Dear members of the press,

 When Severance Neighborhood Organization started efforts in February 2010  to buy Oakwood and turn it into a passive public park, Oakwood was for sale. We held a public meeting,attended by about 80 people, developed a steering committee and worked with the Trust for Public Land. Trust for Public Land bought an option to buy Oakkwood, but could not raise the money in time to go forward with the purchase.

We approached members of Cleveland Heights City Council and Mayor Welo and Mayor Kelley. BOTH MAYORS REFUSED TO MEET WITH US. The members of the steering committee included people who were both members of the Oakwood Country Club and residents of Oakwood Dr. They are the people who approached the mayors.

City governments in Cleveland Heights and South Euclid have done nothing to help with Oakwood.

Just for the sake of clarification, our efforts to preserve Oakwood have never stopped, but since the property has been sold, we no longer state our position as "Oakwood should be a passive public park held by Metroparks".

Our position now is that we oppose the rezoning of Oakwood.

Much press was given to the fact the developer was not invited to the Future Heights forum last Thursday.

We were not invited either.

One of the speakers at the forum has been quoted repeatedly as saying (sic) "if you don't make a plan, someone will make it for you", and that civic vision must me included in the planning.

 We worked hard to make a plan, but the city governments did not do their part, and are still not doing their part to this day.

We are a large part of the civic vision. We have been working on the plan for Oakwood and had the civic vision for a long time. We have over 1400 fans on Facebook, an email list of over 500, a more positive response to our recent mailing than the developer's mailing (actually it was the combined effort of the City of South Euclid and the developer).

 The real story about Oakwood is the actual amount of indebtedness of the city of South Euclid over Cedar Center.

 

It is pretty hard to get at the facts but we think it is,conservatively, $20million. I have been told through a public records request that they owe $19 million in bonds. The school board has more information about it, as the city has been in almost constant negotiation for 4 years with the Cleveland Heights University Heights School Board about TIFs and abatements and South Euclid's landbanking Cedar Center. ( I have not even brought up the amount of money the city of South Euclid put into Cedar Center from other sources--federal, county and city of Cleveland monies).

I have no way of knowing this for sure, but I think South Euclid on the brink of insolvency because of Cedar Center. I do not blame the residents of South Euclid for any of this; they have plenty of civic vision, too. South Euclid city officials are responsible for this.

The real story of Oakwood is Cedar Center.

Why am I sending this to you?

South Euclid Planning Commission will probably vote tonight on rezoning Oakwood.

As of last Friday, they did not have a document prepared to vote on...so I can't be sure that they will vote tonight.

Many of you have already asked the hard questions about Cedar Center. Thank you for that!

I hope everyone will continue to ask these hard questions about Cedar Center---that is the real story behind Oakwood. 

Rezoning Oakwood to get money to pull the city of South Euclid out of debt is like burning your antique furniture to stay warm.

Oakwood is a community asset that once destroyed cannot be replaced.

Big Box retail is a business model that is destructive of local business and of communities.

I could go on and on....

For the sake of the whole area, please continue to dig into the indebtedness of South Euclid over Cedar Center! We can only do so much of this on our own.

 Thanks for your good work--we need you.

 

What you think is the better solution for the land-use and development issues facing communities with private development proposals that include more big box retail? Here's a thought: conservation easements for those golf courses ASAP. I wrote about this 4 years ago: golf inquiry Western Reserve Land Conservancy could begin this conversation yesterday. Interesting isn't it that this particular developer, Mitchell Schneider, sits on the board of the WRLC and has his own land "out there" in Solon conserved.

How do we convince the developers that the community collectively views that as an obsolete model? Profit, especially easy profit is hard to turn around. I don't know... appeal to their better angels. Maybe it's best to just say "no, thank you".

