Alpine’s longstanding hopes for its own high school gained a great boost with the passage of the Prop H Bond Issue.  Funding for building local schools is split between the State and the Grossmont Union High School District.  Proposition H provides for our local share of the costs for a twelfth high school in the GUHS District.

As part of the planning for the new school, Grossmont Union High School District hired the consulting firm Essentia to study potential sites in relation to State of California’s criteria for school sites. 

As part of that study, the District is seeking public comment from Alpine residents regarding the twelve sites that have been preliminarily identified.  The State requires three sites to be submitted, from which one will be chosen by GUHSD and the State jointly.

The Alpine High School Citizens Committee has been advocating for an Alpine high school for about eight years now.  Over that time many potential sites were identified and reviewed.

The Alpine High School Citizens Committee (AHSCC) will refrain from advocating for a particular site, because the selection and purchase of a school site is a complex legal and financial transaction, for which the State and GUHSD are the only responsible parties.

Eminent Domain is a vehicle sometimes used by governmental agencies to acquire property for public use, such as a new school.   The AHSCC has no knowledge of any intent by GUHSD to use this method of acquiring property, however the possibility remains.  

At its AHSCC presentation at the Alpine Community Center in April of this year, Essentia did comment that sometimes it's presumptive to think that condemnation of residences takes time. 

Daryl Hernandez, the presenter, reported on one project that condemned homes, but that homeowners found the buy-out financials apparently very attractive.  The AHSCC hopes there is no condemnation of homes, churches or businesses in Alpine. Ultimately the State of California and GUHSD will be in control of that decision.

Our Objective, or Mission Statement provides, “The purpose of the AHSCC shall be to achieve an exemplary high school for the students and community of Alpine in the fastest, most economical and effective means possible.

This school should embody the spirit and values of the Alpine community while being dedicated to academic excellence and cultural diversity.”

We have reviewed the sites proposed by the GUHS District’s consultants in light of our mission emphasizing the “fastest, most economical and effective means possible.”  A High School usually takes five years to build and open, the range being three to seven years depending on local circumstances. 

Because we have already spent about eight years in this effort, speed is of the utmost importance.

Alpine contains a very complex topography, with limited amounts of large, relatively flat areas with good access and the necessary utilities suitable for a high school.  State law requires the completion of an Environmental Impact Review Study to assure that a potential site will be adequate, without significant, unmitigated impact to the environment. 

Because of Alpine’s unique geography, every undeveloped site contains environmental issues to be addressed.  Our analysis assumes that these issues will be dealt with in the normal required procedures, so we do not call undue attention to this part of site selection.

There were twelve sites chosen by the District, ten within the Alpine community, and two in the Blossom Valley area.  They were identified as “Study Areas B-R (eliminating letters D, F, H, I, and O), each with a location identifier such as a street name or locale.

• Sites E – Quail Canyon and G – Chocolate Summit Dr

These are located in Blossom Valley, they do not fit AHSCC criteria for a high school in Alpine itself.

• Sites L – Hale Dr.; N -- Victoria Dr.; P – Roble Grande; Q – Tavern Road / Oak Haven ,  and R – Ranchito / Alpine Heights Rd  

These represent sites that the majority of the area is fully developed residences, and in one case Queen of Angels Catholic Church. 

From our prospective all of these sites are non-starters because of the time required for acquisition of all the properties, not to mention the disruption to the community to have a whole neighborhood wiped out to be replaced by a school. 

The time required for condemnation law suits would add years to the process before the actual five years required to build the school.

• Site C – Tavern Road

The study notes some environmental issues requiring further study, but does not mention a particular traffic problem associated with this site as a potential High School location, that of the Tavern Road Bridge over the freeway.

In the past decade there have been numerous studies of traffic over this bridge related to development proposals for properties on the north side of the freeway.  None of the proposed developments were allowed, with the bridge traffic one of the major issues. 

The bridge is a two lane, thirty foot wide roadway that is at a “Service Level F” (on a scale of A-F) during peak hours.  Level F means that no development of a significant nature may take place until improvement is made. 

In this case, this means the bridge needs to be widened to accommodate the existing traffic, and the additional traffic caused by the new development, in this case the new high school.

Caltrans has a “future construction” schedule extending fifteen years.  The Tavern Road Bridge is not yet on Caltrans’ list for improvements.

The property itself could adequately accommodate a high school at a convenient location in the community assuming the bridge problem could be solved, and assuming the elimination of the businesses located there were acceptable. 

However, anticipating the time required to get Caltrans to fix the bridge before the high school could be opened this site does not fit our “fastest, most economical” criteria.

