The Observation Deck

During my years as a traveling auditor I visited twenty states and over one hundred cities. In most of those cities there were various government development projects designed to restore old neighborhoods or revitalize downtown shopping districts. In every case I can recall the developments were faded, forlorn and forgotten.

The news that the Avalon housing development in Shaker Heights is floundering illustrates the dangers of top down government dictated development. The City of Shaker Heights is offering cash inducements to high income people in the hopes that high income people can be bribed into buying houses they don’t want in an area they don’t want to live in. It seems a fool’s errand.

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindeal ... xml&coll=2

The City of University Heights is having similar problems with its development projects.

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindeal ... xml&coll=2

The University project seemed like a brilliant idea. Macy’s, Target, Whole Foods and a plethora of small store front space. Throw in a College and high income residents and you have what seems to be the perfect idea. Even huge tax subsidies don’t seem to be enough. Even though it’s not working it still seems like a brilliant idea. Like a second marriage such development seems to be the triumph of hope over experience.

The lesson learned? I don’t know but I’ll take a stab at it.

Government can set the stage but cannot dictate what the market wants.

For Lakewood?

Setting the stage means enhancing the livability of Clifton Boulevard. Make the street more livable, more attractive to people who want to live there but just aren’t quit sure. The City could set the stage on Madison by narrowing the street to two lanes so that restaurants can offer outdoor dining. Set the stage and the market will respond.

It also means that in a region with a declining or stable population government sponsored development in one region cripples government sponsored development in another region. Tax breaks in the warehouse district cause declines in property values in other regions, etc.

What does that mean for Lakewood? That downtown development is great if funded with private dollars. If funded with public dollars it is bad for the City and should be opposed by City leaders.

Bill Call wrote:What does that mean for Lakewood? That downtown development is great if funded with private dollars. If funded with public dollars it is bad for the City and should be opposed by City leaders.

Bill

What it ould mean is if the city can do its part. Safe and Clean, then private groups have a chance to make it enjoyable, and attract new business, work with existing businesses, and hopefully attract residents.

I agree with your assessments, and it just becomes a war of "small people malls." You can get a pretty nice new house in Hough for $500,000 and a thirty year tax-abatement. You can get "Crocker-Park" style living all over Cleveland with a 25 year tax-abatement. Shaker, and CU all but paying people to live there.

It is a war Lakewood can't play, can't win and shouldn't try.

Not sure of Clifton, but love the idea of narrowing Madison. Our studies have shown that Madison is much better for retail. Narrow it with diagonal parking, or parking behind the stores and you could get some nice development and life around Madison Ave.

.

Bill, Jim and myself all agreeing on something?

I think I just might faint!

(wink)

Charyn

My rental half house is at the corner of Winslow and Lynnfield.

Shaker Hts.'s fascinating mix; data:
http://www.city-data.com/city/Shaker-Heights-Ohio.html

There's another lesson to be drawn because the lack of appeal of the Avalon Station development was knowable in advance. But, the city and the developers together concocted the kool-aid and then drank it.

What they didn't do in their euphoria is move on to think things through.

Shaker Hts.'s capital budget is derived from a tax on estates. Their operating budget and the school budget is derived from close to the highest taxes in Ohio.

Problem: as the legacy population ages, they sell their 'mansions' and move away. Answer to re-capture such empty nesters and the eventual payout was to build Avalon Station and the Chagrin-Warrensville condominiums.

Alas, in a competitive environment for rich empty nesters, the new fangled locations offer almost zip. The are each within walking distance of de-classe shopping. There are 3 decent upscale restaurants in all of Shaker Heights, none of which are at Shaker Towne Center. In Shaker's two shopping areas there are 3 bars.

Historical note-Shaker's retail is at the southeast edge of the city and was an afterthought during Shaker Hts.'s prime. Shaker Heights is almost a pure bedroom community play, built as a planned community to service the householder needs of a professional class that once, long ago, worked all the way downtown.

(Now it primarily feeds University Circle and the Beachwood office parks.)

Meanwhile absentee ownership has degraded the housing stock right down the street where I live.

If you peruse the city data you will see that Shaker Heights is safe, rich, aged, and not subject to a lot of churn. It's not a place to move to to be near anything hip or cool. It's 60% white and its once highly praised school system has struggled with a white flight that isn't otherwise an obvious feature.

Yet Shaker Hts. wears its history well in that its park system and housing stock and layout all are distinctive and attractive.

But there was a healthy dose of nostalgia in the kool-aid and it was enough for the object lesson to come about.

The alternatives to living in Cleveland or an inner ring suburb have been greatly subsidized for the last 50 years or so.

now it takes a big deal maker to secure money for building sky scrapers, supermarkets, and big ticket venues downtown.

there are a lot of new safety codes and anti-discrimination codes to keep up with, so that takes some kind of subsidy for anyone with capital to say they are going to "invest" in an already developed area.

I guess this is a problem that happens when most of the people with the brains or position to make a lot of money move out and into designer communities off the high way exit ramps. They are no longer applying their brains to participating in or criticizing civic government and its attendant utilities.