The Observation Deck

Thank you, Councilman. I appreciate that you acted with good intentions in response to concerned constituents.

Best of luck to those involved.

I think this is more a sign of the times, and if anything can be done to save this landmark, it needs to be done with whatever is needed, and as fast as needed.

Yes, other mansions have fallen, but I think it the point that our city seems to be at a crossroads. Either we, that love our city, use all the available resources to preserve it, or we will regret it later, talking more about "whatever happened to...".

I say, let us do whatever we can to halt this loss, and set a community type resolve that, although inner ring suburbs tend to fade rather than grow, we can be and are different. We have many minds and opinions, but one item is common to us all. Our resolve to preserve our city, it's atmosphere, it's comfortable feeling, and to maintain Lakewood as a place we do not want to move out of, and more so, to help it grow is that commonality.

Let our sign of the times be, "Welcome to Lakewood. The city you'll never want to leave."

Mark

This topic is so tough, it underlines why I never had any desire to run for politics. Councilman Ed FitzGerald and Tom Corrigan held a public meeting when it would of been much easier to say, sorry to late for this one. Paula Reed and Otto Lombardo from opposite sides of the table agreed to try to work somethng out.

As the conservative that I know you are, when does the government overstep it bounds? How does Lakewood's right to try to save it's history work with Mr. Lomabardo's right to sell something he owns? What about he tougher private issues for Mr. Lombardo such as possible mortgages or leins against the house. What does the sale mean then?

The answer to this is very simple, and it comes from programs set up by LakewoodAlive, and the good work of Lakewood's Historical Society. Let's move faster on "Historic Districts" and let's support The Lakewood Historical Society. In a perfect world Lakewood Historical would have had access to enough money to buy what they feel should be kept. Then when and if the house comes up for sale they could grab that too.

Last night I had the pleasure of talking to Ed FitzGerald about the house. He had mentioned that time was the killing factor in this. Had the city had more time to talk and work with Mr. Lombardo maybe a quiet compromise could have been reached. He mentioned some very exciting ideas he was working on, but again time is a factor.

In the end who knows what can be done to save this house and/or some of the features. So while Paula Reed, councilman FitzGerald, and Mr. Lombardo work on this problem we must look to make sure it does not happen again. Support the great work the Lakewood Historical Society does, support their fundraising efforts, join, get involved.

The next great war, as pointed out by Don Farris, the city must think about doing something to protect the Lake Erie cliffs from erosion. Many homes I played in as a kid have half the backyard they once had. These are the homes in danger next.

Jim O'Bryan

PS - Interesting side note - The last great Mansion to be destroyed was the Dearborn Mansion. Today we call it Captain's Cove.

Hi,
Mr. O'Bryan said, “The last great Mansion to be destroyed was the Dearborn Mansion. Today we call it Captain's Cove.â€Â￾.

Help me out. I’m just trying to understand the sentiment here.

Is LakewoodAlive nothing more than an organized NIMBY group? (Note: NIMBY means Not In My Back Yard) I have reviewed their web site, again. There is no mention of preserving Lakewood’s great historic homes. I would suggest they add that to their mission statement, but then I fear out of spite to me they wouldn’t do it because I suggested it. Perhaps others could. When these individuals were working to support the destruction of Scenic Park there was no outcry on the elimination of the 100 year old houses there. Our building and several others are beautiful examples of period architecture that these people didn’t seem to care about saving. In the past I always felt LHS was working to preserve Lakewood’s actual history as opposed to it’s perceived history.

As I read LakewoodAlive’s mission statement, I would think they would be working hard to get a developer in to raze this house to put in cluster homes like they did at Captain’s Cove. I thought construction like Captain’s Cove was just the type of development LakewoodAlive was working to create. I remember the election results on Issue 47. Those that live north of Clifton voted overwhelming for the destruction of Scenic Park. Now, they are working to preserve a home that is perfect for cluster homes but in their back yard.

While I understand there were rumors generated by parties (whose purpose may not be clear), as I understand it, Mr. Lombardo is not doing anything more than selling of some of his prized possessions. Perhaps with the fence he is just trying to bring his home in compliance with current zoning laws. The entire notion of Mr. Lombardo gutting the home prior to razing it to build cluster homes appears to me to be completely unfounded. Mr. Lombardo told everyone at that meeting he wants to keep the home for his kids to have some day. But, if that were Mr. Lombardo’s plan I would think LakewoodAlive would be working in full support of it.

I wonder how many of us replaced the old original windows in our homes to put in energy efficient ones to reduce our heating bills. Do we really need our local government meddling into such private matters? I think not.

