I've lived three doors north of Detroit Ave., Lakewood's main commercial corridor, for 13 years. For all that time I've watched this building get ignored. Now it's lost all its tenants and is awaiting demolition. The city will allow demolition without a replacement plan because the building has become a hazard. Soon there's going to be another big, vacant swath of Detroit available for proposals.

 

As if the demolition by neglect weren't enough (and the subsequent loss of a chiropractor, hair salon and guitar studio that were the former tenants) we're now faced with the crapshoot of what comes next. And the only businesses that seem to have money for new construction on sites like this these days are drug store chains and fast food.

 

I'm rooting for condos and first floor retail. Or maybe the rumor of a bank will come true.

 

http://gyroscopethattakesyouplaces.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/detroit-avenue-demolition-derby/

Welcome to the forum - I modified the title of your post since this forum's membership goes well beyond Northeast Ohio. That said, I work in downtown Lakewood - I like the area but it's really disheartening to see so much history and site-appropriate architecture (aka built up to the street) be demolished for fast-food spots, WalgRiteCVSetc. On top of that is the removal of quite a few stoplights on Detroit (though my understanding is that was a state-level mandate); there are some beautiful things about Lakewood - its commercial center isn't one of them. :-(

Hi, Mayday. Thanks for the reply. Seems like there was a period when the city was taking pretty much whatever new construction it could get, which led to some of the convenience stores with parking lots out front, and the bits of trademark architecture (like Burger King, McDonalds, etc.) Either that or that was an era when the city believed its economic future lay in looking more like North Olmsted.

 

Fortunately, Madison's character is much more intact than that of Detroit Ave. But on the other hand, Madison doesn't seem to have as much business.

 

Almost as much as the architecture, I'm concerned about what the type of investment we've seen does for the commercial real estate market.

I'm not in the field, so there are certainly plenty of people here who know better than I. But if the owner of an old theater can sell for a rumored 700K to a McDonalds that wants to operate on Main Street, then other property owners believe their land is worth that much money, too. And there are very few businesses outside the big fast food chains and drugstore chains that have that kind of money. I don't know what CVS paid for the old church at Arthur and the little commercial buildings that complete that block, but I've heard pretty big numbers. So now the guy who owns the corner of my street probably believes he ought to be able to make that kind of money too. And the only place you can find that kind of money for Detroit Ave in Lakewood these days is from fast food and drugstores.

 

And maybe banks. If the rumor that he's talking to a bank for the corner of my street, I'm happy for him. And I hope he makes a whole bunch of money on the deal.

"If the rumor that he's talking to a bank for the corner of my street, I'm happy for him."

 

Welllll, if it's a bank *branch*, there's not much difference between those and fast-food restaurants; after all, it's usually a smallish building with drive-up lanes and "adequate" parking nowadays. Even if it's built up to the street, it's a corner lot and they'll need entrance/exits for both frontages :-\

Welcome to the forum Michael.

 

I moved to Lakewood precisely because it was different than the other west suburbs. In 2003 my area of Madison (Village on Madison) was pretty edgy and cool. However, the coolness  factor has gone down a lot as the majority of those places have gone under. I can honestly see this part of town go either way in the next five years.

 

I'm actually surprised on the number of people here in Lakewood who want Lakewood to turn into a strip of fast food drive thrus. It's "progress" or "we need the revenues" is the mantra.

 

It's extremely frustrating. The amount of support for preservation just isn't up to a level that I'm really comfortable with. It's defeatism. You would think that seeing ugly ass Discount Drug Mart and windowless circa 1970's buildings fronting main streets would have caused more of an anti-suburban backlash.

True, of course, and my first comment to the planning director was to suggest that the bank not have a drive through. Of course he points out that it's not likely that a bank would come without a drive through.

 

And of course I assume "ample" parking.

 

That'll be better than the Taco Bell franchise, which was the prior possibility.  At least a bank won't have the 2 a.m. rush when the bars let out.

 

I guess the ideal thing would be mixed use, or just condos like Rockport Square, or rosewood place.  The YMCA once had a vague proposal about day care at that location. I'd support any of that.

 

 

Ugh. I specifically drove past that building yesterday and I seriously doubt anything new will have the same urban sensibilities of the existing one. Large windows, fronting the sidewalk, trolley era architecture, quality brick....who wants those lol!

 

 

Right?

 

I'll be surprised, too, if what comes next has anything like the class that modest building has.

