The Observation Deck

I have been looking over the materials presented for the Clifton Boulevard street enhancement and I am not seeing a bike path plan. I hope that I am missing something! My wife attended the meeting last Wednesday as well and did not hear mention of a bike path. Do any Observers know anything?
Ken

Ken,

The Clifton Blvd. Project was studied by Kent State University a couple of years ago for the cities of Cleveland and Lakewood. They had at least 4 or 5 public hearings on the plans and asked for public input. Bike path plans were discussed and I believe it was the cost that killed them.

Bike paths will really enhance our community and I would encourage you and all bicycle enthusiasts to make your feelings known.

There was once a trolley/inter-urban that ran along Clifton.
That's good news for the creation of bike paths! The Rails-to-Trails Conservancy http://www.railstotrails.org/index.html promotes the building of bike paths from abandon rail lines. They will assist with finding Federal funds to build the bike path. Clifton's old rail line would help qualify Lakewood for Federal funds.

Bill Grulich

Ken

I believe the state won their case for the first 50' of property back from the lake.

Why not run the bike path along the lakefront.

On the eastside of Cleveland you can travel the entire waterfront to the lake access and their beach.

If Lakewood is to compete, we must develop our lakefront.


.

Personally, as a rider, Clifton is a dangerous road and I believe bicyclists should not be encouraged to use it. Far too many bus stops and parking allowances/restrictions.

I believe Lake Road is part of an official bike route and should be the focus of a bike lane.

David Anderson wrote:Personally, as a rider, Clifton is a dangerous road and I believe bicyclists should not be encouraged to use it. Far too many bus stops and parking allowances/restrictions.

I believe Lake Road is part of an official bike route and should be the focus of a bike lane.

I would agree, Clifton does not seem like an ideal road to intially focus on building a bike path. Other than traffic and use issues and not being the most scenic road, there's nothing on the road worth biking to other than getting from point to point. Not that it wouldn't be worth doing down the road....just feel there are much better places in Lakewood to build bike paths.

Jim,I love the idea of a bike path on Lake Avenue. It is an absolute disgrace that Cleveland/Lakewood continue to have inadequate access to the lake. But since the funding is in place for a Clifton Blvd. enhancement I believe we should start with Clifton and then work on connecting it to other hot spots like Lakewood Park,lovely Downtown Lakewood,the Metroparks,etc. Sometimes I think we talk about being a walkable/bikeable community here in Lakewood because it sounds nice but the fact remains when an opportunity like this comes up to easily make Lakewood more green/less car reliant it is simply not a priority. Maybe RTA is running the show on this one and they of course would be more concerned about bus routes,shelters,etc. and could care less about a bike path. Nate Kelly needs to step up on this one and insist that a bike path is a priority. I bike this route to work so maybe I am being selfish but I see many other bikers on this route and there is plenty of space on Clifton. How could a bike path be too expensive? You simply add lines to the side of the road and put up a few signs.

I’d be willing to bet that I cycle more miles to get from place to place than any other regular Deck contributor. That would be 20 miles a day when it’s above about 25 degrees, and not raining in the morning. I ride to Middleburg Heights and back for work. Plus whatever else. I almost never ride recreationally.

I’m largely opposed to the creation of segregated bike lanes, for several reasons.

1) Bike lanes cause more crashes than they prevent. Generally, bike lanes put bikes where motorists are not looking. Plus, they force bikes to make left turns from the right lane, and motorists to make right turns from the left lane. Bike lanes also create a false sense of safety.

2) Bike lanes are created in the portion of the street where hazards like potholes and debris are most likely to exist.

3) The existence of bike lanes create the impression that bikes are not allowed where lanes do not exist. Which gives sociopath motorists one more reason to harass me.

And putting bike lanes on Lake Road is especially problematic, unless and until the rush hour parking bans are eliminated. Where are you going to put bike lanes on Lake? Up against the curb, where cars are allowed to park most times, or way farther out, which puts bikes practically in the middle of the street during rush hour? Think about it….

What is needed is twofold: smooth pavement and education/enforcement. First, give me streets that I can actually ride on that I don’t have to be constantly dodging pavement hazards. For example, before Lakewood puts paint onto Lake Road, it would be nice if they would repair the split seams running up and down Lake, especially just west of Belle. Get a wheel caught in one of those, and down you go! And second, create for me an environment where traffic laws are enforced, with respect to motorists and cyclists. Cite cyclists who run red lights and such please, so that I can begin to earn respect from motorists. And come down hard on “at fault” motorists who injure cyclists or any other vulnerable user of our roads and sidewalks. Like they do in Oregon for example.

