Showing 62 reactions

  • commented 2018-01-26 19:38:41 -0800
    The addition of two signals on Morena BLVD south of Balboa to access the station will slow through traffic to less than 20 mph. Signal spacing is shown in planning manuals to be ineffective at less than one quarter mile spacing. At one quarter mile spacing,the through traffic speed is about 27 mph. Less than one eighth mile spacing the speed drops to less than 20 mph. Morena BLVD is the only arterial in the north/south direction west of Genesee ave. Before construction temporary striping, Morena BLVD had two through lanes in the southbound direction. The level of service was A-B, now in the construction temporary configuration the level of service is F. One lane in the southbound direction will not handle peak hour traffic.The temporary construction restriping has shown that there are no gaps in the traffic during peak hours for side streets to access Morena BLVD. The solution is to have two through lanes in the north and south directions with turn pockets. Morena BLVD is an arterial, not a small local street with minimal traffic. the street is not broke, why are you trying to break it?
  • commented 2018-01-26 07:48:21 -0800
    I’m a longtime Bay Ho homeowner and reside in close proximity to the planned Balboa Station. I travel through the Balboa/Morena corridor daily. Over the years I’ve seen MANY MANY traffic accidents in this area and a significant increase in traffic congestion. I’m hopeful that the station will provide some relief of that with much-needed public transportation, and I think it can with some modifications to the current proposal.

    First, there should NOT be an exemption of an Environmental Impact Report, regardless of the Senate bill. This area is in close proximity to protected waterways in Rose Canyon and Mission Bay which are already polluted enough. AND it lies directly on a MAJOR earthquake fault with liquifaction-prone ground which presents significant safety issues as well.

    Second, there should be a clear traffic study to show current traffic impact and clearly state how the plan will address these needs.

    Third, plan does NOT do enough to address:

    • pedestrian and biker safety needs in this very heavily trafficked, dangerous area for pedestrians and bikers, which is close to PB and draws many young drinkers and beachgoers

    • the growing homeless and crime issue we’ve been having here which will likely increase with the addition of a new station as seen in proximity to other San Diego trolley stations

    • the impact on safety and the environment with added through traffic to/from the station as well as increased noise and activity; the current ramps for Morena and I-5 are not adequate to handle current traffic let alone an increase. Where is the traffic study and EIR??

    • the VERY poorly planned increase of high-density housing in an already congested area and associated increase in traffic, noise and crime

    I moved to this area because it’s a quiet, safe, clean, family-friendly neighborhood and this plan as proposed will significantly change that. This plan directly impacts my property value and quality of life. I would like to see the plan developers do more to address these concerns and move forward in a thoughtful way before executing a major initiative that taxpayers will be funding and that will impact the residents of this community.

    Thank you,

    Tammy Bruins
  • commented 2018-01-25 10:22:43 -0800
    Maybe someone can explain to me why you can’t do this at Clairemont Drive instead if Balboa? The biking is fantastic there. The information center provides great place for pedestrians and cyclists and it doesn’t increase traffic congestion, plus that area is blighted and could use an upgrade. Balboa Station makes no sense!
  • commented 2018-01-25 09:16:19 -0800
    Due to heavy traffic congestion on the intersection of Balboa and Mission Bay Drive, there should be minimal pedestrian and bicycle traffic. You could endanger peoples lives and property if you contribute to more congestion in the intersection. Also, you would be contributing to more drivers going over the hill in La Jolla in order to reach the freeways. There is currently a backup in the mornings and in the evenings. I am sure La Jolla residents do not appreciate the up tick in traffic congestion in their neighborhoods. I work in the Sorrento Mesa area, and it is not feasible to use public transportation. I am sure the residents would use public transportation if it is feasible. Your plan would not help me in anyway!
  • commented 2018-01-24 21:05:38 -0800
    Thank you staff for your time on this project that encompasses a very difficult car congested area and the goal to become more multimodal and decrease the need for vehicular use.

    First, I want to second the comments for the following comment letters that were submitted by the following three: Everett Hauser with the San Diego County Bicycle Advisory Board, Kristen Victor with Sustainability Matters and Matt Winter with beautifulPB. I support their comments and hope they will be addressed.

    I will highlight a few main points that are concerning to me.

    1. The multi-use path across the i-5 should be a phase 1 priority for the project.

    2. The bicycle connections on Garnet need to continue as separated facilities and there should not be more lanes included for vehicular traffic. Adding more lanes is contradictory to City goals.

