Kaufman/Foxx survey

[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.

[Gary Rice]

We need look no farther than the West Park area to see numerous beautiful green spaces available for their residents to enjoy.

Lakewood does not have many areas to equal those of our next-door Cleveland neighborhood.

Our Andrews/Kaufman field is a fantastic multi-use facility having a golf course, playground, tennis and full size ball diamond. Has anyone considered that it abuts up to the railroad track? Were we to permit a shopping area up there, how many stores would be willing to locate by rumbling horn-blowing freight trains carrying who knows what, virtually inches from their stores?

How many knick-knacks do you suppose will fall off the shelves of those establishments as those trains rumble by? How many patio-savvy restaurateurs will be willing to put up with thundering steel wheels and diesel fumes wafting by their noses?

Atmosphere, yeah.

Perhaps the stores could offer clothespins, ear muffs, and shock absorbers? What an attractive area this might be for glassware shops!

Has anyone considered the overall cost of all these modifications to our city, by the way?

Whatever we might gain through a potential Kaufman sale would no doubt rapidly diminish if we were to develop some other area of the city.

Glad there is time for hearings and discussion.

[Dee Martinez]

If the Kaufman facility is so fantastic, why did nearly everyone who responded to the original post say they hardly, if ever, use it?

There is no "golf course." Just a miniature golf course that was shuttered years ago due to lack of interest and use.

Why are we paying to maintain something the public has no interest in?

[Brad Hutchison]

Could I interrupt and ask someone to provide a short explanation of the Peninsula Plan? I'm not familiar with it.

[Bill Call]

Why are we paying to maintain something the public has no interest in?

It would be easier to answer the question: "What is the meaning of life"?

[dl meckes]

http://lakewoodobserver.com/pdfs/Observ ... e%2001.pdf

Page 9 has the article.

[Brad Hutchison]

Thanks dl. A very interesting and ambitious plan. Was it ever taken seriously, in part or in whole, by the powers that be?

[Shawn Juris]

I went out to a few of our parks the other day. I didn't realize how nice the equipment at Kaufman was. Maybe it was just the bright blue sky and the deep green grass but it looked like a very nice place. I have some photos but have no idea how to get them up here. Clearly there is a need for something to be done with Little Links but I'm still not getting what's so bad about Kaufman and Foxx. I particularly don't buy the explanation of "it's secluded so therefore presents a safety/security issue" when the alternative is moving the field to Cove Park. That is more secluded than Kaufman. But then again Cove doesn't have the interest of a developer.
One thing that I also found peculiar was that while much of this discussion focuses on the need for green space, both parks had a 10x10 block of asphalt where grass should be. Maybe the remnants of a four square court? Too small for basketball. Not sure why that would be there. I also walked around Lakewood Park. Pending the dimensions of the field, I still think that if you rotate the infield you can fit a full sized diamond there without disrupting anything.

Oh and I know there was at one point a desire for community gardens. I had heard that there was a shortage of landspace to cultivate for this purpose. I don't have any green in my thumbs but Foxx field has an area that is between the parking and the field that must be 150 feet long and 20 feet wide that is all just overgrown. I would imagine that this could be terraced or planted with the natural grade. That is if there isn't a Drug Mart that gets planted on it. There is also a rather large patch of green behind the fence in the outfield. Would make sense that this could be better utilized as well. For the number of homeruns that get hit I would guess that you could plant quite a bit back there. Wouldn't that be something to be able to sell produce at a farmer's market just 100 yards away from where it was grown. Talk about fresh.

[J Hrlec]

I personally don't think that is a good location for a baseball field, since I consider it part of downtown lakewood and in my mind those just do not fit.

However, making it into a general park area with a playground and maybe some tennis courts would be fine. Basically I think a "park" area or a shopping area would be fine... I just am not so hot for the combination of both.

[Shawn Juris]

So would Edwards field not be a more logically place to start? That is afterall right on Detroit, while Foxx is tucked away behind a strip mall and a parking lot. Just sayin'. Of course no one was looking to buy Edwards field yet so we're focused on Kaufman/Foxx. Again, while it may not be the most ideal location to everyone, where else would it be better suited? I would say that sending players down to the metroparks doesn't help to promote the city or help to drive business to local shops. I believe that this was the position that Jay Foran took a while back to justify it's elimination but this preference of sending the diamonds out to the fringe seems to be more suited for an exburb that relies on cars than one that is so densely populated and relies on maintaining walkability.

[John Guscott]

Shawn,

Are you suggesting moving Jimmie Foxx Field to Edwards Park? In my opinion, that park is too small for the adult rec leagues (isn't Edwards primarily used by little kids, e.g., t-ball, etc.)?

I agree the metroparks would not be the right location, either. Too far from the residents.

Jeff Endress had some suggestions earlier in the thread, including the sites of some of the closed schools.

What exactly will be happening to those sites? Does anyone know?

[sharon kinsella]

Ryan -

It is much more complex than the perception of the city worker (who may have been on a break you, you could have asked him, with a smile). The city worker is given their orders by their supervisor, the supervisor is given their orders by the administration and council, and the administration and the council should be responsible to us, the voters.

Talk to Kevin Butler. He will tell you that I will call him until I get an answer. If he doesn't call me back, I call and call and call. Then when we talk, I ask how I can get this solved and if there is anything I can do. I bear personal responsibility. That's how we took care of the loud music problem at Harry Buffalo.

This is our town. Ours to raise up or ours to let lay to waste.

[Shawn Juris]

John,
I'm definitely not suggesting moving Foxx to Edwards. So far there seem to be two arguments that are being leaned on to justify doing anything to Foxx and Kaufman. 1. They should be moved because they are secluded and unsafe. 2. The diamond is located in the middle of downtown. To address the 2nd argument, it seems that the bigger target would be to take out the diamond at Edwards, it is afterall on Detroit and not hidden away. Are those that support this claim that diamonds don't belong in downtown locations (that coincidentally are accessible to kids in the area) also setting their sites on this park? To address the 1st argument, the logic doesn't bear out when the alternative suggested is Cove Park which is even more secluded than Kaufman/Foxx. If they are going to explain why a change should be made the solution should solve the problem that their argument is based on. I find it rare to be a conservative in the sense that I don't want change something but unless the result is better than what we have now then why do it? The only reason that I'm left with is money and satisfied a few vocal stakeholders.
To be clear again, I have no problem with redeveloping the strip mall. Go for it. I have a problem with using faulty logic to convince us that we should get rid of an asset that can not be replaced, particularly in a city that abounds with vacant storefronts and other alternatives.

[Joe Whisman]

There are many more alternative areas to redevelop. This "deal" is a land grab. The park can not be replaced or moved. Those of us who want to keep to park should form a lobby and put pressure on the involved parties. Who has the plan? Where can I get a copy of the $20,000 study? Should we start a petition to save the park?

[James Mullen]

1. Do you think that this park is currently safe?
I do think it is safe. This is solely based on the fact of how underused the park is.
2 Do you think that this park is currently well maintained?
I do not think this park is well maintained. The tennis court is in disrepair, the park is is not attractive, and the field are is not in the best of condition.
3. Would Kaufman Park would be improved if it were moved to the forefront, adjacent to Detroit Ave? No, I still feel green space is necessary in that location, but not the extent of what the park is now.
4. Have you or your family members used this park in the past 3 months?
yes, only because of Softball
5. Does a park require playground equipment?
No
6. Do planters qualify as green space?
I think green space can be defined many different ways. I feel there is the ability to make green space where it does not consitute the typical park like setting, with swings, fields, etc.

In conclusion I believe with the construction of the Library and the adjacent renovation to the church building on the corner of Arthur and Detroit, we have the chance to improve something that is dated and does not fit well in the surrounding area. We can relocate a green space to one of the schools that will be closing, and have limited green space at this location.