complete contradiction streets

complete contradiction streets

We stopped by the BLVD Food Market on El Cajon Blvd Friday night, where several food vendors and a live band were set up in the parking lot of the Heart and Trotter strip mall at Utah.  This isn’t your typical strip mall – on this night, several of the businesses were open late, including a mattress store with art for sale.  One of the highlights among the booths was Jordan Hannibal’s 5150 Nut Butter (I’m now hooked on their cookies and cream flavor).  Unfortunately it looks like Heart and Trotter still has a ways to go before opening their space.  And since their booth already was out of food two hours into the event, we walked up 30th to Chris’ Ono Grinds, where we enjoyed their tasty Kahlua pork and barbeque chicken dishes.  They have Fall Brewing on tap so we headed up the street to that new brewery next and were surprised to see the place was nearly full:


IMG_5498

Who knew there was still demand for even more breweries in San Diego?  It was the same story down 30th where the new Rip Current brewing (and its food joint in the back, Sublime) was also packed.  In fact, nearly every business along this northern stretch of 30th was busy – Streetcar, Ritual, Nomad Donuts, Toronado.  Compared to a few years ago, North Park is definitely stretching out.

– Also in North Park, the building formerly housing Undisputed Gym has been sold at 3038 University.  Given its size, it could be an ideal spot for an organic market or similar, but some have brought up the lack of parking at the site.  Yet when we travel to other large cities, plenty of people shop at markets without the need for parking out front – perhaps they just shop more often.  I know that’s a foreign concept to most of San Diego right now, but does that mean it can never change, even as North Park continues to become more city-like?

– In South Park, the anti-TargetExpress group, Care About South Park, have finally revealed themselves (they demand “transparency” from Target yet hadn’t previously identified their members), and one of the group’s spokespersons is Mark Arabo.  While CASP purports to be a community group, Arabo is the head of the Neighborhood Market Association, which understandably does not want a Target to compete with.  Yet CASP purports to speak for the community, not grocers.  Arabo is also known for leading the fight against the plastic bag ban, despite 20 million tons of plastic going into our oceans every year.

CASP’s other spokesperson, Sabrina DiMinico, is critical of corporations despite being an employee at Petco.  Ms. DiMinico provided this gem to Uptown News:

“I shop at Target,” DiMinico said. “But we don’t want a Target in South Park.”

While DiMinico criticizes the traffic that a tiny Target would bring to South Park, she has no problem contributing to the congestion and pollution in other, lesser neighborhoods that host giant Targets.  Wouldn’t the residents of Mission Valley prefer that South Park residents shop at their own Target?  In fact, a TargetExpress in South Park that uses the existing Gala Foods building (I’d be opposed to a giant Target with a huge parking lot) will enable locals to walk, bike, take the bus, or take a shorter car trip to get household items unavailable elsewhere in the neighborhood.

Any successful store is going to increase traffic in South Park compared to the failing Gala Foods.  Instead, DiMinico would rather produce more greenhouse gases and road wear by forcing her neighbors to drive to Mission Valley.

– Speaking of GHG’s, a recent headline in the Reader about proposed development near transit in Grantville caught my attention:

Plan for Grantville population boom – Count on more noise, traffic, greenhouse gas emissions

The article is about the environmental impact report for the planned 8725 dwelling units over the next several decades in Grantville.  Given the huge need for housing in San Diego, it makes sense to put it near the trolley where some vehicle trips will be replaced by trolley rides.  Since those units are going to get built somewhere in our region regardless, wouldn’t this project produce less greenhouse gas emissions than pushing that growth to say, Murrieta and its resulting 60-mile commutes?  Pushing growth to the exurbs is exactly what’s been happening as NIMBY publications like the Reader promote no-growth policies.  Voice of San Diego also has a good writeup on the planned development in Grantville, where traffic and parking concerns are once again more important to many than our city’s housing affordability crisis.

– Community planning groups draw up the community plans that guide how we’ll live in and get around our neighborhoods, and the plans are currently being updated for the next few decades.  One example is the College Area Planning Group, whose existing community plan calls for widening College Ave from four to six auto lanes.  CAPG is fighting a proposed bike lane on College Avenue (more on that below) because they feel it will prevent the above widening, despite there being no funding for the hundreds of millions of dollars in demolition and reconstruction costs that would be required for the SDSU campus as a result.