    3. There needs to be a safe direct protected bikeway connecting to Mission Bay, which is a gem for our city and all residents should have safe access, equitable access, from our transit stations.

    4. Rejuvenate Pac Highway – Old 101 as a vibrant pedestrian bike friendly neighborhood.

    5. Evaluate the possibility to raise residential height limit within 1/2 mile of transit.

    Lastly, I realize this is a very challenging area and there is some great work in the Balboa Station Plan, but the overall bicycle transportation that provides safe connected bike networks needs work. If we truly want to become more sustainable and healthy and meet the goals of CAP, we will need to dedicate the space for people who want to ride bikes, ride a skateboard, walk, and even use a motorized ADA device. This project has the opportunity to change the way we move people and that is the great aspect of the Midcoast Trolley. We must do better to support active transportation, our youth and our seniors, and the residents of our city that want safe access to the beautiful Mission Bay.

    Thank you for your consideration to the comments. I do appreciate your time.
  • commented 2018-01-24 20:56:43 -0800
    I have attended many of the prior meetings in PB and Clairemont. I own a home in Clairemont/Bay Park close to the station and have a business in PB. I try to avoid driving and bike/walk as much as possible. I will be a frequent user of the trolley. The current intersection of Balboa/Garnet – East Mission Bay Blvd. is a “deathtrap” for pedestrians and bicyclists.

    As this project has progressed, there has been more attention to the needs of pedestrians and bicyclists for safe and easy access between PB and Clairemont at this intersection. However there are still glaring inadequacies. There needs to be some accommodation at or west of the Balboa/Garnet-East Mission Bay Blvd intersection for drop-off and pickup of station passengers. The large underutilized parking lot (Chase Bank) on the southwest corner looks to have that potential. Of course a pedestrian-bike bridge across I-5 at Magnolia or Bunker Hill would be ideal, but evidently there is no identifies “funding source”. Without this type of accommodation the intersection will predictably be even more of a logjam once the trolley opens.

    I have often heard from the presenters at these meetings that multiple agencies etc.. are involved, complicating these aspects of the project. While I understand these issues, I also feel the job of those with these agencies is to reach out and coordinate efforts and funding so this trolley has a positive impact in our communities. The time to address these concerns is now.
  • commented 2018-01-24 11:41:24 -0800
    I attended the January 18th CCPG that addressed the specific plan which was announced to start at 6:30. I arrived at 6:25 only to find that the meeting started at 6pm. Graphics were terrible due to the large area to be addressed and the inclusion of existing, funded and long term changes to bike connectivity all on one slide. To be fair the area is very complicated, to address this level of complexity, there should have been at least 3 slides addressing bike connectivity to/from the STATION. One slide showing the terrible existing bike connectivity between PB and Clairemont. A second slide showing the improvements that will be in place when the Balboa Station is opened, showing how PB residents and Clairemont residents will bike to the station. A third slide should be included showing possible future possibilities/solutions to the funded short-comings that are apparent. This area is extremely dangerous for bikes and now you are placing a bicycle destination (the trolley stop) in the middle of it! Please come back to our communities with a more detailed description of how this biking destination will be accessed via bike paths/routes/blvds. safely. Thank you.
  • posted about this on Facebook 2018-01-23 07:37:49 -0800
  • commented 2018-01-23 07:36:27 -0800
    I do not see a traffic study and do not believe that it is possible to account for the traffic issues which will arise at this complicated area. Many streets come together. Adding a pedestrian element will create dangerous conditions. Also, stormwater and runoff issues will be significant with the hill coming down balboa avenue. Upstream flow studies should be conducted. Because of the small size of the area, the infrastructure necessary to deal with both the stormwater runoff issues and traffic will disrupt this intersection for a prolonged period of time.
  • commented 2018-01-10 07:40:25 -0800
    Where is the information on balboa station? It says the link is not available
  • commented 2017-12-17 16:33:31 -0800
    A giant surface parking lot and a pedestrian bridge over Balboa Avenue? This plan looks like it came out of the 1990s. I know this is a challenging site, but can’t we at least try to slow down the cars and create a pedestrian friendly environment. The ramps on Morena need to go; there is no reason why this can’t be a regular intersection built at a human scale. This plan aspires to go beyond just the transit station itself, but without changing the car-dominant tone of the area, it won’t make much of a dent.
  • commented 2017-12-01 08:02:45 -0800
    Is there a meeting on Dec 14, 2017? Nothing on Website. This meeting was announced at the PBPG on Wednesday.
  • commented 2017-07-26 15:39:14 -0700
    1. I don’t see anything about the intersection of Grand and East Mission Bay Drive at what should be a new Gateway Entrance to the NW corner of Regional Mission Bay Park. What kind of access improvements are planned for this intersection – which is overloaded and super-pedestrian unfriendly right now.

    2. Are the additions of bike lanes on Grand and East Mission going to be widenings – or loss of existing lanes?

    3. What is the rationale for making Santa Fe street one-way south? It looks like that’s going to be a new signalized intersection – is that correct? Traffic currently BACKS UP there DAILY and removing the ability to turn north on the Santa Fe from Balboa West will only worsen intersection conditions at East Mission Bay Drive.

    Please advise where is the project description and the notice for public comments for the environmental review and how can changes be made to alternatives?
  • commented 2017-07-17 18:31:45 -0700
    Is there a Map-pdf that shows what the completed station and the changes to the traffic and walking arteries on Balboa, Morena, Mission Bay Drive and Garnet.
  • commented 2017-07-11 10:08:39 -0700
    I’m on the CCPG, on the ad hoc committee for the Balboa Station, the Morena Corridor and am the chair for the Clairemont Capital Improvement Plan ad hoc committee. I viewed your video, and it appears many changes have been made to the original concept, however we haven’t had a meeting to share those changes. Twitter and facebook also say there is a survey the community can take on this site, however I don’t see a survey.
  • commented 2017-07-11 10:02:11 -0700
  • commented 2017-05-14 15:01:26 -0700
    I’m writing to inquire whether a path connecting Morena Blvd and Santa Fe St exists. If not, any idea if the City of San Diego is in the process of building one. Its seems like a path connecting both roads would not only be extremely useful, beneficial, and safe to most San Diegans, but also relatively cheap for the city to make. I came across the minutes or talking points of a 2009 meeting regarding bicycles in San Diego and noticed that this was brought up all the way back then. Just wondering what the status is on such a path.
  • commented 2017-03-03 12:00:10 -0800
    Please consider putting in a sidewalk on Morena from Balboa north to Avati Drive (on the east side). Without this, it will make it hard for people to walk to the station from Bay Ho.
  • commented 2017-01-25 15:44:02 -0800
    After going to a Dec. SD County B.O.S mtg and asking about the “last/1st mi.s” question from a Mesa College Student Government officer, and student at the college & former Certificate student at SDCCD Con’t Ed. Areo Dr. school attendee, I asked about how the County should consider all the money being spent with no connectivity to use the faster/better Trolley transit system. I suggested that D.O.T. funds used for car/ride sharing programs that have been used for Shuttle Buses, that those Shuttle Buses be available during “down times”/weekends, to help connect student to direct access to the trolley systems. The local University (U of San Diego) uses Shuttle Buses to get their students, staff, faculty, admin, to the Trolley and housing neighborhoods. Why can’t San Diego County, the City of San Diego, and the Community College District use a similar program. Will be CCing this to SDCCD, and University of San Diego. Yes, We CAN! If we work together to make betterment for all!
  • commented 2016-11-27 16:12:48 -0800
    A major gap in this project is connectivity between the Rose Creek Bike Path and Olney Street for accessing destinations west of the trolley station. This area encompasses the majority of the Pacific Beach community. Due to high volumes of traffic traveling at high rates of speed, it is very hard to navigate the area between the Rose Creek Bike Path and Olney Street safely. I also oppose any new bridges over Rose Creek.

    Many members of the community feel the best location for a pedestrian and bicycle bridge over the I-5 would be to extend Magnolia Street east of Mission Bay Drive through APN 4241410900 to I-5 where a bridge could be located. This would give users easy access to the Rose Creek Bike Path. Any bridge across I-5 to the trolley station will encounter some requirement to obtain right-of-way and this location is the best one. The City could incentivize a mixed use development in this location that could be a win/win for the property owners and the public while provide housing density adjacent to the trolley station.

    As many individuals in the community have pointed out, getting people from the trolley station to the “main drag” of Garnet is key. There are large swatches of landscaping on either side of Garnet west of Rose Creek and east of Olney Street – probably owned by the US Navy, but there is room for a bit of widening without any encroachment on housing.

    Also, if you look at the Garnet Ave bridge over Rose Creek, you’ll see how wide the lanes are and the center divide. Removing the center divide and narrowing the lands would slow traffic and allow for a raised bike lane along this stretch of Garnet going east to Donaldson Street or to Olney Street. Then all that would need to be done is improve the ingress/egress to the Rose Creek Bike Path at Garnet and we would have a safe and direct route of travel for people who are headed to the Garnet Ave corridor or points to the north of Garnet.
  • commented 2016-11-23 13:27:36 -0800
    Is there nothing on paper that can be posted on this site? I live four blocks from the proposed Balboa station. Walking to the station, which I would do, means crossing three major intersections. I can walk to the new station (BALBOA) however, I will be unable to unless the plan includes the construction and finishing of sidewalks on Danon, Mission Bay Drive, Santa Fe and Balboa Avenue, and to include designated cross walks and pedestrian traffic lights. Where can I view plans?
  • commented 2016-11-18 09:04:58 -0800
    Hi, the plans are looking interesting and I’m happy to see the focus on encouraging biking. The biggest obstacle for most people is when they feel in danger – Even Westbound on Garnet is dangerous because there’s no bike lane – forcing you to ride on the sidewalk (or just take a car). I like the idea of developing intersections, bike lanes, and pedestrian bridges but I also think for a comprehensive plan like this to work, we must also extend a viable bike route into the heart of Pacific Beach business district and towards the beach.

    For example, if we want PB residents to take the train, then we need a way for them to get all the way over there and currently there are few options on Garnet or on Grand to go east easily. Similarly, people coming by train who want to get into PB or the beach would have a difficult time once they get out of your plan’s improvements reach.

    Even a single protected bike lane route that gets you close to the PB business district would be awesome. Right now if you want to go from Pico/Garnet you have to take the bike path south and go all the way into the neighborhoods to try to connect with a bike path there. This is discouraging as compared to just being able to go east easily on Garnet or Grand, connecting to your proposed intersections, lanes, bridges, station concept.

    Thank you for thinking of mixed use developments as well – a station is truly a hub in many world cities and I’ve personally experienced how vibrant a place becomes when centered around transport hubs. If we make it to where there are first level retail and dining, cafes, entertainment options with second floor or nearby commercial retail (get daily life things done) then people will have numerous reasons to come to the transport hub. It can function like a public square in many parts of the world does – Meet me at “such and such” stop and we’ll figure it out from there… a transport hub is much much more than a station and most American cities have underutilized them.

    I’m happy to provide more specific examples or input on where I’ve seen transport hubs become true community centers.

  • commented 2016-11-16 16:30:43 -0800
    A Grander Vision: Realign Grand Ave to “T” up with West Mission Bay Dr. opposite Bunker Hill. This would create a direct bicycle/pedestrian route between the DeAnza area of Mission Bay and the Balboa Station. It would also allow cyclists/pedestrians to connect with the Rose Creek Bike Path directly off of Grand rather than weaving through residential streets. It would allow for more car stacking for the left turn from the freeway exit onto Grand Ave.
  • posted about this on Facebook 2016-11-11 16:15:21 -0800
  • @MoveSD tweeted link to this page. 2016-11-11 16:15:18 -0800
  • commented 2016-11-11 16:14:08 -0800
    I want to focus on walkability to the station from nearby areas, especially the nearby Toler Elementary school. As a patent of students there, I know there is interest in using the trolley (only 1/4 mile away) for student field trips, as well as for the neighbors.
  • commented 2016-11-11 16:11:01 -0800
    Nice work on the website. The images are a bit fuzzy though
  • commented 2016-11-11 16:09:22 -0800
    There is a lot of good in the plan. Now, for the bad: “Vehicle displays on the street, auto related commercial and dealerships”. I realize 1970’s retro is kinda popular right now but please consider the future of mobility, sustainability…Hello! Climate Action Plan! Transit Oriented Development! This area should be for people, NOT cars.

    Regarding single family residence…I want density. Remember the City of Villages with density near transportation / mobility hubs. This is it. Incentivize density with affordable housing. Somebody please show some leadership here!
  • commented 2016-10-30 15:54:55 -0700
    Perfect area to raise the building height limit put up some towers. alleviate housing price crunch
  • commented 2016-10-30 12:42:22 -0700
    1. I suggest that the Balboa station include bike lockers and a restroom.

    2. In the short term, biker riders from the west will access the station via Rose Creek/Santa Fe/Stop Light at Balboa. In LA, the recent trolley extension to Santa Monica has a bike path that runs along the trolley tracks. How about making the connection from Damen to the station using a track-side bike path.
Upcoming events Leave a comment