The Observation Deck

I am a bit concerned about the eagerness of the City to use development money to subsidize the punch palace scene. If you were to list the needs of the City where on your list would you place punch palace parking? At the top? At the Bottom? Would it even be on your list?

How would you spend $150,000 in development money?

If all the bars in that area closed tomorrow what would we have lost? Not much. What would we gain? Some peace and quiet and maybe a more mature restaraunt scene.

Some time ago there was an article in the Plain Dealer comparing that area of Lakewood with the East End of the flats. Is that the future we really want for that area?

Mr. Call.

Two ways to look at this.

1 The rest of the business world has given Lakewood the back of its hand. The purists may sneer at Starbucks or Applebees, but the fact that every American city over 10,000 seems to have at least one of these, except Lakewood, has to tell you something. At least the "punch palaces" are here, paying taxes etc. Why not dance with him who brung ya?

2 De facto subsidizing of places like you describe represent a failure of city leaders to imagine something better. A Crocker Park might not be in the cards, but a modest west shore "restaurant row" seems do-able. Or maybe something entirely different. What do our leaders "see" when they envision the future of our business districts? If they see anything, I must have missed it.

While I agree wth you that #2 is a better way, I also understand the reasoning behind #1. P&D in Lakewood is a tough job.

Bill Call wrote:I am a bit concerned about the eagerness of the City to use development money to subsidize the punch palace scene. If you were to list the needs of the City where on your list would you place punch palace parking? At the top? At the Bottom? Would it even be on your list?

How would you spend $150,000 in development money?

If all the bars in that area closed tomorrow what would we have lost? Not much. What would we gain? Some peace and quiet and maybe a more mature restaurant scene.

Some time ago there was an article in the Plain Dealer comparing that area of Lakewood with the East End of the flats. Is that the future we really want for that area?

Bill

I am a huge proponent of the bars in Lakewood. I has been proven that bars, restaurants, and other "late nights" operations make a city safer.

You are a numbers man. I would like you to do a quick math job on what the bars in Lakewood actually contribute to this city. I will not even ask you to deduct the costs of police, whatever.

$150,000?
How about exactly what council came up with? A revolving no interest loans available to Lakewood businesses with a ten year payback in full. Money would stay in the program. This year council wanted $250,000, I think currently the number is like $10,000!

Joan

As for your choice of Applebees! We have a bunch of delightful small restaurants, I would encourage that, through districts as you suggested. Let's have fun. 30 120 people restaurants all with individual flare that cannot be found at a mall. You know good food. I would take The Place To Be over IHOP every time. Real Blueberries or some kind of sugar jelly composite!


.

Mr O.

Applebees vs. Little Lakewood Restaurant isn't the point. We can always find good chains and bad ones, good local operations and not-so-good ones, and it's way too personal a choice anyway.
My point to Mr Call, admittedly in a bit of devil's advocacy, was this. If Lakewood's single successful industry is "punch palaces", and there is some evidence to suggest that's true, why NOT support it? It's not like there are dozens of outfits standing in line to open up shop here.
So we agree. Sort of. Me, I'd like to see more Sullivans and Players than Johnny Whatsits , but I'm in my old fartiness period. And I'd trade McYouKnowWhos for an Applebee's anyday (and I'd bet 75% of the neighbors would agreee)
Odd you mention The Place to be. Isn't there a muni lot right next door? Think that's helped them?

Jim, We're at $250,000 and with a little work and luck we'll add an additional $250'000 next year.

Many businesses take advantage of existing city programs like http://ci.lakewood.oh.us/dept_planning_cdbg_4.html the DCD's Commercial Property Revitalization Program.

"Property owners or tenants along Detroit and Madison Avenue, W. 117th Street or Berea Road are eligible to apply for the program."

Features include:

"Incentives For Qualified Projects

LOAN
0% loan up to 80% of eligible cost, or a maximum of $50,000 per project. In addition, minor rebates available for architectural fees, signage, exterior accessibility improvements designed to use best efforts to meet ADAAG guidelines, and electrical code improvements.

REBATE
Rebates up to 40% of total eligible costs, not to exceed a maximum of $30,000 per project."

The city may also help businesses identify other programs that can help them grow business, such as the county's Brownfield Redevelopment program.

There may be more than two Brownfield Redevelopment qualified projects in Lakewood, but since it's the weekend, I can't verify information. I believe Donato's expansion is one of the brownfield projects (and they will be utilizing the storefront renovation program) but I know that the new Sherwin Williams project qualifies (former Shell station at Madison & Warren).

I believe Donato's used brownfield funds when it first came to its location, which was a former gas station.

I'm grateful that Mr. Dever mentioned that $250,000 for economic development because that was something identified by Grow Lakewood as being an instrumental tool for Lakewood's health. Council took that recomendation very seriously.

That was the last part of signing off on this year's budget and as Stan Austin reported, it wasn't easy for council and the city to identify those dollars. With declining income, trying to keep the city services that make Lakewood a great place to live and setting aside money for our future isn't an easy (or pretty) process, but in the end, everybody got it right.

