by Austin Speed

We have three important post-Thanksgiving items for everybody:

  1. AN IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT OUR TAX EXEMPT STATUS:  Citizens for the Regents Road Bridge (CFTRRB) has been approved to be a tax exempt public charity under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 501 (c) (3).  We received this good news in mid-November and the IRS’s approval of our application is effective as of June 7, 2017.  Donations to  CFTRRB by all taxpayers are now tax deductible.   
  2. A LINK: The San Diego Union Tribune published an article by Roger Showley titled “UCSD’s growth means traffic jams — more than double the wait time —at key intersection by 2035.”  Roger’s article highlights extended traffic delays into the forseeable future for North University City due to planned construction projects on the UCSD campus and throughout the North UC area.
  3. A NEW ARTICLE: Our blog has a new article titled “A Tale of Two City Councils” which ponders the inconsistencies of City Council’s decision this year to approve a bridge project connecting Mission Valley and Serra Mesa as contrasted with the City Council’s decision to remove the Regents Road Bridge project from the UC Plan which would connect north and south University City.  A Tale Of Two City Councils


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment


by Austin Speed

President, Citizens for the Regents Road Bridge (      

Where do we begin?  

It was the best of times (for Mission Valley and Serra Mesa).  It was the worst of times (for University City).

The San Diego City Council, in December 2016, voted to approve a resolution to eliminate the completion of Regents Road from the University Community (University City) Plan…just in time to announce the cumulative impact to UC traffic from almost 50 major construction projects in North UC.   The completion of Regents Road in the UC area requires a bridge across Rose Canyon and they wanted to eliminate that project from the city budget.  

In direct contrast to this decision, the City Council voted in October of this year to approve a bridge that would connect Mission Valley and Serra Mesa.  

In both cases there are proponents and opponents to these projects.  In the case of the Mission Valley/Serra Mesa connection Councilman Scott Sherman was quoted in an article in the Times of San Diego saying “At the end of the day, we need this road connectivity.”


Councilman Sherman also said, “Mission Valley has traffic problems and it’s going to continue to have traffic problems.  There’s a lot of development coming to Mission Valley because of the trolley, and the transit and the connectivity. We need more connectivity to make this thing work.”

Guess who else has traffic problems and is going to continue having traffic problems because of the trolley and the transit and the connectivity and unprecedented development?  UNIVERSITY CITY.   Yes, and those problems are upon us right now and being made worse (permanently) by a massive amount of construction activity involving over 50 major projects in the North UC area within the next five years.  Many of those projects are already underway and the community is suffering right now from traffic interruptions and slowdowns due to intense construction activity at multiple sites.  Many of those sites involve reconfiguration of the traffic lanes on Genesee Avenue, the only north-south surface arterial route from Clairemont through University City to UTC, Campus Point, UCSD, and the Scripps Hospital complex.  Traffic is seriously being impeded on Genesee at this point in time.

This did not have to happen this way, and it is a problem that does not need to persist into the indefinite future.  It’s reasonable to think that there should have been some kind of credible plan.   There are two key city planning organizations who had a hand in this self-inflicted disaster – the University City Planning Group and the San Diego City Planning Department.  There is also the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), a regional organization largely responsible for the trolley planning.  Apparently they all decided that the residents of UC and the people who commute in and out of the area to work, shop, and use medical facilities would just have to take a deep breath and tolerate all of this for five years.  

  It is reasonable to think that an organization that calls itself a “Planning Group” or a “Planning Department” would have a plan, wouldn’t it?  A plan, in classic terms, deals with cost, schedule, and performance.  By rationalizing cost avoidance due to inaction in the completion of Regents Road, all of these planning groups have virtually ignored the impact of the massive schedule convergence and poor traffic and safety performance of the current community road system.    A logical overall plan would have sequenced the construction of the Regents Road Bridge in advance of this mess in order to increase the surface street roadway throughput in the community and the region.  A roadway grid that includes the completion of Regents Road has been promised to the people of this area since as far back as 1959.  Somehow, the City Council and the UCPG and the City Planning Department have rationalized the prevention of the completion of Regents Road against the recommendations of the San Diego City Planning Commission and against the dominant wishes of the citizens of the region.

