County Unveils Breathtaking Plans For Lake/Clifton Area.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Today the Cuyahoga County Planning Commission unveiled some beautiful new concepts in an effort to both streamline traffic and add green space. We end up with less clutter, less accidents, less maintenance, and one new vista for the cities of Lakewood and Rocky River.

The meeting on video:



Turning the bridge into a new vista park.

The Clifton Blvd/Lake Road Enhancement project looks to address traffic issues with rush hour, while increasing accessibility and entertainment for the neighborhoods/whole city.

The parts of the Lakewood plans I have found most exciting are the implementation of traffic round-a-bouts at Lake and Clifton, and West Clifton and Clifton. Along with that are plans to develop the north side, currently a road, into a sidewalk/bike path with ample green space leading to…

A park/vista on the Lake Road bridge, complete with planters, benches, bike/walkways and more. Instantly one can see how popular this new park/greenspace will be. Moving much of the bike/walking down towards the north, while moving more cars to the under-utilized I-90 corridor.


A roundabout planned for West Clifton and Clifton Blvd.


Looking East

Let’s talk about ROUNDABOUTS, used heavily and very effectively in the UK and Europe, the roundabout is a simple, low maintenance way to route cars in complicated or even simple intersections with amazing positives. Witness the roundabout at Edgewater Park.

• Roundabouts replace complicated intersections with circular traffic movement

• Cars move in the same direction, reducing head-on collisions

• Incoming traffic yields to cars already in roundabout

• Drivers only need watch for traffic on their left side

• Left turns eliminated

• Speed significantly decreased in roundabouts; usually 20-30 mph

• 44% reduction in all crashes

• Decreased commuting time - no traffic lights or stop signs

• Lower car emissions and fuel consumption - cars do not idle as long

• Increased pavement life - less stopping, less rutting

• Require less long-term maintenance

All of these are ideas at this point. But I have to give them credit, they are visionary ideas giving the residents of Lakewood and Rocky River yet another highpoint in all of our lifestyles.


The roundabout a Lake Road and Clifton Blvd.

Someone could bike from Historic Birdtown to the new Bridge Park for the CYC fireworks and a snack with friends. How is that not a win for all?

None of this is set in stone and the County is providing many ways to give your feedback to this project. The easiest way is to got to:
https://www.countyplanning.us/projects/ ... confluence
Or follow this QR CODE

This project is one of the focus areas that came out of the larger Lakefront Public Access Plan. The County Public Works Department retained the services of County Planning to take the lead on this study. A partnership with County Planning, County Public Works, Lakewood, Rocky River and the Metroparks.

The Lakefront Public Access Plan will be officially completed in November and will be presented to the County Council soon after. What has come out of the study is roughly six focus areas where they're recommending further study or implementation. The focus areas include: the Clifton/Lake multi-use path and scenic vista project, Wolf Road multi-use path in Bay Village from Clague to Cahoon, the Gold Coast shoreline stabilization and Public Access path, E. 9th to E. 55th North Marginal multi-use path, E. 156th Beulah Park Shoreline stabilization and multi-use path in North Collinwood, Lakeshore Blvd improvements in Euclid, etc.

Thank you to the Cuyahoga County Planning Commission for this work, and a special thanks to Lakewoodite Michael Dever who always takes Lakewood’s heart, soul and concerns into these meetings.

You can see all the slides from the presentation by clicking here: http://media.lakewoodobserver.com/media ... 063740.pdf

or here in jpeg form: http://lakewoodobserver.com/photoblogs/ ... ion-101121

.

[michael gill]

Thanks, Jim.

Those are great ideas.

I would love to see them eliminate the highway exit and entrance at the western landing. They are a gigantic waste of space, and for a cyclist in the roadway or a pedestrian crossing Clifton to Lake or the other way, those ramps are the biggest safety concern.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Thanks, Jim.

Those are great ideas.

I would love to see them eliminate the highway exit and entrance at the western landing. They are a gigantic waste of space, and for a cyclist in the roadway or a pedestrian crossing Clifton to Lake or the other way, those ramps are the biggest safety concern.

Michael

The "Marion Exit" is expected to become a roundabout too. One of the drawings in the package.

This is just a small part of the Lakefront access plan.

I loved the presentation, and when asking questions to the commission last week, they are ready to get going.

Those of you unfamiliar with roundabouts head to Edgewater Park early and late and at high peak weekends. It always works.

.

[Mark Kindt]

You Can Quote Me On This

"A $50 Million solution in search of a "problem".

--released weeks before Election Day.

[pj bennett]

I am of the era, when the goal was to move traffic along in an efficient manner.
However these days, the goal seems to be, to move traffic along with a tourist mindset.
This is my perspective, mind you.

I like Marion Drive. It's a nice, efficient overpass, that gets one over the train tracks and some industrial properties over to Detroit Rd. I like being able to avoid part of the Detroit Ave. congestion that occurs from Riverside Dr. as far as Wagar.

As a pedestrian, I have walked from my home on Clifton Blvd. to Leo Luck on Detroit, and am well aware of the trickiness in doing it safely around the Marion Drive ramps.

