The Observation Deck

I heard Jennefer Hooper describe the current proposal to spruce up Lakewood's "downtown," and I think it is all to the good. However, it brought to mind the old and wise saying that the good is the enemy of the best. From whatever sources the funds for downtown fix-up are to come, those funds are limited, and so is energy, and I wonder if the time and energy might be better spent in other places and in other ways.
In the first place, it doesn't seem to me that Lakewood really has a downtown (as opposed to calling the center of the city "downtown" simply because you accept the assumption that every city has a downtown.) This is no criticism -- when I think of Boston and New York (i.e. Manhattan), I can't think of any area in either city that would be called "downtown" in the significant sense of being the center of the city. Each has a Theater District, a Financial District, perhaps a dominant shopping district, etc., but no one place that could be rightly called "downtown."
When we think of a downtown area, we think of Cleveland (or what Cleveland used to be). The area adjoining Euclid Ave. and the Public Square had the major office building (Terminal Tower), several major department stores, large movies houses and a legitimate theater (the Hanna), restaurants, etc. But in Lakewood, the area defined as "downtown" (Arthur to Bunts) does not include the Beck Center (nor the new YMCA near it), nor the City Hall, nor any predominant stores (sorry Chas.), nor is it a transportation hub. The most noted restaurants in Lakewood are out of the area. And so on. The most lively place is the curved strip mall at Warren and Detroit (Lakewood Center?), but its four most prominent places are specialty stores of one sort or another -- Marc's, Joane's, Pet Supplies Plus, Chipotle. People come to these for a specific purpose; I can't see them as being on a par with May's or Higbee's (or Dillard's or Kaufman's for the younger crowd.) That's why I don't see Lakewood as really having a downtown. Rather, its attractions are spread out, in a number of separate places -- the Beck Center, Winterhurst; the Gold Coast with Pier W; Madison Village; etc. So sprucing the Arthur- Bunts area just wouldn't do that much overall good for the city. (It's not analogous, for example, to a project that would revitalize Cleveland's downtown -- if that can still be done -- or the attempt, which seems to be successful, of creating Clevelan'd Theater District around E 14th some years ago.)
Second, and more importantly, I am concerned that the limited resources that would go into the downtown project would take resources from -- and perhaps take away any chance of success for -- other projects with a greater payoff. The premier example, of course, is the proposal for a peninsula (or island with a causeway) offshore from Lakewood Park. This is an opportunity that comes once in a century. Of course we should ask the hard questions now -- e.g., what's the weather like in the winter down there? -- but if the project is feasible we should do everything possible -- devote every resource -- to making it a reality as soon as possible.
And then there are other areas of the city that might be developed to good advantage, bringing new enterprises into being instead of merely giving old ones a better shine. I'm not expert enough nor knowledgeable enough to list all the possibilities, but I'll mention a couple.
One is the Hilliard-Madison triangle, especially the building that housed the wonderful old Hilliard Square Theater (later the Westwood and who knows what else). I think it would be great if that could be turned into a first-run theater perhaps accompanied by a book store and a coffee shop and perhaps other related shops. Of course there are difficulties, especially with parking, but urban planners have not found such difficulties to be insuperable, as long as there is a political will. (Perhaps the Madison-Harding schools tract could furnish some parking space, at least in the evening, with a shuttle van running between the parking lot and the building).
The other place is the dog park, in the Rocky River reservation. As a dog park, this has been a great success -- ask the owners who bring their dogs from Strongsville, Avon Lake, etc. etc. We as Lakewood taxpayers pay for their use of the park, and what good does it do for Lakewood? As a bare minimum, I would suggest putting up a billboard on which Lakewood businesses could advertise for a nominal fee; this might bring some of the Strongsville, Avon Lake etc. residents into Lakewood.Or at the top of the hill there might be a doggie-friendly coffee house or restaurant, with perhaps a doggie book store beside it, and perhaps a pet food store. (If the Health Department forbids dogs from being brought into the restaurant, there might be a place for them to be left outside.)
Another good idea, and an inexpensive one, is to put up more signs so that people coming into Lakewood will be better able to get to their various destinations. (Someone suggested this at the Kiwanis meeting -- I think is was Jim Shaw; excuse me if I'm mistaken.)
These are just two possibilities that occur to me. In general, it seems to me that the city can best use available resources to create new attractive developments -- above all the offshore one -- in diverse parts of the city, instead of merely giving a shinier gloss to what is already there.

There are an awful lot of ideas, some quite excellent, and not a lot of leadership, at least from my perspective. Maybe we could hear from each of our ill lustrous representatives about what their term priorities are, so that the people know what the city leaders intend to champion and what will be left to us to work on? Ideas like the offshore park will need the full support of the city . . . if it's possible that a lot of resources would be sucked up into something like this, then we need to know. There is still limited energy and resources, and we do need a leader to help us channel it properly. I'm not advocating waiting for permission to lead ideas and initiatives, just let us know what your priorities are beyond the usual.

Paul Schrimpf wrote:There are an awful lot of ideas, some quite excellent, and not a lot of leadership, at least from my perspective. Maybe we could hear from each of our ill lustrous representatives about what their term priorities are, so that the people know what the city leaders intend to champion and what will be left to us to work on? Ideas like the offshore park will need the full support of the city . . . if it's possible that a lot of resources would be sucked up into something like this, then we need to know. There is still limited energy and resources, and we do need a leader to help us channel it properly. I'm not advocating waiting for permission to lead ideas and initiatives, just let us know what your priorities are beyond the usual.

Paul


I know of five developments in the planning stage that might have some legs. Out of that to be honest only ONE make sense. The rest either sell the property far short, do nothing but line the pockets of the developers, or will cause problems down the road. Think of that.

While I share some of the concerns Mr. Brumm has mentioned, I also see some of the good that could be done working from Detroit and Warren out in both directions.

But lets be honest, about some hurdles and my thoughts. First Federal of Lakewood, a great neighbor has spent a ton redoing their block. Chaz Geiger a great neighbor has spent a ton doing his block. Rueben owner of Marc's Plaza has made it clear his place is at 100% occupancy. If anything he needs more parking. Burger King/That Coffee Place, no change there. The next bock could be raised, but there are some historic features of Wilhemy and above. The next block is the new library.

On the other side coming back Christian Science Church, just redone, the Plaza(?), Masonic Temple will not change, Shelly Turks line of storefronts. Phoenix has a great plan to enlarge, owner has no interest. Strip Mall that should be raised. Rozi's, Gary has been looking, but his enthusiasm come and goes with public hassles over parking, driveways and the liquor license he lost. We skip the mentioned properties and we are at Lakewood Center North, nothing happening there. Hospital is spending money already, INA Building home to the Chamber of Commerce and LCPI, no change there, then the building on Detroit and Warren(?).

This gets us to brick crossing and planters.

If we go south there was talk of a park in front of the Schoolboard. something Dr. Estrop told me about 6 months ago. Recently the Lakewood Observer was willing to reach in our pockets to help underwrite the park. Until the advisory board realized there is no master plan. That the park could be torn down as soon as we finished building the park. I would encourage other E Forums in town to match our spending on this park. Oh that's right they don't spend money on Lakewood or hire employees from Lakewood!

So out of everything out there. We have Rockport up and going, no need to mention. And Rosewood Place which Tom Barrett has some very nice and affordable plans. Everything else is not worth mentioning at this time.

The Farris Plan. needs to be studied, and it is very troubling that it is not being studied. It would cost less than the purchase of the homes in one pipe dream. Most of the work and expenses would fall on the Federal Government, and speaking to one Federal Government Employee at a recent Kiwanis Meeting his answer was. "It is worth looking into."

Stan Austin who had been part of the JetPort group that was looking at building a JetPort in the lake was blown away by the Savannah Farris project. Said it was the only plan he has seen that has no downsides. Stan knows his way around politics, developments and Lakewood.

So there is the short answer.

Every plan has downsides. If a plan doesn't then I'd suggest it hasn't been properly analyzed.

As visionary as Savannah's idea is, it has no price tag and the full range of its impacts hasn't been in the least bit expertly analyzed.

For example, the Savannah Plan seems to me to be a plan, in total, costing in the $100-400 million range. Just to get the price tag attached to it will cost how much moolah?

The first step to expertly study the Savannah Plan will be undertaken by whom?

Stephen Calhoun wrote:Every plan has downsides. If a plan doesn't then I'd suggest it hasn't been properly analyzed.

As visionary as Savannah's idea is, it has no price tag and the full range of its impacts hasn't been in the least bit expertly analyzed.

For example, the Savannah Plan seems to me to be a plan, in total, costing in the $100-400 million range. Just to get the price tag attached to it will cost how much moolah?

The first step to expertly study the Savannah Plan will be undertaken by whom?

Stephen

While an expert study needs to be done, do not say it hasn't been "studied." The plan is one fifth the size of the Cleveland Peninsula. The price tag on that is $100 million - $180 million. will not start for 20 years. For Cleveland the idea is crazy, miles of lake front property undeveloped, even more space within the city that needs to be turned over and replanted.

Lakewood has no such property. Every development in Lakewood pits residents against economic development.

With Savannah's plan, we/Feds pay for the wall and the dredgings. From that point on it's $$$$ in the city's hands. The sale of Pennisula pays for the devlopments and the changes to the park. I would think an approval by the city would see a rash of developers willing to pay upfront for the property.

Also I was referring to something Stan told me. With his background I will take him at his word.

On another note, are sure every plan has a downside?

Just ask my wife. Wait that might be a bad example!


peace

Jim, the Lakewood Observer could sponsor (and my guess is I'm re-introducing here an idea already floated,) a citizens symposium aimed to ask every question about the SP.

The model of inquiry could proceed from breaking the plan into its structural and functional components. For example, structurally, with respect to foundation, how many acres would the foundation at the Lake bed occupy, how many acres is the surface acreage, how many cubic yards of materials bridge the two? How many truckloads?

In such an inquiry how many structural and functional components are there to conduct inquiries about and into?

My extremely rough guess is an inquiry like this would uncover thousands of questions, many of which will have to be asked by someone eventually.

Since the normal way of going about it is to have experts lay fairly fleshed out plans 'on communities' and then to convene interested citizens and conduct half-assed inquiries, at a minimum, the idea of generating an inquiry at the beginning from the citizenry itself is a novel concept.

But, for the inquiry to be valuable it would have to be formulated expertly.

The downside of the inquiry is that it would showcase to a large extent how complex the SP really is. This might strike some people as being "depressingly complex".

***

The downside to both the ramping-up-to and the complexities of a $180,000,000 plan, over twenty years, (and figure inflation and/or economic collapse into this? LOL) is that plans of a certain scale and long time frame may come to have a life of their own and, in this, the idea that Cuyahoga or Columbus or Washington or all three won't hi-jack the plan/phantasy and buffer out the local citizenry needs to be considered and its contravention needs to be likewise considered.

The political ecology, an ecology that will evolve unpredictably over a decade or two, is, obviously, one of the crucial functional components an inquiry would be compelled to consider and ask questions about.

(I would suggest a 20 year plan is dangerously elongated.)

***

Any idea about how many cubic yards of fill are required?

Stephen

Last one for the day as I am deep in production.

I agree at this point twenty years plans seem dangerous. This is what worries me. I get edgy and this is how in my message when prime property is bought and is not used to even 1/200th of it's potential. Or when many blocks will be changed and one of the features is a large parking lot! At that point excitement turns to disappointment.

As for how many cubic yards of fill. A lot, but a lot less than Cleveland will need.

Seriously to show you the depth of how this has been kicked around, but nearly deep enough. Cleveland will not need dredging for 20 years, so this COULD BE free fill. But there is also talk in Cuyahoga dredging can be used in living area because of what is in it. Rocky River does not generate enough to even consider. Fill would not cut it.

But on the flip side. The water depth is between 18 and 25 feet. Talking with one of Lakewood's brightest citizen's Ed Favre, we talked for quite awhile about the logistics. He figure the ground would take at least 4 years to dry. But many buildings and light towers would need pylons. These could be started early.

My favorite part was after hearing the why it couldn't happen. Funding number one. On his way out the door, Ed turned and pointed to a spot in the Marina where he would put his boat!

We will never know until a study is done. So do we spend $100,000 on studing planters in downtown? Or on something that would make stand apart while adding to the economy for ever?


peace

Jim O'Bryan wrote:
We will never know until a study is done. So do we spend $100,000 on studing planters in downtown? Or on something that would make stand apart while adding to the economy for ever?


peace

I mentioned this before. Is there an opportunity to have this study done on a pro bono basis or via foundation grants, etc?
Otherwise, I fear it's DOA. Lakewood is in no mood for this. Unfortunately, we're in a "just get the bills paid" mode. Citizens don't even want to take a vote on a tax increase that would give raises to cops and firefighters. I can only imagine the hue and cry over $100,000 being spent on a report that says we need to spend $50,000,000.
Surely, there are well-connected people who can get a credible study done without tax dollars.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:
We will never know until a study is done. So do we spend $100,000 on studing planters in downtown? Or on something that would make stand apart while adding to the economy for ever?


peace

Joan Roberts wrote:I mentioned this before. Is there an opportunity to have this study done on a pro bono basis or via foundation grants, etc?
Otherwise, I fear it's DOA. Lakewood is in no mood for this. Unfortunately, we're in a "just get the bills paid" mode. Citizens don't even want to take a vote on a tax increase that would give raises to cops and firefighters. I can only imagine the hue and cry over $100,000 being spent on a report that says we need to spend $50,000,000.
Surely, there are well-connected people who can get a credible study done without tax dollars.

Joan


I agree with a couple clarifications from what I know and to clear up some of my comments.

I agree we have many architects in this town as well as people with a rich history of City/Urban Planning, including Chris Johnson(Midtown Corridor), Stan Austin(Jet Port), Webber Architecture, Waddell and others. It would be great to get them involved pro-bono, or just to keep the money in Lakewood.

The $100,000 was not city money. To my knowledge the city only paid a total of $60,000 for Mainstreet. The $100,000 was going to come from downtown businesses to do the study on planters and flowers.(Silvia, you out there?)

One price of acquiring land I have seen mentions $55,000,000.

In talking with Vic Nogalo he never mentioned the tax raise was for fire and police. To my knowledge only Bill Call came up with that. According to Vic, the increase was to leverage a loan that would have taken the money for twenty years. Every penny in the stuff we saw was for roads and infrastructure.

But this is only what I know or was shown.


.

As one who frequently writes RFP's (Request for Proposal) for cities, I think it would be interesting to write an RFP to send out to developers having them answer these questions and indicate what they would need to do this development.

I would be willing to work with a committee of people to write such an RFP - but it has to come from the city or it has no clear sign of support - which developers would need.

Joan, I'm sure this could be funded by Tax Incremental Financing. That means that bonds are floated by the developer and backed by the developer, city, county or a combination (normally a combination.) Then when the property tax comes in, what normally would be used for property tax, goes to retire the bond. Income tax would generate additional revenues to the city immediately (from construction workers) and the additional sales tax would generate additional revenues to the county quickly.

As this is new land, there isn't a down side, where we are losing property, income tax and sales tax for a number of years while the property is being rebuilt.

Ergo, there is no up front money that comes from the city budget if this is structured correctly.

Idea! (Again).
How about we have a group that targets buildings or groups of buildings and matches them with a possible suitor from out of town?
For example, the church next door to the library on Madison is for sale. It would make a great corporate office for an architecture firm or the Vedda building on Detriot would make a nice 3 story Barnes and Noble,Bed Bath and Beyond or Old Navy. Tear down a few doubles and make some parking or how much head in parking could be put against the railroad tracks.
More interesting would be to cobble together the Lake Area Screw land and buildings and GIVE it to someone like Hyundai or Toyota with the promise that they build a manufacturing plant there.
Imagine if there was new manufacturing facility where LES is. Think there would be any empty houses or apartments in Bird Town or the east end?
Not to mention some new diners,credit unions etc etc for the new workers.
What this town needs is jobs otherwise it is purely a bedroom community that cannot compete with new shiny places like Avon.
I have lived in other places where the city or some city/private group went out and CHASED someone with the idea of bringing them back to their town and it worked.

Stan, did you read my post about myself, my wife and an employee, Kim Winters, talking to the city about a secured jetport/marina/etc project? I didn't know you had a a jetport concept also. We presented ours shortly after 9/11 but it wasn't feasible for the city to get involved. What happened with yours?

John


Makes way to much sense.

Let me clarify my thought on Mainstreet. Judging by the calls I need to. As Joan Roberts has pointed out I do not have the grasp of this medium yet, so let me try.

Mainstreet is a very successful program. It has worked in over 2,000 cities, and now we are apart of it. I think everyone at the Observer is glad, as are people at City Hall, The Chamber of Commerce, the School Board and the Hospital.

This is a program we must get behind, our Midtown Corridor needs help and the businesses that have already taken steps to improve their property deserve the support to improve the area around them.

That said, the Peninsula deserve a very real look as well.


Jim

john crino wrote:Idea! (Again).
More interesting would be to cobble together the Lake Area Screw land and buildings and GIVE it to someone like Hyundai or Toyota with the promise that they build a manufacturing plant there.

Interesting idea however I think it would be better to search out some kind of technology or biotech company for the space.

Turning it over to another auto manufacturing company certainly doesn't inspire long term security. While those companies you name are doing alright today, going forward there's no guarantee in today's world.

Rather than looking back at old manufacturing companies I believe Lakewood should look to attract companies on the cutting edge to position us for the future.

I thought John's idea was good. As far as general planning is concerned -- apart from the island/peninsula, or Savannah's Plan as it has rightly come to be called -- what I envisioned was a group of areas in the city with a complex of related enterprises. E.g., around the Beck Center a coffee shop and/or restaurant, a book store and whatever else my limited imagination doesn't catch. Or much he same around my favorite dream, the Hilliard Square. Possibly around Winterhurst, if any land is available. And Madison Village -- maybe just publicizing what's already there.