Monday, November 21, 2011
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Monday, May 23, 2011
The residents of Hidden Hills are once again trying to get cyclists banned from their gated community, and this time, it looks as if they might succeed, at least until the planned connection for non-motorized vehicles from Scottsdale via Hidden Hills to Fountain Hills becomes a reality.
For those of you who are not familiar with Hidden Hills, it is a gated community at the end of a street called Via Linda in North Scottsdale, just a short distance as the crow flies from Fountain Hills. It is a popular destination for individual riders and informal riding groups, especially on Saturday mornings. At one time, large number of cyclists used to cycle to the top of the hill inside Hidden Hills, regroup at the summit cul-de-sac, and then ride back. Some cyclists, a minority, also used the route to do hill repeats, a conditioning technique that involves repeatedly riding up and descending the same hill. In the past year, the number of cyclists entering Hidden Hills has greatly diminished, and the practice of doing hill repeats in the community has all but disappeared.
As a result of the decreased cycle traffic, many cyclists thought that the problem was solved, but in my opinion, as long as a single cyclist has access to their community, some of the residents of Hidden Hills are going to react as if they were being invaded by Mongol hordes.
Some history: Before the community of Hidden Hills was built, the City of Scottsdale and Town of Fountain Hills had planned that Via Linda would be extended to provide an alternative to Shea Boulevard for motorized travel between those two communities. That plan was abandoned, but both Fountain Hills and Scottsdale still want to use the route to provide cyclists a safe travel corridor between the two communities. The City of Scottsdale, in exchange for granting permission for the gated community to be constructed, obtained an easement for non-motorized vehicles (meaning bicycles) to travel between Scottsdale and Fountain Hills. When someone buys a house in Hidden Hills, that person agrees to the easement and should know that bicycles will be using the community’s main street.
The developer that built Hidden Hills and also controls the land in Fountain Hills just up the hill from it was supposed to build the bike route. However, the real estate crisis hit, and the developer put plans on hold. In the meantime, cyclists were given access to Hidden Hills, even though there is a dead end at the top of the hill, which means that cyclists who pedal up the hill have no choice but to turn around and ride back down.
Hidden Hills homeowners soon got sick of bicycles traveling on their private street and have spent years lobbying the City of Scottsdale to break the agreement and abandon the easement, which the City has so far refused to do. To address the homeowners’ stated concerns, the City paid for the installation of four speed bumps, which have dissuaded most, but not all, of the cyclists from riding the hill. However, those who still do ride the hill often descend at a higher speed than formerly in order to have enough momentum to “bunny hop” the speed bumps, and an occasional cyclist circumvents the speed bumps by riding on the sidewalk. Many cyclists now descend the hill at speeds approaching those of the residents in their cars and SUVs.
A squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the Hidden Hills Homeowners Association has done a lot of squeaking about even the smaller number of pesky cyclists who dare to ride past their houses, backing their complaints with a mixture of truth and fiction about the problems that cyclists supposedly cause. Cyclists do not play loud music, they seldom litter, and although many (perhaps most) of them do exceed the 20 mile-per-hour speed limit, they travel no faster than the residents themselves in their motor vehicles. On the face of it, we would seem to be nice people to have around, but in these days, hating groups of people (immigrants, liberals, politicians of the other party, just about anyone who is different) has become the socially acceptable substitute for racism. Among some people, the mere sight of a group of “spandex clad” cyclists raises the same ire as an Obama supporter at a Tea Party convention.
Point persons on the debate for the City of Scottsdale are Transportation Planner Susan Conklu and Senior Transportation Planner Reed Kempton. I spent quite a bit of time on the phone with each of them on May 19 and came away convinced that the Hidden Hills bicycle access will be shut down, at least until the connection to Fountain Hills is built.
At the beginning of our conversation, Reed Kempton described himself as a “cycling advocate”, but as we talked, it became apparent that he is just as fed up with the cyclists who ride to Hidden Hills as I am with the whining, selfish, and boorish behavior of some of the community’s residents. Apparently, a number of cyclists treated Mr. Kempton with contempt when he was out at Hidden Hills during the height of the controversy, and that ill treatment has soured him on the whole lot of us. It may seem unjust to stereotype a whole group of people because of the boorish actions of a few of its members, but that is how human nature works.
To give Mr. Kempton his due, some of the things he says make sense. For example, he makes a persuasive argument for closing cyclists’ access to Hidden Hills until the Fountain Hills connection is built. Contrary to what I believed before I spoke to him, he has also convinced me that we may be doing ourselves more harm than good by continuing to ride Hidden Hills.
Stating his argument as well as I can in my own words, his reasoning is as follows: The only purpose of the easement through Hidden Hills is to permit cyclists to travel to and from Fountain Hills. Since there is not yet a connection to Fountain Hills, cyclists are not using the easement for its stated purpose, and therefore cyclists presently have no legal right to enter Hidden Hills over the residents’ objections. The logical action is for cyclists to stop riding inside the Hidden Hills gate until the Fountain Hills connection is constructed.
I am not skilled at searching for legal documents online, but I did manage to find the following sentence in a contract between the City of Scottsdale and the developer. To me, this sentence is unclear as to whether or not cyclists have access to Hidden Hills until the connection to Fountain Hills is built, but there may be other documents with more explicit language.
“The City [of Scottsdale] has acquired a public non-motorized easement through the Hidden Hills Subdivision which provides the only non-motorized alternative to She Boulevard between the City of Scottsdale and the Town of Fountain Hills.”
Mr. Kempton states that if cyclists continue to ride within Hidden Hills, the Homeowners Association is likely to approach the Scottsdale City Council to ask that the easement be revoked altogether. Given that the homeowners are well organized, articulate, and vociferous, he thinks they stand a good chance of persuading the City Council to do their bidding. His opinion is that the “cycling community” should accept the temporary closure of the access to Hidden Hills for cyclists in order to avoid a permanent revocation of the easement.
Of course, there is no “cycling community” that could make such a collective decision. Most of the cyclists who ride Hidden Hills do so as individuals or as part of informal, pick-up rides. There is no cycling organization that has a line of communication to more than a small percentage of the cyclists who ride Hidden Hills. Even Arizona Road Cyclist News, with a circulation of over 400 reaches on a small fraction of the cyclists in the Phoenix area.
It seems logical that if and when the connection is built, cycling traffic through Hidden Hills would increase by a large factor, and that would anger the Hidden Hills residents even more. However, the Hidden Hills Homeowner’s Association might find it harder to shut down a “transportation corridor” than it would be to shut down casual access to a gated community.
Reed Kempton and Susan Conklu are anxious to communicate with cycling groups about the situation. They say they don’t want to spring the closure on the cyclists by surprise, and they both requested that I publish their contact information so that cyclists and especially cycling groups can get in touch with them. Their contact information follows.
A final word: I hope that cyclists who read this do not stereotype the residents of Hidden Hills the way that some of them stereotype us. Not all of the residents hate cyclists, and not all of them approve of the attitude of the Homeowners’ Association. Some of them are nice people, just as we are. :)
Susan Conklu, Transportation Planner
City of Scottsdale
Reed Kempton, Senior Transportation Planner
City of Scottsdale
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Now a new version of bill has been introduced in the house by representative Daniel Patterson, who is a bicycle rider. This bill may overcome the objections of those who consider cyclists to be "Spandex-clad leftist liberals" who demand superior privileges by treating motor vehicles and cyclists equally, giving both classes of road users the right to proceed through a stop sign without coming to a complete stop as long as they are able to safely make it through the intersection without interfering with traffic that has the right-of-way. If the bill is passed, I wonder what purpose stop signs will serve. Why not just change them all to yield signs? Of course, regardless of the law, most motorists and almost all cyclists already treat stop signs as if they were yield signs, so the proposed change to the law could be viewed as an attempt to make the law reflect reality.
If you would like to read the bill and follow its progress through the Arizona State Legislature, you can do so by clicking here.