DL,
Grow Lakewood's recommendation, I believe, was $2 million but the economic realities of the city forced us to settle with $250,000. By the way it's Michael.

Michael Dever wrote:Jim, We're at $250,000 and with a little work and luck we'll add an additional $250'000 next year.

Knew i could smoke you out!

Of course you are correct. I was thinking of the study for the plan, that Mary Louise Madigan, Nickie Antonio and Ryan Demro are working on.

You know, old hippie, working on the paper, watching the Cream Reunion on TV, some sort of flashback/mental lapse was inevitable.

Speaking of paper....


Thanks Michael


.

Michael Dever wrote:DL,
Grow Lakewood's recommendation, I believe, was $2 million but the economic realities of the city forced us to settle with $250,000. By the way it's Michael.

That council and the city did the best they could to move forward on the recommendation, particularly in the face of our economic situation, is to be commended. $250,000 is a step in the right direction. It's an understatement to say that finding that money in our present budget was a difficult and hard fought process.

OT: OK, Michael, we recently had the great pleasure of meeting your father and some of your family. We thoroughly enjoyed all conversations and had great fun playing a few rounds of "who do/did you know in Lakewood" where long-term residents experience only one or two degrees of separation and remember everything and everyone!

Joan Roberts wrote: At least the "punch palaces" are here, paying taxes etc. Why not dance with him who brung ya?

2 De facto subsidizing of places like you describe represent a failure of city leaders to imagine something better..... What do our leaders "see" when they envision the future of our business districts? If they see anything, I must have missed it.

Ms. Roberts:

The bars in Lakewood do pay taxes and supply jobs and give the City a night life that is attractive to young people. To the extent that those people are encourage to live where they drink it helps maintain the market value of Lakewood's many rental properties.

My main concern is with the point you made about what our leaders "see".
I think they are reacting to ideas submitted by bar owners instead of imagining a restaurant row or a different kind of retail.

Is anyone thinking about future use of the Bunt's road Giant Eagle?

Jim:

Whenever I drove by the two houses in question my first thought was "someone should tear them down".

Replacing those houses with a parking lot is a good idea. The City should use eminent domain to take the land to build a City lot. If the meters charged one dollar per hour the lot would have an immediate positive cash flow.

I don't see any reason to provide the current owner with that windfall. Its not as if he has been a good neighbor.

Michael:

Thanks for your hard work. The council is filling a leadership vacuum.

If I had my druthers - the Giant Eagle spot would be purchased and redeveloped as a Bob Evans.

Plenty of parking would be available, the atmosphere is (IMO) perfect for Lakewood, and they are notorious for having wonderful curb appeal. Additionally, they would create quite a few jobs and attract a large volume of business (Bob Evans is a destination type restaurant which makes it particularly valuable).

What other established or type of business would go well there?

Peace,
~Charyn

Charyn

Sorry, but I think I'm going to have to disagree on the Bob Evan's destination restaurant idea. Yeah, not a bad place to stop on the road over a choice of Mickey Dees or the like, but I don't think I've ever actually set out purposefully to eat at Bob Evan's. I've got to believe we can do much better than your standard franchise.

And if we're going franchise, why not Mustard Seed (not really franchise) or Trader Joe's?.

Jeff

Charyn,

You violated the 11th Commandment, applicable only to Lakewooders.

Thou shalt not covet thy neighboring suburbs' chain restaurants

I learned my lesson when I was smacked down for mentioning Applebee's, and I never even said I wanted one. By actively wishing for a Bob Evans, thou art clearly a blasphemer and heretic.

To the stake with you! Or the steak. Maybe I'll go to Outback tonight.

Joan Roberts wrote:Charyn,

You violated the 11th Commandment, applicable only to Lakewooders.

Thou shalt not covet thy neighboring suburbs' chain restaurants

I learned my lesson when I was smacked down for mentioning Applebee's, and I never even said I wanted one. By actively wishing for a Bob Evans, thou art clearly a blasphemer and heretic.

To the stake with you! Or the steak. Maybe I'll go to Outback tonight.

Joan

Although all coveting is wrong, as taught by the good book without exception. It is not your coveting that upset us. It was your coveting of mediocre crap.

I can think of 50 steak place I would hit before Outback. But I guess if you need that "Blooming Onion" and you did not buy Ron Popel's "Blooming Onion Kit" that you would have to trudge out to Outback for mediocre dinner.

Not to say all chains are bad, just seems that you favor the bad ones.

Bob Evans! The raisin biscuits are OK when hot, but the freeze dried veggies in the omelets! And once again no real blueberries!


.

You know, I have nothing against IHOP, worked there all through HS and college. I was very excited when it came to Lakewood. I do think Bob Evans fits our demographics well - my Father in Law's favorite restaurant.

But as a small business owner I do like the idea of patronizing small businesses.

I know we have the "Taste of Lakewood" and maybe we can push it a little more this year. But maybe we can also put out a guide to Lakewood Restaurants. Include the chains but include everyone.

I hear about places all the time, little jewels that I haven't been aware of that people love. We often try the ones featured in the Observer - and we tell them where we heard about them.