Cave Creek approves $50,630 bike lane funding despite merchant opposition to summer construction
CAVE CREEK, ARIZONA — April 26, 2016

Cave Creek approves $50,630 bike lane funding despite merchant opposition to summer construction

Council approved $50,630 in additional funding for a multi-town bike lane project amid significant controversy from local business owners concerned about summer season construction timing and traffic impacts.

Council Approves $50,630 Bike Lane Funding but Promises to Minimize Summer Construction Impact on Local Merchants

Cave Creek's town council unanimously approved an additional $50,630.70 expenditure on April 26, 2016, to fund cost overruns on a multi-town bike lane project along Cave Creek Road. The unanimous 7-0 vote, however, concealed a sharp policy disagreement between council members sympathetic to local business owners' pleas to delay construction until after the summer tourism season and project staff who warned that any postponement could trigger loss of a $3.2 million Arizona Department of Transportation grant. The meeting exposed the friction between state-administered capital project timelines and municipal economic development priorities.

Background: The $3.2 Million ADOT Grant and Collaborative Project

The project emerged from a collaborative agreement between the towns of Cave Creek and Carefree to add bike lanes along Cave Creek Road. The Arizona Department of Transportation awarded approximately $3.2 million in grant funds. An intergovernmental agreement specified that ADOT would cover most design costs; the towns would share the local match (approximately 5.8 percent of construction costs) split 60 percent Carefree / 40 percent Cave Creek based on mileage. A critical provision: any cost overages beyond the grant amount would be the towns' responsibility, not ADOT's.

The project went to bid approximately 10 days before the April 26 council meeting. The low bid came in at approximately $127,635 over the amount the town had anticipated for construction. This overage triggered the need for council approval of additional expenditure. Carefree would separately approve their 60 percent share at a Thursday council meeting following Cave Creek's vote.

Key Speeches

Staff presentation on the cost overrun and state grant dynamics:

"The implementation or construction of bike lanes — there was an IGA with ADOT for that as well, and the local match was about 5.8 percent. The division of the local funds was based on the total project cost between the two communities, so it was roughly 60 percent Carefree, 40 percent Cave Creek. The project went out to bid about 10 days ago. The low bidder was under 127 thousand dollars over the amount based on construction drawings. So I went to [the] ADOT [project manager] for a DOT and [heard about] needs to kind of [determine] how we would pay those costs and [get] those funds to our respective councils for approval." — Ian, ADOT project staff

On the critical difference between fixed grant amounts and contractor liability:

"If amount went over with that grant not laws that would be up to the local communities, Cave Creek and Carefree, to cover the difference." — Ian

Business owner David Nevers (Quick and Clean Car Wash), expressing deep concern about summer construction timing:

"I'm the owner of the Quick and Clean Car Wash down next to Harold's on Cave Creek Road, and my concern is the timing of this project. I was originally at all the public meetings about the bike lane. I'm not opposed to the bike lane, and that's how with the size of this tonight. I thought they were going to [be] starting that and be done with this project in the summer months. It's tough enough as a business owner just getting through the summer. We're already three, four months behind schedule. What's the problem with delaying until next time, till you know April, May, and let the town go through the season, special events? It's going to have a lot of impact on traffic when they start taking out medians. It's going to be down to one lane in each direction." — David Nevers, Quick and Clean Car Wash

Councilman Lipsky on the state funding risk:

"ADOT contract — they got a timetable. If you delay it, it's going to cost them, what, they won't hold. The opportunity is so much. So I think all that's all my son. Let's discuss that option. I think the reality is we'll discuss your money and we'll only $50 dodging dodge when you're under duct, assuming the bottom that's the bid same a good before short term within the next 60 days. So the reality is if you do try to delay it, it's just going to cut the tomboy and that caused the businesses that are across the mountain." — Councilman Lipsky

Timeline

Opposition

Number of speakers against: Two primary speakers opposed the summer construction timing (David Nevers and one unnamed co-merchant).

Main concerns:

  1. Timing impacts peak tourism season: Merchants struggle through summer months; construction would exacerbate seasonal weakness and reduce traffic flow through town.

  2. Median removal and lane reductions: One lane in each direction during construction would severely impede traffic flow through the town core and deter customer visits.

  3. Lack of construction transparency: No clear plan had been shared with merchants about how the bike lane would be built through the town core or how medians would be handled.