Having attended several community planning group meetings, our neighborhoods’ futures are largely being determined by established residents with older mindsets, primarily concerned with keeping any new housing out of their community.  Meanwhile the region’s housing shortage, affordability crisis and hourglass economy worsens.  These residents largely oppose any infrastructure devoted to alternative modes of transit, despite younger Americans increasingly using these modes, their own future need for them, or the city’s Climate Action Plan that increases bike and public transit mode share.

If you oppose this cars-first planning approach for our city, and instead think we should plan for the needs of all residents, Circulate San Diego is hosting a panel discussion on how to join a Community Planning Group on January 28th at Thomas Jefferson School of Law.

– Circulate SD also put on a fun event with the help of RideScout in Pacific Beach recently at the Java Earth Cafe, A Night of Short Stories: From Point A to Point PB.  With the trolley coming to near Pacific Beach, the event was meant to highlight the project and get people thinking about their experiences on public transit.  Five speakers told riveting and/or funny transit tales, and we especially enjoyed the story of a hung-over American tourist vomiting his way through Paris.

– I met with Robert Schultz, Vice President of Real Estate at SDSU recently regarding the proposed College Ave bike lanes that are part of the South Campus Plaza mixed-use project there:


Screen Shot 2015-01-17 at 3.13.53 PM

 

The project will house 600 students and include ground floor retail.  Bike lanes that were added to the project at the request of the City of San Diego to mitigate the impacts of the new development by employing a Complete Streets approach (the project also widens sidewalks for the significant pedestrian traffic there).  I was surprised to hear that the city may kill the same lanes they suggested, because they have performed an auto level of service analysis that shows increased congestion.  Bob explained that while there have been suggested changes to using LOS at the state level, it’s still fully in charge here in San Diego (this was also confirmed at a later meeting I had to UCSD).  Further, a traffic engineer with the city asked SDSU to perform a 95th percentile traffic queue length study.  The city’s Climate Action Plan, which seeks to increase bike mode share to 18% in communities like the SDSU area, was never brought up.

It sounds like different people within the city have different missions, and the result is that Complete Streets policies are nearly impossible to implement.  (An aside: an email was forward to me from a Portland State faculty member who was looking for examples of mid-rise developments near San Diego college campuses that connect the campus to the community.  Amazingly, there don’t appear to by any near our three major universities).  I understand that state policies take a while to filter down to municipalities, but it would be beneficial to have a more unified approach from the City instead of the contradictions that prevent Complete Streets.

While the College Ave bike lanes face challenges from within the city (and offer a fascinating case study on how hard it is to implement Complete Streets in San Diego), let’s not forget the vehement opposition from local residents, who may seek legal action to prevent them.  Their vision of a six-lane College Ave, which is in stark contrast to the alternative transit modes being used by younger San Diegans (the trolley reduced annual parking permits by 6000 at SDSU, and they’re trending downward yearly),  means that bike lanes and widened sidewalks simply aren’t an option for College Ave, ever.  And this is in a neighborhood that lacks any real safe bike facilities at all for a large student population.  If you support bike lanes on College, please email council member Marti Emerald at [email protected]

Residents also oppose the size of the student housing building, yet they also complain about neighborhood houses being turned into mini-dorms as a result of insufficient student housing on campus.  Insufficient parking is another sore spot, yet College area residents benefit from the city’s cheap residential parking permit program ($13/year; no significant increase in decades) that city taxpayers subsidize to the tune of a few hundred thousand dollars every year.

– I also met with Robert Clossin, Director of Physical and Community Planning at UCSD recently.  UCSD and the UC system have a “robust” sustainability policy in place, so I was confused when UCSD supported the proposed I-5 widening that will increase greenhouse gas emissions.  This widening is part of the SANDAG 2050 transportation plan that has been thrown out in court twice now, for exceeding state greenhouse gas goals.  So Robert and Catherine Presmyk in the same office met with me to clear things up.

Here are the transit projects coming to UCSD:


IMG_5479

Robert explained that UCSD only supports the direct access ramp from the new carpool lanes onto campus, and cited the buses they will bring onto campus.  Unfortunately this distinction was not made in any of the article I read indicating UCSD’s support for the freeway expansion.  Also, I’m unable to find any mention of planned bus routes for the new lanes.  Assuming the lanes will be like those on I-15 where solo drivers can pay to use them, the lanes will simply enable faster access to campus for wealthy North County residents, while not providing a robust public transit alternative to taking the Coaster and waiting for a shuttle to campus.

