”There is too much bike traffic already.

Demetree Drive in the Waterbridge subdivision

The situation is pretty bad,” he said. ”To add anything to that will get some people killed.” — Travis Killgore, vice president of the Waterbridge Homeowners Association (1997)

I’ve always thought that the bike route from Lakemont to Glenridge was dumb. even before it existed. The bike lane becomes way too narrow and I know that Butch was just trying to help when he got a foot or two added during the repaving process, but it’s not working.

When I am so moved to do so, I take the route through the Waterbridge subdivision since I think it safer if a bit longer. For years, I wondered why the City did not or could not connect the two.

Today, I found out why. The neighbors complained and this is something to think about when we talk about permeability. There is a reason that enclaves exist and many of the people that live in them like things that way.

They don’t like “us” using “their” streets.

Here is the original article from 1997. Try not to roll your eyes.

Bicycle Route To Get Closer Scrutiny In Winter Park

Some Waterbridge Residents Don’t Want The Path In Their Neighborhood, So The City Will Look At Other Options.

March 30, 1997|By Ines Davis Parrish of The Sentinel Staff
WINTER PARK — The city will spend $25,000 to further study a bicycle route because a residents group doesn’t want the path to extend through its neighborhood.

Commissioners narrowly agreed last week to fund the study because of significant opposition to the proposed route by homeowners in the Waterbridge community.

The city has already paid $10,000 for engineering studies for the path, which is being funded with a $1.2 million grant from the federal Department of Transportation.

// //

Construction of the path likely will be delayed because of the new study. It was scheduled to begin later this year.

Mayor Gary Brewer reluctantly voted to approve the additional study, even though he said he felt it might be a waste of money.

”We’ll probably spend (the money) and find that the Waterbridge route is the safest and most-used,” Brewer said.

Commissioners Rachel Murrah and Kenneth ”Kip” Marchman said the study wasn’t necessary.

But Mayor-elect Joseph Terranova said it was important to look at alternatives. Commissioner Roland ”Terry” Hotard said, ”If we don’t look at alternatives, we would be letting people down.”

The proposed route would have been marked by signs through the 156-home community. It would not have involved construction or taking of right of way. Two streets in Waterbridge – Demetree and Bridgeport Drive – would have had signs marking the bike route. Bridgeport exits onto Glenridge and Demetree is accessible from Lakemont.

The entire proposal consists of a five mile path that begins at the Cady Way Trail and ends at Mead Garden. It ultimately will connect 14 miles of bike paths in and around the city.

What will be studied now is a way to take the path around the intersection of Lakemont and Glenridge.

Public Works Director Jim English said the Waterbridge route was planned because the intersection at Glenridge and Lakemont was considered unsafe and ”too tight” to put a bike path there.

But Travis Killgore, vice president of the Waterbridge Homeowners Association, said it would be unsafe to route more bicyclists through Waterbridge.

”There is too much bike traffic already. The situation is pretty bad,” he said. ”To add anything to that will get some people killed.”

Schoolchildren and other bicyclists currently cut through Waterbridge because, as Brewer said, it is a safer and shorter route than Lakemont to Glenridge.

The path is not being designed as a recreational one, such as the Cady Way Trail that draws in-line skaters and families on bicycles. Instead, it is being designed as a ”professional bike path” that will serve as an alternative mode of transportation, English said.

Source: The Orlando Sentinel

8 replies
  1. Ed W
    Ed W says:

    We had a similar situation in Tulsa when the on-street route system was first proposed. One route went through a quiet residential area where one or more vocal homeowners decried allowing those cyclists to use their streets, because after all, they didn’t pay any taxes to maintain them. I pointed out that they were welcome to use other streets outside their neighborhood, streets presumably paid for with tax money from someone else. Furthermore, the homeowners were terribly concerned about the cyclist’s safety since there were numerous crashes and street mayhem. The city crash map showed there had actually been 3 crashes in 2 years, and those were at intersections with arterial streets.

    I used to have a big cowbell labeled as a “bullshit detector.” I should take that to some meetings.

  2. Grayson Peddie
    Grayson Peddie says:

    I chuckle at those who have concerns about cyclists riding on streets. 🙂 LOL!

    😉

    • Eric
      Eric says:

      Give them credit where credit is due.

      Even though they bricked part of Winter Park Rd and Pennsylvania with the rough bricks — which are moving all over the place due to Newton’s Third Law of Motion — they left the “Share the Road” signs up.

      That should count for something. Shouldn’t it?

  3. Laura M
    Laura M says:

    Not surprising, welcome to NIMBYism. When I worked in parks and recreation we butted heads a lot with nearby homewners where new parks were planned. FOR those same homeowners! I blame Mighk, since he’s originally from Euclid, OH. 😉

    Randy Lyons, the developer of Lake Nona, commented at a workshop I attended years ago explaining the difference between ‘community’ and ‘privacy’. So many developments, Waterbridge included I’m sure, use privacy and exclusivity as selling points. Newer development adjacent to these exclusive developments (particularly true for greenfield development) detract from that privacy and exclusivity. That’s why it’s so hard to connect existing adjacent neighborhoods today that were designed with cul de sacs and other curvy linear streets and walls.

    However, when you build a ‘community’, you’re not selling privacy and exclusivity. As the development fills in, you’ve actually enhanced the community (the product) that you were selling. Think Baldwin Park and how it’s beginning to gell as a community with a sense of place. The original Lake Nona Development has this too – lakes and other natural resources are public, not private. Houses don’t back up to lakes or other natural resources, trails and other paths do. Not saying the spin off developments around Lake Nona resemble this, however, there is a synergy developing down there.

    Something to keep in mind when we’re looking to connect more quiet residential areas throughout the city. I think it will be easier in the urban core (we’re used to activity), but outside of that it will likely be much more problematic. Permeability will likely come in the form of canal and utility easements.

    • Mighk
      Mighk says:

      “I blame Mighk, since he’s originally from Euclid, OH.”

      Hey! We didn’t invent zoning or NIMBYism, we’re just their poster child. (Or maybe “poster grandfather” is a more appropriate term.)

      Actually Euclid had/has very good permeability compared to Central Florida. As a kid there I could bike all over town and rarely had to use an arterial or collector. I walked to school from kindergarten through high school, and could even walk to the grocery store and movie theater.

      (OK, for you non-planners: Euclid, OH won a Supreme Court case back in the 1920s upholding the power of cities to utilize zoning in their planning. Euclid wasn’t the first place to do it (I think Los Angeles was), just notorious for having a case in which a developer wanted to build industrial in an area zoned residential.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_of_Euclid,_Ohio_v._Ambler_Realty_Co. )

  4. andrewp
    andrewp says:

    If you’ve ever been on Glendridge (in a car) heading towards Lakemont, you know that the traffic backs up at the light during heavy congestion times — backs up so far as to stack back past Waterbridge’s entrance on Glenridge. I watch cars cut through there all the time trying to bypass the Lakemont/Glenridge light. I’m surprised they haven’t put up an electronic gate yet …..

Comments are closed.