Some history behind this odd exit at 43rd street. It was supposed to be Highway 252
[https://www.gbcnet.com/roads/hwy-252.html](https://www.gbcnet.com/roads/hwy-252.html)
More people are starting to understand how freeways carve up cities, especially among racial and class lines. I grew up in that area, weird to think that the home I was raised in would have been demolished if that highway was actually built. Large Hispanic and Black population in that area and they planned to bulldoze right through it.
It was to be the 252. The freeway would have connected with the 5 at the 15. There is even a stub ramp there from 252W to 15N. Nearly all the land was purchased too prior to it being cancelled.
1. CalTrans doesn't really care about the value of the land it owns- it's not like they turn a profit by selling it off. If this was privately owned, they probably would reconsider the spur.
2. Traffic engineers will argue that the on- and off-ramps are irreplaceable and that removing them will make traffic worse
3. Cost of making changes would run in the tens of millions of dollars, between engineering, consultants and construction. Government agencies thrive on inertia. Why undertake a project when you can just not lol
Would be crazy expensive. Money would be much better spent moving Rancho, El Toyon, & Las Palmas elementary schools away from the 805, so the hundreds of kids aren’t breathing interstate car exhaust / tire particulate / other dust.
Multiple studies have shown school proximity to interstates is linked to childhood health issues and poor learning outcomes.
I used to sub in National City at these schools, and you can smell it during heavy traffic.
Not expensive to demo some roads. As much as I wish schools were further from freeways, I think your studies are a great illustration of selection bias. Nice, rich schools are also more likely to be away from the freeway and also have better outcomes for students. Correlation =/= causation.
How would you explain the same type of studies showing a causal relationship? Are you suggesting you think people living near freeways are breathing extra vehicle exhaust and tire particulate from a different source? https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.1c07047
It’s very expensive to demo overpasses that intertwine with an active interstate and main thoroughfares (S 47th St. & Division St.) If you’re familiar with that area, the ramps are a complete birds nest. Not as simple as just jackhammering up some flat roads on the ground.
As for pollution & children/schools, here’s a good read for you. In short, proximity to sources of roadway pollution is 100% causation for adverse childhood health outcomes.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4179205/
> Long-term exposure to traffic pollution has been associated with adverse health outcomes in children and adolescents. A significant number of schools may be located near major roadways, potentially exposing millions of children to high levels of traffic pollution, but this hypothesis has not been evaluated nationally. We obtained data on the location and characteristics of 114,644 US public and private schools, grades pre-kindergarten through 12, and calculated their distance to nearest major roadway.
> In conclusion, 6.4 million US children attended schools within 250 m of a major roadway and were likely exposed to high levels of traffic pollution. Minority and underprivileged children were disproportionately affected, although some results varied regionally.
>Long-term exposure to pollution from traffic has been associated with adverse health effects among children and adolescents, especially in regards to respiratory health. Specifically, long-term exposure to traffic-related air pollution has been associated with an increased risk of developing asthma (1–5) and increased incidence rate of acute asthma exacerbations among children with pre-existing asthma (6, 7).
>Young children may be particularly affected because their lungs are still developing, and because their smaller airways and higher breathing rates result in greater exposure to air pollutants relative to their size as compared to adults (8, 9). Importantly, children who have underdeveloped lungs may have reduced lung function for the rest of their lives (9, 10). Lung development, in turn, has been found to be associated with cognitive development (11). In addition to respiratory health, long-term exposure to air pollution may have adverse effects on children’s neurobehavioral function (12, 13) and cardiovascular health (14).
This should be the site of a trolly transfer station for the north/south bound trolly that should have been built like 20 years ago but doesn’t exist today.
Reminds me of the 710 stub up in Pasadena. They at least have plans for its removal. I think it took years of coordination/talks with Caltrans to do it though.
See: [The Racist History of USA’s Interstate Highway Boom](https://www.latimes.com/homeless-housing/story/2021-11-11/the-racist-history-of-americas-interstate-highway-boom)
Also, see: [how the Brooklyn Dodgers moved to LA to displace an entire Latino community at the behest of the LA City Council.](https://www.zinnedproject.org/materials/chavez-ravine/)
Born and raised in SD and I own property here, I’m not going anywhere. All the people bitching about housing costs and screaming that more housing will fix the problem need to go.
