The Observation Deck

Just what and who is "Develop Lakewood"? Is it a registered organization or a committee authorized by a government body or is it a bunch of individuals with vested interests? The plan for a coffee shop is speculation if they are not affiliated with any organization and have not coordinating with the City. Is the plan essential to the area and does it benefit most of the citizens of Lakewood? If the question is no to either one of these questions then it is a waste of funds to improve the structure using City funds. Has anyone ever thought that a self-funded organization may have plans for a better use of the building? Just what Lakewood needs is more special interest groups to divert funding from essential capital improvements and eventually draining operating funds to keep a well intended but miss directed idea alive.

Mr. B:

I'll be attending Mark Schroeder's meeting Thursday night to learn more about his proposal for Lakewood Park. I haven't an answer with respect to the term "Develop Lakewood," that is, whether it's an established group, but I do know Mark's a neighbor of mine and a very well-respected guy.

The discussion is at the library at 7 p.m. I'm sure there'll be further talk afterward on this forum.

Best wishes,

Kevin Butler

Care to elaborate on what this is all referring to?

Bryan Schwegler wrote:Care to elaborate on what this is all referring to?

http://www.lakewoodobserver.com/home.php

Now on the front page of this website with drawings.



.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:

Bryan Schwegler wrote:Care to elaborate on what this is all referring to?

http://www.lakewoodobserver.com/home.php

Now on the front page of this website with drawings.

.

Link to drawings yields server error...

Mr. Baker:

Thanks very much for the questions. As of today, Develop Lakewood is a concept name for shepherding the ParkPlace vision. I am a Lakewood resident and frequent visitor of Lakewood Park.

This summer, the question came to me, "What is this building used for and why is it in such disrepair?" From that question, I envisioned the concept of ParkPlace: a gathering place for residents and neighbors in Lakewood Park.

I have chosen to make my vision public and solicit feedback from interested stakeholders since the space is so central to many residents, and so dear in many hearts.

As Mr. Butler points out, I am hosting an Open meeting to discuss my vision and hear other voices with an interest in the Skate House facility and in developing a community space.

My vision is for a private entity to lease the space from the city. The mechanics of which we will need to discuss at some point in the future as the vision becomes more clarified.

You write: "Is the plan essential to the area and does it benefit most of the citizens of Lakewood?" That is a central question. My view is that having an attractive space for residents and neighbors to gather is essential to the area and will benefit most of the citizens of Lakewood in many ways not least of which would be park enhancement and job creation for Lakewood residents.

You write: "Just what Lakewood needs is more special interest groups to divert funding from essential capital improvements and eventually draining operating funds to keep a well intended but miss directed idea alive." I am reading sarcasm here, and I couldn't agree more. What I envision is a public private partnership with the city leasing the space to a private entity to operate the business. This would not only reduce city operating expenses for the facility, but also bring revenue to the city via lease revenue and payroll tax receipts.

I have been spurred to action on this project in part by the efforts of Lakewood Alive. My vision is in alignment with the findings of the recently released Grow Lakewood report.

From the Lakewood Alive website (a very thorough and informative website): "Lakewood has had a proud past and certainly can have an energizing and exciting future. For sustainable economic development to be achieved and realized by everyone in the community, Lakewood citizens need to be proactive in taking up and leading the effort. Working together collaboratively can make the difference in creating a vibrant and “aliveâ€Â￾ local economy. Our future depends on it.

I hope you have the time to join in the discussion Thursday at 7p.m. at Lakewood Public Library auditorium.

A simple point of clarification: We are delighted that Mark Schroeder has been inspired by LakewoodAlive to act on his personal vision. Otherwise, LakewoodAlive has no role in this concept development.

We continue to urge residents to become fully informed before advocating their position on any economic development project. The library meeting sounds like the place to get questions answered....and it certainly appears there will be follow-up on this page on Friday morning...oh, make that Thursday night!

Mary Anne

Mr. Schoreder

Thanks for answering several of the questions. I didn’t realize that this was a just a vision since a drawing and the description of the proposed commercial use of the property was in the article, but you are correct I didn’t notice a business plan or a feasibility study. Although a coffee shop may be considered economic development, I don’t think it will change the challenges facing Lakewood for commercial development. Anytime a city spends funds for a private partnership its called a subsidy, something this City cannot afford to do is to promote a coffee shop. Unless this vision has the economics to stand on it own [completely without a dime from the City] I suggest our taxes would be better spent our neglected infrastructure.

You are also correct that “Lakewood citizens need to be proactive in taking up and leading the effort. Working together collaboratively can make the difference in creating a vibrant and “aliveâ€Â￾ local economy. “ but they need to or at least try to coordinate these efforts thru the City and research the City’s long range plans , otherwise disappointment and disinterest will reign. I won’t be at your meeting since I don’t feel I have anything to add to your vision.

Good luck

Mary Anne-- Thanks for the point of clarification. And for the encouragement for people to attend the meeting. I am attempting to create a conversation that matters.

Mr. Baker-- I am saddened that you will not be at the meeting tomorrow night. It appears you have some passion around this vision. While my vision will be discussed, I encourage all interested parties, including the City, to come and publicly voice their positions/plans/visions.

You wrote: "I didn’t realize that this was a just a vision since a drawing and the description of the proposed commercial use of the property was in the article." Perhaps you should have read the title, "A 'Third Place' Vision for Lakewood Park" We included the concept drawing to spur imagination.

You wrote: "Anytime a city spends funds for a private partnership its called a subsidy, something this City cannot afford to do is to promote a coffee shop. Unless this vision has the economics to stand on it own [completely without a dime from the City]" I COULD NOT AGREE MORE. My judgment is not that the current facility is in disrepair from intentional neglect. Rather it is a sign of a City facing numerous challenges, prioritizing those challenges and spending its limited funds on more urgent needs. As this vision clarifies, and if it has the necessary support from citizens we will present a plan that will stand on its own, and in fact provide the City with economic benefits.