Recently in the San Diego Union Tribune a key member of the UCPG was quoted as follows:

“It’s a nightmare,” said Janay Kruger, chair of the University Community Planning Group. “There’s congestion everywhere, large equipment in the public right-of-way, shutting down lanes. We’re having interruptions in power in our homes. The community is very frightened, and they think there won’t be any relief.”,amp.html

Anybody with any community or project planning experience might reasonably think that a prime responsibility the organizations responsible for this situation would be to  model or schedule some kind of coordinated view of these pending projects.  Strong recommendations should have been made by the UCPG to the City Planning Department and to SANDAG on the advisability of staggering some of these projects.   The convergence of the schedules for all of these projects should have been obvious to anyone paying attention. 

A completed Regents Road would have provided a viable north-south surface artery that would help people enter the community in the morning and leave in the evening as part of the normal, daily north-south migration we see in UC.   The completion of Regents Road can still provide this kind of relief for the increasingly congested traffic patterns that most of us expect in the future.  It could also be accomplished before the construction of the trolley line juts out onto Genesee and totally disrupts the flow of traffic.

Mayor Faulconer originally campaigned on closing long-standing infrastructure gaps in San Diego.  He voted for the construction of the Regents Road Bridge when he was a Councilmember in 2006.   It is interesting that the city continuously touts the slate of new construction projects in North UC as part of the “new downtown.”

Having a new downtown is supposedly good for the city of San Diego and for our area.  Apparently it is not good enough to justify the completion of the community’s plan.  University City needs key alternate routes in and out of the area like the “old downtown” has.


Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment


By Carole Pietras


Westbound Governor approaching Genesee – November 9, 2017 5:16 p.m

  • Both westbound left turn lanes are backed up beyond the designated lanes — blocking the center lane.
  • The right turn lane to Northbound Genesee is backed up
  • Westbound traffic past Genesee is also backed up.
  • There was no accident or obstruction on Governor Dr.  

Do you have a plan to…

  • Evacuate in case of a fire? Gas leak?
  • Get to your child’s school or athletic event in case of an emergency?
  • Leave or enter the community if Genesee or Governor Dr. is closed because of an accident or an obstruction like a tree across the road?
  • Get to safety if Hwy 52 is closed?

CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING in your emergency plan:

  • Governor Dr. is the ONLY east/west street running the length of our community from I-805 to Stresemann.
  • With a few exceptions, streets in south UC have to connect with Governor Dr. to get to Genesee or Regents Rd.
  • Genesee is the only North/South artery connecting Clairemont and University City to the businesses, UCSD, hospitals, medical facilities, commercial and residential complexes north of Rose canyon.
  • Over 57,000 people travel to, through or within the Golden Triangle every day!
  • Over 3400 students, attend UCHS*, Standley Middle School,* Curie Elementary* and Spreckels Elementary* school including students from Doyle Elementary and areas throughout the city. *UCHS is on Genesee.  Curie, Standley and Spreckels are on Governor.
  • Many workers in the business condos and Governor Business Park near I-805 drive west on Governor to Genesee to Hwy 52 because I-805 and the access ramp are backed up.
  • Over 50 public and private projects are either under construction or slated for construction in the Golden Triangle area.
  • Per the City Planning Commission, communities are supposed to have TWO ways in and out. Without the Regents Road Bridge, we have ONE! 


Join our fight to KEEP the Regents Road Bridge in the Community Plan and BUILD IT.   Spread the word to your neighbors, friends and co-workers.   Help defray our legal expenses. 

Donate now: online at

 or mail a check payable to Citizens for the Regents Rd. Bridge or CTFRRB to


4079 Governor Dr. #165

San Diego CA 92122

 Thank you to all who are supporting our effort!


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Recent Regents Road Bridge Poll Results — Build the Bridge Already!

By Katie Nelson Rodolico

We’ve heard that the “majority” are against the Regents Road Bridge.   This may be because the majority has elected two City Council members in a row who had stated anti-bridge positions or because the majority of the UC Planning Group members are against the bridge.