 

I've got to say, it's heartening to read the replies here. The idea that other people could care about that building--a modest building, significant only as a part of the streetcar-era whole--is really refreshing from a lot of what I hear around here. Some eople in Lakewood, it seems, are desperate for any developer to spend any money here. Of course there are plenty who respond when something like the Detroit Theater is threatened. But this building was common always, and now it's so far decayed that no one--not even me--is arguing that it should be preserved.

 

But I WOULD like to see something of similar character in its place. And I think that would be good for the city, too. On the bright side, the architectural review board has done well lately getting developers to step up. At least sometimes they have. The Social Security bldg is an atrocity. The YMCA is built to the sidewalk, and has a bust stop out front, but there is no front door. SO of course there have been gross failures. But then the IHOP/Cozumel is on the sidewalk, and has big front windows, and a side entrance. At least it doesn't totally turn its back on the street, like the YMCA. And the CVS ... even if it does occupy the entire block ... does at least have big windows, and some masonry details, and is built to the sidewalk. So we'll see what they come up with.

 

 

Right?

 

I'll be surprised, too, if what comes next has anything like the class that modest building has.

 

I've got to say, it's heartening to read the replies here. The idea that other people could care about that building--a modest building, significant only as a part of the streetcar-era whole--is really refreshing from a lot of what I hear around here. Some eople in Lakewood, it seems, are desperate for any developer to spend any money here. Of course there are plenty who respond when something like the Detroit Theater is threatened. But this building was common always, and now it's so far decayed that no one--not even me--is arguing that it should be preserved.

 

But I WOULD like to see something of similar character in its place. And I think that would be good for the city, too. On the bright side, the architectural review board has done well lately getting developers to step up. At least sometimes they have. The Social Security bldg is an atrocity. The YMCA is built to the sidewalk, and has a bust stop out front, but there is no front door. SO of course there have been gross failures. But then the IHOP/Cozumel is on the sidewalk, and has big front windows, and a side entrance. At least it doesn't totally turn its back on the street, like the YMCA. And the CVS ... even if it does occupy the entire block ... does at least have big windows, and some masonry details, and is built to the sidewalk. So we'll see what they come up with.

 

 

Agree with those sentiments 100 percent. We're at a pivotal time in Lakewood where, as you said, the age and condition of our buildings combined with a desperation attitude to build new can wreak havoc on the character of the city.

 

I'm ready to side with the good guys in this fight.

 

I need the find the time to become more politically active locally.

 

Funny story, the first time I ever went to attend a public meeting I never even got in....I actually could NOT FIND the right door to get inside our City Hall! I often wondered if the confusing setup is on purpose to dissuade the public from attending lol.

More thoughts on this later, but Detroit Ave in Lakewood had a lot more homes that made it past the streetcar era. So it always was kinda of spotty Architecturally. A lot of these commercial buildings that are suburby replaced old homes over the last 50 years.

Indeed, there was a big house where Edwards Park is now, and another one where the YMCA is now, and another where Johnny Malloy's is now. "The worst thing that ever happened," a woman who lived on Cordova once told me, "was when they tore down that house and put up the Beef Corral."

 

Indeed, one of the many studies that has looked at the city's long commercial corridors has recommended the long term development of commercial nodes along the street, with new housing in between. More density, more customers, of course. The other bright side of this is that if the new housing be decent apartments or townhomes, it means less fast food and drugstore chains.

 

But when McDonalds is knocking down mixed use theater buildings, and when other vernacular, streetcar era buildings are being demolished by neglect; when Cozumel / Ihop stands where mixed use once stood, and when Auto Zone stands in the place of Miller's, I'm not ready to concede that the loss of character was mostly about the lost housing. You probably have a much deeper knowledge of what used to be along Detroit than I do.  How much housing was there?

I agree that there has been a lot of loss of character along Detroit, just that like you stated. The point that I was trying to make is that Detroit never had the dense store front build up that I originally thought it had. A lot of the infill replaced houses. The drugmart plaza by the library is actually the second plaza there. The first one built in the 30s?t, which later burned down,  replaced the original Andrews house. Taco Bell replaced a car lot.  Actually a lot of the intact retail is of the one-story single use variety. Think the shops where Five guys is, the Alladins strip  or strip next to Educators music east of Bunts.

 

Anyway, despite some major SNAFUs the city is doing much better in the last 5 or 10 years than in the previous 30. Unfortunately you can't win them all. I am not trying to be a Pollyanna, but I am not that outraged either. Just be happy it's not a Taco Bell thank god for the new Drive Through rules.

 

It will kill you to know that the new CVS was sited around the old 2 story building on the SE corner of Lakeland and Detroit, but CVS said that's OK we'll just buy it all. BTW they planted the 20ft tree yesterday and today at the CVS site.