[SDCBC] SR56-Sorrento Valley Road connector

[Gene Carman]

I tend to agree with Wade...  I would much rather 
see the existing bike path completed, rather than 
another half effort at something else.

I am particularly interested in "doing it right," 
which includes putting "walk" buttons on the 
proper side of the existing intersections as 
cycle traffic moves along the right side of the 
path, and the repair of the weir, to prevent flooding.

Sure, I would love to see a complete isolated 
path all the way to SVR, but thus far I tend to 
see more half completed projects being treated as "good enough."

Amazing how we never see a freeway offramp end in dirt, vice pavement.

I would much rather see good, complete, safe 
pavement (with moderate speed limits) that is 
shared with autos, then another almost finished 
path that terminates in dirt...  or "almost" 
makes it over, or under the freeway.

At 03:09 PM 8/29/2007, Wade Blomgren wrote:
>To me it hinges on how vulnerable the undercrossing would be to
>extended closure from flooding.  I assume the bridge option will be
>much more expensive.
>
>Since either solution is probably many dollars and years from actually
>being implemented (along those lines, how long is it going to take
>Caltrans to restore the 50 meters of asphalt at the north end of SVR
>to make that section all-weather and less sketchy on narrow
>tires????....that's got to be going on 10 years or more now ), it
>seems to me lobbying for some relatively dirt cheap improvements to
>the current bike path terminus would make a lot of sense.
>
>A curb cut and some asphalt on the east side of ECR would accommodate
>entry from and exit to southbound ECR, and repaving of the ragged
>existing ramp (there's already a curb cut), and ideally, some
>realignment as to pitch and switchback angle of the ramp on the west
>side would improve that transition.  As I'm sure Serge would agree,
>it's not all that hard to get to SVR from there via El Camino Real and
>Carmel Valley Road.  Or, if you're ultimately headed south through
>Sorrento Valley, it's not that big a deal to just go on up ECR and
>turn right on Carmel Mountain, probably less arduous than a 7.7%
>bridge, and if you're going the other way (out Carmel Valley road to
>the beach), the 50 yards going past the park&ride you'd get on SVR
>isn't of much additional use compared to the aforementioned taking of
>ECR direct to Carmel Valley Road.   I realize the roadway transitions
>aren't necessarily practical for, say, kids on training wheels, but at
>this point SVR itself isn't much of a destination unless you're headed
>for a tour of the sewer pump station.
>
>I would hope that such obvious and inexpensive improvement to the
>current transitions wouldn't impede further consideration of extending
>the class 1 facility, but frankly even if it does I think it's worth
>it - those transitions are needed regardless of how they decide to
>deal with the freeway.
>
>Wade
>
>On 8/29/07, Kathy Keehan <execdir at sdcbc.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your input needed!
> >
> > We've been asked to provide comments for a feasibility study for the
> > connection between the west end of the 56 bike path and Sorrento Valley
> > Road. As many of you know, there's a giant 
> freeway in the way there, and the
> > City and Caltrans are looking for ways to get bicyclists across.
> >
> > There are a couple of options, basically one over the freeway and one under
> > it. Which do you like better?
> >
> > The bridge would be your typical 12 foot wide bike/ped bridge over the
> > freeway. It would be about 17 feet above the 
> traffic at a minimum, and would
> > have 6.5% and 7.7% grades for the approaches 
> (200 to 400 feet long depending
> > on the design), and 90 degree turns at each end of the bridge.
> >
> > The undercrossing would go under I-5, with a 
> minimum vertical clearance of 8
> > foot 3 inches. There will be concerns about water (particularly in wet
> > years), lighting, and security. The grades down to the undercrossing would
> > be about 7.5% for a couple hundred feet, then up at about 3% for about 80
> > feet. It will have a fairly sharp turn on the west side of the freeway to
> > connect to existing Sorrento Valley Road.
> >
> > Bridge ­ less potential maintenance, open even in wet weather, uphill both
> > ways, over noisy auto traffic/fumes
> >
> > Undercrossing ­ downhill both ways, quieter, more potential maintenance,
> > potential to be closed in wet weather
> >
> > Which do you prefer?
> >
> > Kathy
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------
> >
> > Kathy Keehan
> >
> > Executive Director
> >
> > San Diego County Bicycle Coalition
> >
> > P.O. Box 34544
> >
> > San Diego, CA 92163
> >
> > 858.487.6063
> >
> > execdir at sdcbc.org
> >
> > www.sdcbc.org
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > You are subscribed to the SDCBC mailing list as wblomgren at gmail.com
> > To unsubscribe or change mailing options, go to
> > http://www.bikesandiego.org/mailman/listinfo/sdcbc
> > List privacy information is located at
> > http://www.stickman-computing.org/aup
> > For help or to talk with someone other than the mail robot, send e-mail to
> > postmaster at stickman-computing.org
> >
>_______________________________________________
>
>You are subscribed to the SDCBC mailing list as gcarman at san.rr.com
>To unsubscribe or change mailing options, go to 
>http://www.bikesandiego.org/mailman/listinfo/sdcbc
>List privacy information is located at http://www.stickman-computing.org/aup
>For help or to talk with someone other than the 
>mail robot, send e-mail to postmaster at stickman-computing.org