Then again, as a pedestrian, I know how hard it can be to cross Detroit Ave. in Lakewood.
Drivers often take away the pedestrian's right-of-way to cross, and sometimes display their middle finger digit in the process.

I'm curious as to how the efficiency of police/ambulance/fire vehicles to answer emergency calls would be affected.

If these traffic changes occur, I suppose that the dragsters and motorcycles that race along the Clifton Blvd straight-away will have to change their tactics.

As well as, the semis that like to fly along Clifton Blvd after dark.

The vista will be nice for cyclists, but for who else?
Who is going to walk from what part of town to that vista? Folks who live in Clifton Park?
For the rest of the city, the only place to park a car would be on Clifton Road.
I'm sure those residents would really appreciate that.

Most parks/vistas have accessibility to a restroom.
Maybe porta-bodies are already a part of the grand scheme.
(That would be a really nice touch.)

[Mark Kindt]

You Can Quote Me On This

"A $50 Million solution in search of a "problem".

--released weeks before Election Day.

My cost number is just a stab at a guestimate.

Let's just say that this is a multi-million dollar plan that would require an area reduction in an existing city park.

I've driven this intersection regularly for a very, very long time. It is difficult for me to imagine a traffic circle as a traffic engineering solution at this time at this location.

It is an interesting and surprising proposal and a glimpse into the future by implying more remote work and autonomous vehicles.

[Richard Baker]

Incredible, a round about at West Clifton and Clifton Blvd with Clifton Road having stop signs 25 yards from the intersection. Are they insane, or is this plan the product of a liberal arts college instead of engineering? Drivers coming around the round about will not be visible to traffic on Clifton Road turning or crossing Clifton Blvd.
Round abouts are all over England and do function well even though the Brits drive on the wrong side of the road. They also have splashes, crossing creeks and nobody drowns. The reason they work so well, is the fact the Brit drivers grew up with them, are courteous and know how to drive.
How much did the county pay for this adnomination? It would be better spent on resurfacing county roads as the City of Lakewood should do, instead of expanding the city payroll to provide the residents circus show in a worn out tent.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Incredible, a round about at West Clifton and Clifton Blvd with Clifton Road having stop signs 25 yards from the intersection. Are they insane, or is this plan the product of a liberal arts college instead of engineering? Drivers coming around the round about will not be visible to traffic on Clifton Road turning or crossing Clifton Blvd.
Round abouts are all over England and do function well even though the Brits drive on the wrong side of the road. They also have splashes, crossing creeks and nobody drowns. The reason they work so well, is the fact the Brit drivers grew up with them, are courteous and know how to drive.
How much did the county pay for this adnomination? It would be better spent on resurfacing county roads as the City of Lakewood should do, instead of expanding the city payroll to provide the residents circus show in a worn out tent.

Richard

Your understanding of how all this works is well, somewhat lacking.

The only city money I see possibly spent would be on using Horace Mann and the power used.

They grew up with them? Yes as did much of Europe and the rest of the world. But we have had them here in Northern Ohio as long as I can remember. Not many, but a few and they all seem to work.

The one I found fascinating was the one at Edgewater Park, less than 3 years old, and it took people about 30 days to figure it out. Now getting to the Park, Docks, and even Wendy Park are a breeze no matter how busy the park is. I am looking for before and after accident numbers.

It doesn't matter what kind of jerk is driving, the roundabout handles them well.

Richard here is a fact, they probably spent way too much on the study. That said, this money is getting spent anyway. Why not make it nice and or better?

Clifton Road extension destroyed Clifton Park back in the early 60s. The idea of making it a freeway for quick access and travel through Lakewood was a bad idea.

Thank you for admitting they work so well because people got used to them.

Hope you are doing well.

.

[Tim Liston]

Jim you're misquoting Richard. He did not say the city would be spending money on it. He said the county. And he did not say Europeans "got used" to roundabouts. He said they "grew up" with them. There is a big difference.

And just because the city won't foot the bill does not make the roundabouts a good idea.

As for the Edgewater Beach roundabout, I have traversed it maybe 200 times and I'm not fond of it. Of course maybe 198 of those times was by bicycle. Most recently yesterday. Which I thought was a big impetus for the reconfiguration of the Lakewood/RR corridor. I was at the meeting and started out about bikes when the bridge itself was discussed but quickly became all about motoring when the roundabouts were discussed. Have you researched safety considerations of roundabout where cycling is involved? I doubt it.

I'm pretty ambivalent about the whole thing. I tend to think the money would be better spent resurfacing roadways.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Jim you're misquoting Richard. He did not say the city would be spending money on it. He said the county. And he did not say Europeans "got used" to roundabouts. He said they "grew up" with them. There is a big difference.

And just because the city won't foot the bill does not make the roundabouts a good idea.

As for the Edgewater Beach roundabout, I have traversed it maybe 200 times and I'm not fond of it. Of course maybe 198 of those times was by bicycle. Most recently yesterday. Which I thought was a big impetus for the reconfiguration of the Lakewood/RR corridor. I was at the meeting and started out about bikes when the bridge itself was discussed but quickly became all about motoring when the roundabouts were discussed. Have you researched safety considerations of roundabout where cycling is involved? I doubt it.

