Edition:
June 16, 2006
Public Notices - DBA Info • CONTACT
US: News Department • Display
Advertising • Classified
Advertising
Letter: Regarding motorcycles Editor, The Friday Flyer:
I was the person who recently proposed rule changes regarding access of motorcycles and would like to respond to the questions Jim Corson raised in last week’s letters to the editor. They were good questions that need to be clarified.
1. Visitors would not be allowed to operate their motorcycles in Canyon Lake. The 15 mph in the bike lane is for residents only to have access to their property.
2. Stand-up electric or gas scooters would not be permitted. Only licensed, highway “legal” motorcycles operated by licensed drivers would be allowed. The exhaust pipes of the motorcycles must also meet federal and state standards for noise.
3. Driving motorcycles in the bike lanes would not be more of a problem than golf carts. At 15 mph, motorcycles will be going slower than most golf carts. Motorcycles are also much narrower and have superior suspensions and brakes.
4. I have received responses from Canyon Lakers who sold their motorcycles due to the hassle of using it. I would assume that more Canyon Lakers would use their motorcycles if access to their property was easier. If the price of gas continues to increase, I would assume more people would also ride their cycles more.
5. No, the POA dues would not have to be raised if this proposal is passed. An amendment to the rule may also help reduce the expense to the POA of current and even future litigation. An annual fee could also be charged similar to golf carts for motorcycles meeting the minimum standards of the community.
6. Our present security and police is adequate to handle motorcycles having access to their residences. Ninety-nine percent of the residents in Canyon Lake who ride motorcycles are not members of bike gangs or the Hell’s Angels.
7. One last question that others have raised (not Mr. Corson) goes something like “if you read the CC&Rs, you knew when you moved here that motorcycles were prohibited.” Actually, that isn’t true for those who have been at Canyon Lake for more than eleven years. When Canyon Lake was formed, there was never a motorcycle ban in the CC&Rs. It was created by a POA Board decision that could have been easily rescinded. An election to amend the CC&Rs occurred in 1995 and 12 of the 31 tracts in Canyon Lake did not pass the amendment that required two-thirds approval.
To get the amendment approved, the CLPOA petitioned Superior Court to “reduce the percentage of affirmative votes necessary.” (See Riverside Superior Court web site, case #268509). This provision was created by the Davis-Stirling Act passed in the 1980s whereby any owner or the association could seek the assistance of the court to amend CC&Rs. I believe the CLPOA made the right decision. It is not uncommon among associations 25 years old or over to find declarations that require a super-majority two-thirds pass rate for each tract. Over time, changes in the condition of the property, the mix of owners, and new laws may make it necessary to make a change to the declarations. The requirement of a supermajority vote coupled with voter apathy can result in the failure of even good amendments to gain voter approval.
POA rules and CC&Rs have to be reasonable. They simply cannot be based on the subjective feelings of their members. California does not have a published appellate court decision on a motorcycle ban by homeowner associations. Appellant decisions in other states, e.g. Michigan and Massachusetts, struck down motorcycle bans as being unreasonable. If the ban is designed to eliminate noise and speed, the court ruled the association should enforce noise and speed ordinances for all.
The POA attorney in the 1995 lawsuit brought in a risk management “expert” to testify that the slope, curve radius and sand and gravel in the Canyon Lake streets made it too dangerous to operate motorcycles.
If his testimony was true, the Canyon Lake motorcycle ban would obviously be reasonable as it would protect the health and safety of the community. I believe most Canyon Lakers would find this representation as appalling. Cycles designed to safely travel the hairpin turns of the Ortega highway are not safe enough to travel on Canyon Lake Drive or Vacation? If our streets are too dangerous for motorcycles, then they pose an even greater danger for golf carts.
The majority of Canyon Lakers do not own motorcycles. However, the majority also do not play golf, tennis or ride horses. Yet with our POA dues, we help subsidize these activities in the interest of all. If the ban on motorcycles was eliminated and the level of noise and distraction to the community was as bad as some of the critics say it would be, don’t you think the non-motorcyclists who voted for the motorcycle owners would vote against it in the next election. We are only talking about 15 mph in the bike lane.
From my experience, the biggest nuisance in Canyon Lake which often interrupts my sleep is dogs that bark late in the evening or early in the morning. The POA has rules on this nuisance and yes it is often difficult to enforce every occurrence. Does that mean if the majority of residents are non-dog owners, we ban dogs from the community due to the behavior of a few? No, we go after the offenders and in April 2006, four citations were in fact issued. The same should be the protocol in regulating the access of motorcycles.
With the rising price of gas, an increasing population of commuters in Canyon Lake and state policy that encourages alternative transportation, such as motorcycles in the carpool lane, I ask for your support in permitting street legal motorcyclists to use the bike lane at a maximum of 15 mph for the sole purpose of ingress and egress to their residence.
Chuck Marler
|