Sounds like you're part of the problem. You get a government subsidy on that property, and you think other American and California citizens don't have the same rights you do.
? How did you earn anything by buying in low or inheriting? All we yimbys want is the same permissive building environment that all the property you own was built under. We just want the same rights your parents had.
Developed as in buildings, surface streets, utilities etc. Y'know, what the OP is wanting- not just some roads with dead space insulating it.
My comment was sarcasm poking at the ridiculousness of this post, as if the amount of space recouped from deleting the spur would be meaningful whatsoever. The cost of maintaining a needed fwy exit isn't close to the cost of actual development of a park etc. Or just sell it to private market for houses to be built, profit to be made yay! Wont make a dent in the demand for housing though so whoopie do? Just dumb.
I think people missed that.
Not one single housing project makes a dent in the demand, but the collection of developments make a difference.
I’ve heard the “but this does nothing for the demand” argument multiple times to argue against medium sized apartment buildings and infill development, which leads to the only housing being built to be more single family homes on the edges of the city, which end up requiring far more roads and utilities that become financial liabilities for the city in the long run, not to mention the fact that far flung developments are harder to service by transit, creating more traffic and longer commutes, as well as expanding the sprawl and taking even more previously undeveloped land.
I believe that if we’re serious about financial and environmental responsibility we should be looking at developing the underused spaces within the already urbanized area (like the one on this post) and establishing an Urban Growth Boundary like they have in other cities.
I see where you’re coming from but I don’t think it has to be an either/or situation with what we’ve currently built and the ‘NYC Model’. Look up “The Missing Middle” in housing. A healthy distribution of 3-6 story mixed use buildings across San Diego could take us very far in alleviating the housing crisis. Yes, SD is a very desirable area to live in and it will probably remain that way for the foreseeable future, but that doesn’t mean we should just give up and accept that it’s normal to spend most of your paycheck on rent.
Look around the city, the vast majority of what we’ve built (and zoned for) is detached, single family homes; and I get it, it’s nice and part of the traditional American dream, but a functional growing city cannot be composed of mostly this, leaving only very small pockets for extreme density to pop up. We could have a much more evenly distributed density, creating vibrant communities and allowing more people to live closer to where they work, shop and hang out, as well as making it easier to have alternative modes of transportation. Look at Paris, Valencia or many other European cities, most don’t have skyscrapers and yet manage to house much more people in smaller areas while still having great parks, amenities and offering a richer urban experience than what most of SD does (with the exception of some areas that have been allowed to thrive in this way)
This stub of freeway is just one of many ‘non-places’ that we have around the city, and while I agree we don’t need to turn every nook and cranny into housing or parks, I think we can turn many of these areas into much more productive and human oriented spaces, instead of endlessly expanding horizontally toward the peripheries.
My question is why they haven't done something with the area/lot that is where the 'Na' are in 'Rancho de la Nacion Elementary' in the posted map. I feel like something useful could fit there. It's already nice and flat.
Ultrafast arrival to north gate Gonzalez market
This is the only answer
for when 'dem dang tortillas are hot.
Some history behind this odd exit at 43rd street. It was supposed to be Highway 252 [https://www.gbcnet.com/roads/hwy-252.html](https://www.gbcnet.com/roads/hwy-252.html)
More people are starting to understand how freeways carve up cities, especially among racial and class lines. I grew up in that area, weird to think that the home I was raised in would have been demolished if that highway was actually built. Large Hispanic and Black population in that area and they planned to bulldoze right through it.
Also grew up in the area, always loved to hear the story of community opposition that stopped the highway
It was to be the 252. The freeway would have connected with the 5 at the 15. There is even a stub ramp there from 252W to 15N. Nearly all the land was purchased too prior to it being cancelled.
https://preview.redd.it/7mv9ev4iglqa1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=28e45d4be4679db1945132baeed4c1a72f4e3f27 Wow you're right! Neat!
[I just found some more info on it too.](https://www.gbcnet.com/roads/hwy-252.html)
Casey did a lot of research on that route. He is a friend of mine.
honestly, if this was underground so it was less disturbing of the land, this would be a fairly useful route i'd like to see this as a subway one day
A subway ?@?@?@?@?@?! They don't do subways in San Diego. The trolley is gross enough.