I'm pretty ambivalent about the whole thing. I tend to think the money would be better spent resurfacing roadways.

Tim

Thank you, you are correct, I read it wrong. Richard sorry about the mixup.

Tim, I have looked at the overall numbers for traffic and accidents with Roundabout and without. Bike in particular I have not.

At Edgewater I have seen time and again pedestrians and bikes getting let into the center, or across the edge roads. Which takes it down to just crossing a street. With crosswalks, or for that matter without, pedestrians have the right of way. This of course means bike riders might have to dismount for a couple minutes.

I am sure it seems frustrating. I just remember trying to get through that intersection in an ambulance once on a busy day. I think it was 10 minutes from Boat Club to Shoreway. That was with police sirens and stop signs. The only real backup I ever see is coming from the east of July 4, Airshow Day, etc.

I think anything that pushes traffic off Clifton/Lake and potentially gives residents back their road without towing cars, would be a great thing.

I also loved the idea of using just half the bridge. It's there might as well use it for something positive. This city has for far too long has ignored or wasted their vistas.

Thanks again for the correction.

.

[michael gill]

A roundabout is a better idea than the highway exit/entrance on the Rocky River side. I think it would be safer. When I was in Cambridge for school I rode a bicycle on roundabouts daily, and never had difficulty safety-wise. Just drive like a car. They work fine.

I am very glad to see transportation tax dollars spent on improving quality of life and safety in Lakewood and in cities, vs. building more, wider highways and exits in cornfields.

[Tim Liston]

I guess I don't understand the problem at Clifton and Lake, and at Clifton/Clifton/Clifton, that would be solved by roundabouts.

Roundabouts are said to be safer for motorists. Fine. But are these two intersections particularly unsafe relative to other Lakewood or nearby intersections? I've lived in the neighborhood for 31 years and have never known these intersections to be particularly unsafe. West Clifton at Riverside is unsafe.

Roundabouts are said to move traffic more quickly. Fine. But who benefits primarily? Lakewood residents? Or Rocky River residents? Take a guess....

I agree with Mike. If the County wants to spend money on a roundabout, and promote cycling/walking it seems to me that the Marion Ramp is a MUCH better candidate. That "intersection" is a complete mess for bikes and pedestrians.

I biked again today down to Wendy Park and back and took note of the roundabout at Edgewater Park. I agree with Jim. It's a pretty fair example of what would be built at those two intersections. I had perceived it as smaller but it's really pretty big. I'm not a fan of crossing near it on my bike (west to east) because I don't want to dismount and never do. But I don't mind using it like a motorist (east to west). I do think the approach speeds are different. Traffic is naturally slower I think at Edgewater Park than it would be on Lake/Clifton.

But as proposed, it just seems like a "solution" to a non-problem. Help me out....

[michael gill]

I do think the wide pedestrian / bike sidewalk on the North side is a good idea, and that a place to view the lake from there would have appeal. A wider sidewalk would certainly make a more pleasant walk, run, for for the sidewalk cyclists, a more pleasant trip across the bridge. The current sidewalk is way too narrow to feel OK walking.

I agree with Tim about the roundabout on the Lakewood side. I was not aware that safety or congestion were a problem at West Clifton or Clifton Road / Lake Road.

On the Rocky River side, a roundabout would be safer than the current highway style ramp set-up. That causes cars to well exceed the speed limit, and if you are on a bike the ramps require those dangerous and lengthy lane crossings. A roundabout would improve that.

But I think a regular intersection over there would be better still because it would take still less space, and would allow that to become a regular city street. The ramps are a profligate waste of space in the city. Maybe someone would build houses in the newly revealed acreage, or add to their little commercial district. Either of those would be a good thing. Lake has regular intersaections and traffic lights all the way along: one roundabout isn't going to do too much to help traffic move. And why is that such a high ideal on city streets anyway? Lake Road is not a highway.

[cmager]

There are many perceptions and mis-perceptions about roundabouts and what they accomplish. Here is a case study from Indiana University that examines the now 25-year program to install (now more than 138) roundabouts throughout the City of Carmel, IN on the north side of Indianapolis. The City has installed these in new construction, and in existing and high-volume corridors. This is an easy read, and is packed with information and data on their experiences and results. There are some relatively surprising, quantified benefits.

https://eri.iu.edu/erit/case-studies/ca ... bouts.html

[Richard Baker]

With all due respects, this is not about the typical round about, its about a round about at a major T intersection with 6 and 4 lanes that is located 75 feet or less from a cross street. In addition at night the vehicles' headlights driving around the round about will shine at all the homes that are located near it.

Why would a cyclist continue to want to travel on major roads when less travel secondary road are available is beyond me. I seen cyclist cut across traffic lanes of traffic, run both red lights and stop signs and they wonder why they are hit by vehicles.

Why not close the bridge, it is not needed for traffic, it was installed for bribes. I can be used as an observation deck of the river and lake, in addition of a bike path through it with place planters until the bridge needs be torn down.