 |
Emagine Entertainment |
|
|
Emagine Entertainment |
|
29 Oct 09 Civil civic discourse re Emagine With a couple of emotional exceptions, 16 residents offered the Planning Commission quietly expressed opinions about the proposed Emagine theater/bowling alley project. Ten spoke against the project, six in favor. Chairman Tom Hallock set the reasoned tone of the meeting by asking for a series of show-of-hands: (1) For the project; (2) For, but with attention to some concerns; (3) Against the project, but willing to listen to modifications; (4) Totally opposed. Hallock asked for and recorded the names of attendees who would be serving as spokesperson for neighborhoods or like-minded clusters. He announced each speaker would have three minutes. The meeting was in two parts: (1) The Public Hearing, in city commission chambers, during which residents spoke and (2) the work session, in Room 309, in which Planning Commission members and Emagine Entertainment representatives discussed the plans which were spread on the conference table. Because of limited seating in 309, only the spokespersons and the press sat in. VersagiVoice did not attend the 309 meeting and instead reached out to others for their impressions, for possible future publication. Before and after the 2-part Planning Commission meeting, VersagiVoice heard from less than a handful of residents who have a thorough distrust of all levels of Royal Oak government, elected and Staff, and who insist, "It's a done deal. They're going to approve it, but I'm going to fight it anyway." Extreme among the extremists is one resident who maintains Royal Oak government has ignored residents' concerns through several City Commissions and City Managers and City Attorneys. Those extremes aside, most of the opponents of the Emagine project repeated -- before during, and after Public Comment -- objections they have voiced in previous public meetings:
Residents who favor the Emagine project offered:
Emagine will be on the mind of city hall watchers for at least several more weeks, and the public will have several more opportunities to weigh in. Previous gatherings have become acrimonious, as too many speakers or attendees moved beyond discourtesy to rudeness. This Hallock-chaired meeting, though, can serve as a template: A quiet but firm chair; the appointment of spokespersons; a 3-minute per speaker limit led to mutually respectful discourse. § I take issue with the constant diminishment of the legitimate concerns that the residents and seniors have raised over this Emagine development. We are all entitled to a difference of opinion, and our opinion right now is that the process has been flawed, the City is being deliberate in its efforts to keep decisions out of the public eye until the decisions have already been made and wheels set in motion and that there is a disregard for the residents' efforts to try to maintain some "balance" in our community development. -- Kathleen A. Klein § Monday night it was Carlo's comments that really struck a chord with me. The fact that after listening to the developer made him reconsidered his vote. I agree with Carlo regarding the developer's insistence to have the commission agree to his plan of operation. What has happened to Freed? This is his project. I heard many comments made by the developer that were reruns from other developers Royal Oak has dealt with, including Burton Katzman, Corvis, Schostak, Hanna, and several more. There must be a developer workbook somewhere. This developer is absolutely no different. He is wanting to squeeze 10 lbs on a piece of property that is not large enough. I agree with the movie venue. I am not sold on the alcohol attachment, but it is not a deal breaker. I don't go to movies, I rent. There is JUST not enough parking for a movie theatre, a bowling alley, the residents, and a bar that seats 200. The developer seems to want to use the Novi model and plop it down in RO. It will also drive the Main theatre out! Also, do you remember that it was Dennis Cowan that was always pushing the communications between developers and residents. As a matter of fact, he always insisted that residents connect with other residents regarding home projects too. -- Laura Harrison
28 Sep 09
Ongoing Emagine saga VersagiVoice was told that when Emagine CEO, Paul A. Glantz, met with Barton Tower Residents to address the concerns they had already expressed twice -- at the Liquor Control Committee and at CITCOM -- "The questions were the same. The answers were the same." Essentially, observers reported, the proposed theater/bowling alley development is still opposed by those residents. I reached out to Glantz for his reaction. He replied:
As respects the meeting at Barton Towers last week, I think
it was productive overall. I certainly did my best to
address all those questions or concerns that would not be
characterized as "rhetorical in nature." While our
opponents were quite vocal among the attendees, I was
encouraged by those who quietly called me aside indicating
that they favor the project.
§ Reader Rick Karlowski tells VersagiVoice he sent this email to CITCOM.
§ And Tom December, chairman of the Skylofts Board, coped me on his message to city officials:
|
Conversation
with Emagine CEO Paul Glantz Public Comment at 29 Oct 09 Planning Commission Work Session- Search for Other mentions of Emagine |
|
Needless to say Frank, I'm deeply disturbed at the
findings of the Parking Study and a Traffic Study would
be equally disturbing if it isn't allowed to address
parking and traffic during peak usage which is the
greatest cause for concern for this project.
I'm also
seriously disturbed by how the developer was allowed to
build a one-way garage??? If you haven't been up-top,
you need to make the trip because if E-magine and Bar
Louie both go in, that deck will fill up on a Friday and
Saturday night and there is no way down once you get up
to that top level, which I'm sure can be addressed with
some measures but it is again, inappropriate and never
should have been allowed to be built that way and from
all comments I've heard, it wasn't supposed to be built
that way at all...which lends to our concern that these
developers have a tendency to do what they want when it
comes to making/saving money vs. doing what is right by
a community.
