Detroit corridor - hyper local and city-wide. In other words, some green space for green space sake isn't a strategy. And not all green space is created equal. The short term gain of $30 Million might not offset the potential long term damage created by this PARTICULAR area becoming yet another mixed use development project designed by a developer with 10 year exit strategies in mind.

Without any long term goal in place, the only thing anyone could see positive would be the cash infusion. "hey - the city needs money. This should help". That is the lowest common denominator.

So to illustrate a point - lets take the closest thing I have seen to a long term vision (and since others in this thread are familiar with it) - the Peninsula Idea. Let's say that everyone in Lakewood bought into this thing and it was a total hit - clear as day - this is our future. (stay with me).

How does Kaufmann Park area fit into that plan? Well - if people are getting off Warren from 90 and heading north - they are coming right through Warren/Detroit. The Peninsula has no ball field. The Peninsula is too far from the Library. The Farmers Market would not use the Peninsula. You can see the Peninsula lighthouse from the top of Kaufmann Park. What would a developer do to gradually make Kaufmann/Foxx area more "Peninsula-plan friendly". Wouldn't the Peninsula plan be a bigger hit if people could see smaller, near term projects get done in their lifetime? Replace "Peninsula Plan" with the 40 year vision of your choice. (Can anyone tell me of some others?)

I throw out this far fetched example mainly because it isn't that far fetched when you think about connecting the center of Lakewood - Warren to the Lake - with sustainably developed pieces that work extremely well in conjunction. A strong trunk that invites you in from the south with green fingers shooting off east and west integrated with residential, retail and tiny courtyards in between. The pièce de résistance being the Lakefront itself (Peninsula or not).

Right now - people who get off at Warren have no clue that there is a Lake or anything worth heading north for. As they progress, they see a random patchwork of residential/carbon-copy plazas and anytown-USA corners. Gas station. CVS. Sherwin Williams. HR Block. Lets just turn around.

It seems like the only language the average citizen can use when describing the pros/cons of any planning decision has to do with short term monetary benefits, "keeping us safe" or "how can we attract businesses". Everyone pays taxes - so the degree of which you pay or care to pay will determine your energy for engaging in a planning process. So all we have involved are a few "it would be cool to have green space" people verses a bunch of "but our taxes are high" people. This is snake oil salesman heaven.

But when the proposed development for the area is revealed - how will we even know what forces shaped it and if they are forces and patterns we want to support? Would there even be time to ask? And how would the average citizen be able to understand and give support to something if all they can fathom is "it should make the city money" and "better than what is there now". Rinse and repeat for another 40 years.

I just don't think you can simply "recreate" green space or any space for that matter. If an area needs to be a park or courtyard - it deserves to be and should be. We can't simply maintain a certain acreage of green-ness as a goal by playing a game of musical parcels.