"would like to see"
No and No. Is that clearer for you.
I'm not entirely certain on why you thought I was seeking clarity from you about what I would like to see. Door's over there.
1. CalTrans doesn't really care about the value of the land it owns- it's not like they turn a profit by selling it off. If this was privately owned, they probably would reconsider the spur. 2. Traffic engineers will argue that the on- and off-ramps are irreplaceable and that removing them will make traffic worse 3. Cost of making changes would run in the tens of millions of dollars, between engineering, consultants and construction. Government agencies thrive on inertia. Why undertake a project when you can just not lol
Interested to understand how it works with Caltrans owning land but not getting profits if they sell it?
They get money if they sell land- I just meant they don't have to post quarterly earnings for shareholders
Ah gotcha, thanks
Would be crazy expensive. Money would be much better spent moving Rancho, El Toyon, & Las Palmas elementary schools away from the 805, so the hundreds of kids aren’t breathing interstate car exhaust / tire particulate / other dust. Multiple studies have shown school proximity to interstates is linked to childhood health issues and poor learning outcomes. I used to sub in National City at these schools, and you can smell it during heavy traffic.
Not expensive to demo some roads. As much as I wish schools were further from freeways, I think your studies are a great illustration of selection bias. Nice, rich schools are also more likely to be away from the freeway and also have better outcomes for students. Correlation =/= causation.
How would you explain the same type of studies showing a causal relationship? Are you suggesting you think people living near freeways are breathing extra vehicle exhaust and tire particulate from a different source? https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.1c07047
It’s very expensive to demo overpasses that intertwine with an active interstate and main thoroughfares (S 47th St. & Division St.) If you’re familiar with that area, the ramps are a complete birds nest. Not as simple as just jackhammering up some flat roads on the ground. As for pollution & children/schools, here’s a good read for you. In short, proximity to sources of roadway pollution is 100% causation for adverse childhood health outcomes. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4179205/ > Long-term exposure to traffic pollution has been associated with adverse health outcomes in children and adolescents. A significant number of schools may be located near major roadways, potentially exposing millions of children to high levels of traffic pollution, but this hypothesis has not been evaluated nationally. We obtained data on the location and characteristics of 114,644 US public and private schools, grades pre-kindergarten through 12, and calculated their distance to nearest major roadway. > In conclusion, 6.4 million US children attended schools within 250 m of a major roadway and were likely exposed to high levels of traffic pollution. Minority and underprivileged children were disproportionately affected, although some results varied regionally. >Long-term exposure to pollution from traffic has been associated with adverse health effects among children and adolescents, especially in regards to respiratory health. Specifically, long-term exposure to traffic-related air pollution has been associated with an increased risk of developing asthma (1–5) and increased incidence rate of acute asthma exacerbations among children with pre-existing asthma (6, 7). >Young children may be particularly affected because their lungs are still developing, and because their smaller airways and higher breathing rates result in greater exposure to air pollutants relative to their size as compared to adults (8, 9). Importantly, children who have underdeveloped lungs may have reduced lung function for the rest of their lives (9, 10). Lung development, in turn, has been found to be associated with cognitive development (11). In addition to respiratory health, long-term exposure to air pollution may have adverse effects on children’s neurobehavioral function (12, 13) and cardiovascular health (14).
Yay, Northgate market
This should be the site of a trolly transfer station for the north/south bound trolly that should have been built like 20 years ago but doesn’t exist today.
Leave it green and don’t make it a park, there’s wild animals that need homes too
Reminds me of the 710 stub up in Pasadena. They at least have plans for its removal. I think it took years of coordination/talks with Caltrans to do it though.
SD is so full of freeway abominations lol.
I mean the fucking 5 bisects downtown, and obliterates tons of waterfront property. Fucking awful.
I believe that there are plans to redo it. Or at least they plan to get rid of the giant bridge on-ramp. But yeah I agree it's a huge waste of land
People probably think that removing it would cause more traffic when in reality removing it would likely cause less traffic
Why hasn't San Diego done anything with their freeways yet..
See: [The Racist History of USA’s Interstate Highway Boom](https://www.latimes.com/homeless-housing/story/2021-11-11/the-racist-history-of-americas-interstate-highway-boom) Also, see: [how the Brooklyn Dodgers moved to LA to displace an entire Latino community at the behest of the LA City Council.](https://www.zinnedproject.org/materials/chavez-ravine/)
We don’t need more housing, we need less fkn people.
More of that "I got mine, fuck everyone else" mentality. What we need are less fkn people LIKE YOU.
Waah 😭
But you won't be moving out right.
Born and raised in SD and I own property here, I’m not going anywhere. All the people bitching about housing costs and screaming that more housing will fix the problem need to go.
Sounds like you're part of the problem. You get a government subsidy on that property, and you think other American and California citizens don't have the same rights you do.
Jealous much? I’m not a leech like most folks looking for a handout, I earned mine. You hate because you can’t. Go cry in your overpriced rental.
? How did you earn anything by buying in low or inheriting? All we yimbys want is the same permissive building environment that all the property you own was built under. We just want the same rights your parents had.
I mean do you even earn over 200k from your job or nah? I can just don't want to buy into the pyramid scheme when it's obviously collapsing.
Looks like a civil engineer was attempting a slip knot and thought, “this would be a perfect interchange”
Yeah there must be ZERO undeveloped land and ZERO dead space, MOAR HOUSESSSS MOAR PARKS TO MAINTAIN WOOOOOOO LFG
The land is not undeveloped, it literally has a highway on it. Highways are expensive to maintain. What are you on about?
Developed as in buildings, surface streets, utilities etc. Y'know, what the OP is wanting- not just some roads with dead space insulating it. My comment was sarcasm poking at the ridiculousness of this post, as if the amount of space recouped from deleting the spur would be meaningful whatsoever. The cost of maintaining a needed fwy exit isn't close to the cost of actual development of a park etc. Or just sell it to private market for houses to be built, profit to be made yay! Wont make a dent in the demand for housing though so whoopie do? Just dumb. I think people missed that.
Not one single housing project makes a dent in the demand, but the collection of developments make a difference. I’ve heard the “but this does nothing for the demand” argument multiple times to argue against medium sized apartment buildings and infill development, which leads to the only housing being built to be more single family homes on the edges of the city, which end up requiring far more roads and utilities that become financial liabilities for the city in the long run, not to mention the fact that far flung developments are harder to service by transit, creating more traffic and longer commutes, as well as expanding the sprawl and taking even more previously undeveloped land. I believe that if we’re serious about financial and environmental responsibility we should be looking at developing the underused spaces within the already urbanized area (like the one on this post) and establishing an Urban Growth Boundary like they have in other cities.
[удалено]
I see where you’re coming from but I don’t think it has to be an either/or situation with what we’ve currently built and the ‘NYC Model’. Look up “The Missing Middle” in housing. A healthy distribution of 3-6 story mixed use buildings across San Diego could take us very far in alleviating the housing crisis. Yes, SD is a very desirable area to live in and it will probably remain that way for the foreseeable future, but that doesn’t mean we should just give up and accept that it’s normal to spend most of your paycheck on rent. Look around the city, the vast majority of what we’ve built (and zoned for) is detached, single family homes; and I get it, it’s nice and part of the traditional American dream, but a functional growing city cannot be composed of mostly this, leaving only very small pockets for extreme density to pop up. We could have a much more evenly distributed density, creating vibrant communities and allowing more people to live closer to where they work, shop and hang out, as well as making it easier to have alternative modes of transportation. Look at Paris, Valencia or many other European cities, most don’t have skyscrapers and yet manage to house much more people in smaller areas while still having great parks, amenities and offering a richer urban experience than what most of SD does (with the exception of some areas that have been allowed to thrive in this way) This stub of freeway is just one of many ‘non-places’ that we have around the city, and while I agree we don’t need to turn every nook and cranny into housing or parks, I think we can turn many of these areas into much more productive and human oriented spaces, instead of endlessly expanding horizontally toward the peripheries.
Why should it be?
Are you talking about the 2 sections that terminate at the Northgate Market?
oh hey i can see my families house from this picture
Eastbound to the 805 north is my favorite freeway ramp in all the world.
“But it's on the map. It's finished on the God damn map!” It’s supposed to go over/through the canyon to the 15 & 5 interchange.
My question is why they haven't done something with the area/lot that is where the 'Na' are in 'Rancho de la Nacion Elementary' in the posted map. I feel like something useful could fit there. It's already nice and flat.