You wrote: "You are also correct that “Lakewood citizens need to be proactive...but they need to or at least try to coordinate these efforts thru the City and research the City’s long range plans , otherwise disappointment and disinterest will reign." Prior to taking my vision public I approached the Mayor's office and presented my ideas to Tom Jordan, City Planning Director. I have discussed my vision with several members of City Council. I have read the Lakewood Park Master plan crafted in 2001 which has proposed use of the current Skate House facility as a Lakewood Historical Society 2-story Barn Structure at a cost to the city of approximately $600M (their estimate in 2001 dollars). So, I have tried to coordinate my vision through the City.

Again, I invite the City Planning Director, Mayor, and any interested members of City Council to attend the Open meeting I've convened tomorrow at Lakewood Public Library. There will be active, engaged residents there seeking a better solution for an underused and poorly maintained structure in Lakewood Park.

Finally, to address the lack of business plan. You have referred to the ParkPlace Vision as a "coffee shop". I am uncertain if this is the final outcome of our process. As Mary Anne Crampton correctly states in her post, this is a "concept development".

My hope is that subsequent to the meeting tomorrow, I will have sufficient input from interested parties to move to developing and presenting a business plan to the City. A plan that will have the backing of a significant block of Lakewood residents.

Mr. Schoreder,

My lack of attendance to your “Develop Lakewoodâ€Â￾ meeting has nothing to do with emotion. Please don’t read emotion into my statement that I had hoped reflected realism. Mr. Schoreder with all do respect, you have no traffic feasibility study, business or marking plan, or financing for this or any other project in the Park. Everything I have read thus far is nothing more than a mystical Christmas shopping wish that is waiting for Santa Clause to drop a coffee shop in the park. My only interest is that City property and funds are not used for anyone’s vision or an overactive passion.

If you can persuade the Mayor, Planning Director and the Council members to attend your meeting perhaps your unorthodox method of securing the City’s assistance for your vision may prevail. If they do attend it will set precedence for the City’s development protocol or perhaps it won’t set a new precedence since the City’s dismal failure with the West End Project that cost taxpayer hundreds of thousand of dollars.

Richard Baker wrote:Mr. Schoreder,

... it won’t set a new precedence since the City’s dismal failure with the West End Project that cost taxpayer hundreds of thousand of dollars.

I hope you are talking about the money wasted on those studies.

As far as Mark Schroeder, from what I have seen he not only has a plan, but many plans for how this unfolds.

.

Point of Clarification: As Mr. O’Brien pointed out the cost inferred was the expenses the city incurred for the West Side Project associated with attorney and consulting fees, studies, surveys, etc. authorized by the City Council.

Richard Baker wrote:Point of Clarification: As Mr. O?Brien pointed out the cost inferred was the expenses the city incurred for the West Side Project associated with attorney and consulting fees, studies, surveys, etc. authorized by the City Council.

I agree.

This is why I like what Mark has started. Is it perfect no, but the ripples it has caused are beautiful. People getting energized and talking about it. Had he said nothing, nothing would be what we would be getting back. Does Mark have everything in place, no, but everyday he has been molding and making the idea better. Not just for his vision but the vision of Lakewood, Lakewood Historical Society and other Third Place in Lakewood.

You used to be a mayor correct? So I will aka you what I have asked Tom George. "Isn't it nice when a private group or individual develops a plan without government money, not needing government money?

The Lakewood Observer has been working with a bunch of groups that are ready to take their shot at making the city better. As I know who is involved, I give them the better chance than many others that have official sanction.

Richard I want to thank you for jumping in, writing and sharing your opinions, they are gold. Ken and I were thinking that you might be a perfect person to sit down with Mark and kick around some of these ideas.



.

Mr. Bakerâ€â€￾

You seem hung up on “feasibility studiesâ€Â￾. So although I don’t know you I am thinking you are either a politician or consultant, or possibly both.

Consultants are always peddling studies, basically so they can charge (as you’ve referred to in your prior post) large fees for what often the man off the street can give you for free called “common senseâ€Â￾. Politicians love these studies because when things go awry as they often do (and more often in this ever increasing age of complexity), the politician can say “But the (PWC, McKinsey, etc.) study said…â€Â￾ and cover their posterior. Such posterior covering is very necessary for even the best politicians if they wish to be re-elected.

So, for what its worth, here is the Develop Lakewood feasibility study in its entirety: “North of the tracks, west of 117th, east of Rocky River there is exactly ONE casual place to go if you want to meet friends over a nice hot beverage.â€Â￾ For extra credit, name the place?? (although it’s a great place, it’s a hidden gem).

I have had a team of experts working overtime on this study and the costs have ballooned out of control. I will be billing myself one well deserved Latte from the Phoenix.

The idea that Lakewood residents would want an attractive place in Lakewood Park to gather informally to socialize and build the social networks that are the basis of our 21st century economy sounds pretty feasible to me--as well as almost EVERY person I've shared this vision with.

Clarify vision, gather support, make solid plans, attract investment, execute plan, enjoy a new and much needed amenity in the Park. Mystical Christmas wishes perhapsâ€â€￾but there is always hope. Right now I’m in Clarify Vision, Gather Support mode. Will you join me?

“Hope lies not with the expert or official, but with those who use the environment built for them and find it lacking.â€Â￾â€â€￾Ray Oldenburg

I have a powerpoint presentation of the full ParkPlace vision to date for anyone who requests it. Just email me at develop_lakewood@yahoo.com and I will send it quickly.

Thanks Lakewood!