If I have those two things I don’t need anything else. Especially not bike lanes….

I'm not sure the money is there in the sense that money for construction has been set aside. From their web site, it appears that what funding they have is only for study and planning, and academics do a lot of studying and planning without ever lifting a shovel.

I haven't been impressed with their performance. You have to register to participate on their web site. I registered March 29, and received an automated email that my registration had been received, and I would receive the actual registration shortly. To date, no further response. Perhaps they can read minds and don't want to hear from me.

From their press releases and web site, it appears they are concerned solely with aura and aesthetics, and not at all with function. My feeling is that there is beauty in something that functions well; while I value public art, I value functionality more, and it seems to me that they are proposing to decrease functionality of the road.

I would invite anyone's attention to Hilliard on the other side of the bridge; No one lives on the north side of the road, but people do live on the south side. Someone had to find a way to spend some money, so they build a narrow weedbed down the whole road. So if you want to get to a residence on the south side, you have to drive the length of the road, make an unsafe and probably illegal uturn, and drive back to the place you want to visit. And of course every once in a while you have to dodge the city trucks, while the workers water the weeds. I can't think of a better way to waste gas and increase pollution than making people have to drive further, but that is the type of scheme that city planners are wont to dream up.

The Clifton scheme suffers the same flaw. There is an intersection every couple of hundred feet, and we can make a turn almost anywhere without impeding traffic, because, at least for a while, we have turn lanes. When they take away those turn lanes (one hopes they will keep at least a few of them, but perhaps the Fung Shui is against that) we will have to drive past where we want to turn, make a turn or a uturn, and drive back to where we were going. Since the same number of turning vehicles will be making these turns, it would appear that they will be backed up into the driving lane, which will slow everyone else down, except the SUV drivers who will just cut up onto the carriage lawn, since an SUV is meant for stuff such as that. The net result will be slower and noisier traffic, increased pollution, and increased costs (someone will have to tend to the weeds). That is the type of solution that you too often get from city planners.

If we are lucky, these people will continue their studying and planning until the money runs out, then move on to study floating some flowerbeds in the river.

Incidentally, I was in Berea for the Bach Festival, and noticed that they have bike lanes between the parking lane and the outside traffic lane. The lane was cleaner and in better condition than those I have seen in the gutters, but I wondered what it would be like to ride there, subject to traffic on the left, and opening doors and entering traffic on the right.

I read that they are putting noisemakers on some of the all-electric vehicles as a safety measure, since alone they are so quiet that people don't notice they are there. I think bikes are in the same boat; they are harder to notice because they are so quiet. I wonder if requiring noisemakers would add to safety. I would suggest we require that bikers yodel constantly when they are in motion; it would help us notice them, and certainly add to the aura and aesthetics.

Will Brown wrote:The Clifton scheme suffers the same flaw. There is an intersection every couple of hundred feet, and we can make a turn almost anywhere without impeding traffic, because, at least for a while, we have turn lanes. When they take away those turn lanes (one hopes they will keep at least a few of them, but perhaps the Fung Shui is against that) we will have to drive past where we want to turn, make a turn or a uturn, and drive back to where we were going. Since the same number of turning vehicles will be making these turns, it would appear that they will be backed up into the driving lane, which will slow everyone else down, except the SUV drivers who will just cut up onto the carriage lawn, since an SUV is meant for stuff such as that. The net result will be slower and noisier traffic, increased pollution, and increased costs (someone will have to tend to the weeds). That is the type of solution that you too often get from city planners.

If we are lucky, these people will continue their studying and planning until the money runs out, then move on to study floating some flowerbeds in the river.

Will

If I remember correctly some of the problems were that the fire department sees the
"center section" of Clifton as their express lane to get around the city. So to close that off
could, and I only say could slow down emergency response. Also there was something
about the layout of fire hydrants that make it a costly project.

Then lets not forget the $50+ Million dollar sewer project that was supposed to be
completed by 2010 or I thought or we suffer penalties, that revolved around the sewers
along Clifton caving in. (This might have been set back)

I had thought a more realistic study was the 20' concrete wall running down the middle
of Clifton, or maybe now Lake, with machicolations.

As for Bike safety, Tim knows his stuff.


FWIW

All I know is that whatever work is done on our roads.....hopefully this guy isn't on the job:

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/ ... l=19255397

boss is only giving him hand tools now --- a chisel, a hammer