There has, however, been some recent polling done using Facebook and NextDoor as polling platforms.   Every poll we’ve seen favors the bridge.   There have also been vigorous arguments as to how “unscientific” these poll results are.   Who cares?

Since there have not been any professional polls done we will look at social media polls and other sources.   These social media polls are remarkably consistent in favor of building the Regents Road Bridge.

Here are some examples.

Here’s a snapshot of a Facebook group poll from “You Know You are from University City”, May 25, 2016.   63 votes for the bridge; 34 votes against the bridge; 3 votes “Not in my backyard”


There have been a number of polls on  Here’s a rundown on the polls I’ve seen starting with…

September 16, 2017,  486 votes, 66% for the bridge



September 22, 2017.

This poll had illogical/mutually exclusive choices in an attempt to divide the pro bridge vote.  You could only choose one item from a list of 7 items even though a couple of these items could be done as part of a combination of traffic mitigation projects.   This didn’t seem to fool the pro bridge crowd…61% pro bridge.   



Here’s another attempt to present a list of 9 options in an apparent effort to dilute the responses from bridge supporters.  Mark Salata’s poll still resulted in 61% supporting the bridge.  Actually, 11% of the respondents indicated that they were interested in a combination of these items. We’ll assume that means that these folks want the bridge and one or more of the other ideas.   That really means that 72% of the respondents favor the bridge.

November 5, 2016




Then there was the choice offered when the final EIR was issued.

October 25, 2016, 80% pro bridge when compared to the “grade separation” option (the “Genesee Tunnel,” as it is referred to in this poll).


And before the EIR process started there was a poll posted by one of the lead to get a feel for the issue.  66% in favor of the bridge.

August 30, 2015



Because these polls tend to show widespread majority support for the Regents Road Bridge project the anti-bridge crowd likes to point out that these polls are not “scientific.”   They may not meet someone’s definition of scientific polling, but they are remarkably consistent in reflecting pro-bridge support.   I believe that these polls are reflective of the community and consistently show a majority of the community wants the bridge.  

Fewer pro-bridge people speak out about it on venues like because they are quickly shouted down, insulted, and harangued by five or six regulars who like to pontificate about how awful the bridge will be.  These regulars try to overwhelm any thread that brings up the bridge.   By posting many posts in a thread – sometimes 3-4 at a time – they try to give the impression that the majority is against the bridge… but the anonymous responses to these polls show otherwise.


Katie Nelson Rodolico

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

The Top 10 False Arguments About the Regents Road Bridge

By Katie Nelson Rodolico

We hear a lot myths, assertions, or just plain false arguments from bridge opponents — provably false.  Here are the top 10 myths Regents Road Bridge opponents keep repeating  — accompanied by THE TRUTH.

  1. The bridge will bring more traffic into the area (even though we want projects that provide more jobs in UC) and it will destroy the canyon.

FALSE:  This is the BIG LIE.  Actually it’s two big lies. The UC development that has already been built or is being developed now has been based on the Regents Road Bridge being in place as a key piece of the infrastructure.  The traffic is already here… as can be seen with the mess on I-5, La Jolla Village, Genesee, I-805, Nobel.   The golden triangle is the high tech job center for San Diego.  The jobs are already here or are coming (from already approved projects.)   The large number of workers and residents in the Golden Triangle have brought all roads in the area to a standstill during rush hours  The bridge doesn’t bring more traffic to the area… the development does.

As far as destroying the canyon goes, this is really an egregious misrepresentation regarding the impact of the bridge on the canyon.    The canyon already has many imprints from civilization and development.  There are the human influences from heavy rail transportation, construction activity, trash, and the occasional shopping cart.   There is no regular or systematic cleaning or maintenance in the canyon.  While segments of the canyon have been “set aside” as an open space park, those are simply lines on a map for a canyon that was already in the City’s property inventory.  

         2. Rose Canyon is the last (or the best) of the open space parks.

FALSE:  We are fortunate to live in a city with many canyons and open space parks.  We are even more fortunate to live in an area of the city that has several open space parks:  San Clemente Canyon, Barnes and Lopez Canyon in nearby Mira Mesa, Peñasquitos Canyon in nearby Carmel Valley, and Tecolote Canyon in Clairemont.   Those are just the canyons and open space parks within a few miles.   San Diego Canyonlands lists over 130 canyons in the San Diego area.  Many of these open space parks have much better amenities than Rose Canyon has and much better access for the elderly, handicapped, and disabled.