  4. Project delay feasibility: Merchants questioned why the project could not be delayed until after the season (April–May had already passed; they meant late summer to fall); questioned whether there was truly no flexibility in the timeline.

  5. Contingency fund depletion: Reference to the town's contingency fund being low raised concern about the town's financial cushion for future cost overruns.

  6. Contractor accountability: Concern that the town bore financial risk for contractor-driven cost increases, with limited recourse.

  7. Business viability: Merchants explicitly stated that summer construction could threaten their business survival.

Organized groups: No formal opposition group identified; speakers represented individual merchants and town core businesses.

Support

Number of speakers in favor: Two speakers broadly supported the project (though not addressing the timing dispute directly in the same terms).

Main arguments:

  1. Safety imperative: Multiple speakers and council members emphasized the project is a major safety issue, addressing the need for connected bike infrastructure along Cave Creek Road and Pima Road.

  2. Regional connectivity: Connecting existing bike lanes along Pima and Cave Creek roads would create a network benefiting both residents and visitors.

  3. Economic development and tourism: Bike lanes attract different types of visitors and support long-term community vitality; one speaker noted that businesses not represented at the meeting may actually benefit from improved pedestrian and bike access.

  4. State funding leverage: Councilman Lipsky and other council members noted that the project represents significant outside investment (ADOT funds); deferring it risks permanent loss of $3.2 million in grant money.

  5. Project longevity and effort: One council member noted the project had been in development for approximately five years and represented substantial prior effort; allowing it to drop from the state program would waste that investment.

Project Details

Vote Breakdown

Outcome & Next Steps

Cave Creek council approved the $50,630.70 additional expenditure for the bike lane project cost overrun. The vote cleared the way for the town to submit its funding to ADOT, pending parallel approval by Carefree at their Thursday council meeting. Staff was directed to coordinate with the successful bidder on a construction schedule that (1) prioritizes work outside the town core, (2) delays town core construction until after the peak summer season, and (3) maintains adequate traffic flow and business access during high season. Bid award was anticipated within 18 days; project start estimated for mid-September 2016, with an 80–100 working day construction timeline. Council acknowledged that state grant administration imposed firm deadlines and that any significant delay risked ADOT dropping the project from the five-year program, resulting in permanent loss of $3.2 million in funding.

Controversies & Context

The primary controversy centered on project timing and business impact. Local merchants, particularly David Nevers of Quick and Clean Car Wash, argued that beginning construction at the start of summer season (immediately following the April 26 approval) would devastate local commerce already struggling in the slow months. Merchants requested delay until after peak season (late summer / early fall).

However, Councilman Lipsky and project staff explained a critical constraint: ADOT operates a five-year transportation program with firm deadlines. If Cave Creek and Carefree failed to commit funds and move the project forward on schedule, ADOT could drop it from the program entirely, forfeiting the $3.2 million grant. Lipsky cited historical examples of projects held or tabled that "never surface again." This created a no-win dynamic for the council: approve now (and risk business damage) or delay (and risk permanent loss of state funding and years of prior effort).

A secondary controversy involved contractor liability and cost overruns. David Nevers and other speakers raised concerns about how future cost overruns would be allocated. The IGA made clear that any costs beyond the ADOT grant amount were the towns' responsibility. Staff indicated the contract included standard liquidated damages and quantity/cost dispute provisions, but no hard caps limiting the towns' exposure. If the contractor encountered unforeseen field conditions or other issues, the towns could face additional bills, with the contingency fund already depleted.

One speaker also raised a contingency fund depletion concern, noting that the town's contingency fund was already low and that absorbing $50,630 in overruns further reduced financial flexibility for emergencies.

A transparency and design communication issue also emerged: merchants stated they had not been provided with a clear plan showing how bike lanes would be constructed through the town core or which medians would be affected. One speaker called for release of construction drawings or a phasing plan to merchants before work began.

Finally, there was a philosophical divide on the value of bike lanes themselves. One council member's comment — "I don't say it's … throughout the United States now everywhere you go they want to put bike lanes and you want to get people out of their cars and they want to get men bike lanes and who knows 100 years from now when they all be riding bikes in Cave Creek" — captured a skepticism some audience members shared, though this was not a formal opposition plank. Supporters countered that bike lanes are a proven safety tool and economic development amenity.

Duration

Other Notable Items

No other substantive agenda items were discussed in the excerpt provided. The meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn following the bike lane vote.