I'm deeply disappointed that the residents who were
allowed to participate at the table felt so dis-empowered
by the process that they felt it would do no good to
ask if the project could support a reduction in
services and still be viable. I am asking the
Planning Commissioners to seek the following
concessions from the developer and E-Magine:
1) 6 movie theaters instead of 10
2) 8 bowling lanes instead of 16
3) Limited hours for movie show times (i.e., last
movie show time Sun - Thurs 9:30 p.m. / last movie
show time Thurs - Sat 10:30 p.m./ bar/party room to
close at 1:00 a.m. instead of 2:00 a.m.)
4) Ask the E-magine people what "green" features
(i.e. energy efficiency, etc.) they are implementing
into the development of this structure, since
"green" communities are the most desirable places
to locate in the new economy.
Thank you.
-----Original Message----- From: Tim Thwing <timt@ci.royal-oak.mi.us> To: Sent: Fri, Oct 30, 2009 12:30 pm Subject: RE: Planning Committee Packet on E-Magine Attached are copies of the information you have requested. Emagine/Joseph-Freed is in the process of revising plans to address those issued raised last night as well as several raised by various city departments. Initially it will be up to the Planning Commission to determine if they have addressed the issues/concerns, then the City Commission and ultimately the various city departments involved in the development process.
From:
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 7:24 AM To: TimT@ci.royal-oak.mi.us; Subject: Planning Committee Packet on E-Magine
Hi Tim, can I request a copy of the
information that was provided to the
Planning Committee for last night's
meeting? Can you send it electronically
or do you need me to come and pick it
up? Thank you.
How will we ensure that the upper level
of the parking garage remedy gets done
before the E-magine complex gets built.
I think we'd both have to be honest and
admit that once a project starts, often
the developer does things other than
what were promised and planned and I
don't think any of us want to see that
parking deck go unaddressed.
How did he manage to build it the way he
did in the first place without the City
catching it and correcting it in it's
initial build? These are issues of
concern that need to be addressed.
=== The Emagine is a shoe in. I have forwarded my inputs to the planning commission (separate emails) for your amusement in the hopes you don't lump me in with the chronic bitch-er camp. 30 No v 09I find it interesting that many of the same folks who don't see what the big deal is about the location of the Emagine project screamed bloody murder when the plan to develop the driving range at 13 - Woodward was proposed. I live a block away from the Emagine project, and when I purchased my home I checked out what the plans where for the corner at 11 Mile/Troy St. The Emagine is a major change in use from that originally approved. As a consequence I had (have) some major concerns about how it will impact the neighborhood, have voiced those concerns, and put forward suggestions (moving it to the empty dealership on Main (bigger site, better traffic flow, requesting the building be right sized to the lot size) to attempt to address some of these concerns. That does not make me anti-development or afraid of change, it makes me a concerned neighbor. -- Rick Karlowski |
The special planning meeting was as expected; well orchestrated, controlled, paid for and completely in favor of Emagine. Hired consultants with special interests: attorneys, parking and traffic, plus entertainment reps flown in at “great expense,” and the Freed rep anxious to unload this property. Their “great reputations” were mentioned; the congestion, alcohol and dance club aspects played down.
Well-massaged parking statistics so far from reality, with ratios literally based on nothing, severely underestimated the parking needs. Most committee members remained neutral, while others salivated over the plans. No mention of downsizing. No questions about our concerns. They steamrolled along like it’s a done deal.
The original Main North development was compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and an asset to downtown. It made the perfect transition from downtown urban living to a vibrant downtown neighborhood. It was and would remain harmonious.
The Emagine project is the opposite. It is nothing more than an alcohol fueled profit machine for the developer, with dire consequences for downtown and its neighborhoods. It does not fit and will suck resources and life from the city, while adding nothing of value to the community. It will ruin the landscape and devalue downtown forever.
Peggy Goodwin Sad Day for Democracy in Royal Oak
Dear Frank,
Election Day was a sad day for democracy in Royal Oak. A third term mayor ran unopposed, and, depending upon the precinct, from a low of 5% to a high of 14% of registered voters exercised their right to vote. With apathy prevailing, could it be that residents feel they have no voice against the special interests, developers and attorneys who are dominating Royal Oak’s agenda these days?
Special interests certainly filtered down to City Hall just prior to the election, when developer Paul Glantz’s attorney, former Mayor Dennis Cowan, asked for and was granted a “special workshop” for Emagine at the September Planning Commission Meeting. At the “workshop,” a majority of residents who opposed the 73,000 square foot development sat with Glantz, his attorney and high priced consultants that were hired by Glantz and the City. Answers about definitive parking numbers and their plan of operations were hard to come by. Questions like, “How are you going to prevent the 21 year old from giving his 18 year old buddy alcohol once they are in a dark movie theatre?” were posed but not answered.
Despite the fact that Glantz has to have a Class C Liquor License until 2a.m. complete with spirits, beer and wine, his “boutique bowling” expert told us that the party room with bowling was about “5th Grade Birthday Parties,” and nothing more. Residents are right to be both weary and wary of politics in Royal Oak.
Emagine will surely put the Main Theatre, a compatible movie theatre that has been a good neighbor for decades, out of business. Emagine’s parking and traffic requirements will put both the neighborhood it affronts and especially independent, small downtown businesses at risk. How is this good business?
Royal Oak residents are smarter than this. We moved here for its independence, its walkable downtown and anchoring neighborhoods. If “Big Box” is what we wanted, we would have moved to Novi or Canton, where the other Emagine projects are located, in the first place.
|