Planning commission rejects rezoning for condos on Conneaut Lake property

Posted Thursday, March 29, 2007 11:28 PM | Contributed by Jeff

Believing no changes should be made in a township ordinance until the future of Conneaut Lake Park is determined, Crawford County Planning Commission on Wednesday rejected a proposal submitted by Summit supervisors to change its zoning ordinance to allow 10 condominiums be built on an acre of land in the township instead of the current maximum of six units. The proposal now goes to supervisors for consideration. The commission’s recommendation isn’t binding and supervisors can accept or reject it. A portion of the Conneaut Lake property is for sale, but the sale is contingent on the rezoning.

Read more from The Meadville Tribune.

Related parks

Friday, March 30, 2007 12:19 AM
Oh brother... :(
+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 2:22 AM
The usual retarded politics. Lets face it. They are trying to force this great classic park to shut down for good. It's a shame that very soon our children won't get to see these great family type parks as they soon will all disappear in the name of development as if there isn't enough land out there.

http://www.placeswecouldgo.com
http://members.trainorders.com/ram1970/Top/photo_gallery.htm

+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 8:24 AM
Idiots! Without the zoning change and the sale of this land, there definitely is no future for CLP.

There still may be no future with the sale, but reducing their crippling debt may have given it a fighting chance. Of course, it will never get out of the funk with the court running it instead of an invested business person.
*** This post was edited by PerrysburgGuy 3/30/2007 8:28:19 AM ***

+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 9:48 AM
What a bunch of jackasses. It's a lose, lose proposition if it's not allowed to happen. The park is lost forever and the county and twp. lose millions in both property and income taxes.

Chuck

+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 11:36 AM
While I agree that blocking the change would be short-sighted, this isn't a magic bullet. The park isn't going to instantly be a sustainable business. Various entities have been throwing cash at the thing now for years.
+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 11:48 AM
Jeff, your statment holds some water but reports of the park has been breaking even and actually making a little over the past couple years just lead me to believe the aquired debt is the only restraining issue on the park eventually thriving.

I can't say that for certain. I have no access to the books but the Vollenteers and general improvements over the last couple years lead me to believe there is a chance.

Chuck, who will never say just close the damn place already if there is a chance.

+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 12:42 PM
Pardon my non-verbal expletive.

Arrrrrrrrrgggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!

+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 1:33 PM
/me wonders when people will realize that Meadville isn't obligated to run their district so that everything is in Conneaut's best interest.

Whether rejecting the proposal was a good decision or not is an opinion, but the bottom like is that the system WORKED. If Conneaut can't make their own money, then the planning commission shouldn't be forced to go against what they feel is in the best interest in the community to give them cash.

You people can yell and scream all you want, but one day you'll realize that your sentimental feelings for the park are clouding your common sense. Conneaut Lake loses money every year. Its time has passed--with the advent of superhighways and cheap airfare, people don't drive to the lake anymore for vacation, and certainly aren't going to drive 1.5 hours into the middle of nowhere for such a small park. Conneaut served the lake like Trimper's rides serves Ocean City MD--people will visit as something additional to do, but they wouldn't make a special trip up just to visit the park. The only way for out of the way parks to be successful is to offer a ton of attractive things to do, and Conneaut doesn't have that, nor does it have the money to do so. I just don't see how it can become a viable business again.

People pulled this whining routine when the casino board didn't give the Pittsburgh license to the company that would build a free arena. Let's grow up, people... the planning commission and local government are there to serve in the best interest in the community, and making decisions against their judgment just to help a business with no future is not in the interest in the community.

+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 2:21 PM
And this happening less than two months before they open does not help the situation.

I've got plenty of CLP memories, just as I do of Euclid and Chippewa beaches. My kids have memories of it, as we vaca'd there many times. If it dies, we'll miss it.

The last ten years for that place has been nothing but one struggle after the next. I hope it opens, but won't be surprised if it doesn't.

+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 3:33 PM
Bell's. Another victim of the same "I don't care" attitude by local officials.

As least Waldameer won its zoning battles to build that new coaster planned for 2008.

+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 5:56 PM
Phantom Tails. I suppose condos isn't a improvment over the trailer parks and bars that line the road for a mile in each direction. Why can't they sell some of their own land?.

IMHO the Zoning around there is F**D Up the other side of the lake is all condos and half million dollar homes.

+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 6:21 PM
The parcel of land is already zoned for condos, so your argument is irrelevant. There won't be trailer parks and bars there regardless of the outcome. The only issue is whether they'll allow 6 or 10 condos per acre.


*** This post was edited by PhantomTails 3/30/2007 6:24:23 PM ***

+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 6:47 PM
And thats what? The difference of having two or three floors?

Chuck

+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 6:52 PM
Read your post again, and my response. You asked if condos aren't an improvement over trailer parks. They are. Problem is, the land is already zoned for condos, so there never was a possibility of it being occupied by trailer parks. I never said anything about the difference between 6 or 10 condos aside from that it's the issue the commissioners are considering.
+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 6:56 PM
Ok, I get you now.

Chuck, who wonders if thats the condition of the sale. They'd buy if they could build ten but not 6.

+0
Friday, March 30, 2007 7:57 PM
Where have you been, Chuck? ;)

Yes, that's exactly one of the four conditions of the sale happening. If they're not allowed to build 10, they won't buy.

+0
Saturday, March 31, 2007 2:30 AM
The good news is that this is ONLY a recommendation. The bad news is more than likely the zoning board will not see the error in the ways or the recommendation and vote the way they recommended. What will the values of the land be by this area if the park disappears? What other than the lake front property will have any value? NONE! Get this park back on stable ground and possibly be able to add new attractions again and this whole community might become more viable as the park will draw more tourists. I for one though think that they will make the wrong choice here. Just me being pessimistic. The whole community will wither and die if the park dies. it will be just a matter of time.
+0
Sunday, April 1, 2007 5:56 PM
The area around the park died in the early 1980's. It is a wonder the place is still even standing. With that said you mentioned value of land prices, the park property lakefront and back is worth more without the rides than with them. The next time you visit the park take a look at the house that sits to the right of the hotel facing lakefront, it was valed at $750,000.00 3 years ago, it sold for $660,000.00. Take a walk through the gate near the water park onto Comstock drive, go straight down to the boat launch area and look at the homes along the lakefront, not one is under $850,000.00. Land and house prices have been going up over the years, the only thing that is holding the values from exploding is the old POS homes and cottagse that have been left unused by the owners. These places have hurt values and the park because for some they are still under 99 year lease agreements many owned by the old Conneaut Lake Park owners, who are long gone. There are about 10 developers just buying their time for the final days when someone says enough is enough and the park is put up for some sort of land sale. Nobody wants to see this happen, not me, you or anyone else who loves old parks, but Conneauts days have come and gone and they will not come back.
+0
Monday, April 2, 2007 5:34 PM
But didn't the township just change the zoning within the past few months to reduce the number of units allowed per acre?
+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...