Download Lakewood Active Living Task Force PDF

TitleLakewood Active Living Task Force
File Size3.6 MB
Total Pages89
Document Text Contents
Page 1


Active Living

Task Force

Recommendations Report
December 2015

Page 2

City of Lakewood
12650 Detroit Ave.
Lakewood, OH 44107

(216) 521-7580

Cuyahoga County Planning Commission
2079 East 9


Suite 5-300
Cleveland, OH 44115


About County Planning
The Cuyahoga County Planning Commission’s mission is to inform and provide services in support of the short and
long term comprehensive planning, quality of life, environment, and economic development of Cuyahoga County and
its cities, villages, and townships.

Page 44

Lakewood Active Living Task Force

36 | P a g e

Infrastructure, facilities, and programming should not only be high quality, but appropriate for the
population it serves. For Lakewood, that means suitable for a diverse population in terms of age,
ability, and cultures that have specific needs and concerns.

A. Perform and maintain an inventory of non-municipal active living and recreation amenities that
would be complimentary to the inventory and assessment efforts performed in the City’s Master
Parks Plan. The map above illustrates the population in Lakewood that is within a reasonable walking
distance to a municipal park or recreation facility. Those areas that fall outside of a green circle are
considered to have inadequate access. However, private recreation facilities have not been included
in their analysis.

1. Include any active living site existing in Lakewood. Include both formal and informal areas of
active living and recreation in order to correctly understand where the greatest needs exist in
terms of access.

2. �h�•���� �š�Z�]�•�� �]�v�À���v�š�}�Œ�Ç�� ���v���� �š�Z���� ���]�š�Ç�[�•�� �]�v�À���v�š�}�Œ�Ç�� �š�}�� �µ�v�����Œ�•�š���v���� �Á�Z���Œ���� �‰�}�•�•�]���o���� ���}�}�‰���Œ���š�]�À����
agreements could exist to satisfy various programing and facility needs (see B and C below).

3. Ensure the inventory documents infrastructure for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit riders as
well. Proximity to an active living or recreational venue without safe access from alternative
forms of transit limits the potential users. I order to attain full utilization of a resource,
infrastructure for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users must be accounted for.

B. Increase and optimize public and private active living space in Lakewood. Lakewood is the densest
city in Ohio, and is almost completely built out. With a precious 75 acres of open space remaining,
every bit of existing and potential active living and recreation space counts. According to the National

Page 45

Lakewood Active Living Task Force

37 | P a g e

Recreation and Parks Association standards, there should be between 6.25-10.5 acres per 1,000

With 75 acres of parks and openspace and a population of 51,000, Lakewood falls well

below that recommended standard. Furthermore, the map above illustrates all Lakewood municipal
parks with a ¼ mile to ½ mile buffer around each. This buffer represents an appropriate walking
distance for youth based on the relative size of the park. As the map above illustrates, many
residents, especially in the south central portion of the City, fall outside of a reasonable walking
distance from parks. When walkability is an issue, access becomes a concern. The strategic creation
of more active living and recreation acreage in Lakewood may help achieve a better active living and
recreation ratio and access for Lakewood residents.

1. Investigate how to create more park space. Unlike many cities that were included in the
benchmarking research, Lakewood is very limited in the amount of land that it can devote to
new active living and recreation opportunities. Therefore, the City must not only be strategic in
how it uses the remaining 75 acres of open space, but must employ creative means to create
more active living and recreation opportunities.

a) Utilize marginal lands effectively, such as the lawn at Lakewood City Hall or areas along
the train track or highways if and only if these spaces could be safely separated for public

b) Use parkland to its fullest potential.

 Consider recommendations in the Park System Strategic Plan (2010) regarding
conversion of space for more in-demand activities.

 Investigate temporary or modifiable court space and infrastructure that could be
easily shifted to accommodate multiple activities.

c) When strategically and financially possible, consider the purchase of property as it
becomes available for the eventual use as greenspace or parkspace.

d) Investigate the possibility of converting formerly industrial land into passive park use. For
example, the former Graftech Industrial Building.

e) Create more green space and a more park-like setting along Lakewood’s main corridors
to foster the sense that Lakewood is a green and healthy city.