Speaking of the Sorrento Valley Coaster station, one benefit of the Genesee Avenue widening project shown above is that it will include a new bike path to the Coaster station from campus.  On the negative side, despite the Genesee bridge being expanded, there was only room for a painted bike lane, not a buffered or protected one.  This is also the case for the new Gilman bridge over campus.

One bright spot are the trolley stations coming to campus; the west campus station will include bike lockers, a public gathering space, some potential retail, and a new walkway connecting to the Price Center.  Another positive is the plan to replace some of the Mesa housing at the southeast corner of campus with new multi-story buildings, including micro-units for graduate students.  This would also have the potential to connect with the businesses across Regents Road there.

Overall however, UCSD remains largely isolated from its surroundings, especially the businesses and residences on the south side of La Jolla Village Drive.  While there is a pedestrian bridge, LJVD is practically freeway-like and dangerous by design to pedestrians and people on bikes.  UCSD has taken positive steps to create village-like settings on campus; it would be great to see them connect with villages off-campus too, as other colleges are doing around the country.

4 thoughts on “complete contradiction streets

  1. Hi Heather thanks for your comment. I wasn’t thrilled about the campaign finance story either, or the attempted treatment of their Canadian employees. Target is far from my ideal store for this location, but I’d rather all of South Park (and nearby residents) have the right to decide whether it’s successful, instead of a minority of residents blocking it.

    Also, I think we get into dangerous territory when we dictate whom a property owner can lease to, even though the tenant is following the rules for the site (which Target appears to be doing).

  2. thanks for the intelligent counterpoint on Target. I have friends in the neighborhood that are really against the Target, but I think your points are quite valid too. I hope that if the Target comes it works out well for the neighborhood. I lhavent shopped at Target since the whole campaign finance brouhaha, but i know it is an important shopping destination for a lot of new families.

  3. Hi Paul, just want to clear up a few things since 99% of what you “reported” in your blog is inaccurate. I have been open about my identity as a founder of Care About South Park since we issued our first press release on November 11th requesting transparency from Todd Gloria about the South Park TargetExpress project. Mark Arabo is not a spokesperson for Care About South Park. He is the President and CEO of the Neighborhood Market Association. We are aligned in our opposition to a TargetExpress coming into South Park but we are independent organizations. Care About South Park is speaking out on behalf of the many people in the community who oppose the TargetExpress due to the negative impact it will have on our neighborhood and Mark is speaking out on behalf of his members, whose independent businesses in and around South Park will be negatively impacted by a corporate chain.
    Not that it’s at all relevant, but you have not identified my current employer accurately. I won’t bother to correct you, because as a homeowner in South Park, I’m entitled to want to protect the neighborhood in which I live regardless of where I work. The one thing you did copy and paste correctly was the “gem” about me shopping at Target but not wanting one in my neighborhood. Let me explain the logic behind that. Mission Valley and Sports Arena are both well-established commercial areas that are densely populated with corporate chains. When purchasing a home in San Diego, I specifically chose not to buy in these areas because I personally don’t want to live in a dense commercial zone. And that’s not a slight against people who do. We all have preferences and choices. And if the residents of Mission Valley or Sports Arena wanted to oppose yet another chain opening in their neighborhood, I would support them and certainly wouldn’t expect them to give up their fight so I could personally shop at said chain. Again, everyone has a right to protect the neighborhood in which they live. The TargetExpress will only be 18,000 sq feet whereas the average full sized Target is over 100,000 sq feet. South Park residents will still have to drive to Mission Valley and Sports Arena to get things that the TargetExpress won’t carry. I, and many of my neighbors, on the other hand will never shop at another Target store again if TargetExpress comes into South Park.

    What our neighborhood wants and needs is a grocery store and there was and is one who is interested that would be a perfect for us. However, we have been lied to by Mr. Hirmez, who stood up in front of members of the community at the Greater Golden Hill Planning Committee meeting on October 8th and told us that he wanted to retire and Target was his only option because no other grocery stores wanted the space or could afford the improvements needed to the building. So if you want to add some new and interesting information to your blog, perhaps you should research that story and report back with some facts that have actually been corroborated beyond a simple Google search.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *