Uptown

BikeSD Uptown Committee Meeting Recap

Some of the BikeSD Uptown Committee Meeting Attendees

Monday night, BikeSD held the first meeting of its Uptown Committee. Uptown is a very important community for walkability and bikeability in San Diego. Home to many popular late-night businesses, it is also a major crossroads of the city. Streets like University and Washington connect neighborhoods like City Heights and North Park to the beaches while the numbered avenues bring traffic from Downtown and Little Italy up the mesa. Yet Uptown has not been a strong force for transportation progress. Plans to create a bikeable, pedestrian friendly corridor along University Avenue have been met with strong resistance, and the unobtrusive bike lanes on parts of 4th and 5th have drawn unfortunate backlash. The goal of the Uptown Committee is to organize the residents of Uptown, both to highlight the concerns and needs of residents and to create action plans to resolve those needs.

The map below shows the boundaries of Uptown, shaded in red, including the east/west and north/south corridors that are our primary focus.

Broad Interest
The meeting brought in several residents of Uptown, as well as some former residents and residents of nearby neighborhoods. Coming from diverse backgrounds, the attendees originally hailed from as far as the eastern US and Canada and as near as San Diego itself. They were all drawn to this meeting with a desire to improve the community they now call home, Uptown. The committee is a project of BikeSD board member and Hillcrest resident Dre Sparks, who decided to organize Uptown specifically after years of seeing the difficulty in the neighborhood first hand.

Dangerous Corridors
BikeSD’s executive director, Sam Ollinger, helped start the meeting with a description of Vision Zero, a movement to reduce traffic fatalities that has been gaining traction in major American cities. Important for the residents of Uptown, University Avenue has been identified, by CirculateSD, as the most dangerous corridor in San Diego. All those in attendance at the meeting piped in with times they felt unsafe on University Avenue.

The general consensus seemed to be that there was no good east-west bike route through Uptown. Some mentioned that they have moved to Robinson after frightening experiences on University, while others mentioned dangerous road conditions and freeway ramps on Robinson pushing them to University. One attendee mentioned only feeling comfortable on the sidewalk through this section of town. Because of the concentration of businesses and the lack of full-length streets, University seemed to be the eventual destination of all cyclists; it just cannot be avoided.

The discussion brought together some of my personal experiences in a way I had not considered before. While I do ride on University to save time or reach businesses on University, it occurred to me that I never take guests from out of town on the street. I have done this without consciously thinking about it, always leading visitors westward through Mission Hills and into other neighborhoods. I have not asked my friends and family about this; perhaps they think there is nothing to see in Hillcrest!

Chicken and Egg
There were mixed feelings about the upcoming introduction of Decobike. While everyone seemed excited about the new bike share program, a few residents expressed concern that usage might not be high enough to support the system, given the lack of strong bike infrastructure. Residents with past experience in Montreal and New York suggested that good infrastructure made the bike share programs into obvious successes.

All was not doom and gloom, however. It was noted that the bike share itself could be a driver of increased road safety. Not only might it further infrastructure development, but an increase to the number of bikes on the road would cause drivers to pay more attention and maneuver more safely.

Getting Attention
The most influential group in Uptown is Uptown Planners Community Planning Group, the city recognized advisory group on all issues related to community planning and development Though often harboring the best of intentions, the Uptown Planners are unfortunately narrow in their awareness of the needs of many Uptown residents. The Planners will meet next on February 3rd at the Joyce Beers Community Center, on Vermont Street. Meetings are generally called to order at 6 pm.

Our meeting quickly turned to a discussion of the Uptown Planners. While all Uptown residents can attend and have their voices heard, becoming a board member requires a more substantial commitment. We discussed the requirement to attend at least 3 meetings in the year leading up to elections, a requirement I was surprised to hear is not present in the most other community planning groups. Several people, all working professionals, discussed how difficult it can be to get back into the neighborhood by the 6 pm start time, making it difficult to get involved.

The Future
The next BikeSD Uptown Committee meeting will be held at 7 pm on February 16th. We will be meeting at Filter, at the corner of University Avenue and Richmond Street. All residents of Uptown who wish to see an increased focus on bike infrastructure and safety are welcome to attend and join the conversation. You may sign up to receive updates on the Uptown Campaign page as well.

The neighborhoods of Uptown have largely shifted toward pedestrian and bike traffic, increasingly focusing on nightlife and small shops and containing reasonably high density for San Diego. With an organized message, we can make a push to finish the job and have the infrastructure catch up!

---

Erik Dorthe is a BikeSD member and a resident of Hillcrest.

by BikeSD Staff

On Monday 10/20: City to Present Plan to Extend 4th and 5th Buffered Bike Lanes; Leo Wilson Continues his Campaign Against Bicycling

Photo by Adrian Granda of the buffered bike lane that currently ends at Laurel St.

Next Monday at 6:30 PM, the city will be presenting a plan to extend the new 4th and 5th bike lanes from Laurel Street. If you live or travel through Bankers Hill you should be there. Brian Genovese (City Engineer) is­ presenting 4th and 5th Avenue bike lane extension through Bankers Hill at­:

3030 Front Street (Bankers Hill Social Club) on Monday at 6:30 PM (October 20th).

If you'd like to ride to the Bankers Hill Social Club, a group is leaving Balboa Park at 5:30 PM.

Opponents (such as Uptown Chair Leo Wilson – whom we’ve asked to step down as Chair) are claiming that the city needs to do a environmental analysis in order to add a bike lane. In an email sent earlier this week, Wilson writes:

Attached is a copy of the San Diego Bicycle Plan.  Page 138 has the bicycle plan's recommendations for 4th and 5th Avenues in Bankers Hill.

The recommendations are for Class II and Class III bicycles lanes -- not a Class I type of bike route that would require the removal of traffic lanes.  Instead the bicycle plan (p. 138) indicates it "would be necessary to narrow the existing traffic lanes to 11 feet and narrow the existing parking lane to 7 feet to provide necessary space for Class II bike facilities along 4th and 5th Avenues."  It does not recommend lane reductions

The City's claim they can remove traffic lanes based on the recommendations of the City's approved bicycle master plan are erroneous.  There needs to be CEQA review, and an amendment to the bicycle plan involving a community review process.

That's right. San Diego has its own Rob Anderson and his name is Leo Wilson.

Making room for a bike lane by reducing and existing travel lane doesn't result in a Class I bike path (examples being the Harbor Drive multi-use path or the Bayshore Bikeway). If anything, narrowing existing travel lanes will result in the city creating a Class II bike lane (marked by paint stripes on asphalt with painted buffer hatch marks). With some sustained effort, our advocacy will result in eventually converting that Class II bike lane into a cycletrack or a Class IV facility, recently approved by the Governor, thanks to the California Bicycle Coalition.

Furthermore, last year the Governor signed a bill into law exempting bike lanes from CEQA (The California Environmental Quality Act). In other words, Wilson is wrong.

As an update to the petition calling for Leo Wilson to step down as chair to the Uptown Planners I asked Marlon Pangilinan, a city planner who oversees Uptown, a few questions and he provided me with some clarification on the rules about Community Planning Group members. The responses are below:

1. Are there rules on how long a member of a planning group can serve both on the board and as chair?
Yes. According to Council Policy 600-24 which provides the standard operating procedures and responsibilities for the City’s recognized Community Planning Groups (CPG), no person may serve on a planning group for more than eight consecutive years if members are elected to two- or four-year terms, or nine consecutive years if members are elected to three-year terms.

The eight or nine year limit refers to total service time, not to individual seats held. After a one-year break in service as a planning group member, an individual who had served for eight or nine consecutive years shall again be eligible for election to the committee. There are exceptions to serving more than the 8 to 9 year limit in the case there are not enough members to fill vacant seats.

In the case of the Uptown Planners, their approved bylaws dictate fixed terms of 4 years, therefore the maximum time an individual can serve on the Uptown Planners is 8 years.

The Chair is an officer position on the Uptown Planners. The length of the officer’s term is one year. However, officers are elected annually from the and by the members of the Uptown Planners, so the same individual can be voted to fill the same officer position every year except that no person may serve in the same Uptown Planners office position for than 8 consecutive years.

2. What are the consequences for violation if there are rules?
If a violation is proven, the CPG must take corrective action. A planning group member or planning group found to be out of compliance with the provisions of Council Policy 600-24, or the planning group’s adopted bylaws, risks loss of indemnification (legal protection and representation) and forfeiture of its status as recognized advisory body.

3. Has there been an effort to unseat a Planning Group chair in the past? What has the result been?
No. Based on my recent discussions with other Community Planners in the Planning Department, there have been complaints regarding the way CPG Chairs run the meetings and regarding Chairs with perceived conflicts of interest, but with no apparent or proven violations.

Hope to see you on Monday at 6:30 PM. We could sure use your presence.

Update: John Anderson has a great writeup of the meeting.

by Sam Ollinger