Former Mayor Cain once called the time right before an election the “Silly Seasonâ€Â￾. I think she was right on that one. We, as the electorate, have to use that to our city’s advantage. Let’s have Councilman Fitzgerld work to address the erosion problem along the cliffs of the lake. That would do some real good for all of Lakewood. A nice grassy slope down to the shore with a breakwall and beach would end forever Lakewood’s erosion problem and save all of those nice homes from destruction.

PS: Based on the recent views of the SCOTUS, taking the Lombardo home for cluster homes could be considered an appropriate use of eminent domain, if our City Council thinks it is. If you talk with Councilman Fitzgerald ask him to sign the pledge not to use eminent domain for private development. That is if you truly care about Lakewood’s wonderful home stock and are not a NIMBY.

Donald Farris wrote:Hi,
Mr. O'Bryan said, “The last great Mansion to be destroyed was the Dearborn Mansion. Today we call it Captain's Cove.â€Â￾.

Help me out here. I’m just trying to understand the sentiment here.

Is LakewoodAlive nothing more than an organized NIMBY group?

Don

I am sure my answer will not satisfy you. I also know that Mary Anne Crampton, one of the few leaders of LakewoodAlive that have signed on to this open forum is out of town, so that she cannot answer.

As LakewoodAlive's newest member I will try.

I do not belive there is anything about LakewoodAlive that we do not know. I do not belive that the organization is NIMBY, far from it. One of the things that came out of their meetings is that 95% of Lakewood could be designated "Historic." This would not only offer huge savings to residents, and businesses in tax credits, and loans. But would make eminent domain, and commercial development of Lakewood nearly impossible. So I find it hard to call the organization NIMBY. I believe, and take them at their word. A civic group brought together to educate the city about the possibilities of economic development. I really believe it goes no farther.

You have been at the meetings, you have heard what I heard. In their first meeting they brought up Eminent Domain, and was pleasantly surprised how fast the topic died. Let's think back to Mike Summers talking at two meetings with descriptions of what Grow Lakewood came up with. Again it flew in the face of everything I wrongly perceived that LakewoodAlive was all about. He stated very clearly they found that retail development was a dead end for Lakewood. That Lakewood should concentrate on "office space." It was far easier to convert between tenants, and brought people into the city to live, taxes would be much higher, and offices did not place a larger burden on roads, the police, city services and residents.

That said, I would think that many members are not as open. But I find it nearly impossible to fault LakewoodAlive for what some members think, or even some of their actions. You and I have worked on various projects, yet we do not always agree or walk in lock step.

Look at the Observer as a group. We cannot control what members think or do, nor do we want to.

If you look at their mission statement, they do not hide the fact that they are for economic development. You and I have asked them to add the term "responsible" they choose not to. As it is their group not mine, so be it. I cannot see how LakewoodAlive would be able to add respect for Lakewood's historic homes, as that goes against everything they are about. But that does not mean, they cannot believe Lakewood's history should be saved.

Finally it would be great to hear from Jay Foran.

Did I make it confusing enough for you?

Jim O'Bryan

Todays Cleveland Plain Dealer made mention of this in the Cheers and Jeers section.

Unfortunately for Lakewood, we got a JEER:

http://www.cleveland.com/search/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1121420463232110.xml?oxedi&coll=2




Many "historical" homes have been removed in this city. As Mr Farris points out, the Dearborn mansion along the river is now high end cluster homes. The Gold Coast was once home to outstanding lakefront mansions; today they are high rises that contribute greatly to our tax base. Several unique homes along Sloan Ave were slated for destruction when the "Italian Villa" along the river was proposed a few years back, which would have also enhanced economic development and offered upscale housing attracting wealthier residents.


Although they have not weighed in on this issue, from a reading of their website and mission statement, I could only assume that the LakewoodAlive group would embrace change and discourage restrictive government interference.

One of the stated purposes of the LakewoodAlive group is:

Better understand economic development and the changes required

Bolding mine.

In addition, they recognize that:

Our housing stock while charming is old and requires regular reinvestment.

Change is inevitable. We must be accepting of change if our city is to be vibrant and attractive to new residents.

Cluster housing on that lot could double or triple the economic value of the parcel.

Just because things have been done in the past doesn't make them right.

The condo's may have added to our tax base but our city is still in the top 5 for highest taxes in our area. As Grace mentions in her post:

Grace O'Malley wrote: Change is inevitable. We must be accepting of change if our city is to be vibrant and attractive to new residents.

Cluster housing on that lot could double or triple the economic value of the parcel.

Well, I am a new resident to Lakewood. Two years ago I bought a house on Lake Avenue. With these attitudes, I think I may have made a bad decision. It saddens me, but it might be time to start looking for a new community that isn't simply looking to double or triple the economic value of a parcel. Situations are never so black and white. This is a much more complex issue.

With regard to the Plain Dealer - getting a "Jeer" from them is positive.

Cyndie---- You made the right decision two years ago! Just hang on for the ride-- it ain't gonna get any better than here in Lakewood for people who love civic life!

In about 2 months many of us will be gathering at an as yet to be named popular spot with the nastiness a dim memory and solutions right at hand.

In my experience this episode will be concluded amicably and before Labor Day.

Stan Austin

Rereading my posting above, if I in some way inferred that government is the focused answer, I sincerely apologize. My intention was to make a general statement regarding our city and what I perceive is our collective mission as applicable to this discussion.

I reiterate, that I feel we should rally any means, "any" being defined as a general term, which might include private individual(s), or the Historical Society, or any other possiblities that might help Mr. Lombardo or any other sites or situations of importance to our city in general. If Mr. Lombardo or anyone else does not want or need that help, then of course that is his/their right. In this case, if the timing is past, then of course I agree what is done, is done.

I have absolutely no intention of bringing up any politics in this forum, nor will I. I'll leave that to others, who might be so inclined.

Excuse me Don, and perhaps I'm very late to the discussion but what the devil are you talking about?

Lakewood Alive's mission statement:

LakewoodAlive is an independent nonpartisan citizens' group devoted to promoting economic development in Lakewood and enhancing how Lakewood is perceived inside and outside its borders. LakewoodAlive's efforts benefit all Lakewood residents by stabilizing and building our tax base, attracting and retaining residents, and preserving and improving the unique quality of life our inner ring community offers.

Our primary goals are to:

Assist Lakewood citizens in navigating the complexities of economic development and its importance to the future of our community and sustaining it as a “living and vibrantâ€Â￾ city. Being knowledgeable about all the facets and implications of economic development will help the community evaluate and address future economic development projects.

Provide benchmarks indicating where Lakewood ranks relative to economic development and to keep folks informed of current and future projects involving Lakewood.

Create advocates. Getting people involved in the economic development process is imperative to insure that future projects are responsible and representative of the community’s preferences.

Our goals will be accomplished through:

Our website, which will provide a learning center environment regarding economic development and current and future projects involving Lakewood.

Our newsletter, that will be sent regularly to all members.

Our speaker series, that will provide forums that will promote dialogue and understanding about economic development in Lakewood.

Our success will be measured by the size of our membership, the use of our materials, attendance at our speaker series and the number of people that choose to get involved in their community. Our best indicator of success will be that a Lakewood citizen will be able to say that with the help of LakewoodAlive they

Better understand economic development and the changes required


Value the importance of it to Lakewood and


Feel personally empowered to get involved and contribute to Lakewood’s economic future.

Membership is open to anyone and is at no cost. However, we will rely on the personal donations of our members to help insure that we are delivering the latest economic development news and information.

What we are not:

1) We are not a city government or developer sponsored group. We are not agents for our city government and officials or developers. We are a citizen’s advocacy group.

2) We are not a booster organization. We believe all of our members love Lakewood and have its best interests at heart; however we will equally and honestly examine our strengths and our opportunities as a community.

3) We are not an organization seeking to promote our position on elections and/or issues. We do firmly believe that economic development is an imperative for any city to be sustainable and attractive to its residents. We believe honest and open debate contributes directly to people’s willingness to be open to the changes that come with economic development. Building awareness and knowledge among our citizens will contribute directly to the health and well-being of our community.

As far as I can tell, they have nothing to do with hiring developers, purchasing property, or lobbying government. Could we just TRY to drop the personal agenda and get on with what the forum was created for? Honest, intelligent talk? We're trying to stick to facts, drop the personal attacks, and work together.

Thanks for the clarification.

JUST POSTED AUCTION PHOTOS!!!

Otto Lombardo invited Lakewood Observer photogrpaher Rhonda Loge over to photograph the house and some of the items being auctioned off.

Mr. Lombardo was very kind to invite Lakewood's only paper to see first hand the items being auctioned. Thanks for the invite.

You can see these photos in the Lakewood Observer Photo Gallery on page 1.

http://lakewoodobserver.com/home.php?which=gallery&article_id=178&no_article=1.


Jim O'Bryan

No matter where one stands on this matter, the PD editorial board’s perfunctory jeer is testament to disregard for the complex and proximate differences encountered in Lakewood’s human neighborhoods.

It's quite clear to me that the PD’s editorial board is no arbiter for the differences to be negotiated within the complex critical, economic, imaginary and political terrain that informs the value sets reverberating in Lakewood's human neighborhoods.

Dana Cuff reminds us in “Enduring Proximity: The Figure of the Neighbor in Suburban Americaâ€Â￾ that “the house is a receptacle for humanness and a record of its existence. But the same can be said for the neighborhood as a whole, which has its own interiority. The figure of the neighbor reverberates in my reading of myself and of my neighbor in his house and in our neighborhood.â€Â￾

For more see: http://www.iath.virginia.edu/pmc/curren ... #copyright

As a dynamic and effective politician, Councilman Fitzgerald has people communicating, talking and listening to one another about actions and issues reverberating in neighborhoods. He has demonstrated respect and sensitivity to these complex reverberations, whether registered by Mr. Lombardo and Mr. LaCerva.

I commend all participants.

Even when human emotions heat up over differences, there is a gain where neighbors stand revealed in the complex occasion of their ideals, instincts and interests.

I believe participation in the Lakewood Observer has helped to advance an effective forum for neighbors to name, claim, negotiate and honor differences. This is the ground for personal transformation in the city that would know itself better than any other.

Now, as we come to know more about ourselves, where our ideals and interests differ, we must continue to attune ourselves respectfully to the reverberating personalities that will inevitably ripple through our human neighborhoods.

"For it is a simple matter to love one's neighbor when he is distant, but it is a different matter in proximity." --Jacques-Alain Miller

Kenneth Warren

Hi,
Ms. Metelko, I have not been on a personal attack of anyone. If you feel I have been attacking you. I'm sorry. It is nice to see you joining in the discussion. You always offer a perspective that challenges my thinking.

I have been attempting to assist in the stopping of personal attacks on Mr. Lombardo. If the guy wants to sell his lawn ornaments I think he should be allowed. If he wants to sell his fence and comply with Lakewood zoning laws, I think he should be allowed. That could save the neighborhood from a future "blight" designation, if the City Council would ever attempt that again. If the Historic Society wants these items saved, I suggest they go to the auction and buy them. If the Historic Society has the finances to purchase the entire building, I think they should make an offer that Mr. Lombardo would not refuse. If LakewoodAlive cares about the homes in Lakewood, I suggest they support our efforts to see eminent domain for private development doesn't occur here in Lakewood. That is a threat on everyone's property.

I suggested citizens concerned with saving Lakewood's great homes look beyond just this one house and take on a real problem of saving our shoreline. Can I count on your support, Ms. Metelko, and assistance in solving this real problem Lakewood faces?

I hear that my great uncle's (E. A. Meckes) former home at 12534 Lake (built in 1913) is to be torn down and the owner (Kenilworth Estates, Inc. - Zaremba Management Co. in Independence) wants it replaced with five town homes. The current owner built the apartments next to the house.

You can see a picture of it at http://tinyurl.com/cj7z4.

There's a house sale that ends tomorrow if anyone wants to see the home. There are some interesting architectural details inside. The value of the house to the county is $230,000.

I'm confused. DL, that home is also spectacular. If it is the one that I am thinking about, I heard interesting stories about it. When the developers came in to do the Gold Coast, the people that lived in this house stood firm and didn't want to sell. (Maybe this was your family?)

The developer built around them. Time and time again in Clifton Park with the folks that remembered, I heard this story. So not only does it have architectural features, it has historic and polictical importance as well.

They aren't just selling furniture and fences here, they are demolishing a lovely home to put up cluster homes. Where is the outrage?

Ken, I respectfully disagree with your assessment somewhat. While it is a good discussion to have whether homes should be protected in general as landmarks and what that protection should include, the discussion of the Lombardo home and the way in which it was handled, was not appropriate to have in public, in my humble opinion.

I have to agree with Stan, and others that were there, it was not Lakewood's finest hour. No one should have to suffer the humiliation of having their personal finances discussed in a public form with people asking questions about what he could afford or not. Even essentially well intentioned people telling him to sell and get rid of the stress over money in his life, was way too personal for a public forum. Nastier people were yelling at him to sell while he was explaining that his home was not a historic landmark and getting rid of his furniture and fountains were a family decision which he described as cutting off his arm to save his body, not a city one. At some points, there was a lynch mob mentality in my personal opinion and Ed did a good job of stopping it before it went too far, but of course it was his responsibility as he had started it. A young man who dared to take the other side was stopped immediately by the mob, because he dare not express an opinion as he didn't own a home.

We need to think carefully about what requirements we want. And that Ken, I agree is a great purpose of this forum. For example, I noticed a neighbor who just moved in is gutting their home, taking out panelling and fixtures. No one is complaining. I have seen home after home remodeled with energy efficient windows, new lighting fixtures, bathroom fixtures, kitchens etc. This is normal and we don't want to stop it.

It is ironic to look at this in the face of the blight definitions. Homes are blighted that lack modern amentities. So do we want to limit people in older, special homes from installing these modern amentities, which may distract from the historic element? I don't know - that is a public discussion and one in which I don't think council should suspend the rules to rush through in one night.