How do we do a better job of insisting that when development happens, it’s mixed-use, promotes biking, walking, public transit connections, produces more energy than it uses, cleans the water instead of dirties it, and supports the local economy? Don't forget social justice - sort of covered in "supports the local economy", but I wanted to be sure you're including that here. That's what's called a Community Benefits Agreement. So far as my research tells me, only one has been negotiated in Ohio to date - in Cincinatti for a school. It's a tool that's used elsewhere. Surprising that this didn't come from the Levin College or another nonprofit entity particularly around publicly funded projects like stadium, ballpark, medmart, flats eastbank and casino. OK, that's an aside.

Interestingly, not unlike a CBA which is an agreement between the developer and a citizens group, the beginning of municipal mergers is a citizens initiative. This process is lead by citizens, not elected officials. So we can talk regional, bioregional all day, but until a citizen or a group of citizens gets on the street with petitions, nothing moves.

This is a call to action not for governments, but for citizens. We will need gcbl, cmnh, neorsd, E4S, watershed groups, CSWCD, ecowatch, observers, newspapers, etc. to help us educate.

I can't be the "little red hen" here, but I'm ready to start "planting the wheat". Anyone else game out there for dialogue and then walking to improve our communities and our watersheds?

I'm with ecpat. This is a much larger discussion and that larger discussion is being had elsewhere - not here. That this conversation is just emerging here at gcbl.org wouldn't surprise me if the guy who founded the organization that produces this blog didn't start ecocitycleveland 4 doors down from me in Cleveland Heights and if Marc didn't live 6 blocks from me in Cleveland Heights.

It was easy to begin with regional planners and regional collaboration director to launch this conversation in the "public" sphere, but it's been ongoing for months in our communities. There's lots more here: http://www.facebook.com/citizensforoakwood and http://www.heightssno.org

What's that they say? "All politics is local"? Please be aware that my comments aren't just NIMBY. They're NIYBY, too.

Don't worry if it's not in your community yet. It will be soon enough. Golf courses will fall like dominos leaving vast tracts of land like roadkill for developers. Look around. Any golf courses near you? They may be the targets of the specious anti-sprawl greenwash campaign by a developer soon.

It's time for that downward pressure Mr. Jerse talked about to get elected officials and citizens busy with merger discussions and strategic doing. It's time for the sewer district to add landuse decisionmaking to their credit manual at a municipality level. Golf courses are sponges (yes, they may not be perfect, but they're better than parking lots). We desperately need to think of this on a watershed planning level for the health, environmental and economic health of our community - the big one, the county one, the regional one.

I'm sad that Ms. Schwarz played the que sera sera card and said development will most likely happen at Oakwood. She might not have been quite so comfortable saying that if it was in her backyard. But then maybe it's the Icelandic yogurt in the pretty container at Whole Paycheck or the desire for novelty that's crept in there. Hard to know.

As my mother used to say, "It's easier to sweep someone else's back porch than your own."

Marc, you had the brilliance and tenacity to save a tree, energy bills, a neighborhood with a gravel driveway - how many sq ft is that? Could you take that to scale at Oakwood, Marc? Could you lend a voice to those who would see a slower process that could potentially with creative consideration create a central park for our community? I think you could. After all, the Breuer is still standing thanks to your efforts.

What would our children prefer, benefit from more? A big box or greenspace? Hmmm...

While my kid and David's have passed through the developmental k-12 and even college years, many others, younger ones who are still here should perhaps be asked - what would you like in your future? What would keep you attached to this place? Big box retail or a clean drink of water? I know, some are too young to answer.

Please join us Marc (and the rest of the staff at gcbl and cmnh) to create that cohesion. It's OUR community. WE connect the dots. WE pick up the pieces.

There is actually a plan that is being ignored and zoning that could be kept "as is" to keep the Big Box out. There are potential traffic issues that are being ignored. Where is the discussion of the planned closing of the Severance WalMart? Where is the discussion of the undeveloped Cedar Center area?

I have a hard time relating to this post.