2. Investigate how vacant or underutilized buildings can be used for active living and
recreational purposes and other associated enterprises (see C. below). For example, the
Fairlington Community Center is a 36,000 square foot recreation center serving Arlington
County, VA. The building was originally built in 1944 as an elementary school. The historic
building, designated on the National Register of Historic Places, was renovated in 2007 to
improve energy-efficiency and better incorporate the needs of the community. The community
center includes art studios, a gymnasium, a fitness room, public Wi-Fi, and healthy vending
machines. Outdoor amenities include a playground, amphitheater, basketball courts, a fitness
trail, a multi-sport field, and a picnic gazebo.


a) Explore the possibility of converting storage buildings on Madison Avenue into indoor
courts, gym space, etc.

b) Advocate for better utilization of city buildings such as the old Lakewood Skate House.
Many times, these areas house some active living and recreation opportunities, but
reconsideration of the space could enhance the active living and recreation experience,

Page 88

72 | P a g e

From 2008-2011

 Participation in Fitness Sports had the highest participation levels in 2011, at 60% of the general
population, with Outdoor Sports having the second-highest participation rates (over 40%). Both
have remained relatively steady during the time period. Individual sports declined from over 40% to
roughly 36% during this time.

 Millennials (1980-1999) are engaged more overall in all areas of activity

o Fitness, outdoor, individual and team sports had highest participation at approx 51%, 49%,
48% and 30%, respectively.

 Among Inactive individuals ages 13 to 44, the most popular “aspirational sports” were working out
with weights and working out with machines.

 Among inactive youth aged 6-12, swimming, bicycling and camping were the most common
aspirational sports reported.

 See tables on opposite side

Page 89

73 | P a g e

2007 2009 2011 4 year change

Triathlon (traditional/on road) 798,000 1,148,000 1,686,000 111.3%

Squash 612,000 796,000 1,112,000 81.7%

Adventure racing 698,000 1,005,000 1,202,000 72.2%

Triathlon (nontraditional/off road) 483,000 634,000 819,000 69.6%

Telemarking 1,173,000 1,459,000 1,960,000 67.1%

Snowshoeing 2,400,000 3,177,000 3,967,000 65.3%

Kayaking* 7,762,000 9,308,000 11,128,000 43.4%

Lacrosse 1,058,000 1,162,000 1,501,000 41.9%

High impact aerobics 11,287,000 12,771,000 15,755,000 39.6%

Stationary cycling-group 6,314,000 6,762,000 8,738,000 38.4%

Cardio boxing 4,812,000 5,500,000 6,488,000 34.8%

Skiing (freesyle) 2,817,000 2,831,000 3,644,000 29.4%

Trail running 4,216,000 4,845,000 5,373,000 27.4%

Skiing (cross country) 3,530,000 4,003,000 4,424,000 25.3%

Yoga** 17,758,000 18,934,000 22,107,000 24.5%

Running/jogging 41,064,000 42,511,000 50,061,000 21.9%

Gymnastics 4,066,000 3,952,000 4,824,000 18.6%

Activities with largest participation growth 2007-2011

* includes sea/touring, recreational, and white water

** 2007 is actually 2008, 2007 data unavailable

2007 2009 2011 4 year change

Wrestling 3,313,000 3,170,000 1,971,000 -40.5%

Paintball 5,476,000 4,705,000 3,606,000 -34.1%

Inline Skating 10,814,000 8,942,000 7,451,000 -31.1%

Scooter riding (non motorized) 6,782,000 5,729,000 4,829,000 -28.8%

Football (touch)* 10,493,000 9,726,000 7,684,000 -26.8%

Martial Arts** 6,865,000 6,643,000 5,037,000 -26.6%

Roller hockey 1,681,000 1,427,000 1,237,000 -26.4%

Skateboarding 8,429,000 7,580,000 6,318,000 -25.0%

Cross country ski-machine 3,696,000 3,294,000 2,913,000 -21.2%

Football (tackle) 7,939,000 7,243,000 6,448,000 -18.8%

Softball (slow pitch) 9,485,000 9,180,000 7,809,000 -17.7%

Volleyball (grass) 4,940,000 4,970,000 4,211,000 -14.8%

Tai-Chi* 3,424,000 3,315,000 2,975,000 -13.1%

Activities with largest participation decline 2007-2011

* 2007 is actually 2008, 2007 data unavailable

**Martial Arts has been split into additional categories, which accounts for some of


Walking 112,715,000

Bowling 53,906,000

Treadmill 53,260,000

Running/jogging 50,061,000

Free weights (hand weights) 46,944,000

Bicycling 39,834,000

Weight resistance machine 39,548,000

Fishing (fresh water) 38,864,000

Free weights (dumbbells) 36,470,000

Stretching 34,687,000

Hiking 33,494,000

Elliptical 29,734,000

Free weights (barbells) 27,056,000

Aerobics (low impact) 25,950,000

Golf 25,682,000

Home gym 25,083,000

Basketball 24,790,000

Stationary cycling (upright) 24,409,000

Other exercise to music 23,610,000

Yoga 22,107,000

Activities with largest participation base 2011

Similer Documents