         3. Rose Canyon is special for its lack of development.

FALSE:  Rose Canyon is an enjoyable canyon to hike and bike in… but anyone who spends time there knows that it is a heavily used area and is not, by a long shot, pristine.  

* There are railroad tracks running through the canyon carrying 24 Amtrak trains a day and 22 Coaster light rail trains a day.  These numbers will double when double tracking projects are completed north of us.

* There is a road that carries 31,000 trips a day through the canyon.

* There is a high school on the edge of the canyon.

* There are water, gas, and electrical utilities in the canyon. And there is…

* …A leaky sewer trunk.  This sewer trunk is expected to be repaired over the next several years starting in 2018.  This will be a multiyear project costing $7M

  1. The Trolley will take traffic off the street

FALSE:  In order to ride the trolley you need to get to a trolley station.  For those of us that live south of the trolley, that means a trip north on Genesee.   SANDAG clearly knows people will commute to the trolley stations which is why they are adding commuter parking at Westfield UTC and at La Jolla Village.   Parking wouldn’t be needed if people weren’t go to be driving to the trolley.

  1. Uber and Lyft carpool services, and creative bus loops will cut down on traffic.

FALSE: Several projects recently approved at UCPG have promoted the idea that employees of these developments would take the trolley then Uber or Lyft the last mile.  This suggests that Uber and Lyft cars are somehow not ACTUALLY cars.  In reality an Uber ride is a round trip since the driver has to reach the rider, drive them to their destination, then drive out from their destination.  

  1. The construction projects planned for UC won’t make the traffic any worse because all of the trips have been accounted for.

FALSE:   UCSD does not have to account for additional trips through the area.  They are currently building new residential housing that includes 2 large parking structures.  Several of the large developers are proposing projects that expand the square footage and average daily trips beyond what was originally allotted to their parcels.  The trip load assigned to parcels was based on having the Regents Road Bridge.   So we’ve removed a major road and are allowing developers to build projects with even more trips than originally allowed.

  1. You need to be “forced out of your car.”

FALSE: This idea suggests that if cars are inconvenient more people would take public transportation or ride bikes or walk.  But removing the Regents Road Bridge from the UC Plan makes bike travel harder by removing a key element from the City’s Master Bike Plan.   Parents who want to walk their kids from the Doyle area to Spreckels (sent there because of overcrowding at Doyle) would be forced to walk on Genesee or drive around.  And public transportation does not adequately service the UC area south of Rose Canyon.  Wouldn’t a bridge crossing above the canyon, 70 feet above the creek, be a better path to walk or bike?  To even tempt people to get out of their cars we need to provide adequate bike lanes, safe pedestrian walkways, and effective public transportation.

  1. We can just build a pedestrian, bicyclist, handicapped access bridge with a single locked lane for emergency vehicles only.

FALSE:  The traffic study and the draft PEIR looked at this option.  It offers 100% of the cost with much less benefit.  No emergency egress in the case of a fire.  No traffic relief for those who live and/or work in the Golden Triangle.  And traffic relief means less idling cars emitting carbon pollution. See: The Regents Road Bridge is GOOD for the Environment

  1. Doyle Elementary school children will be put at risk due to traffic and harmful emissions from cars.

FALSE: Doyle is in the most protected position of all 5 schools in the UC Cluster.   It is not directly on Regents Road.  It is on Berino Ct, a block off of Regents Rd.  It is further from Regents Road than Curie is from Genesee.  UCHS is directly on Genesee.  Curie, Spreckels, and Stanley are all on Governor Dr, exposing the children to traffic and harmful emissions.  Students who attend Doyle elementary will eventually attend Stanley Middle School and then UCHS.  Doyle students will continue to attend school in a facility that is NOT on a major arterial roadway and is set back further than any other school in the UC Cluster.

  1. Ducks that use Rose Creek will not understand the new bridge structure and will be in jeopardy.

(This issue was actually raised at a Scoping Meeting prior to kicking off the current EIR effort.)