• Site M – North Tavern Road

This is an isolated location without existing street access, and requiring extensive grading to achieve the flat surfaces to accommodate a High School.  

It is also subject to the Tavern Road Bridge situation mentioned above.  Therefore this site does not meet our “fastest, most economical” criteria.

• Sites B, J and K

This leaves three remaining proposed sites; B, K, and J.  Each of these sites is large, somewhat flat and relatively undeveloped, consistent with our criteria.  However, they each also contains significant environmental issues requiring intensive study and evaluation. 

Two of the sites, J and K contain large mature oaks and other trees that provide environmental concerns, but also valuable and rare benefits to a high school campus.  Very few school sites have the luxury of giant shade trees throughout the campus. 

These trees may add to the complexity of locating the buildings to take advantage of them, but the effort could result in a unique campus atmosphere.

Site B – Wright’s Field has long been a source of controversy within the Alpine Community, occasionally dividing neighbor against neighbor.  Without taking sides, we only note that previous development plans relating to Wright’s Field have resulted in litigation. 

Any litigation filed regarding placement of the high school will have the potential of frustrating the goal of achieving a high school by the “fastest most economical and effective means possible.” 

Site K – South Grade Road is across the street from Wright’s Field, and has not been suggested before as a potential site.  It is near Wright’s Field and has mature trees throughout the site. Site K has riparian and oak filled areas on its southern side, including an officially protected east-west wildlife corridor. 

These issues have made development plans on the main 38-acre property somewhat complicated.  This would likely result in the development of site K for a high school as becoming problematic.

Both Sites B and K are located on South Grade Rd, which is designated as a “Light Collector” in the County Road System, a four lane road. It is a two lane road as it exists today, and contains a very tight “S”curve and passes between large granite boulders at Site K, just before arriving at Site B. 

Major reconstruction and straightening of South Grade Road for a considerable distance may be required to serve the traffic generated by a high school.  It should be noted that any school will create traffic because of the congregation of people at one place;

In the case of a high school, many of the students drive themselves, creating an additional dimension to a traffic situation.

Both sites B and K are located directly adjacent to existing residential development.  This is advantageous for student access from these houses on one hand, but causes disturbing elements such as band practice and lighted sports contests affecting the surrounding neighborhoods on the other.

Site J – Alpine Blvd is located on what are now the Lazy-A Ranch and four properties adjacent to it.  It contains a half mile of frontage on Alpine Boulevard with West Willows Freeway interchange a half mile to the east and the proposed East Victoria Interchange, under consideration at this time, to the west. 

Traffic access is very good.  As mentioned before, Site J contains many large oaks which can benefit the campus atmosphere, but also causes an environmental concern.  Viejas Creek flowing through the site likewise creates a two sided issue.

The location of the site is perhaps the furthest removed from developed properties, thereby reducing the adverse impact of noise and light caused by a high school. The Lazy-A property is divided into two areas, on either side of Viejas Creek. 

The North-West portion, adjacent to Alpine Boulevard, is the section most useful for high school use.  The part south and east of the creek consists mostly of a steep canyon covered with chaparral, oak and riparian habitat.  It is difficult to access. 

It potentially could be used as mitigation open space to compensate for the environmental impact of a high school located on the North-West side of the property.

Site J - the Lazy A, may actually end up with better future traffic flows on the basis of ongoing county circulation modeling for its General Plan 2020 update.  Of all the possible east-west road elements in Alpine to relieve traffic on the "downtown" part of Alpine Boulevard, the extension of Eltinge east to the general vicinity of the Lazy A then turning north to join with east Alpine Boulevard does seem reasonable. 

This concept was presented recently to the Alpine Planning Group by San Diego County Planner; Robert Citrano.  Citrano's preliminary circulation studies confirmed that north-west Alpine across the Tavern Road I-8 overpass is a future problem. They also found problems with much of South Grade Road.

Provided is the county map showing this proposed extension of Eltinge Drive, for your review, on the “Eltinge Drive Map” tab, at the left “navigation area”, of this web site.

We have provided this assessment of the various proposed high school sites, based on the founding “Objective” criteria of the AHSCC;

                  “To provide the fastest, most economical High School for the Alpine Community”

GUHSD is required to present three sites to the State authorities for final selection.  Each of these will receive extensive research and study, and there will no doubt be an opportunity in the future for further public input.

                                                 "The Alpine High School Citizens Committee"

 Click Here / Go To:  "Quick Info & Links - Complete Site Index"  

© 2007/2008 - All Rights Reserved - www.AHSCC.com