OB Planning Board Nixes Roundabout at Bacon and Brighton

By Geoff Page

The clear highlight of the Ocean Beach Planning Board’s monthly meeting August 2 was the board, and the attending public, driving a stake into the heart of the Bacon Street roundabout proposal. If the city is true to its word, that idea is dead. We’ll see.

Bacon Street and Brighton Ave. Roundabout

The proposal for a roundabout at Bacon and Brighton came before the OBPB in May. It came back in June . The third time Wednesday was not the charm.

City of San Diego Senior Traffic Engineer, Philip Rust, returned to seek a vote of approval from the board. He was not successful. As recounted by board member Tracy Dezenzo, Rust told the board at the last meeting that the city would drop the proposal if the board opposed it. If so, that should be the end of it.

The biggest question for everyone was — who was responsible for the roundabout idea? No one knows, not even the city’s engineer spokesperson. Rust said he had been trying for weeks to find out and he still did not know himself. The Rag speculated on the genesis of this proposal in the June story.

It was clear, however, that no one on the OBPB, or anyone else in OB, requested it. This looked like another top-down action by the city. The OBPB was unhappy because the introduction of the roundabout into the overall paving project once again delayed paving Bacon, by at least a year.

During the June meeting, Rust said several times that the roundabout plan was not the reason the paving was delayed. He did not explain what then did delay the work. The effort this writer made to get an answer about what did delay the paving was recounted here.

At first, the city took the position that the claim that Bacon was to be paved this year was an assertion, a fabrication. Documents were set to Mr. Anthony Santacroce, Supervising Public Information Officer, disabusing him of that notion. Here is how he responded on July 20:

Ok. I will present this information and assertion and provide a response.

From now and moving forward I request that you email communications@sandiego.gov for any questions or inquiries. I will only be responding to your emails forwarded to me from the Communications inbox. Also, I will be only providing you with answers verbally moving forward as well.

Santacroce has not lived up to his promise.  And the rest of his response is unacceptable coming from a public employee to a citizen of this city. But, that is another matter.

So, no answers about who wanted the roundabout and why the Bacon Street paving is again delayed. This did not help the city’s cause. As the discussion continued, it also became clear that there was no need to spend the money to build a roundabout.

The intersection needs ADA improvements. But, these are a part of the original repaving plan anyway.

Several members of the public attended the meeting and every one of them spoke against the idea. Some of these folks live at this intersection.

One resident said how happy he was when the city put in the four-way stop at this spot. His driveway is close to the intersection and he said backing out onto Bacon used to be a nightmare due to constantly moving traffic. Putting in a roundabout would just cause him to have the same problem all over again.

The roundabout proposal would remove nine parking spots from an area already parking challenged. No one was happy about that.

Residents described how pedestrian heavy this particular intersection is. In the proposed roundabout design, the crosswalks on both streets are a considerable distance from the outer edge of the roundabout. With this design, a driver would have to stop in the roundabout while a pedestrian crossed.

Stopping in a roundabout would foul up traffic on both streets. With a four-way stop, traffic is only affected on the street being crossed, the other street can proceed. The idea of trying to provide continuously moving traffic on a north-south street like Bacon, two blocks from the beach, being crossed regularly by pedestrians, makes no sense.

The city’s arguments for a roundabout are weak. They say roundabouts are safer, which is true. But, in the same breath, they conceded that the Bacon and Brighton intersection has a very safe history. They say roundabouts are environmentally beneficial because they keep traffic moving instead of idling and spewing pollution waiting at four-way stops.

Dezenzo responded to that claim. She said that argument about idling cars is fading into history. Cars have improved considerably over the years and the advent of electric cars might make the point moot in the near future.

In the end the board voted unanimously on a motion to express disapproval – not approval – of the roundabout idea.

Projects

The board heard two projects. The first was at 4732 Del Monte. There are three units on the lot now. The owner proposes to demolish the two rear units and build two new 1,200 square foot units each with a two-car garage.  These will be called ADUs, accessory dwelling units. He said the only reason they are being designated as ADUs is to take advantage of new ADU rules that allow them to avoid some requirements. The board unanimously approved the project.

The second project was a proposal to build three new ADUs over the commercial property at 2171 Abbott. The site on the corner of Muir Ave. and Abbot St. now houses a laundromat and a surf shop. Here is the description from the agenda:

The board will review a Process 2 Coastal Development Permit to construct three new accessory dwelling units of 669 sq. ft. for the first unit, 637 sq. ft. for the second unit, and 806 sq. ft. for the third unit over an existing 2,495 sq. ft. commercial building at 2171, 2175 and 2179 Abbott St. An additional 203 sq. ft. of new construction will be added to the existing ground level commercial building for a total of 2,315 sq. ft. of new construction. The existing site includes (4) detached dwelling units and (1) detached single-car garage at 5086, 5090, and 5092 Muir Avenue that will remain with no new construction proposed.

The big problem with this project is that these two-bedroom and two-bathroom units will have no parking. The owner is taking advantage of the new ADU rules. Parking is at a premium in this area and is even more scarce during the summer due to the proximity of the beach. The architect presenting the project said he did not like either but it was legal.

The board approved the project unanimously, also taking the tack that it was all legal. Planning board recommendations do not have to approve something just because it is legal. A no vote on any project like this with no parking, would be perfectly acceptable. It would send a message that dumping probably six cars, at a minimum, on the surrounding streets is unacceptable.

OB Pier

The City of San Diego’s Director of Strategic Capital Improvement Projects, James Nagelvoort, gave an update of the pier replacement project. He did not have anything new to offer but did encourage everyone to attend the next public workshop. It will be held September 9 at the Liberty Station Conference Center, where the two previous workshops were held.

Nagelvoort said this third workshop is very important because it will be the point where the preferred design of the pier will begin to be solidified. The workshops have been well attended, hopefully this one will be as well.

Bermuda Stairs

District 2 representative, Manual Reyes said the old stairs have been demolished and the base for the new stairs has been poured. The new stairs should be complete sometime in the fourth quarter or between October and December.