TRUE:  Ducks probably don’t understand or care about the bridge. 

FALSE:  Ducks will not be put in jeopardy if the bridge is built.   The Rose Creek watershed does not originate in Rose Canyon.  In fact it is a 36 square mile area that originates south east of Scripps Ranch.  It crosses I-15, I-805, and I-5.   It runs through a military base.   A bridge that is 70 feet above the creek will not impact the ducks.

These are just a few of the misleading and false statements regularly presented as talking points by the anti-bridge crowd.  This is an important topic about a very important project.  Too bad we can’t have a FACT based discussion. 

University City needs a completed Regents Road Bridge!



Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment


by Austin Speed

The video in this article is a compelling piece of San Diego history.   On August 1, 2006 San Diego’s City Council voted 6-2 to proceed with the Regents Road Bridge project.  The video highlights key speakers on that day who advocated the bridge project and Council Members who voted to complete Regents Road.



Since that day a small but vocal minority political group and a few key politicians have thwarted the will of the people in our region in San Diego by rationalizing a lack of action to complete Regents Road.  We have filed a legal action against the City regarding their EIR and Statement of Overriding Considerations based on California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) law.   We need everyone’s help to meet the expenses we are expecting in order to go to trial with this lawsuit.

Please consider making a donation to Citizens for the Regents Road Bridge (or “CFTRRB”) by going to our GoFundMe page at:

Or you can mail a check payable to:
“Citizens For The Regents Road Bridge” or “CFTRRB” to:
4079 Governor Dr. #165, San Diego CA 92122.

Tell your friends, neighbors, and the folks you exchange email and texts with if you feel they are “bridge supporters.”

Thank you.


Austin Speed

President, Citizens for the Regents Road bridge



Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Another Opportunity For Matching Funds

We still need your help! We have more fundraising requirements that we have to meet in order to keep pace with our anticipated legal expenses.

We have GREAT NEWS!!!! Another benefactor has stepped forward with another matching pledge.  This new benefactor has pledged another $10,000 towards our legal campaign to match all donations of $100 or more.  If you have given previously, thank you!  Please share this news with your friends and consider donating again.  If you haven’t given yet – now is your opportunity to double your contribution of $100 or more.

This incredible opportunity means that your donation has double the impact to our fundraising campaign.  In other words, $10,000 in donations becomes $20,000!

The first time we did this, Citizens for the Regents Road Bridge, your representative in this fight, raised enough funding to get the full $10,000 match… Please help us do it again!  We’re at crunch time to raise the funds for our legal costs, but we feel that we can do it with your help!

Please consider donating to our campaign today!

You can donate through our GoFundMe page:

Or you can mail a check payable to:
“Citizens For The Regents Road Bridge” or “CFTRRB” to:
4079 Governor Dr. #165, San Diego CA 92122.

Thank you,

Citizens For The Regents Road Bridge

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Top 10 Traffic Related Reasons Why North San Diego Needs A Complete Regents Road (Part 3 of 3)

by Austin Speed, President, Citizens for the Regents Road Bridge

This week we will conclude our look at the North UC projects that will have a significant impact on the already failing traffic patterns on our UC roadway network.   As we have mentioned in part one and two of this article, there are over 50 major construction projects planned for North UC that will have a long term impact on our already intolerable traffic situation.

Over the last few weeks we looked at six of these top 10 projects:  the Westfield UTC expansion, the Scripps Hospital campus expansion, the Illumina Headquarters development, residential towers going up at Costa Verde and UTC, and the UCSD Hospital Expansion.

This week we’ll conclude our look at projects seven through 10.

Before we do this, keep in mind that from our perspective each of these projects can be viewed as indicators of economic success with the inevitable expansion of facilities and housing to sustain and even expand the capacity of the community to support that success.  However, a certain form of insanity comes into play if you consider the scope of these projects in light of an absolute refusal by the City to significantly improve roadway capacity and infrastructure in University City.

So here we go.  Let’s look at what’s going on up at Campus Point(e), other major housing construction projects in North UC, research facilities and office space expansion, and miscellaneous other projects.

Number 7. The Campus Point Projects:   Campus Point Drive is the main access road (off Genesee Avenue) for a major new facility that has opened up at the north end of the area called the Alexandria Life Sciences Center at Campus Pointe.

Alexandria has renovated the 24 acre property to create this Life Sciences complex.   The project was nominated this year for the coveted Orchid award by the San Diego Architectural Foundation.   A number of life science related businesses and one high end restaurant now occupy the facilities.

Figure 1Figure 1.  Alexandria Life Sciences Center at Campus Pointe

There is ongoing construction at the site which apparently will consume one of the major parking areas that occupied one side of the building.   We’ll see what kind of strain all of this puts on traffic to and from the area.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Construction Adjacent to Alexandria Life Sciences Center (9/24/17)

Before we leave Campus Point, you should know that Amazon recently leased space in the area – 107,000 square feet at 10300 Campus Point Drive to accommodate more than 500 employees.  Many of these employees will be driving to and from work.  Many of those will use Genesee Avenue as part of their travel route.

Figure 3Figure 3. Leased by Amazon – 10300 Campus Point Drive 

Number 8. The Trolley Arrival at UTC.  These are pictures of the elevated trolley platform that will enable the trolley to travel to and from the UCSD East Campus above the centerline of Genesee Avenue to ultimately turn into UTC.

Figure 4Figure 4. The Trolley is Coming to UTC

There is an assertion that pops up occasionally that the trolley will change traffic patterns and reduce car traffic in UC.  Frankly, I don’t see it. A few current commuters may use the trolley, but I doubt that we’ll see any significant reduction of UC’s traffic congestion.

 Number 9. Condominium and Apartment Projects in the UTC Vicinity

Figure 5

Figure 5. La Jolla Crossroads


Phase one at The La Jolla Crossroads 360 apartment complex, east of Westfield UTC, just completed.  The overall plan appears to add at least another hundred or so rental apartments to the North UC residential inventory.

Here are a couple of pictures of these apartments under construction.

Figure 6

 Figure 6. La Jolla Crossroads 360 Under Construction (June 2016)

Number 10: Other Office and Research Space Projects

Finally, there are a number of other projects that will add to our demand for roadway capacity in UC. Here is a sampling:

Alexandria is planning a 3-story, 163,648-square foot mixed lab and office building at 9625 Town Centre Drive…with parking…for cars.

The Irvine Company is planning a three-story, 96,435 square-foot, campus-style workplace called Eastgate Terrace…with parking…for cars.

Here are a couple of pictures of another mixed use facility on Executive Drive that was under construction in June 2016…with parking…for cars.

Figure 7

Figure 7.  North UC Mixed Use Facility Under Construction

Below is a SANDAG map of public and private projects that includes the specific projects we have been talking about in this three part article as well as others.  By the City’s count there are 50 major projects either recently completed, under construction, or planned over the next five years.


                   5 YEARS. 

                              MANY OF THEM WITH PARKING STRUCTURES…FOR CARS.


Figure 8

Figure 8.  A North UC Construction Project Map (SANDAG)

That wraps up our discussion of the Top 10 Traffic Related Reasons Why Regents Road Should be Completed.  Don’t get me wrong.   I’m a development advocate.  UC can benefit from the economic opportunities and the modernization. However, the commitment to accommodate this incredibly intense development activity should be supported by a  commitment to increase our roadway capacity and improve our transportation infrastructure.

Remember, improving roadway capacity isn’t development.  Adding to our roadway capacity provides the infrastructure needed to support the economic opportunities and development that has been clearly approved by the City for our UC community.

We just cannot have one without the other.

We’ll tackle another subject next week.   Stay tuned.


Austin Speed

President, Citizens for the Regents Road Bridge


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Another Milestone Has Been Reached

WE ARE VERY PLEASED AND EXCITED to report that we have reached our matching donor’s goal of $10,000 for donations of $100 or more. And we have, so far, raised MORE THAN $30,000 in total donations in just ONE MONTH!

HOWEVER, we still need to raise an ADDITIONAL $30,000 within a relatively short period of time in order to keep pace with the next phase of our anticipated legal costs.

WE KNOW there are more good folks out there who want to see the Regents Road bridge get built.  We’ve seen the recent POLLS on the neighborhood website NextDoor, where TWO-THIRDS of the votes were FOR the bridge.

WE NEED YOUR HELP to spread the word to friends, neighbors, co-workers, and anyone else who is willing to support this vital and worthy effort to keep the Regents Road bridge in the University City community plan.

PRINT AND POST our campaign flyer on your company/employee bulletin board, on your community bulletin board, at your local library, and anywhere else you can.

THANK YOU for supporting us on this issue and to everyone who has helped us come this far!


Austin Speed

President, Citizens for the Regents Road Bridge

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Top 10 Traffic Related Reasons Why North San Diego Needs A Complete Regents Road (Part 2 of 3)

by Austin Speed, President, Citizens for the Regents Road Bridge

To pick up where we left off last week, there are over 50 major construction projects planned for North UC that will have a long term impact on our already intolerable traffic situation.  Last week we looked at three of the top 10 projects:  the Westfield UTC project, the Scripps Hospital campus expansion, and the Illumina Headquarters projects. 

This week we’ll look at two residential high rises going up near Genesee Avenue and the expansion of UCSD’s East Campus bordering Genesee.  

Number 4. Costa Verde High Rise Residential Project:  Currently under construction, this Costa Verde high rise residential building group, known as Monte Verde Towers, will ultimately provide over 550 residential living units in 4 large tower buildings which will add to an already crowded skyscape of high rises in North UC.  The first tower is already going up and is growing taller as this is being written.

Monte Verde Construction

Figure 1.  Costa Verde Reaches for the Sky…Again

 Located at the corner of La Jolla Village Drive and Genesee Avenue these four behemoths, adding up to about a million square feet of floor space, will inevitably contribute to traffic on our favorite, and only, neighborhood arterial north-south roadway, Genesee.  

Monte Verde Map

Figure 2. Monte Verde Towers – Almost A Million Square Feet of Residential Space

We truly hope the residents of these towers don’t feel too trapped as they watch the gridlock on Genesee.  But, if they do feel like it’s just too challenging to leave their parking garage, they will be in good company with the occupants of our next big construction project.

Number 5. Westfield UTC Residential Tower:  Westfield UTC recently received some press for the public announcement of their 300 unit residential tower project.

UTC Towers

Figure 3. Westfield UTC Residential Towers

Westfield UTC’s residential apartment building is budgeted at $200M — about 1/3 of the cost of UTC’s current $600M Westfield UTC shopping center renovation.  While the address is not technically right on the Genesee Avenue & Nobel Drive intersection, this facility will be close enough that residents can throw paper airplanes at it.  Occupants who want to escape the Westfield UTC resort environment and venture out into the real world will be exposed to an immediate taste of the Genesee traffic experience.   As long as they’re willing to wait out the 5 hours of high traffic congestion on Monday through Friday they will be all right.  I recommend that only people who are truly patient consider living here.

Number 6: UCSD East Campus Expansion.    By my count, looking at the UCSD planning diagram below, the campus is planning 20 or more construction projects in the foreseeable future.  On the East Campus alone they plan to build 2 major parking structures as well as a number of other buildings.   The green triangles in Figure 4 represent projects in the planning/design stage.  The red circles are projects that were under construction or pending at the time this drawing was done (2016).


Figure 4.  The UCSD Construction Project Map

It should be noted that UCSD doesn’t require approvals from the City of San Diego to engage in construction projects on their campus.  These projects will be funded and initiated by the UC system regardless of any input from the City of San Diego. These new developments were not considered in the PEIR’s traffic study.   

It should also be noted that the eastern boundary of the UCSD East Campus is Regents Road (with a smidge of Genesee Avenue thrown in for good measure).  Because Regents Road has not been completed across Rose Canyon the southbound traffic departing the campus on Regents will have to transition to Genesee Avenue or I-5 to leave the UC area.

Have fun watching all of this fall into place.   

Next week we’ll talk about Campus Point projects, the trolley system, more condos, and other office and research facilities going up in the North UC area. Until then..


Austin Speed

President, Citizens for the Regents Road Bridge

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment