The Observation Deck

One thread I keep seeing through a number of different topics online here is the decline of Lakewood's population, and the fear that it also means the decline of Lakewood, period. And while this is a plausible fear (because declining population often does mean overall decline in so many ways as active, vibrant citizens move out, and the ones left are too often the poor, the elderly, or ones who do not take an active role in preserving the city's prosperity and way of life), should we not have a debate about some of the positive aspects of shrinkage? Maybe having a smaller city could be an improvement in a way ...

There's a movement afoot about city shrinkage, as noted in the article below that appeared a few months ago in Newsweek. But after you read it, and the article following it about what Youngstown is doing to address this, perhaps we can start a new discussion about any potential positive aspects of shrinkage, and what Lakewood can do (governmentally, or by the action of its citizens) to make it a better place ... can we manage this ourselves? Can Lakewood pioneer a new form of urban development ... not for growth, but for redevelopment and transformation? Or are the costs too high (human as well as financial) or the will to do this not there? I'm not arguing mass demolition, like this article says, but perhaps there are things that can be done in Lakewood ... can apartment buildings be eventually removed to reduce rental properties available while more programs enacted to encourage home ownership? Can new greenspace be carved out? What can be done to turn a negative into perhaps a positive?

So read, and discuss amongst yourselves ... online, of course!


"The Shrinking Cities
Urban Blight: What Used to be a Regional Problem is Sweeping the World
By Stefan Theil
Newsweek International
Sept. 27 issue - In 1960s America there was "white flight" to the suburbs. In the '70s and '80s the death of heavy industry emptied once proud cities like Manchester and Glasgow. Social and economic change has been wreaking havoc with cities for a long time, but each instance is usually thought of as an isolated eventâ€â€

C.D.


Funny I was just talking with Lakewood's renaissance man Ken Warren about this. It would seem that many great topics have fallen by the wayside. At the first LakewoodAlive meeting some talk was given about tearing down whole neighborhoods and rebuilding.

For some reason I remember between Clifton and Detroit being mentioned as a great zone for this. Some of this could work, but I wonder if it truly takes into account the future, or is just reacting and rearranging the furniture?

LA had Cindy Stockman come in and talk about turning doubles into singles. For the life of me I have never been able to make these numbers work. Not for the city, nor the homeowner. The same might be true for thinning the lots. I have to give Cindy credit, her drawings were beautiful, and she made a great case.

While green space is something every homeowner wants. It also figures into the Food Security Network ideals. But is one house on two lots ever worth two houses on the same lots? We have to take into account costs, property values, and the income and spending possibilities of residents.

There is also another move afoot that many claim are the new goldmines. Half homes, side by sides, 4 families, etc. Being purchased, cleaned up and sold as condos. What it does is gives the seller a chance to make a little more from investment. It also allows the buyer, who is traditionally a renter a chance to own the American dream. The thought is as money continues to tighten, and the supply dries up or interests go up everyone will still be able to buy in.

It is all fascinating stuff.


.

The only way the United States will eventually be able to cope with post-peak oil is to reverse the population shifts of the last 60 years. I don't know how this will take shape, as financing home purchases is much easier than before and zoning laws are much more restrictive.

Lakewood's problem is rental vacancies, not population.

Our population from the 75,000 to 55,000 is definitely NOT a bad thing...in fact, it is quite good. The primary change between 1950 and 2006 is the number of children per family. Those large Irish families pumped up the population figures, but didn't really provide much tax base (unless we were taxing paper routes and lemonade stands). Many of those once crowded homes are now owned by empty nesters, smaller families or single professionals.

If Lakewood still had all those kids, our school costs would skyrocket, and we would not be able to undergo the school consolidation that is currently underway.

What we need to address is the high vacancy rate among rental units. Ideally, it would be great to reduce the number of rentals in the city, since I firmly believe that there is a permanent, structural housing glut in Lakewood.

While there are many benefits to being smaller, a near term concern would be if the city population fell below 50,000. This population threshold permits Lakewood to qualify for certain Community Block Grant Funds that are vital to our internal financing and revenue generation.

It will be important (as of the 2010 census) that we are above the 50,000 population threshold. This was reported within the 2005 Grow Lakewood Report.

Jay brings up an excellent point. CDBG funds, which Lakewood gets a large chunk of due in part to our aging housing stock, is vital to the city.

In addition to providing funding for many social programs, CDBG funds have paid for many street pavings over the years.

Also, another thought on shrinkage....historically speaking, the construction of I-90 played a considerable role. We lost a lot of homes in the southwestern portion of the city.

Chris:

Interesting reading.

The green/space, pocket parks, community gardens and other communitarian amenities typically emerge from a shrinkage that includes collapse in property values and abandonment of properties.

In Youngstown, for example, there are at least 25 house for sale at prices between $3,800 and $10,000.

Many of us would I'd like to buy the house behind us for a song and knock it down to grow more vegetables, maybe raise some chickens, like they do in Cleveland. But that kind of shrinkage is immensely painful, and something I hope Lakewood can avoid.

Lakewood's property values are, reasonably speaking, hanging tough in the face of the creative/destructive cycle of capitalism and the political economy of housing and sprawl.

But those bargain basement prices in the shrunken cities, the tax abated properties are all temptations that beckon and threaten the Lakewood market in one way or another.

Kenneth Warren

Free range... the only way.

Take a listen to this program on Chickens in the City in New York City.

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/lopate/episodes/2006/12/21

Cluck, cluck....

Kenneth Warren

Shrinking. I'm reminded of a Seinfeld episode. Is shrinking a temporary situation?
Population is important, but as mentioned, working adults is the figure I want to see. A city that's top heavy with people needing more than they pay in is probably a little dangerous. I've been focusing on improving the efficiency of government. (Some people tell me that's impossible. I tell them it's the only thing that can save any city with limited finances.) I like to keep in mind that a city government is there to provide services to the citizens. They need to be focused on priorities & deliver services in a cost effective responsible manner. Oh, and respectful & HONEST.
Housing: I'm not in a big hurry to tear lots of things down. Right now most of our properties are paying taxes. Ever notice how new projects seem to require some type of tax break? When that happens you're shifting the cost of services to existing property owners. (That's taxation because of poor representation.)
My latest push is to create the largest project in Lakewood history.
Renovate every home in Lakewood. OK how about 30% for a start. The advantages include: 1) A sharper looking city 2) No loss of existing taxes 3) More homes that are energy efficient & desirable. 4) Rental property that draws people that demand sharp, unique up to date residences. These will be people that can also support our local businesses.
The list can keep going but you get the idea.
So how do we get people to invest in THEIR city? Provide exceptional city services. Make this a city where people are respected & are respectful. Create a well oiled efficient focused government that WORKS. One that gets along. Make sure people in our government are bright, dedicated, organized & HAVE A GOOD TEMPERAMENT.
"THE THINKING THAT GOT US IN THIS MESS WILL BE INSUFFICIENT TO GET US OUT". Albert Einstein
Pat Ballasch

well, one thing that could help towards the goal of renovating a lot more houses is a program that Cleveland Heights has ... now I know no one wants to hear about something on the East Side, but take a look at this resource that residents of Cleveland Heights have:

http://chuh.net/homerepairresourcecenter/index.htm

I'm not sure how this is paid for (it looks like it was set up with generous grants from various foundations), but it is FREE for all city residents. The classes are all hands-on, and if you look at the list of classes, really covers important renovation skills in detail. Plus, they even have a tool loan program!

Perhaps this is an idea worth "stealing" and having in Lakewood? I know the continuing ed program here has classes in home repairs (I've taken the ones offered by Jim Engler, and while they're good, it'd be nice to have ones with actual hands-on experience), but this is something beyond that. Lakewood could have a program like this; a 501(c)3 non-profit organization could be set up, money could be gotten from foundation grants for startup costs, there might be a building or storefront that could either be donated or rented at low cost, and a workshop set up for classes, as well as library of resources (Lakewood does have some very good resources online, as well as good books at Lakewood Library ... maybe these could be combined at this hypothetical center) and a tool library. Because I think what prevents people from doing a lot of this work is that they just don't know how, or can't afford to have someone do it for them.

But this could be a small step in the right direction.

Just a thought.

Excellent renovation site. A perfect template for any city that has homes needing renovation. Another example how we don't need to try to re invent the wheel when it comes to tools to improve our fair city.

Ken

I know you're free range chicken idea is tongue in cheek, but a number of years ago there was an enterprising young man who was raising quail in his garage. While it's certainly NOT something permitted under our zoning ordinances, nevertheless, there was an unfilled demand for the product, most of which was purchased by Sammy's.....

As a young lad, growing up on the other side of the Williams-Sonoma line, we had 3 Peking ducks as pets.

Jeff

Jeff Endress wrote: As a young lad, growing up on the other side of the Williams-Sonoma line, we had 3 Peking ducks as pets.

Jeff

And a really great train set.

Heidi had ducks, we all remember that!

Recently Hoffert had chickens, but was forced to get rid of them.

Meanwhile, in every other city they are legal.

But then again, we could touch turtles, and given mercury to play with in school.

Go figure.


.

I started to read the Newsweek article and found that it doesn’t make much sense to me. I need some help with the “aging countriesâ€Â